A murderer in police custody kills his interrogators and escapes—and now Detective Joe is dragged into the station, hungover, and put in charge of the case. The case has more mysteries than anyone expected, though: a mysterious society, religious serial killers, and ghosts from Joe’s past. Still haunted by the death of his partner, Joe has to choose between hunting down old enemies or new ones—or does he?
| Release Date | October 1, 2021 |
| Publisher | Self-published |
| Content Warnings | Gore, violence, death, sexism, racism, ableism |
| Did I receive an ARC? | Yes |
| Links | Amazon | Goodreads |
Shells is Joshua Radburn’s first novel, and is an homage to the gritty noir films of the seventies. While many authors would seek to modernize the genre or subvert old tropes, that isn’t Radburn’s intention: this is a love letter to the genre, in all its glory and all its pitfalls. Our favorite books and favorite genres—especially with heydays past—aren’t always perfect. Radburn acknowledges that there are many imperfections with the noir genre, but doesn’t let that stop him from crafting his own narrative.
I admit that I am often hesitant going into independently published novels. That’s not to say that they’re all bad; rather, there’s no standard of effort. There are self-published authors who write six drafts, bring their manuscripts to workshops, and hire multiple editors. And there are authors who write a single draft and throw it out there for people to see.* I am happy to inform you that this is one of the higher-quality self-published books. Sure, there are some things I might’ve edited further, but they’re things that really come down to a personal preference. For the most part, the quality of this book on a basic level is pretty top-notch.
It is certainly an ambitious project. Clocking in at almost 600 pages, this is a brick of a novel, and there are a lot of story threads that Radburn is pulling together. There are multiple murders on the loose, a gang, a personal assistant doing the work of a detective, the actual detective being a loose cannon, and various other odds and ends that make it into the narrative. There are flashbacks, there is a bit of head-hopping. And the entire book takes place over only four days. There are times when the threads aren’t weaved together perfectly and the reader falls through the holes, but for the most part, Radburn does a good job tying in all the loose ends and creating a cohesive narrative, although mildly confusing.
I’ll admit that I don’t have a ton of experience with the noir genre as a whole. It is a genre that devotes itself primarily to film, and unfortunately, I just don’t watch a ton of TV. As such, I have a limited repertoire to compare Shells to, but I’ll endeavor to do so nonetheless: at many times, this book reminded me distinctly of Brian Evenson’s Brotherhood of Mutilation and Last Days. The sections of Shells that really shined were the parts with Mick and Clive, a pair of buffoonish gangsters who introduce the book by fighting over a bag of crisps at a stakeout. The humor amidst the gore and dark themes really reminded me of the Evenson I’ve read (God, I need to read more), and were also some of my favorite parts. Really, one of my complaints is that I’d rather have more Mick and Clive—by the end they managed to become central characters, but for the most part they were just in the background. I wish their characters had been developed more fully earlier on in the book.
As I said, it’s an ambitious book, and I do think it was a bit too long-winded. Perhaps this is an aspect of the noir genre Radburn was trying to emulate that I’m not familiar with, but I think the book would have worked better as a whole if some of the length had been cut and the storylines had been more focused. By spreading the plot out to three distinct trains of thought, a little something was lost for all three. Some reader comprehension falls through the cracks when there are so many moving pieces to fit together, especially when parts are only alluded to instead of outright explained. It is a mistake that I can forgive while reading, especially since I don’t particularly mind when I don’t fully understand something, but I do think attachment to the characters and all the different plot points was a pitfall while preparing the book for print. Some things just need to be series, rather than squeezed into one standalone book.
Nonetheless, I did, on the whole, enjoy this book. If you’re a fan of noir fiction, especially classic noir, I think this is absolutely worth picking up. If you’re looking for a gritty detective novel with a lot of gore, Shells will be right up your grimy London alley. If neither of those are particularly your thing, some outdated tropes might bother you. I wouldn’t necessarily recommend this to everyone, but I do think that many readers will enjoy.
*For the record, this is the kind of author I would be, so I get it. Editing sucks. But that’s why I’m not an author.
The Library Cryptid 