Well, Sophia, I do agree with you. I do not speak much in class because I love to hear the thoughts of others. However, I was extremely interested in seeing the next thing that Holmes would do and Larson's writing style did not distract my interests in his character. In fact, I think I got tired of the building jargon: building maintenance, building funds, building discussions, building materials, building conferences, etc. etc. It was enlightening to know that the author spent so much time researching the city and its architectural history but I wanted more of Holmes. I, too, am a CSI, Law & Order, Cold Case files type of woman and the clues, trails, evidence that I felt Holmes might have left behind excited me. I consistently wondered when the police would jumped on his trail and start to piece it all together. I was interested in the tools used to find him; people, documents, and articles of clothing that could place him at the scene of any of the crimes. After paying attention to my classmates feelings about Larson's poor literary skills and his unbelievable knowledge of how Holmes was feeling at the times of the murders, I noticed the literature was not the best that I've read. Then I used my own mind to ask myself would I have enjoyed a fictional book packed with so many facts as entertainment? In that sense, I too began to just read it for what it was. My brain just switched gears from entertainment to news flash mode and that way it no longer bothered me. In fact, it it was written with fluffy language, extraordinary metaphors, and victorian dialect I do not think it would have held my interest. Larson still gets accolades from me for taking on such a daunting task and putting it in print.