Nothing to Fear But Ferrets [Mass Market Paperback]

First-research. If you are writing a series about animals, and you are using a species you haven't first hand knowledge of, is it OK to fudge facts assuming your readers won't know or care anyway?

Regarding any research-is it OK to fudge say, facts about the Middle Ages, or how to fire a particular gun, or make up some poison to create a murder method?

My opinion is, if you have a particular subject you are writing about, get the most accurate info about the subject you can, check and recheck your facts, because the reader is trusting the writer's knowledge and takes this info away from the book believing what was described about the subject is truth.

This is particularly important if the entire series is bulit around the premise of a pet sitter.Of course, not many writers are familiar with the ferret species, especially if not ferret owners. But if one is writing an entire plot revolving around ferrets, doesn't it behoove the writer to learn all salient facts?

I started reading this mystery of a pet sitter detective, Ms. Ballantyne and the facts regarding ferret behavior started off dead wrong, and continued along those lines throughout the book.

Granted, the detective lives in CA, ferrets are illegal, and she had to use the Internet to get info about them. Having done that, the detective still thinks it may be possible that ferrets ate a corpse. Not to the bone, mind you, but bites about the entire body. And she wasn't thoroughly convinced they didn't kill the victim to begin with.

Now, my question is, if the detective used the Internet, didn't the author writing the novel also use the Internet for info? And if so, didn't she read enough to understand that ferrets do not "make noise" when frightened-and wouldn't have been frightened by a car crashing through a wall to begin with? More likely, they would want out of the cage to explore the bucket seats. I won't even get into the likelihood of vampire ferrets.

And why does she confuse a domesticated ferret with Black Footed ones (*not* domesticated and not even related to the domesticated ferret) that are a hair's breath from extinction, and *not* roaming around North Dakota--and I'm referring to both species here.

So, research is very poor for this book, something non ferret fanciers may be able to overlook.

Stereotypical characters. The author kept making pointed remarks about a couple of characters' weight-to the point that the unpleasantness of one character's personality was almost defined by her being fat. Someone needs to inform this author that stereotyping people like that in fiction went out with Simon Legree and Little Nell on the railroad tracks.

Other characters, such as the pain in the behind cop, the oh-so-sexy private eye (or law enforcer) love interest, the male best friend pet spa owner, are standard in practically every amateur detective novel. No originallity here.

There are quicker, better ways of summorizing the first book's high points than the redundant recounting of them throughout the first couple of chapters. I felt as though I already read the book after the multiple references.

The plot isn't original or interesting-other than the idea of Bela Legosi ferrets.

I usually don't critize crime fiction I don't like. It is a matter of taste in many instances. But the severe lack of facts, plus irritating characters and plot, compelled me to take a stand for once.

Diane Plumley

Former Editor--Dastardly Deeds

I guess if I didn't actually own ferrets I would have enjoyed this book more. Ferrets are probably the most misunderstood domestic animal around and suggesting that a 2lb ferret (albet 4 of them)could kill a grown man and eat his face off is just plain absurd, and does not help the image of these wonderful animals. I know about literary license but pleeese! If you're going to write a book with an animal as the prime suspect the least you can do is a little research. Okay, I admit that I was expecting too much from a paperback mystery, but it would have been nice if she explored the ferrets personalites a little more. I mean, if it was called Nothing to Fear But Bunnies I would expect some insight on bunnies! As for as the rest of the book . . . I liked Kendra's character but I had a hard time getting past the ridiculous ferret face-eating plot and the whole story seemed to drag.

Wow, this book is just BAD BAD BAD.

Not only does the author obviously know NOTHING about ferrets (very poor attempt at research, she had many facts just plain wrong), but the writing in this book is also pretty darn poor. I have read many other teen books (I can only hope this was intended for young teens, not adult fiction!) and this one is definitely more poorly written than average. I could only read the first 17 pages before I just couldn't take anymore - I had to skim the rest. The characters are silly, vacant and poorly written - I found myself rolling my eyes and groaning more times than I could count! The fact that this book has an average rating of four stars is even worse - if THIS book has a four-star average, what good is the rating of books in general!?

Overall, I got the impression this book was written over a weekend - and that includes research time. Not worth the effort - if you like animals and want to read young teen animal books, skip this one and try Bunnicula or The Black Stallion instead.

› Go to Amazon.com to see all 12 reviews  3.5 out of 5 stars