Electric Angel by Sue Dent. Book review

ELECTRIC ANGEL by Sue Dent, Black Bed Sheet Books, $12.98, http://blackbedsheet.goshopper.net/

Reviewed by Maryann Boo

Electric Angel is Sue Dent’s third novel, a departure from her Thirsting for Blood series. Cancer sufferer Anna Chadwick is pregnant with twins and when she learns one will be stillborn she prays and the eponymous entity arrives with an offer to replace it.

Sue has produced another page turner and truly original concept and I am very excited for her next book.

22 Comments on Electric Angel by Sue Dent. Book review

  1. Thank you Maryann!!! (((((hugs)))))) Now stop working so hard!!

  2. It’d be interesting to hear what other BFS reviewers thought of Sue Dent’s books. I read the sample chapter of this one, and I thought it was awful (http://merau.pair.com/sdent/electricangelfirstchapter.%20-%20Sue.pdf).

  3. LOL And that’s what sample chapters are for. By all means, don’t read the rest of it! *egads* No one’s work appeals to everyone but thanks for sharing your opinion. Would hearing what others think about a story you don’t like change your opinion? I doubt it. So why be interested. There are other reviews available. But again. I don’t see your point. Not that there has to be one.

  4. Oh and for the record, that’s not the first chapter it’s a small section of the first chapter. At any rate, it’s clear it doesn’t “float your boat” so I’d pretty much suggest you stay away from it. Why torture yourself? As a writer, iIt’s certainly not my intent to torture you thus the sample segment. You don’t like it, don’t read it. Please!!!!!

  5. CarolineC // March 31, 2012 at 9:50 pm //

    Well, we all have different views on what we like and what we don’t like. It’d be a boring old world if we all liked the same things! Sue – many people must like your books, so don’t mind those that don’t. Besides, Stephen linking to that sample might send a few more potential readers in your direction so he’s really being helpful! 😉

  6. Well one thing his linking did was to remind me that I haven’t actually posted the entire chapter. LOL I do feel in this day and age of “let me throw something out there and see if it sticks” writing, the reader deserves at the very least the first chapter to make sure the writer is at least “readable” and that the story looks like something that might interest them. And yes, quite a few do enjoy my stories but even at that I would’ve quit writing a LONG time ago there’s actually no way to make a living doing it. So sad. I’ve stuck with it though due to receiving wonderful validation such as being on the 2007 Bram Stoker Preliminary Ballot for Superior Achievement in a First Novel and the 2009 BFS long list. And there are other reviews out there, Mr. Theaker, of my work but it doesn’t meet your criteria of being from a different BFS reviewer. But as far as that goes, one can’t have their book reviewed by multiple BFS reviewers. Please correct me if I’m wrong. Actually, I didn’t ask for this review. I was asked if I’d allow BFS to review it.Why? Because BFS is awesome like that. Thank you Caroline. 😉 It’s all good.

  7. Sue, the thing is, this is the only reviewer from the BFS to have reviewed any of your books, as far as I can remember. All the reviews have been quite complimentary, and you’ve used those endorsements prominently on your books and your blog. Fair enough. Maryann clearly loves your work.

    And yet the sample of this novel is, in my opinion, really bad. I’m sorry, but that’s my honest response. In that context, it would be interesting to hear what a different BFS reviewer – one of our more regular reviewers, perhaps – thinks of your next book. It’s just good to get different points of view.

    As far as this review goes, it would certainly have been good to hear more about what Maryann liked about it, and why. This would have been a perfectly good one-line Twitter review, but as a BFS member I’d usually hope for a bit more depth from a BFS review.

  8. Oh how I’d love to respond to the last comment you made and all its wonderful mute points but I’ve been told by others in the BFS to tell you to f**k off! And so I shall. “F*ck off!” It seems you carry a lot of baggage with you. If you’d like, you can unload it http://www.SueDent.net where I’d be more than happy to go head to head with you in “my yard!” Thank you once again Maryann for honoring me with your review. Thank you Craig for posting it. And yes Maryann the third book is coming along nicely. Yay!!!! ;D

  9. Jim Steel // April 2, 2012 at 12:04 am //

    It only takes one nomination from one (1) member to get on the BFS longlist, Sue. I have no idea if it is the same for the Stokers preliminary ballot although I suspect the clue is in the word ‘preliminary’. But congratulations on your achievements!!!!

  10. You are correct, Jim, it does only take one vote to get on the preliminary ballot. At a certain date, those with the top 5 most recommendations (plus any added nowadays by the respective juries) go on to the nominations list. This is the only one that matters. It is from this small list of nominated works that the Active Members of the HWA vote for the winning entry.

    Mind you, quite a few brilliant works never get more than one recommendation, especially if they’re published outside the States (where most of the HWA’s members are). Quite often I’ve been the sole recommender of a work published here – works which, in my view, deserved to go much further. But that’s another issue.

  11. It’s worth bearing in mind, though, that votes, even for winners in either the Stokers or the BFAs, are still relatively small. Both only have a tiny electorate, numbering in the low hundreds.

  12. Steel! That’s my maiden name only with an “e”! It takes a few more recommendations to make the Bram Stoker Preliminary Ballot though I forget exactly as I didn’t expect to get them with all the wonderfully talented writers out there. Making the Preliminary Ballot for the Stokers is a big deal. The HWA even sends out a Press Release. I wasn’t aware what it took to make the BFS long list as I didn’t submit nor worry about ever ending up on it. What a surprise to learn that I did! And thank-you for your Congrats.Nice to be noticed for what I hope to make a living doing someday . . . before I die. HA!

  13. I guess I won’t be getting my one nomination from Theaker! *Sue covers mouth with hand.* Did I just type that? I think I did!!

  14. Also, if you actually make the Preliminary Ballot, it’s in the by-laws that you can use that to advertise your work. You’re forbidden to advertise that your work is “under consideration” because technically “every” horror authors work is “under consideration.” So yeah, making the Preliminary Ballot is a HUGE deal. ESPECIALLY when you’re up against Stephen King and the like. 😉

  15. I’ve read all of Sue’s books and this latest one nearly gave me a paper cut, I was turning the pages so fast. Family completed neglected. LOL Turns out, I wasn’t the only one who felt that way. You can see what others are saying on Amazon.

    Looking forward to the next book from the Thirsting For Blood series.

    My fave part about Sue’s writing? It reads like you’re watching a really good movie. I like well written stories that totally suck you in and flood your imagination.

  16. Sue, I’ve been enjoyably bemused by your blog post, the Facebook rants, the t-shirts, the wishing to run me over in a car, etc. I don’t feel I need to address every point you’ve made regarding my comments above, since you’ve been kind enough to quote them in full on your blog and the quality of your writing on there makes my point more powerfully than I ever could. But I am puzzled by your frequent references to my only having read 3 or 4 paragraphs of your work. The sample to which I link above contains, at my count, 35 paragraphs.

  17. Well, I read the sample. To be completely honest, it didn’t blow me away. The situation was interesting, but I didn’t find a lot of suspense or emotional connection to the character, and the description didn’t have as much flavor as I preferred. I don’t know, maybe horror books just aren’t my cup of tea. Not a bad opening. Just one that didn’t hold my interest.

    Ms. Dent, I have to say, it’s probably better if Theaker was allowed to have his opinions without people yelling at him. I don’t see much aggression or bullying coming from his side. You are the one making T-shirts that mock him.

  18. David A. Riley // April 10, 2012 at 12:30 pm //

    There was a discussion in the HWA some time ago about issues like this and the agreed advice was to ignore any adverse reviews. However irritating or otherwise they may be to the writer, they will almost certainly come over worst in any exchange and only help to publicise any bad comments even more. A dignified silence is the best answer. After all, the reviewer may be right. Usually, in my own case, I’ve found this to be the case, a hard pill though it sometimes is to swallow. In any case, no amount of attacking the reviewer is going to make a writer look better or change their stance.

  19. Sue, bad reviews almost never hurt an author. Every book out there has bad reviews. But authors reacting badly to bad reviews … that, madame, does indeed hurt authors. You’ve made it so I’ll remember your name, and will avoid your books. If I buy a book by an unknown author, and make no mistake, you are unknown, I consider it a favor to that author that I’m giving them a shot. I could buy a Stephen King book and be guaranteed a good read, but for whatever reason I decide to give a newbie a shot. I won’t be wasting my money on a book by any author who tells reviewers to F**K off.

    Take a page from real, professional authors and act … wait for it … PROFESSIONALLY.

  20. Agreed, Mr. Riley and I actually wish there were some way to go back and rework how I responded. It just sort of caught me off guard and one rarely reacts wisely in those situations. To be clear though, it wasn’t Mr. Theaker’s words about the few paragraphs he read that caught me off guard. I just couldn’t wrap my mind around what he was suggesting I do by asking for another reviewer. To the best of my knowledge BFS doesn’t give you that choice. For the record, the blog expressing my confusion over his suggestions has been changed to read: matter resolved. And I hope that does the trick for Mr. Theaker. I’m sure he still hates my writing but I can live with that. 😉

  21. No. Wait. The blog title has now been changed to “Sue Dent apologizes to Stephen Theaker *gasp.*

  22. Sue, thank you for your apology, which is gratefully accepted. Thank you also for taking down the blog posts. Best of luck with your future projects.

Comments are closed.