The Recovery Agent (review)

I have read quite a few of Janet Evanovich’s Stephanie Plum novels. They are enormous fun, though they do get a bit repetitive as you progress into the later books in the series. I just recently read the Recovery Agent which is the start of a new series by Evanovich with the protagonist Gabriella Rose. She is an independent contractor who works mainly for insurance agencies to find items that have been lost. Unlike Stephanie Plum, Gabriela Rose is very competent at her job, is well established, and is making a good living. This first outing of hers concerns a job she is doing for her own family: finding a legendary treasure that will help her to save the family home and town.

My main criticism with the book is that things happen too easily. They encounter problem after problem, but each problem is not carried out to its logical conclusion. Things just fall into place for her usually without consequence. They find the strongbox under the floorboards, just where the ghost Annie told Grandma it would be. The box yields maps and a diary by Francis Drake that tell them where in Peru to go look for the treasure. To which my response was ‘Hello, to hell with trudging through the Peruvian jungle to look for something that may or may not be there. You have the notebook of Francis Drake! Just cash that in!’ Instead, they go to Peru and fight crazy cult members, deal with underground tunnels and drug lords. The crazy cult leader follows them home and causes more problems but the good guys never seem to be in serious peril because we see how easily they get out of tight situations every time (even when by all the rules of logic, or just the law of averages say they shouldn’t). Also, the bad guy is too much a cartoon villain to be taken seriously

For all of the above reasons, I was going to give this book 2 stars, but . . . there is an undeniable fun factor in all of Evanovich’s books and that is present here as well. There are funny characters, a likable protagonist, and good crisp dialogue. So, three stars it is.

Star Liner

Comments

A Child of the . . .

What was it like to grow up as a child in the 90s? How about the 1940’s? Thinking about a child growing up in each different decade, conjures up images in my mind. But that is all they are: images. I was a child in the 1960’s. I can tell you what it felt like to be growing up in the 60’s and 70’s, but what it felt like to me is not what the history books remember. History will tell you the 60’s was about the Viet Nam War, civil rights, and the space race. The 70’s was Disco and Watergate. I remember being aware of all of those things, but to me this era was about finding time to play with my friends, something I probably share with a child of any decade. It was about navigating the social intricacies of school. It was about the Beatles, Three Dog Night, The Moody Blues, The Animals, Jefferson Airplane. It was Bullwinkle, the Wonderful World of Color, and Ed Sullivan. There are things that a kid pays attention to that the grown-ups don’t. Then there are things the adults ...

Bureaucrats

I am one of those nameless, faceless bureaucrats. Yes, that is my job. Though I actually have a name; I even am rumored to have a face. Bureau is the French word for desk, so you could say bureaucrats are “desk people.” In short, I work for the government. I sometimes have to deliver unpleasant news to a taxpayer. I sometimes have to tell them that the deed they recorded won’t work and they will have to record another one with corrections. Or we can’t process their deed until they pay their taxes. I can understand why some of these things upset people. The thing is, we don’t decide these things. It is not the bureaucrats that make the laws. The legislature writes the laws. We are required to follow the law. If you are going to get mad at someone, get mad at the legislature. Or maybe get mad at the voters who voted the legislature in (That’s you, by the way). The same thing happens when the voters vote in a new district, or vote for a bond, or a new operating levy for an ...

Telephonicus domesticus

Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone from 1877 bears about as much similarity to the modern smart phone as an abacus bears to a PC or Mac. There are just about as many leaps in technology in both cases. It’s funny how a major jump in technology happens (like the actual invention of the phone). Then there are some refinements over a few years or decades until it gets to a useful stable form. Then it stays virtually the same for many years with only minor innovations. The telephone was virtually unchanged from sometime before I was born until I was about forty. Push-buttons were replacing the rotary dial, but that was about it. (Isn’t it interesting though that when we call someone, we still call it “dialing?” I have never seen a dial on a cell phone.) Cell phones were introduced and (once they became cheap enough) they changed the way we phone each other. New advancements followed soon after, texting and then smart phones. Personal computers were also becoming commonplace and wer...

A speculative mind

Search This Blog