[ SECRET POST #6762 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6762 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________

















06. [WARNING for discussion of death, rape/sexual assault]





















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #965.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

04. https://i.imgur.com/6PhrPLn.png

[(Anonymous)]

I guess if I had to choose a descriptor for her writing, it would be 'serviceable'. So, I'm with you there. I'm not sure having serial killer in your life should be considered lucky, though. There are a number of true crime writers who got their start by being close to a crime in one way or another, so that just feels like an aspect of the genre.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

I wasn't saying she was lucky to have a serial killer in her life. She's lucky to have had that close encounter that didn't end with her getting hurt, but did end with her making a lucrative career out of true crime writing when she's not a naturally gifted writer.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, people in true crime always talk about her book (just the one) like it's so amazing and when I finally sat down and read it I was disappointed. It's Not Good. I think if she hadn't had that connection to Bundy she wouldn't have had a career in writing at all.

[(Anonymous)]

It was one of the earliest, really BIG true crime books, about one of the most famous serial killers, written by someone who was personally acquainted with him. That's a lot to coast on, so a lot of people rec her. But to be honest, great writing in the true crime genre isn't really the standard, IMO.

[(Anonymous)]

True. There are very few rare gems of actual good writing in the genre.

[akacat]

Are you talking about her in present tense on purpose, or is that just a grammatical oops?

I enjoyed the one book of hers that I read. Too bad my library doesn’t have anything of hers in ebook format.

[(Anonymous)]

I didn't know she'd passed away, tbh. She's not absolutely terrible, and like another nonny said, her writing is best described as "serviceable". The material is what's interesting, not her approach.

[(Anonymous)]

What always irritated me about her writing was how insistent Rule was on stating over and over how attractive or glamorous or "ruggedly handsome" (one of her favorite descriptors) the killers or victims were, then you turn to the photo pages only for them to look quite ordinary. Not saying Ann Rule should have described everyone as looking like they fell off the back end of a tractor, but it was just annoying.

[(Anonymous)]

Ha, right? She's not alone in describing Ted Bundy as good looking, for example... and then you see a really ordinary guy with a unibrow and think damn, raise your standards.