Hush Hush by Becca Fitzpatrick

I never gave this book a proper review for several reasons.

One, is that I read and reviewed it before I'd even joined GoodReads and LOOOOOOooooooooonnnggg before I hit my bitchy stride.


Admittedly, Tatiana has been the one slipping them into my drinks.

Once I did read a wider variety of books, I eventually developed a healthy dislike for this book and everything it represents.

Yet time passed and I never edited this review.

Now Becca Fitzpatrick has written this blog post regarding aspiring authors and the need to "be nice" to the work of other authors.

It is at this point that I'd like to give an honourable mention to Katie-bab who did the following:

a) Commented on Becca's blogpost stating she felt Fitzpatrick was wrong, before;
b) Linking to her blog post that explains why she felt Fitzpatrick was wrong, and stating in said post that;
c) Hush Hush was a terrible book, Katie would NEVER recommend it to anyone and had included it in her list of 2009's worst books, and proceeded to;
d) Link to her own, highly critical review of Hush Hush.

Katie, I just want you to know, you're my hero.

But all of this, as interesting as it is, does not provide a review for this book, which leaves me in a conundrum.

Do I take Fitzpatrick's career advice, considering that I AM an aspiring author, and politely exclude my opinion of this book? Because, let's be honest. I DON'T have anything nice to say about Hush Hush.

Or do I rip it to shreds, as is my custom, and use its seeping internal organs to explain, in graphic detail, why nobody should ever buy this book?


Either I wipe my ass with this book and get bitten, or walk away covered in crap...

Decisions, decisions, decisions...

It's very rare that a book doesn't get SOMETHING right. Usually, even if the protagonists are crap, the supporting characters are okay, or the plot isn't too bad, or the writing is at least solid or even the concept is interesting.

For this book, it's a no, no, no, no, NO!

Nora and Patch are such miserably crafted characters that I would forever repeal my active anti-gun stance for the opportunity to shoot them in the face. Providing, of course, that I get to do Vee as well because that would just be an act of fucking mercy and frankly a public service.

There isn't a single character in this book that is, in any way, redeemable. Nora is pathetic in her constant switch between investigating (I use that term lightly) Patch for suspected murder, and getting turned on by him in dangerous situations. Leaving me wondering whether the author actually intends to romanticize abusive relationships to her age demographic, or whether that was just considered an added bonus.

Patch, unlike Edward and Sam from Twilight and Shiver, actually has a pair of balls and has not been completely emasculated. Then he uses them to sexually harass and intimidate Nora for almost the entire book. He manoeuvres her into dangerous situations with the apparent intention of either killing her or force seducing her. It's not really obvious while reading this book until you get to the end and discover (view spoiler)[ that it's both. (hide spoiler)]

How romantic.


Please excuse me while I have a perfectly valid reaction to the underlying messages of this novel.

The plot is nonsensical, with multiple plotholes and discrepancies. The writing is clunky, though to be fair, this was Fitzpatrick's first novel and I don't think it's entirely valid to criticize a learner writer on their writing. Unless you paid AU$22 for their book.

In which case, I did. So the writing is clunky and I'm going to be critical of it.

But should I really say all of this? I mean, as writers, aren't we all in it together? Aren't I going to begin submitting my manuscript to publishing houses shortly? Is it possible that my novel, whilst not intentionally written that way, could end up in the YA section? Shouldn't I have taken heed of Fitzpatrick's YAAB (Youse Are All Bitches) post and shut my mouth and walked away?

Maybe it would be a much better career choice. Maybe I'll one day rue my arrogance...


But it's not arrogance when it's the truth!

The thing is, my novel shouldn't be judged based on how many author's asses I've kissed. Nor should it be dismissed because I'm an unrepentant, opinionated bitch with no problems expressing myself. It should be judged on whether a publisher thinks it's going to be profitable, commercial and appropriate to print. The readers should then judge it on the exact same criteria that I just judged Fitzpatrick. And if I don't meet the fucking grade then I need to get better until I do.

Most people dislike critics because critics can stifle creativity. Well, some things need to be stifled. Where was a critic when this book was being edited to say, "Excuse me, Ms. Fitzpatrick, but I think we have a few issues..."? If one person had spoken up, allowing Fitzpatrick to make rewrites, then she wouldn't have to be posting YAAB blog entries about how mean reviewers/aspiring authors will get what's coming to them.

Writers and authors, me being one of them, need to eat some cement and harden the fuck up.

Yours sincerely,

Francois M. Schmid
(Which is totally, TOTALLY my...er... real name that I will be published under as opposed to Kat Kennedy...)