Dressed for a Kill
by Brian Bianco
BookSurge Publishing/Createspace
Copyright © 2009
ISBN-10: 1439258880
ISBN-13: 978-1439258880
430 pages
$14.99 Paperback/Amazon
Dressed for a Kill, Brian Bianco’s first novel, is a suspense / thriller with all the elements: a light read but complex storyline, fast pace, plot twists, and a slick cover. While interesting and enjoyable in places, this is not as rewarding a read as it could be.
The surprise acquittal of two accused lowlifes for a grisly rape and murder outrages a small Idaho town. But investigative reporter Miles Fischer, who’s spent three weeks in the boonies covering the trial, is already back in Chicago when someone executes the acquitted men, with a crossbow, no less. This arouses Fischer’s curiosity. A little digging, with the help of his attractive assistant, reveals two similar cases of acquitted rapist / murderers killed by crossbows within the past eight years. The Idaho incident appears to be no simple, one-off case of vigilantism. Fischer digs some more and discovers enough truths to write an article linking the three cases.
His article draws the unfriendly attention of two FBI agents who want him to back off but also share his information. He also receives a crossbow arrow in the mail, from the killer no doubt, intended to scare him from further investigation. These have the opposite effect. While the Tribune is reluctant at first to support continuing the story, out safety concerns, they give way. His pregnant wife, the FBI agents who agitate his First Amendment principles, the angry father of one of the crossbow victims in Idaho and his hired private detective, present more challenging obstacles. Doggedly, often clumsily and tactlessly, Fischer forges ahead, soliciting the aid of his superiors, colleagues, old friends, incidental strangers, and in the end even the FBI.
The climactic action takes place in Seattle where Fischer establishes himself at a hotel. Information comes in from various sources and Fischer ventures out to track down the rest. To do so independently, he must elude the ever-present FBI agents, who are no match for his bag of evasion tricks, and circumvent a private investigator who is cleverer than the Feds. In Seattle some things become clearer, others murkier, but eventually come together at the end.
The trade-off for such an involved plot, of course, is flat, stereotyped, sometimes cartoonish characters—lewd and remorseless rapists, cigar-chewing and First Amendment spouting journalists, overbearing FBI agents—and a heavy reliance on coincidence or chance. Even the protagonist seems more an agent of the plot for much of the story than a character in himself.
But he is a character. A bit of a jerk, but an infectiously tolerable one, due to his childish, almost Forrest Gump-like simplicity. Other than his communication with strong women, things come relatively easily to Miles as he pilots us through the plot. He faces resistance but people eventually cooperate, and Miles never faces any setback or resistance that lasts longer than one or two chapters. If the receptionist at the exclusive club refuses to tell him about a member, well then the quirky daughter of the owner shows up to supply all the information he wants. Why? Because of his good looks? His charm? To get herself in the newspaper? I don’t know and I have to admit this lack of motivation for helping this out-of-town reporter—common with many of the characters—bothered me. Everything and everyone seems geared toward helping Miles in his quest for the truth.
Everyone except his pregnant wife, Erin, who is in the hospital after a bathtub accident. In a scene of escalating tension, the crux of their marital issues comes to the surface in a loud argument out of which Miles gains his freedom to pursue the story but at an emotional price:
Miles stood quietly in the hallway, just outside Erin’s door, the elevator only seconds away. He was breathing heavily. He could see the nurse, the few visitors who were there, and some of the patients leaning out of doorways and into the hall, staring at him from both ends. They were glaring in his direction, concerned with the intrusive commotion that had abruptly ended from behind the door. He felt deeply embarrassed and ashamed, having shared the most intimate details of his marriage with complete strangers. Go back and apologize, his conscience was telling him. Seconds passed as he paced back and forth, thinking feverishly as to what to do. Do I apologize or should I just leave? He paused and looked at the closed door, where, unbeknownst to him, Erin was experiencing the first signs of labor pain. The hell with it! He decided to leave and headed for the elevators and his black Jimmy waiting in the parking lot. He would not apologize. He had finally said what needed to be said.
It’s a convenient method of getting Erin out of the way to set up the rest of the story but since the drama comes first, the execution is satisfying. More of this would have enhanced the story.
Aside from his marriage, though, never once did I sense any menace surrounding the protagonist who seems too protected. No feeling that something truly dangerous is at stake. No thriller aspect. Whenever Fischer faces any resistance at all, the reader encounters an unexpected solution. A Mercedes Browne, for example, who pops up to provide a key piece of unsolicited information key to the plot. Such devices, while expected in genre novels, strain my willingness to suspend disbelief.
The novel does suffer from a lack of diligent editing; the prose, while generally fluid and readable, still seems bloated. The dialogue clips along but much of could be shortened. Many turn into extended arguments that lead to no resolution (i.e. the exchanges between Miles and the FBI) or an unrealistically thorough interview extended to ensure everything comes out and nothing’s held back (i.e. the exchange between Miles and Ned in chapter 34 and between Miles and Brooke in chapter 36).
In fact, the entire novel could benefit from a round or two of ruthless cutting of excess narration. The prime targets would be all instances of authorial intrusion, exchanges in which characters explain almost verbatim things the reader had read earlier, and unnecessary naming and descriptions of minor characters that appear only once.
One notable exception is the exposition early in the story that summarizes the archival information about the previous crossbow crimes reads nicely. It’s much tighter than most of the novel and a pleasant read, supplying essential information while moving the story along.
I found the first two-thirds of the novel markedly better edited than the last third. The final scenes rush by with plenty of telling but little showing. There is also an increase in niggling proofing errors such as wrongly placed apostrophes and missing hyphens; the pace of the story does ensure they do not impede the reading. I sense a rush to get to the end of the writing and to publish, a temptation first-time novelists need to learn to resist.
Overall, the story is entertaining, even if the motivation of the characters isn’t always plausible. The author shows a knack for disseminating the plot in easily digestible chunks that keep one reading. Fans of the genre can probably overlook the issues noted above but I hope that, in his next effort, Mr. Bianco does not. Dressed for a Kill contains enough promise to indicate that’s possible.
I read Peter’s review of my book with some sadness and regret at some of the remarks he made according to what he had read. I take issue with some of his comments and thus, will address them here. He states and I quote,
“If the receptionist at the exclusive club refuses to tell him about a member, well then the quirky daughter of the owner shows up to supply all the information he wants. Why? Because of his good looks? His charm? To get herself in the newspaper? I don’t know and I have to admit this lack of motivation for helping this out-of-town reporter—common with many of the characters—bothered me. Everything and everyone seems geared toward helping Miles in his quest for the truth.”
If Peter had retained what he had read, he would have read the following and I quote,
“I have to ask you something. Why did you come out here just a minute ago and tell me what you told me? Why help me by giving me her address? Why do you care, if she’s a friend of yours like you say?”
“I guess it’s because I’m a law student. I figure we’re on the same side, right? We’re both searching for the same thing—the truth. In spite of what you see, don’t let this costume fool you. Not everything is what it seems. Besides, I still want my father to be proud of me.”
He goes on to say and I quote,
“The trade-off for such an involved plot, of course, is flat, stereotyped, sometimes cartoonish characters—lewd and remorseless rapists, cigar-chewing and First Amendment spouting journalists, overbearing FBI agents—and a heavy reliance on coincidence or chance.”
So I ask, are rapists nice and sweet or are they as he states, lewd and remorseless? Do journalists defend the 1st amendment when it is threatened and thus their livelihood, or do they give in, then abide and do what is requested, even though the 1st amendment, freedom of the press, is theirs and in everyone’s interest to protect to the fullest, no matter who threatens it.
As for chance or coincidence, do they exist in real life or are they just a figment of a writers imagination? Chance and coincidence are tools used by a writer to enhance, to move the story along because without them, there is no story.
In order to make any story come together, whether it be in a book, on a stage, or on a movie screen; plays, scripts and novels are written in such a way, especially in the instance of a murder/mystery involving an investigative reporter, that information will come in many ways. As it states in the book, people talk,people will always talk and why? Because they do and usually for their own reasons, whether noble or otherwise. No reporter can write a story and bring it to conclusion without outside sources. That’s why they’re called investigative reporters.
Peter states in his review and I quote,
“Aside from his marriage, though, never once did I sense any menace surrounding the protagonist who seems too protected. No feeling that something truly dangerous is at stake. No thriller aspect. Whenever Fischer faces any resistance at all, the reader encounters an unexpected solution. A Mercedes Browne, for example, who pops up to provide a key piece of unsolicited information key to the plot.”
Though not mentioned in his review, there was a moral reason why Mercedes Browne came forward to tell what she knew. Peter does not say why she did it which I am glad for since it is part of the plot and to say anything would give some of it away before those who have not read the book have had a chance to read it. Just like I stated above, everyone who talks has their own motivation for doing so, even in real life which this book depicts in a very honest way.
As for Fischer, he may have encountered those who helped him along the way but in any piece of literary work, and for that matter, in real life when one achieves the success that they sought, it begs the question, how did they get there, how did they do it? For most of us who have achieved any degree of success, it was not our doing alone. We all had help along the way, whether we want to acknowledge it or not. As for an investigative reporter, they rely on those who know but are reluctant to talk. So what motivates them to do so? For a whole litany of reasons, some of which I have stated here and in the book.
As for Miles encountering danger, it happens near the end which Peter has not mentioned for his own reasons. Is the receiving of an arrow unexpectedly a threat? Does it add suspense?
With regards to the editing of this book, this book was edited not by myself, but by a professional editor from beginning to end. The editor used the Chicago Style of Writing when editing this work.
In his final personal assessment, Peter writes and I quote,
“I sense a rush to get to the end of the writing and to publish, a temptation first-time novelists need to learn to resist.”
This is the farthest thing from the truth, having worked on this novel for over a year before even getting to the revising stage.
Conclusions based on assumption are just that, assumptions.
I acknowledge Peter’s right to his own opinions on this book, his right to freedom of speech and his right to his feelings on what he has read but in the same sense, I have the right to correct that which is wrong. This is not about not having a thick skin or being sensitive to criticism because not everyone will come away with the same thoughts about what they have read, thank God. Its really about the right to freedom of speech and the right to say it.
Regards,
Brian
Brian-
I think you are “reading” a bit too much into Peter’s review. While you are correct that a review is a “personal assessment” and “Conclusions based on assumption are just that, assumptions,” reviews are also just one person’s opinion of a book. Another reader might read your book and see it in a completely different way, totally opposite than Peter. But as a reader, and a reviewer, Peter is still entitled to his own personal opinion of the work.
As an author, you should be prepared for criticism – no matter if you take it in a positive or negative way. Reviews can hurt. It’s hard not to take them personal and want to jump up to your book’s defense. Believe me, as an author myself, I’ve gotten the good and bad. But I don’t feel the need to defend myself or my work when the bad ones come along. I’ve never told a reviewer they were wrong. I’ve listened to or read their opinion and tried to learn from it, whether I agreed with it or not.
As you say in the end of your post, “This is not about not having a thick skin or being sensitive to criticism because not everyone will come away with the same thoughts about what they have read, thank God. Its really about the right to freedom of speech and the right to say it.” If you had that thick skin you talk about, you probably would not have felt the need to write this lengthy comment. As for “freedom of speech,” is Peter not entitled to the same privilege just because of what he had to say about how he interpreted your work?
I appreciate your soap box efforts and for coming to your book’s defense, but as I’ve said to others, just because you’ve written a book don’t expect everyone to read it, and for those who do read it, don’t expect everyone to like it. Authors should be read and not heard. Let your book speak for itself.
Regards,
Shannon
LLBR
Brian, I completely concur with Shannon’s comments. And just as you defend your novel, I stand by my review of that novel, which honestly represents my reading experience. I too have received the good and the bad, as Shannon puts it, but in my opinion both are much more preferable to the indifferent.