A review of Laurell K. Hamilton’s ‘Blue Moon’ chapter eight

It’s a real hassle to get everyone to hospital, and they’re seriously injured which is cool because they are video game goons who just spawn off-screen, ready to attack again. Belisarius is representing Anita, Jason, and Shang-Da which means that now Richard is entirely out of custody.

… can that happen? Is that legal, for him to just be let out for no reason?

Wilkes tries to take everyone’s fingerprints, but Anita decides it’s a bad idea when Shang-Da is reluctant. She calls up some police and FBI contacts to pressure Wilkes into leaving them alone. Anita immediately decides that Wilkes is a dirty cop, because he’s a bad guy in an Anita Blake book.

The two chat in the interrogation room where Wilkes reveals he’s been talking to Detective Freemont, who Anita bitches about. Then this happens:

“You should be more careful who you do a frame-up job on, Wilkes.”

“He’s a fucking junior high science teacher. How was I supposed to know he was shacking up with the fucking Executioner?”


Tension and intrigue out the window.

The corrupt police chief is helpless in the face of one comment from Anita Blake.

Wilkes admits to framing Richard, but will not say why. He just asks him to leave town, and points out that the guy Anita got in the fight may never walk again or use his arms. This is justified because he pulled a knife on Anita, who had a whole bevy of superhuman bodyguards that she might have summoned. They vaguely insult each other and Anita doubt he’s a true cop cause he looks afraid.

I’m bored. This boring plot is doing nothing for me.


7 thoughts on “A review of Laurell K. Hamilton’s ‘Blue Moon’ chapter eight

  1. “… can that happen? Is that legal, for him to just be let out for no reason?”

    Actually, Richard was bailed out. But yes people can be let out of jail if the judge feels that they will show up for trial. It’s called being released on one’s own recognizance.

    And this chapter bugged me so much since LKH knows nothing about the law or, well anything: A Sheriff is not what she thinks it is (it is NOT a synonym for a small town cop, they are elected officials in charge of entire counties, which in eastern Tennessee means he probably has a staff of 40+), Anita Blake has a concealed carry permit in St. Louis (which is valid in Tennessee) and her fingerprints should be on file, the Sheriff can’t just make charges go away (that is the DA’s job), nor can someone press charges for felony assault (that again is the DA’s job), and if the charges did go away the complaining witness would be in serious trouble because this is a rape case, and so forth.

  2. I think LKH’s idea of “plot” is not the generally accepted idea of “plot”. I’m still trying to figure it out, but I think it’s something like “someone doesn’t kiss Anita’s ass, this is a serious plot development and must be taken care of and they will be shown to be bad and wrong over the course of the book.” I’m not totally sure about that part, it might be too specific. I’m more sure that everything must always center completely and utterly on Anita. Richard being charged with rape cannot be the plot, as it is not entirely about Anita.

      • Very little sex, actually. I’m reading Danse Macabre, and am at the moment trying to get through a solid 50-page wall of people bickering. So far there have been only 5.25 pages of sex, and I’m being generous in that estimate.

        Proportionally, nearly every writer I’ve read who writes sex at all has more sex in their books than LKH does in hers, though the other writers do not have the obsession with their main characters’ vaginas, boobs, and sexual relationships that LKH has.

  3. Well, at least LKH didn’t try to awkwardly force the supposed-plot to connect with whatever crap the book’s really about in the last ten chapters. I… guess that’s an improvement. Sort of.

    But more importantly: Hamilton, would it kill you to not have *everyone* who doesn’t immediately bend down and kiss Anita’s ass turn out to be a bad guy? Because in the real world, just because someone doesn’t like you doesn’t automatically make them bad. That kind of thinking is incredibly childish.

    Oh, wait, I forgot – I’m talking about a woman who labels anyone who criticizes her or her work as a “hater”. I guess that’s just the level of maturity I should expect.

    • Obviously, the world is just entirely black and white, there are obvious good guys and bad guys, what are you talking about hater?

      If you can’t write morally ambiguous people, then here’s a pro tip: don’t write about vampires. They tend to be morally grey.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s