Book Review: Ghost Stories; Whit Taylor.

Here's the thing. I thought the cover of this graphic novel was so cute and the premise looked promising. Everything else...I really didn't like.

SOURCE: Netgalley
TYPE: E-Read

TITLE: Ghost Stories
AUTHOR: Whit Taylor
SERIES: --
PUBLISHER: Rosarium Publishing
PAGES: 157
GENRE: Young Adult, Graphic Novels, Contemporary

RATING: 1/5 Stars

Blurb:
Ghost Stories is a graphic novel collection offering three haunting explorations.

Granted the chance to meet three of her dead idols in "Ghost," the author’s cartoon-self embarks on a journey to remote and unanticipated landscapes, in a story of self-discovery and healing. In "Wallpaper," a child tells the story of a household move, remodel, and loss through the lens of flashbulb memory. And in "Makers," two girls with an unorthodox friendship make a rocky transition into adulthood. 

Throughout each tale, ghosts exist as past selves and remnants of past relationships that are met with inquiry, resolution, and personal rebirth.

What I Liked:

• Uhh...like I said, the cover? Seriously guys. I struggled with this one and spent the whole read trying to make sense of and like something. I failed.

What I Disliked:

• The stories were so disappointing. I already knew they weren't going to be creepy, I didn't feel misled by the title in any way (a lot of people were though). However, I was expecting deep and reflective. I got what felt like a load of nonsense. There was no point to any of them - 'Ghost' felt more like a poor theory lesson on Campbell and Darwin's life work more than anything. 'Wallpaper went by so quickly that I did not get a story from it at all. And 'Makers' felt...pointless?
• The art...meh. It was rough. Like looking at a twelve year old's homework, not the work of a professional artist. It might sound harsh but I really hated it and I felt pretty cheated. Even the wallpaper designs for story two really didn't entice me, and the odd glimmer of 'oh that panel looks semi-okay' is not what I expect to find in published work.
• The work is riddled with grammatical and factual errors? Firstly referring to a companion as 'me and <name> went to...' made me inexplicably angry. 'NAME'. AND. I.' Also, don't make a joke about the moon by referring to it as a planet? It's a moon. Which is why it's called the moon.

Overall Conclusion:

Hmm. Maybe I've been harsh but I really felt very negatively about this work. It felt, above all, that it had been lazily handled by all parties. An editor really ought to have gone through this with a fine tooth comb but it really showed that this hadn't happened. I expected way more than I got and it left me feeling very lacklustre about the whole thing.