Official Review: Running Amok by Paul Hughes

[joellas]

Now I know am not alone in this. I so hate character overload by authors, having to flip back to recheck the different characters is quite tedious.

[CasualBookReader]

[Following is an official OnlineBookClub.org review of "Running Amok" by Paul Hughes.]

---

3 out of 4 stars

---

Share This Review

---

Running Amok by Paul Hughes is a C/T/M/H novel that immerses the reader into a world of plotting, manslaughter, and suspense to relate the story—set in the 1960s—of a New Scotland Yard (NSY) Detective Sergeant (DS) Kevin Devlin. The DS has just moved from Glasgow to a “swinging” London. While heading to work after a good old gym workout, he gets tailed by a stranger. Though Devlin “almost” captures his follower, the DS ends up with a concussion, requiring six stitches to his head. And this event marks Devlin’s official entry into the tricky web of conspiracy and murder that the NSY has been trying to break out of for quite some time.

With a new boss to report to—thanks to the old one being murdered—can Devlin work the never-ending string of mysterious cases out or will he join the line of people getting murdered one by one? Are some members of the MI5 involved in these murders?

Running Amok is book 2 of the DCI Spearing and DI Devlin Series. I have not had the opportunity to read book 1 yet, and so I had no idea what to expect from this one. However, the way the author managed to create the perfect blend, introducing tidbits from the personal lives of the main characters in between episodes from their professional lives, piqued my interest and the story seemed to flow smoothly without a hitch thereafter.

The author successfully creates the feel of the “psychedelic period” of England, when drinks and drugs flowed freely, the Beatles had weighed in with their iconic “Sergeant Peppers” album, Jimi Hendrix had emerged in that “Purple Haze,” and the peace movement and protests proclaiming the need for love set the mood along with the weed. When Hughes says it is 1967, you can imagine 1967 even if you haven’t seen that time period yourself in life. That’s how well the author has set the background for the story.

The book has brilliant character development—from those of the officers’ assistants right down to the murder victims (and there were many of the latter). While the author masterfully created two strong, capable female characters that are said to be in an intimate relationship, the readers were also given an insightful look into the changing laws on homosexual relationships during that period.

What I didn’t particularly like about the book is how it had a “congested” feel due to an overload of characters. Due to this, I had to flip back pages several times and reread some sections just to make sure I wasn’t confusing the characters. Some scenes ended too abruptly and I was left feeling that some of these chapters are just too dry and unsatisfying. For instance, the chapter that introduces one of the main characters of the book—The Fox—was too short, not overly informative, and confusing for the most part. If the character means enough that he is given an entire chapter just for introduction, I think he deserved to be presented better to the readers. There were also errors like missing and misplaced words and punctuation, awkward sentences, and multiple grammatical issues.

Owing to the aforementioned errors, I award this book 3 out of 4 stars. A gory scene describing the events connected to a particular murder makes the book inappropriate for young readers. However, if you love reading stories of murder conspiracies, then you will appreciate this book.

******
Running Amok
View: on Bookshelves | on Amazon

Like Samy Lax's review? Post a comment saying so!

That definitely sounds like something I would enjoy reading!!

[MagensWife1995]

Manslaughter and suspense? Count me in! This book sound so interesting, I love creepy and suspenseful books. This one is my type. I will have to read it soon.

[T_stone]

Good conspiracy plot. Character overload won't really matter if they are well shown. Would be a very easy book to read without so much characters.
Good review

[grace8031]

Murder, plotting and mystery are kind of my books . seems DI Devlin is in for a ride . Would love to know what he finds out

[T2theTABU]

Excellent review, though this is definitely not my genre. It takes a patient reader and reviewer to read the entire thing despite awkward sentences and so many other spelling/grammar errors. I just posted my first review and gave the book a 2 out of 4 despite having no apparent spelling/grammar/punctuation issues! Perhaps I'm too harsh! I definitely love an author who pays attention to tone and setting though, so it's wonderful to hear this author called up the spirit of 1967 for you.

[Mhiz Haryourmiedae]

I so much love books set in the 60s,it's so inspiring though I haven't finished it.Ill be sure to finish it soon....Nice job

[Leslie123]

Being a freshman in this field, i could say that i cant remember all the names and their roles in the story. Might as well limit the characters and focus on the storyline. Thanks!

[[Valerie Allen]]

Good review. No doubt it, this book seems to be running amok.

[Sumra Abbas]

Its nicely written novel. However, multitude characters sometimes sabotage its taste. Fewer characters keep reader more engaged - being suggestive. Overall its plot is appealing as it supports my taste.

[Lisa A Rayburn]

Not really a genre I usually pick up and your review pretty much sealed that decision. Add in the overcrowding of characters and the confusion that causes and it makes it a definite pass. Thanks for the review! I'd rather learn that I probably won't like a book BEFORE I actually wade into it and end up stopping.

[teevic_o]

I completely understand how extreme insight of a character can feel confusing and congested, but I'd like to agree to disagree. I for one enjoy 'cracking' complex characters and trying to find out if I can guess the character just by their behaviour for instance. I am a sucker for books with character development, though I'm not a thriller and suspense fan, this review has definitely done a convincing job of persuading me.

[EvaDar]

When Hughes says it is 1967, you can imagine 1967 even if you haven’t seen that time period yourself in life. That’s how well the author has set the background for the story.

How great that this author was adept at creating a vivid narrative. I would enjoy being caught up in the 60s in England. Thanks for the beautiful review.

[Kgaelsdottir]

This is one I'd like to read as it sounds fascinating; I just often get hung up on grammatical and punctuation errors. And if I have to refer back to former pages to try to understand who a character is, because it's perhaps one or two too many to keep reasonable track, that's another frustration I might not enjoy too much.

[Rick Swan]

I for one completely commiserate with your dislike for character overloads. If there is a multitudinous array of people to follow, I fervently wish for character lists.
I appreciated your thoughtful review!

I am glad I found someone who agrees with me on the character overload point. It gets tedious sometimes. Books go up several levels just when this one wrinkle is ironed out.

Thanks for stopping by and leaving a comment!

Agreed. It's frustrating having to reread sections. Thanks for bringing that point up in your review.