"If I Were You, I'd Save Myself The Trouble!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

                                           So, at a crucial point, does Ann Blyth, as Veda, say this to Joan Crawford in "Mildred Pierce."  It is equally applicable to this overlong, badly written  pan sexual redo of the  Leopold and  Loeb murder  case.

                                             Wait till you see the author's photograph.  I do not mean to cast asperions, but is this  a man or a woman?  Someone born a  woman, who now identifies as a man?  Or vice  versa?

                                                  It really doesn't matter.  If the novel were any good, things could be overlooked. As soon  as  the book  sets up Julian and  Paul as  intimates, I knew where this was headed.

                                                    In the Leopold and Loeb case both are wealthy, but Loeb moreso.  He is  also the more dangerous of the  pair.  The current novel inverts it; Julian, the wealthier, is closeted, more conforming,  and  afraid.  Paul,  the poorer, more dominant one, embraces his homosexuality to the point of  B and D,  S and M, and blood.  The book turned me off there.

                                                     They are more calculating than impulsive.  They systemtically select a  victim who clashes with their  socio-political idealogy, even though they never met  him.  They go so far as  to kill his dog, which gets them on my convicted list.

                                                        Ho-hum.  The rest  of the tale  is an on-the-run "Bonnie and Clyde" type saga,where one gets away, while the other is imprisoned either in a correctional facillty or mental  institution.  Who cares???????????????????????????

                                                         And yet I wanted to.  I have to credit the author; until I  read his acknowledgement, I never thought he had any knowledge of the Leopold and Loeb case, or  the  Parker-Hulme case, superbly and imaginatively dramtized in Peter Jackson's 1994 masterwork,  "Heavenly Creatures."  But he references both here.

                                                         Micah, dear, why didn't you learn anything from this trope???????? Specifically, why couldn't you do something  more imaginative and original, that would give the  reader a desire to go on?  Knowing this  trope, I was curious where it  might  lead.  The answer is nowhere.

                                                           This debut falls flat.  It does not endear me to read any further works of this  author.  Save your trouble,  girls,  as I said earlier.

                                                              And Micah, for career's sake, please develop some orginiality!!!!!!!!!!!!

                                                                "These Violent Delights" is anything but delightful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!