Tuesday, December 25, 2012

Authors Diss on Hattie, Part II

How do authors really feel about Harriet’s reviews?   Part 1 entitled “Authors Diss on Harriet” talked about this, but there were too many authors and too many comments for one article.  This is Part II of the discussion.

Once again, author identities are not included to protect their privacy interests and their relationships with their editors and publishers.  They, however, have some very interesting things to say.

“I stopped reading Harriet’s reviews of my books (and others) a long time ago because banging my head on the desk causes a weird ringing in my ears.”

“My problem with Harriet is that a) her reviews are full of inaccuracies b) often contain spoilers.  It’s really irritating to glance at a one paragraph review and see a ‘by the way, here is how the book ends!’”

“[I don't really know what the rest says because I'm doing this:  Hahahahahahahaha! The Lions? The Raiders? WTF?  Hahaha!]”

“Well, okay, The Amazing, Reads a Thousand Books a Month and Thus Usually Gets  Protagonists’ Names Wrong Harriet Klausner has reviewed my books, but I’m pretty sure she reviews pamphlets about Famous Jewish Sports Legends and Nora’s grocery list in her free time, so she doesn’t really count.”

“Harriet’s reviews are often misspelled, odd to the point of head-scratching”

“Harriet’s misspelled my character names, left words out of sentences, and missed the point on some of the reviews she’s given my books, yes.”

“Harriet Klausner as an exemplar reviewing professional? I just swallowed my tongue. In what universe?”

“in my opinion, I think Harriet Klausner makes all book reviewers look bad and her reviews are total crap.”

“Klausner may get her conveyer belt of ARCs shut down, but her review system will probably remain. A pity, because she does muddy the waters with inaccurate reviews.”

“Wow. Wow. And to claim that Harriet Klausner is a ‘professional’ reviewer? Ignorant or crazy.”

“surely no one with a functioning frontal lobe takes her reviews seriously.”

“Yes, one of her reviews for one of my books was barely even in English, and had nothing to do with the actual plot (except for the spoiler she managed to include).”

“She did, after all, post 44 reviews for March 11th which does seem, um, a little on the prolific side. And that's not apparently unusual for her. Gives a new definition to speed reading, doesn't it? . . . it would take her a whole day just to pen the reviews - and that's without reading the books.”

“Does a Harriet Klausner review carry such weight that it would boost sales? Are they kidding?”

“Yes, and she also summarizes plots (not always accurately) and gives away spoilers.”

“Unbelievable.”

“Yes, and she also summarizes plots (not always accurately) and gives away spoilers.  That is just the worst. In at least three of mine, she gave away plot twists that were intended to shock the hell out of readers.  Harriet Klausner is a real person?  I thought she was a bot.  Far as I know, she's real. Been reviewing for a long time.”

“If she did what you suggested and called them a readers' advisory I wouldn't be so irritated. Calling them reviews is absurd.”

“I'm pretty sure her reviews are if not actually plagiarized, liberally borrowed from various sources.  Case in point: Her review of my book * is almost certainly cribbed from *’s review of the same.  Both misspell the protagonist's name (It's * not * ) in the same way.”

“Unethical, yes. I'm not sure about illegal.  And really, who takes her reviews seriously anymore?”

“Ignore the poor sentence construction, grammar, detours from the actual plot and so on”

“Klausner. A gold-standard reviewer. Really. I must have missed something, because I find her reviews beyond annoying. She’s quantity-over-quality in action, and she doesn’t seem to have ever read a book she didn’t like. With her speed reading, I doubt she’s absorbed anything in her reading, much less given it any thought, particularly given that many of her reviews seem to have been badly lifted from the book’s back cover.”

“I've been reviewed by her a few times.  In at least one case the review was a rehash of a newspaper review by a critic.”

“My theory is that HK’s reviews are amalgamations of back cover copy, first chapters, and reviews written by other people. Her review of my first book quotes practically word for word from the reviews in the trade journals, occasionally switching in a synonym or mangling the sentence structure.”

“She got everything about my book *wrong. oops’”

“Harriet likes everything, without exception, her reviews are little more than extra noise in the system, a background hiss of blanket positivity.”

“How impressive can a venue be that publishes Harriet Klausner reviews?”

“I know, but please don't hold the Harriet reviews against us authors. This one has wrong character names (*, not *) and my protag definitely doesn't find * attractive. Sigh. Anyhow, thanks for taking a look.”

“I don’t care how much your soul is worth to Satan, no one reads that fast.”

“As the frequent victim of drive-by Harriet reviews, I know she’s inaccurate to the point of my sometimes wondering if she’s perhaps confused my book with someone else’s.”

“it’s about time someone called Klausner on her crap.”

“Her reviews are often and largely inaccurate, they’re usually grammatical nightmares, and they frequently reveal the plot twists or surprise endings.”

“But the random person on Amazon would find avoiding Klausner’s reviews a challenge, much like dodging the wafting smell from the odoriferous person in the crowded subway. Eventually it permeates every space… and every review.”

“It was as meaningless as this one, and among the more glaring errors, the names of two major characters and THE AUTHOR were wrong!”

“three friends of mine and Harriet Klausner have already reviewed it. My friends gave it (on average) four and a half stars, and Harriet Klausner gave it five. This was a generous if odd ranking, because Harriet did not take the trouble to read even the blurb on the dustjacket this time, but merely made up something based on the title.”

“Don't even get me started on Harriet Klausner.”

“She's a very sloppy and inaccurate reviewer. I admire her enterprise in making her mark so strongly early on, but I don't even bother to read her reviews anymore. And, yes, she loves me, too, but I find it hard to get excited about it”

Monday, December 24, 2012

A Lump in Your Stocking

In addition to her interest in "lower heads," relish, tsuris, the Lovin' Spoonful, readers and fans, and Diogenes of Sinope, Harriet Klausner seems to have a fascination with feces.  She's written the "s-word" in at least 41 different reviews.  A few examples (please note that in each and every case, the asterisk was in Hattie's original review on Amazon):
  • "Mr. Cooper received a life lesson from his father when he was four years old about eating sh*t." (link)
  • "He feels this is fitting as his life has been one toilet bowl of sh*t after another." (link)
  • "The characters are fully developed except for Brian, who is the stereotypical selfish sh*thead who could not give a sh*t about his wife or daughter except how it impacts on him..." (link)
  • "same sh*t just after WW I" (link)
  • "her wonderment about PR able to make a seven course gourmet dinner out of chicken sh*t" (link)
  • "Classic example of sh*t going downhill occurs; GiGi is fired." (link)
  • "Her autobiographical account of sh*t happens is southern humor at its most jocular." (link)
Variations on a theme:
  • "some sh*thead took her virginity and hurt her emotionally so she is reluctant to be with any man." (link)
  • "how killing one evil vampire ruler could cause such sh*tty chaos" (link)
A couple of times, she gets away without the asterisk:
  • "I shit you not" (link)
  • "her credo is that if you can laugh at the shittiest moments in your life, you can transcend them'" and "get the audience to 'laugh at your awful shit ...'" (link)
  • "he seem to have the Midas touch buying stocks in the state of 'KISS - Kompanies in Serious Shit' but with a long history of making money" (link)
Ask yourself: is this sort of language appropriate on Amazon?  Aren't there other ways to phrase these sentences?  Heck, in some of these cases, even "tsuris" might be appropriate.  Ah, well, the rules are different for Harriet.

At any rate, happy holidays from everyone at the HKAS.  Here's hoping you don't get a lump of coal (or a lump of anything else) in your stocking.

Is the Noose Tightening Around Harriet Klausner? NY Times Article

It was inevitable that Harriet Klausner would eventually draw the attention of the mainstream media as more intense scrutiny is focused on Amazon and its reviewing practices.  It happened on December 23, 2012,  in the New York Times article, “Giving Mom’s Book Five Stars?  Amazon May Cull Your Review” by David Streitfeld.

This piece identifies Klausner as part of the reviewing problem on Amazon’s website.  In it, Streitfeld says:

“The dispute over reviews is playing out in the discontent over Mrs. Klausner, an Amazon Hall of Fame reviewer for the last 11 years and undoubtedly one of the most prolific reviewers in literary history.”

One of the most prolific reviewers in “literary history”—not Amazon history (where the controversy rages), but the history of literature.  Ouch!  Obvious overstatements are often used to cast doubt on an underlying statement. We all know that Klausner's place in the history of literature wouldn’t make a ripple in a thimble full of water.

Klausner is mentioned 10 times in the article and about one-third of it is devoted to her.  She points to Harlequin Romances as the reason that she can read 7 books in a day.  This statement is as disingenuous as it is misleading.  Harriet reviews comic books, graphic novels, science fiction, westerns, biographies, non-fiction, manuals, self-help books, and many other genres.  In fact, most of the romances that Klausner reviews are not Harlequin Romances.   Her reviews for Harlequin are only a minor percentage of her “reviewing” output.

Streitfeld notes that 99.9% of Harriet’s reviews are four and five stars and that her husband Stanley even says Harriet is soft on her ratings.

What does Harriet say in her final defense?  “Get a life.  Read a book.”  Yeah, another compelling argument to believe what she says.

Our thanks to you, Mr. Streitfeld, for your revealing and excellent article.  Kudos!

Sunday, December 23, 2012

Reading Is Not Necessary to Harriet's Reviews


There has been a lot of conjecture about Harriet not reading the books that she reviews.  We can talk about a human’s ability to read an average of 7 books per day and write corresponding reviews, every day for eleven years; we can talk about the science and mechanics of the eyes; and we can talk about a variety of different ways to prove whether or not it’s possible to accomplish this amazing feat.

The way I want to look at it, though, is a backward look over my shoulder.  I’ve learned to read Harriet’s reviews after I’ve read a book.  I expected to see some mistakes, but what surprised me was the number and severity of mistakes.  Even more eye-opening was how much was missing from Klausner’s reviews and her failure to capture the essence of a book.

So, I decided to keep track.  I haven’t included the text of Harriet’s reviews because they are easy enough to find on Amazon where there are more comprehensive comments associated with them.

Alien in the Family by Gini Koch
Corrections:
1.   Kitty and Martini are not planning their wedding; they’re in Vegas getting married.
2.   Time is not relative.
3.   Kitty could never become queen.
4.   The tests were of Kitty's worthiness as wife to the king and as mother of future heirs.

Missing:
1.   Kitty's best friend has taken charge and become the wedding planner and he plays a huge role.
2.   Kitty's other best friend, Chuckie, also plays a huge role.
3.   The poofs? Adorable and frightening at same time and critical to the story.


Alien Tango by Gini Koch
Corrections:
1.   Katherine (Kitty) doesn't muse a whole bunch about tilting perceptions.
2.   Kitty learned about the aliens five months ago; not six as Harriet states.
3.   A-C is short for Alpha Centauri.  They're Alpha Centaurions, not Alpha Centauri "A-C" aliens.
4.   Purebred earthling? No. The word is human.
5.   Kennedy Space Center brass. No, again. The A-C are ordered to the space center by their underground counterparts at the Space Center.
6.   The Olympus Mons review filler and not mentioned in the book.

What’s missing:
1.   Kitty's biggest threat is from an alligator she nicknames Alliflash and the alligator tales.
2.   Wildly entertaining alligator tales.
3.   The group is beaten, kidnapped; do their own beating and kidnapping; deal with the riddle of the astronauts and a very powerful alien; discover a former boyfriend of Kitty's, and uncover an unwelcome surprise sprung from back on Alpha Centauri.
4.   The anti-alien conspiracy at the highest levels of government
5.   The wonderful secondary characters
6.   The initial attack at the Space Center that almost left everyone dead.

Biting Cold:  Chicagoland Vampires, by Chloe Neill
Corrections:
1.   Ethan Sullivan didn't simply "return"; he came back from the dead.
2.   Tate doesn't stalk Merit--nobody does.
3.   The trip to the Great Plains doesn't take long; most of the story occurs in Chicago.
4.   There is no such thing as others preferring the alternative.

Missing:
1.   Mallory’s success in binding Ethan to her and her emotions taking a serious toll on Ethan.
2.   Mallory success in finding the Malificium and its impact on the rest of the book.
3.   Merit and Mallory's crumbling relationship.
4.   Catcher and Mallory's crumbling relationship.
5.   Mallory’s forced forced detention under the watchful eyes of the werewolves.
6.   Mallory’s crucial role in the final showdown.
7.   A surprising development in the first half of the book that is carried throughout the remainder of the book which results in open and public murders in Chicago--not in the Great Plains.
8.   Merit’s kidnapping and near death.
9.   Two more surprising developments leading to unusual alliances necessary to defeat the enemy.

By a Thread, Elemental Assassins  by Jennifer Estep
Corrections:
1.   Callie Reyes is Bria's (Gin's sister) best friend.
2.   It's Callie, not Bria, whom Pete and Trent are harassing and intimidating.
3.   Pete gloats over hurting Callie, not Bria.
4.   Gin's former love interest, Donovan Caine, is engaged to Callie, not Bria.

Harriet, . . . missed the really big stuff:
1.   Gin's ever widening schism with her sister.
2.   Bria was the sole focus of the trip.
3.   The widening chasm between Gin and Bria.
4.   Callie owns the Sea Breeze and it's the Sea Breeze that Randall Dekes intends to have.
5.   Then there's Gin's kidnapping, the tension with Donovan Caine, and the first hint of things going wrong with Gin and Owen's relationship.
6.   The food, the food, the glorious food.

Cry Wolf:  Alpha and Omega Series, by Patricia Briggs
Corrections:
1.   There were no "out of control murderous beasts" (werewolves). 
2.   The story plays out on multiple levels--not just two.
3.   Charles does not reject Anna.
4.   His father, Bran, sends Anna to Boston to work with the FBI and Charles accompanies her.
5.   Anna is to serve as a good will ambassador to the authorities.
6.   Anna's mission is to forge a good relationship will be forged between authorities and werewolves.
7.   Brand hopes that Charles will decompress from the awful strain he has been under.
8.   Everyone hopes that Charles and Anna will heal what is wrong with their relationship

What's missing:
1.  Briggs once again makes her mark on a significant fae legend and makes it her own.
2.  The murders have some fantastic twists and turns.
3.  The local alpha, witches, and the fae.

Death’s Rival:  A Jane Yellowrock Novel, by Faith Hunter
Corrections:
1.   Leo doesn't order Jane to return.
2.   They are all aware of the vampire takeovers because it's happening around the country.
3.   They are all aware of the plague.
4.   Leo sends Jane to take blood samples from the dying vampires so they can find out what it is and develop and treatment.
5.   Jane uncovers the plot, the methodology, and develops the fighting strategy.
6.   Jane is on the side of the New Orleans vamp community; she's only mad at Leo but she works for Leo.
7.   Jane knows there are traitors and she watches her back the entire book.

What's missing:
1.   Beast, who's given great play in the book.
2.   The new partners.
3.   Jane's self-discovery.
4.   Bruiser.
5.   Rick.
6.   Sabina.
7.   The showdown.
8.   The battles that set the stage for the final showdown.
9.   The implications of Jane's having declared herself as Leo's "Enforcer".

First Grave on the Right, by Darynda Jones
Corrections:
1.   Charley Davidson has three jobs--not one. Grim reaper; consultant for the Police Department and owner/operator of a private investigative agency.
2.   Her clients aren't dead; they're quite alive.
3.   The spirits aren't vengeful and only want to move on, but can't.
4.  There is no live sex in the book.
5.   There is no comparison to Jennifer Love Hewitt’s Ghost Whisperer.

What’s missing:
1.   Most of the story
2.   The “entity” holds two natures.

Flesh Circle, Jill Kismet, Hunter, by Lilith Saintcrow
Corrections:
1.   The Cirque is run by hellbreed (not "hellspawn") and Traders. The circus performers and staff are neither "refuges" nor refugees.
2.   Jill places a spiked ring on the neck of the hostage. She doesn't "ring" anyone or anything.
3.   When I think of Jill's colleagues, I think of her partner Saul, her fellow hunters and the police she works with. She does not suspect any of them, nor should she.
4.   There are zombies, but there are no "hordes" (maybe 15 in all) and they appear to be natives (that is, not "flocking to the city"). I have no idea what a "zombie needed death toll" is.
5.   I don't recall Jill "donkey kicking" anybody.
6.   The trouble in the present does stem from an event in the past, but memories are not the problem.

Fourth Grave Beneath My Feet, by Darynda Jones
Corrections:
1.   Charley has spent almost two months hiding in her apartment; not several months.
2.   Charley believes Harper Williams from the getgo.
3.   It's not very far into this book that Reyes is back in her life, whether that be for bad or good, permanently or not.
4.   Harriet says that Charley wallows in her feelings "like a burned out loser." PTSD and agoraphobia are grounds to call the heroine a "burned out loser"?
5.   "her last case ended in the cesspool." She solved all of her cases in the last book, but one of them involved Charley's being tortured and resulting psychological disfigurement. And that's a "cesspool"?
6.   "Though the circumstantial evidence supports the assertion that Harper is insane".  The circumstantial evidence clearly supports Harper's claim that someone wants her dead.
7.   "arson fiasco." There is no fiasco.
8.   "the overarching theme barely moves forward." There are two main plot points of the series and they both move forward nicely.
9.   "Reyes "Son of Satan" Farrow, whom she kicked out of her life". The truth is that their relationship is anything but stagnant.

What’s missing:
1.   Charley begins to come into her power.
2.   The demons plan and execute a far more sophisticated and active strategy to get to Charley.
3.   The relationship between Charley and Reyes moves both overarching themes forward.
4    We learn more about what is needed for either side to win the final battle between good and evil.
5.   We learn more about Charley's back story and her purpose.
6.   Reyes is morphing into things that are important to the overarching theme.

Fury’s Kiss (A Midnight’s Daughter Novel), by Karen Chance
Corrections:
1.   "Fallen angels with malice" There were no fallen angels with malice.
2.   "Dory has controlled her urges by going after rogue vampires and evil demons."  She has other ways of controlling her urges.

What’s missing:
1.   At the heart of this book is the relationship between father and daughter and what went wrong.
2.   At the heart of this book is the lengths a father will go to save his child.
3.   At the heart of the book is Dorina's personal growth.
4.   Dory is possessed by not one, but two, entities at the same time.
5.   The book is laugh out loud funny.
6.   We learn about Louis-Cesare and what makes him tick.
7.   Dory gains a sidekick and another ally
8.   It's a love story on several levels.
9.   The setup is a plot to take over the world from the vampire senates.

Grave Memory (Alex Craft), by Kalayna Price
Corrections:
1.   James Kingsly never claims he was murdered.
2.   Alex is never concerned that she will be the next suicide victim.
3.   Alex is not concerned for her life.

What’s missing:
1.   Worldbuilding
2.   Self-discovery
3.   Fae intrigue
4.   Family revelations
5.   Body switching
6.   Possession and its side-effects
7.   Alex’s friends who are in trouble.
8.   Betrayal.

Gunmetal Magic, by Ilona Andrews
Corrections:
1.   The first paragraph happened in the previous book.
2.   Rebecca is not Raphael's fiancée.
3.   Rebecca does NOT work the case.
4.   Gunmetal Magic is not a serial killer case.
5.   The placement of “Magic” is in the title because it's Kate Daniels' world in the Magic series.
6.   This book focuses on a lot more than Raphael and Andrea fighting.

What’s missing:
1.   Andrea forces herself to come to grips with where she's been and where she wants to go.
2.   She almost dies.
3.   Ascanio is the third main player and almost steals the show.
4.   Old, heretofore unexplored myths and history combine to create an entirely new threat.
5.    New monsters of all kinds appear.
6.   We learn much about Andrea as a person.

Hitlist (Anita Blake), by Laurell K. Hamilton
Corrections:
1.   If you can call Seattle "near Tacoma", then it works. But the story occurs in Seattle.
2.   This is the first murder in Seattle, not the fourth.
3.   Anita is sent by the U.S. Marshal's service--not by high level officials.
4.   Not all of the Harlequin work for the Mother of Darkness.
5.   Chief Marshall Raborn does not prefer Anita to die.
6.   There is no one on Raborn's staff willing to make Anita's death happen or even think it.
7.   Some of the murders were violent and precise--not all of them as Harriet says.
8.   The sex is nothing at all like many of the previous books--quite aside from Harriet's take.
9.   "Blake takes SeaTac" never happens.

Magic Without Mercy (Allie Beckstrom), by Devon Monk
OK, so...is the pun on Shame's name intentional, or did you just skim and think that "the Shame" is an actual entity in the book that represents her guilt? Shame is a person; his full name is Shamus, and he's been in the series for ages.

Night Shift (Jill Kismet, Hunter), by Lilith Saintcrow
Corrections:
1.   Hunters protect humans against all manner of "other" nightlife, not just against hellbreed.
2.   The Church tells Jill that she is beyond redemption because she's a hunter--not because she consorts with the damned.
3.   Life was depressing for Jill when the book opens. She is alone. Her beloved master is dead--murdered by something other than a hellbreed.
4.   Shapeshifters are not Jill's enemies. Rogue murderers of any genus are.
5.   Jill protects all humans, not especially the children.
6.   Jill did not willingly choose to link with Perry. She was coerced by her master, Mikhail, to do it.
7.   Jill is called in when the police can't solve supernatural murders. The detectives hate, fear, and somewhat respect her.

What’s missing:
1.   Jill trains incessantly when she's not on the job.
2.   She teams up with a shapeshifting threesome who stay in her apartment to work the case.
3.   Perry, the hellbreed, is working his own angle.
4.   In spite of accepting her own damnation according to Church dogma, Jill prays with heartrending poeticism.
5.   Jill gets in horrific fights.
6.   She gets horrifically injured.
7.   She sees and experiences horrific things.
8.   A gentle and caring werecougar enters the picture who begins to put her personal space in order.
9.   Jill goes without sleep for days on end in order to solve cases.
10. She doesn't like to sleep because sleep brings nightmares.

Pale Rider by Kim Harrison
Corrections:
1.   Rachel has her aura; it was already restored before this book takes place.
2.   Pale Rider is Trent. Rachel takes him for a cross-country ride to fulfill his quest.
3.   Rachel wears the silver bracelet to prevent herself from pulling on leyline magic and thus exposing herself to the demon realm.
4.   Rachel did not choose isolation from her friends, she feels isolated because they are moving on with new relationships..
5.   The HAPA operatives haven't developed a weapon of mass destruction, they need Rachel's blood to make it work. Thus, the title, A Perfect Blood.
6.   Rachel couldn't come back from the dead because she wasn't dead in the first place.

Raven Cursed (Jane Yellowrock) by Faith Hunter
Corrections:
1.   Beast is a mountain lion whose conscientiousness shares Jane's body and mind, she's not a spirit.
2.   It's Kem, the African werecat, who first tells Jane about the grindylow; Jane finds the grindylow's fishy scent trail at the murders; and Beast follows the scent.

What’s missing:
1.   The omission of Jane's best friend and her best friend's family.
2.   The omission of Jane's boyfriend, Rick.
3.   The omission Jane's best friend's sister, Evangelina, who is central to the story;
4.   Leaving out the heart of the book -- the vampire negotiations.

The Shadow Reader by Sandy Williams
Corrections:
1.   McKenzie wasn't worried about taking eight years to get her BA; she was worried that failing the test for the third time would kill her chances at ever getting her degree.
2.   McKenzie's love for Kyol (who was fae) wasn’t taboo; the taboo was a hoax.
3.   The king didn't order McKenzie to find the rebels; the king ordered Kyol to retrieve McKenzie to help Kyol find the rebels.
4.   McKenzie is too busy trying to get back to Kyol to consider Aren's "just plea to join their side."
5.   Faerie is a land, a world, not a people. The people of Faerie are Fae.
6.   McKenzie has been in the fight willingly, but plans to quit the war once she can support herself.

Shadowfever  by Karen Marie Moning
Corrections:
1.   The Sinsar Dubh IS the book, it's not the "magical book of the dark Sinsar Dubh".
2.   Mac doesn’t think the Sinsar Dubh will tell her who she truly is.
3.   Mac doesn’t think the Sinsar Dubh will shed light on Alina's murder.
4.   Mac was never in the White Mansion with the Unseelie King.
5.   Mac will NOT do whatever it takes to achieve her goals.
6.   Mac was never an exile.

Shadows Before the Sun by Kelly Gay
Corrections:
1.   Alessandra has never offered help prior this time. It's not an "again".
2.   Circe is not someone's name. The Circe are three powerful witch sisters; it's plural.
3.   Tennin is barely mentioned and plays no role in this book.
4.   No. Ahkneri never wakes up. It simply didn't occur.
5.  "Which places Atlanta in peril." No. Once again, it didn't happen.
6.   The entire second paragraph is false.

What’s missing:
1.   The murder in the Pendaran’s grove which is part of the set up for the book and connects the beginning with the end.
2.   Charlie’s visions which are a critical element of the unfolding events.
3.   Cassandra’s central role.
4.   Two mysterious, powerful beings who become significant players of the present and future.
5.   Detail about the horrendously evil Circle.

Somebody to Love by Kristin Higgins
Corrections:
1.   James doesn't ask Parker to accompany her to help flip the place.
2.   "Parker begins to learn living without a gold spoon means accepting decisions you hate." No.  Not even a consideration.
3.   The Jefferson Airplane allusion fits nowhere.
4.   Parker learned to see her family, friends, and James as they are.
5.   There is absolutely no epiphany about the “1%” economic and social freedom.

The Hour of Dust and Ashes by Kelly Gay
Corrections:
1.   The trials by sylphs have nothing to do with Charlie's decision to go to Charbydon.
2.   "The two sleuthing partners . . ." Charlie and Hank aren't sleuthing partners. They're detectives who've been partnered together for many years.

What’s missing:
1.   Hank's back story
2.   The hellhound.
3.   Charlie's husband's release.
4.   The fascinating relationship Bryn has with her boyfriend.
5.   Charlie's daughter Emma,
6.   Charlie's continued evolution
7.   The near-death trials imposed on Charlie by the sylphs.
8.   Charlie's most terrible choice about the man she has fallen in love with.

Third Grave Dead Ahead by Darynda Jones
Corrections:
1.   Reyes Farrow is not a hybrid and he is not half human.
2.   Charlie’s Dad encouraged Charley's dangerous path, hasn't supported her since his remarriage, sacrificed her, and then jailed her because he can't bend her to his will.
3.   Stepmom could care less.
4.   Her sister and her uncle care too much to ask her to change careers.
5.   Dad and the rest of the family didn't know anything about the biker gang.

Missing:
1.   A sadistic murderer who’s after Charley.
2.   Charley not sleeping for weeks and the reason why.
3.   Reyes’ jail break.
4.   Hostage crises.
5.   Torture.
6.   Sister.
7.   Best friend.
8.   Guardian.
9.   Best male friend.
10. The haunted asylum.
11. Her ultimate break with Reyes?

Touched by an Alien by Gini Koch
Missing:
1.   "Kitty learns superbeings exist but unlike comic book superheroes they are not."  No.
2.   "As Jeff and Kitty are attracted to one another, she learns how to use weapons of evil alien destruction like hair spray." No, again.
3.   "Jeff and his peers from Alpha Centauri explain they came to earth tracking a nasty alien who has apparently taken control of a nasty terrorist chief." Wrong.

What’s missing:
1.   The threat of world domination.
2.   Kitty's awesome and funny parents.
3.   The real setting of the book that mostly takes place in Nevada.
4.   The romantic triangle.
5.   New friendships.
6.   The alien agency set up to help protect humanity.
7.   Showdowns with the monsters.
8.   All of the interesting secondary characters.
9.   The betrayals.
10. The unexpected trials that have to be overcome.