Carrie kind of cheated, by posting a one-sentence summary today, which is about four days after the deadline. But it was excellent! Should I reward her tardiness by saying how much I like it? Yeah, I think I’ll do that, because she’s way too late to be eligible for the prize, which I already handed out.
A forensic artist stumbles upon the killing grounds of a vengeful serial killer.
Randy sez: Hey, this is really good! I like it. Let’s see why this is so good:
1) Forensic artist–this is good. It tells us quickly that we’ve got an interesting character.
2) Killing grounds–a cliche, but a good cliche. And stumbling on it tells us this artist is gonna be in jeopardy. Very good! The one thing I’d say is make it “stumbles on” rather than “stumbles upon.” I have no idea which is more grammatically correct, but mine sounds less pedantic.
3) Serial killer–yes, yes, yes! That hits all the right hot buttons. I’d say to lose the adjective “vengeful.” Personally, if I’m up against a serial killer, I really don’t care if he’s vengeful or not, because the guy is bad news. Drop the dead weight word.
So my suggestion:
A forensic artist stumbles on the killing grounds of a serial killer.
I like it! I’d buy this book!