Beasts of Extraordinary Circumstance by Ruth Emmie Lang

Thank you, Goodreads, thank you. I know I should stop going on there and actually be creative and original enough to come up with new and exciting perspectives on these books I read, but why bother when Goodreads is such a fertile ground for such absolute tosspots? And there’s a word I’ve not used in a few decades…

Again, let me reiterate that I’m not having a go at people who don’t like the book. All those 1-stars from people who just didn’t like it are all fair enough. We don’t all like everything. One man’s Jimmy White is another man’s Jimmy Saville. No, I like to search through and find the complete twat muffins that bask in the joy of anger and negativity. Oh, and utter stupidity.

Talking of which, let’s start with Patricia who came up with one of my favourites straight away: “A little far fetched” stated Patricia. No fucking shit, Sherlock…it’s a fictional fantasy book. I can picture you watching Star Wars: “Seriously…how many robots do you know that are fluent in 6 million forms of communication? Ridiculously inaccurate”.

Barbara Shoop (stupid fucking name) gave it 1 star after only reading 18 pages. Well done Babs, you really hung in there. Alberta gasped “Finished, but barely”. How do you barely finish a book? Do you physically struggle to turn over the last few pages? Crabbymama (assuming that’s a reference to her lady garden) started her short and pointless review with “Worst Superhero book ever”. WTF? That’s like commenting that Cujo was a poor guide dog. This wasn’t a superhero book, Crabster.

Jennifer, a native of Montana where the book is set is “sick of others writing what they think Montana is like” and lumps Yellowstone in with this. She goes on to say (about wolves, which feature heavily in the book) “Wolves are savage animals! Ask the ranchers in the northwest! They kill just to kill! Not just for food which is what some would like you to believe. Look up wolves kill over two hundred sheep in one night eastern MT, leave them lying dead”. This may come as a shock to you Jen-babe, but this book is fiction. None of it is true. That’s what the word fiction means.

My favourite ‘review’ by far is from Scott, who wrote this baby: “This book was utter crap. Most people who would share my opinion probably would not bother to pick up this book in the first place, so my one-star review is a minority opinion here”. The level of big-headed fuckery on display here is astounding. What I think Scott is trying to say is that all the people who are exactly like him (i.e. opinionated wankers) are too smart to pick the book up in the first place, but if they did and then read it, hated it like Scott does and then reviewed it, would also give it a 1-star rating, hence increasing the number of 1-star reviews and their relative percentage against the 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-star reviews so that that percentage would actually be accurate, and not currently skewed as Scott thinks it is due to normal and sane and people not having read it, hated it and 1-star reviewed it. You with me? In summary, Scott hates the book so much that he thinks others exactly like him would also hate it. What Scott is likely forgetting is that there’s not too many twats like him and therefore the numbers are all about right.

As I think with all books, you might like it, you might not. I loved it; loved the story, thought the writing was beautiful, was able to suspend my disbelief for long enough to realise it’s a fantasy story and very likely not true and thought the book was pretty magical if I’m honest.

Leave a comment