I generally like Kathy Reichs: Temperance Brennan’s stories are a lot more intricate, factual and detailed than the other ‘investigative forensics’ expert, Kay Scarpetta. Where Scarpetta ended up getting in more and more dramatic situations, and needed a military strength, Brennan needs none of that. Besides, I’m such a big fan of Bones, I can’t not be a fan of her namesake – although that seems to be the only link between the two characters.
I don’t know what it is about 206 Bones. It’s TOO complex. There’s too much going on. You know there’s something afoot at the lab as soon as a new recruit turns up some ‘missed’ bones, and you know what it is. You know that character will get their comeuppance. But apart from that, the plot was thin and overly complex – like 3 not very good stories woven together.
The other problem with it, I found, was its readability. I never really thought Kathy Reichs was a fan of the ‘chop and change’ paragraph, and to be honest, it made it impossible to follow. I know it’s supposed to make Brennan’s thoughts seem dramatic and disjointed, but it’s TOO disjointed. It’s like seeing into someone’s actual mind – and that isn’t always a good thing in mystery writing.
I’ve got a Karin Slaughter to start on, although I had promised I’d go for something a little bit more stimulating and non-fictiony, but with GCSE scripts looming over me to mark, I feel I’m due a little light relief!