Book Review: SOMETHING IN THE WOODS IS TAKING PEOPLE
This “book” is actually a compilation of five works by author Stephen Young: SOMETHING IN THE WOODS IS TAKING PEOPLE, HUNTED IN THE WOODS, PREDATORS IN THE WOODS, TAKEN IN THE WOODS, and MYSTERIOUS THINGS IN THE WOODS. Mr. Young gets a lot of press on the COAST TO COAST AM radio program, or so I’ve heard. I’d never heard of him, but I found the premise of his book fascinating. Something, some kind of creature, some predator, lurking in the wilderness areas of the world, even the First World, snatching unwary hikers and campers who are never seen again or who turn up later, deceased, in areas where they should not be.
I always hate to give bad book reviews. Someone once pointed out that it’s just as hard to write a bad book as it is to write a good one. Still, I have to be honest, don’t I? To retain my credibility? I must bite the bullet, then, and proclaim that TAKEN IN THE WOODS is an amateur effort from cover to cover. The typos and grammatical mistakes are commonplace, and Young provides nothing in the way of serious scholarship. Incident after incident is chronicled with no attempts to substantiate them, no verifying of sources. Oftentimes there isn’t even a name provided for the witness supposedly providing the given information, and much of Young’s “evidence” is lifted straight off the Internet! (If ever there was a trustworthy, credible source, it’s the Internet!) What we are left with is a hodgepodge of often repetitive accounts, conspiracy theorist ramblings, and the author’s speculations served up with no real pattern or order. It’s painfully obvious Young is not a professional writer. Sorry, dude. I gotta tell it like it is.
All that being said, though, the book, or books, more properly, are still an entertaining read. The overview provides no depth. It’s sorta like an abridged tabloid-style TV show on the subject. Even so, it’s all still fascinating. I enjoyed the book(s), once I settled to the realization of what kind of work it was I would be reading–and the kind of work it was NOT. Journalistic? Scholarly? Critical? Or even organized? No. None of the above. Interesting? Yes. Definitely. I wanted more than what I got, but what I got was intriguing enough to keep me reading.