The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo by Stieg Larsson >!has the rapist/murderer psychopath villain antagonist being chased by the protagonists. At which point the antogonist (deliberately) crashes his car and dies.!<

As a reader, there’s less satisfaction in this than pretty much any other options. In the US film version, it’s incredibly anti-climactic. I’ve always found it an odd choice.

There are a few Agatha Christie novels where she gives you enough clues to know that it’s any of these five or so people, but usually nothing that will rule out any of those five. Kind of a strength of her writing. You can just imagine her revelling in messing with the reader …

If I remember correctly, Cormoran Strike #3 really gives you the clues you need to pin the baddie … In Cormoran Strike #6 you’re given plenty of options, plenty of evidence, and in my case, actively want to look deeper into it. Kind of feel like the author was more comfortable with that novel than any of the earlier ones and just enjoyed writing the twists and turns.

Was not a fan of Breakfast of Champions either. It’s quite some time since I read it, but I’ve never come to understood why that one in particular is so popular.

However, I have not read Cat’s Cradle and have been unsure about going into it. Unfortunately, your review doesn’t really give any actual examples of how Vonnegut is ‘condescending’ or ‘arrogant’, nor how the book ‘beats shallow nihilism over the reader’s head the entire time while ignorantly bashing on those with different views’. Do you think you could expound on this? You’re obviously quite certain about it and probably have examples bursting out of you. Please just pop a few in to help illustrate your point.

Is it also possible to explain why the characters ‘were one dimensional cardboard cutouts’ by stipulating what was missing from their characterisations - and why Vonnegut did not choose to leave this missing on purpose which might not be inappropriate if there’s so much nihilism - because at the moment, your review doesn’t really convince me of anything. I’ve definitely found thin characters in Vonnegut before, but I’ve always found he gives them something in an effort to add depth to them, although I’ll also argue this doesn’t always work. As such, your insights here would be pretty interesting.

You’ll also have to forgive me, but with the total lack of examples in your review, I genuinely thought you were just an edgy high-school student. Do you think you pop in a few more details? It would be much appreciated and hopefully add to the strength of your arguments. Cheers!

Many of you will disagree, but James Patterson used to write incredible first chapters. If you read the first chapter, you would at least start on the second one. However, this is what introduced me to writers who pour everything into the first chapter, then let tension, excitement, forward movement, etc. go out the window in the second chapter. As such, nowadays, I’ve often found it’s the second chapter where I want to be amazed but don’t really expect to be …