The beginning of Maggots of Heresy has the voice of a history text. After that, we’re introduced to the scenes of a grisly murder depicted that is described as art. 

This bothers me.  Perhaps the author or the characters can find beauty in its feces covered ugliness, but I, as a reader, cannot.  The author then goes into a lengthy, philosophical-esque diatribe about how, exactly, this can happen because we don’t have to "approve of something to declare it beautiful" or because a "murderess can be beautiful" and other things. 

I know that as a reviewer I am to be objective, but this was such an immediate turn off I cannot help but mention it.  Also, it didn’t make sense to me—such deductions seemed illogical.  Sure a murderess can be beautiful, just like people can be beautiful, but that doesn’t mean that murderous acts are "beautiful"—that line of reasoning doesn’t flow.

After the "arty" murder is described, there is a bunch of dialog from the people about the man and who he was, but, as I continued to read, I didn’t really see what the point was for the murder or for the conversation.  Granted, I only read five chapters, but, from where I am now, I just don’t see the point.

This trend seems to follow through the five chapters that I read.  Characters are mentioned but never really introduced.  I never really got a feel for each character and, in fact, was often confused about who was who.  There are also long "philosophical" discussions that are little more than info dumps and entirely painful to read.

The story is very dialog heavy, which I find stunts the story itself, its flow, and its depth.

I am very well aware that I might be the wrong audience for this.  But as as editor—those are my thoughts on writing, story, and structure.

1 of 1 members found this review helpful.
Help us improve!  Register or log in to rate this review.