Review: David Baldacci's new YA fantasy THE FINISHER--not your normal Baldacci.

Mixed feelings on this. Would love your take on it if you read it.

The Finisher by David Baldacci  For aspiring writers, obtain a hard copy and edit the omniscient recaps and Mary Sue* angst out. Then read the flow to see an immediate improvement to the writing style. What were the editors and Baldacci thinking?

Goodreads review:
Starts slow; ends strong. Labelled as a stand-alone but feels like the first in a series. NOT FOR THE CRIME FICTION BALDACCI FANS. BE FOREWARNED. THE TITLE IS NOT AN ASSASSIN.

As a writer, I'm warned against so many things--which Baldacci (if this is truly Baldacci) breaks in this fantasy. Something the crime fiction writer Baldacci would never do. First, the MC begins weak and spends too much time mentally verbalizing her situation when the action and dialog clearly are sufficient. This is so agonizingly repeated and time consuming that I twice put the book down. The editors weren't tough enough, didn't bother, or the author wasn't up to the task. Crime fiction writer Baldacci knows better. So what the heck is going on? This was fixable, but wasn't.

The main character goes around obtaining magical items like a common & boring RPG game--all with too much Mary Sue angst. Yes, she grows into the power she obtains, but she falls and trips into them. She is constantly agonizing over her interior conflicts--that are no brainers for even the weak minded. Then you're hit once again by the ever yet repeated omniscient character voice, "If I had known this would happen, I wouldn't..." Then you live through what is going to happen. Complete novice writer foolishness. So frustratingly irritating. This was fixable, but wasn't.

The world is rich and unique but full of inconsistencies and the main character is too easily provided luck happenstance which is basic scifi/fantasy 'never do' rules. Again a clear sign of weak writing. Again, this was fixable, but wasn't.

"Yet, you give it a four star? What's with that, Meg?" you ask. Because it was fixable and the underlying story is worth the read and the frustration. Even I, an inept editor at best, could have made this worlds better with more tightening. In fact, I heard this rather than read the book. If I'd had the hard copy, I would have crossed off every foolish recap out of sheer anger.

The ending redeems it. The one on one Hunger Game-y type ending works although the reason for it being in the book is not explained, nor why this year--of all the world's history--adds in its 2nd class women to fight. At least it wasn't on a platter and she had to go through some clever plot twists to be included as a younger. (Redeeming feature.)

Why would Baldacci chose to write this barely disguised RPG? Does he have a young daughter ready to take off on her own? If so, okay. I see where it came from. It provides moral guidance and advice. It has super tension in the last 2/3s proving that the author has what it takes to sustain an excellent story, but will he do so?(Again, Baldacci has the proven skill...) Was this a case of a major adult writer saying, "It's just young adult?" I can't believe that David Baldacci would do that. This is simply too different from his other works--and more importantly an entirely DIFFERENT WRITING STYLE AND VOICE--so different that I again ask, "Did Baldacci really write this?"

If it had been properly edited, this could be a new Harry Potter--even a prequel to Harry Potter. The world does have incredible similarities. (Could it be there was another writer? I don't know and my mind can spin conspiracies.) I hope, if there are further books, the editors will actually put their hearts into helping Baldacci raise the bar considerably.

It also gets 4 stars for aspiring writers. Take your pen and get busy editing a hard copy and see how you can easily elevate, so damn easily, raising it to 5 stars.

*Unfamiliar with the term Mary Sue? Google it. I've included Priscella Spencer's Harry Potter's list that you'll need to modify. You'll have to move down to sections 3, 4, & 6 for the obvious ones here.

DON'T take me wrong. An author includes herself in every character, but the heavy interior angst in this book screams self-insertion--the author providing a point of view that is the character's.

Great Story First & the Trouble with Mary Sue Characters

Stuffing your tool box, improving your craft—those are your goals, not publication. All the world class marketing and publicity ideas can’t make up for the great book. All the complicated world building in the universe can't help. It takes a great book first. A stand alone, logical book with secrets and tensions and sparkly character distinctive dialog and rich layered quirky characters and incredible tight pacing. Include taste, smell, hearing, imagery for the eyes, touch—smell, touch, and taste being the hardest to apply. Do it until they drip off your pages, every page.

You can break the rules if you're Meg Rosoff (& congrats on her 2013 NBA finalist award BTW), and I can guarantee you aren't Meg Rosoff.

In RL, I'm a successful business professional and personally hire people on a regular basis. It's always a turkey shoot. The one you think is perfect is dismal. The one I think is a dud but something makes me reach out with an offer turns into the greatest employee with the most empathy for my clients. Apparently the same is true for aspiring authors. Yeah, I know. Should have seen that coming.

The difference is that some people are good employees and some are great interviewers. It is difficult to know which is which--even after all these years. The same applies to writers. Some can talk the talk to sound ready for publication. They have the terms, the concepts, the phrases to make you think they are ready. Then you read... and OMG.

Mary Sue is a term used to describe a character that is an author's self-insertion into the story. It can be idealized, it can be too perfect, or it can be so well masked that the author doesn't realize it. I'm not saying that authors do not instill something of themselves in ALL of their characters, and some more than others. They do. There is a difference however between the amateur and the professional.

The trouble that arises with a Mary Sue is when the writer's ego is tied up inexplicably in the self-inserted character so much that the plot dissolves to ridiculous extremes. It becomes an exercise in self-psychology which the author often ignores--no matter how blatant it is within the pages. If it is such an exercise, I hope she wakes up and reads between the lines to find a resolution to her problems.

I'm going to repeat my first paragraph, because the answer to writing is about your tool box: the number of tools you stick in there and your proficiency with which you apply them.

Stuffing your tool box, improving your craft—those are your goals, not publication. All the world class marketing and publicity ideas can’t make up for the great book. All the complicated world building in the universe can't help. It takes a great book first. A stand alone, logical book with secrets and tensions and sparkly character distinctive dialog and rich layered quirky characters and incredible tight pacing. Include taste, smell, hearing, imagery for the eyes, touch—smell, touch, and taste being the hardest to apply. Do it until they drip off your pages, every page.

Happy writing everyone.