"Ruined"

"Ruined" by Paula Morris
Review written by Diana Iozzia






"Ruined" is a young adult fiction novel starring the main character, Rebecca. She recently moved to New Orleans, near the French Quarter, to live with her aunt and her younger cousin. Rebecca starts making new friends at her new school, and naturally, she makes a few enemies. Rebecca visits a cemetery nearby her apartment, which is practically in shambles post Hurricane Katrina. Rebecca meets a girl who she later finds out is a ghost named Lisette.

Throughout the novel, Rebecca finds herself hallucinating that she is back in the times of slavery, when Lisette's family were slaves. Not to give away the ending, which is pretty climatic and intriguing, Rebecca finds out that her ancestors are much more involved in the history of New Orleans than she'd like them to be.

I've read this book at least three to four times as a teenager, and it still holds a place in my heart as probably the first thriller book I read other than "Goosebumps".

"Dark Souls"

"Dark Souls" by Paula Morris
Review written by Diana Iozzia

"Dark Souls" is a young adult fiction novel, full of ghosts, thrilling romance, and exploration in historic York, England. I read this when I was in my teenage years, but I re-read this two summers ago, when I was visiting York, England.

Miranda and her family are on vacation in York for the summer, so her mother can participate in an orchestra program. Miranda makes friends with a hipster-like guy named Nick, who shows her around the city. Soon, you realize that Nick is very shady and might not be telling the entire truth about himself. With lots of haunted folklore, it creates a creepy setting for the lovely city. 

I personally enjoyed "Ruined" by Paula Morris much more than this book, but for a second novel, it was quite creepy and interesting. There is a great sequence before the final climax. Good read for a young adult novel with some thrills and chills.

"Surviving Death" by Leslie Kean

“Surviving Death” by Leslie Kean

Review written by Diana Iozzia

                “Surviving Death” is a book of accounts collected by Leslie Kean that she believes to be proof that there is an afterlife, or consciousness about death. Leslie Kean researched for years about certain people who had near death experiences. The main research type she collected is stories in which children knew information about real life people, but the children did not have any prior knowledge of these people.

                I am very skeptical about paranormal research and E.S.P. phenomena. Although Leslie Kean offers the names of many scientists and doctors, the evidence she provides is mostly based on word of mouth. In many occasions in the book, Kean discusses hypothesizes and conclusion. She mentions that hypothesizes should prove the data to be true, but scientific theory asks the data to prove the hypothesis to be true. We cannot use hypothesizes to explain data. Using the Scientific method, if the hypothesis is not proven by the data, the experiment is not accurate and must be tried again.

                There are many issues I have with this book. However, they are due to the content of this book, and not how this is written. The book is segmented into chapters, in which new stories are told in each. The first two chapters and half of the third both are about a little boy named James, who knew a great amount of information about a military pilot who died in Iwo Jima. However, can we prove that the parents are completely truthful? If we believe every word they say, can that be technically scientific proof? I don’t buy it.

                The writing skills of the author are great. She has a wonderful vocabulary. Her written explanations content makes for a great read, however, the science behind the content is a bit muddled. She is not a scientist, and she bases her research on stories and events she had personally experienced. Can we trust her to be a journalist who tells the truth and nothing but the truth?

                The author reiterated a Henry James quote, which is explained by if you don’t look for a difference of opinions, a change in what you believe, if you don’t have an open mind, you may not be enlightened. Does that not leave the burden of proof on the reader? I shouldn’t have to be the one looking for the proof and making sense of the evidence. If something is proved to be true, I shouldn’t have to dissect it to understand it, to find connections and draw conclusions.

                I liked this book, because of the head ache it gave me. However, I did not like the content.