first, before I say anything about the contents of this book: Sourcebooks, just so you know, an editor is not an optional element in the book publishing process. they’re quite critical to it, actually, especially when your final copy has so many grammatical errors that it continually jars the reader out of their reading immersion. I’m pretty sure there are at least three in the first two chapters alone, and it hardly stops there, which is completely ridiculous. you can’t expect your readers to respect you if you don’t even respect the books you publish.

funnily enough, an editor would also have been immensely helpful in working out a lot of the kinks in the plot, namely the fact that the domestic violence subplot comes in only after at least half the book is over and hits you like a train wreck to the face. there is not nearly enough build-up to support everything Hibbert wants to discuss in this subplot, and the gravity of the matter suffers a lot for it. the situation is resolved almost immediately after it is introduced (and far too cleanly as well), which makes it feel as though it was only introduced to either take up space or to dramatise the novel’s already pretty dramatic premise even further. Ruben’s family issues are glossed over too; the progression of his realisation feels way too fast for how deeply his siblings have affected every aspect of his life.

this problem, quite unfortunately, also extends far beyond this subplot. the focus of the novel is overwhelmingly centred on the romance—which, to be clear, is a decent romance—and everything else suffers for it. Cherry’s family only shows up when it’s convenient for the narrative (and it almost never is), and her friends appear only once after she leaves England. sure, it does create the impression that she’s been swept up in all the royal glitz and glamour and the rot that lies beneath, but I personally think her development would have been more interesting and fleshed out had there been a contrast between the royal life she’s now meant to lead and the ordinary life she’s left behind. as it is, Ruben’s character development is prioritised over Cherry’s, and yet it also suffers because of the aforementioned pacing issues regarding the subplot.

anyway, for the most part, the romance itself was more enjoyable than most of the romance novels I’ve read in English over the past year. it’s particularly interesting that Cherry is so obviously well-versed in manipulating men to do whatever she wants with a single look, whereas Ruben thinks of himself as more “enlightened” than the average sex-obsessed man—and he is, but only enough to recognise what Cherry is doing. he still falls for it anyway, which really adds to the hilarity of the whole situation. even the insta-lust plays a more plot- and character-relevant role here. unfortunately, my aversion to insta-lust and their constantly-tightening genitals negated some of my interest in the romance. I also found myself particularly concerned about how the narrative brushes over a certain scene in which Cherry deliberately chooses a heavier object (one that will cause more damage) and then proceeds to throw it right at Ruben’s head. that’s not cute or charming; in fact, considering the domestic violence that gets brought up in the later half of the book, I think the fact that this scene is so quickly glossed over casts a grim shadow over both Cherry and Ruben’s relationship as well as the more serious themes Hibbert tries to discuss, and that is what detracts from the overall quality of the story.

I raise a glass of chocolate milk to my first Chuck Tingle book. I love it, it is truly peak and no book will ever reach these new romance standards.

I do have to unfortunately remove a star due to anatomical errors. Morn's dick would have been severely injured by a handjob as sharks are covered in teeth-like structures called denticles. Rubbing against shark skin causes a painful and bloody carpet burn. Not ideal for a finjob. Additionally, I wish Tingle could be a little more creative with the penetrative sex. Male sharks have a reproductive structure called claspers. These are inserted into the oviduct of female sharks to transfer sperm. Yoko being a brain surgeon, should have been more anal about being scientifically corrected and referred to his organ as his clasper and not dick, but I guess love makes you open to more common terminology. Since this is my first Tingle book, I won't judge too much for not accurately naming Dr. Yoko's claspers.

The plot wasn't bad, though I wish we got more in Morn's and Cort's disagreement in the end. Perhaps Morn and Dr. Yoko could send Cort a holiday card as a big fuck you to Cort's negative views on romance. Cort only acts as the instigator that causes Morn to irresponsibly drink chocolate milk, but there is no resolution or arc for their opposing world views. Perhaps Cort will appear in a different story - perhaps a grumpy x sunshine romance. There is a small plot hole, who is the angry sailor man at the end? Was he watching the whole time? I feel like the shark jumping authorities should look into protecting sharks from perverts as well and banish this sailor perv. A positive for the pair, I appreciate the inclusion of brain surgeons in romance, it is such a hard field to get into, and Dr. Yoko is a MULTI SPECIES surgeon. Morn has found himself a very handsome and intelligent Megalodon and I'm jealous.

There were also some spelling and grammatical errors, so I do have to deduct stars in the quality section.

I cannot judge the sex as I have never had sex under water and then breached the surface at the exact time of a climax then blissfully stayed suspended in the air before diving back into the water. Will report back when I do.

EDIT: I CAN'T BELIEVE I FORGOT THE BLOWJOB! PSA: SHARK TEETH ARE SHARP AND THEY DO NOT HAVE 'LIPS' DO NOT ENGAGE IN SHARK BLOWJOB I REPEAT DO NOT ENGAGE!! NO MATTER HOW MUCH SEXUAL TENSION THERE IS BETWEEN YOU AND A SHARK

I think Quackery is a fun, coffee-table science book. It’s something that’s fun to read by flipping to a random page or by choosing a topic of interest from the table of contents. But I, personally, don’t think it’s a 5/5 front-to-back-cover read, which is why it’s taken me so long to get through it. I listened to the audiobook for most of it, so it may flow better as a physical book. I wasn’t a fan of the ebook, but that could also be because of the electronic version's formatting, and with my added spacing and font changes.

Information Accessibility: I found the information pretty accessible, though there were moments where I had to relisten to a section to understand what was being said. The images are amazing, and I think they bring the information together so readers aren’t just reading pages of text. There is also highlighted text in boxes (the paragraphs were outlined in a box in the ebook, I'm not sure how that looks in the physical book) that is pretty interesting too! I worry that the order and grouping of topics make the book harder to read front-to-back, or at least inaccessible if you’re someone who processes information as flow charts/mind webs (like me). How topics were connected under the subheadings was one of the reasons it took me some time to finish this book, as it felt like I was getting the very tip of an iceberg for one topic, the water next to the iceberg for another, and a random iceberg tunnel for the next topic, all under the same subheading. That’s why I think this book works better when you read it by topic of interest instead of front to back. The book is split by different methods (ex., plants & soil, elements, animals, etc.), and then those are split into subheadings (ex., leeches, cannibalism, tobacco, cocaine, etc.). But how everything connects under a single subheading worked better with some subheadings vs others, which can make processing and connecting the information harder.

Information Depth: This is completely a me issue; I just like more depth in my information. Most of the nonfiction I read comes from science articles, so I’m using review papers as a comparison here, which is not fair. But I also found the depth inconsistent: some topics felt like they needed 2-3 additional paragraphs, while others dragged on for 2-3 extra paragraphs. Sometimes the depth related to a person, and other times it focused on the practice, so I found that inconsistent while listening too. Obviously, the amount of information we’d get is related to how much archival information the authors can find, and I don’t think every single topic reviews more than 1 page, but there were just a few instances while listening where I would pause and rewind because the end of the topic felt too abrupt/incomplete.

Audiobook: I liked the narrator; they reminded me of some of my professors with their sassy/humourous tone. My advanced biochemistry professor told us, in a really sassy tone, that he would only spend half a lecture on vampires, unprompted, during syllabus day (and he did). My cell biology professor told us at the end of the first lecture that if any of us decided to get cancer, he recommended thyroid cancer and then spent 2 mins laughing at his joke (love that dude). All this to say, I liked the narrator's humorous tone. My issue with the narration is more about flow/order. Without the book in front of you, I think it can be a little weird to understand the order of the topics or how they all connect in a single part of the book. For example, in the last part, called Mysterious Powers, under the subheading The King’s Touch, we go from the King’s touch to cure scrofula to weird ways to cure vision issues to cancer, and then we end the book. I actually had to look at the ebook to figure out how it all connected.

Shark: There is content about sharks 😈 . It’s related to the mystical powers of shark cartilage from the myth that sharks don’t get cancer. They do, unfortunately, get cancer. Please do not consume shark cartilage; sharks need their cartilage inside their living bodies. Thank you

Deduction of 1 star: I’m sorry, I do not tolerate corset hate. This was a silly jab at corsets, but I’m personally sick and tired of jabs at corsets. The author is explaining the use of wet dresses as part of hydropathy and hydropathic institutes and then states: “The only real benefit to wearing a wet dress was the refreshing break for your body from the crushing confines of a corset.” Pause. Corsets aren't crushing confinements; they’re supportive undergarments, and few women practiced tightlacing.

I think Quackery is a fun, coffee-table science book. It’s something that’s fun to read by flipping to a random page or by choosing a topic of interest from the table of contents. But I, personally, don’t think it’s a 5/5 front-to-back-cover read, which is why it’s taken me so long to get through it. I listened to the audiobook for most of it, so it may flow better as a physical book. I wasn’t a fan of the ebook, but that could also be because of the electronic version's formatting, and with my added spacing and font changes.

Information Accessibility: I found the information pretty accessible, though there were moments where I had to relisten to a section to understand what was being said. The images are amazing, and I think they bring the information together so readers aren’t just reading pages of text. There is also highlighted text in boxes (the paragraphs were outlined in a box in the ebook, I'm not sure how that looks in the physical book) that is pretty interesting too! I worry that the order and grouping of topics make the book harder to read front-to-back, or at least inaccessible if you’re someone who processes information as flow charts/mind webs (like me). How topics were connected under the subheadings was one of the reasons it took me some time to finish this book, as it felt like I was getting the very tip of an iceberg for one topic, the water next to the iceberg for another, and a random iceberg tunnel for the next topic, all under the same subheading. That’s why I think this book works better when you read it by topic of interest instead of front to back. The book is split by different methods (ex., plants & soil, elements, animals, etc.), and then those are split into subheadings (ex., leeches, cannibalism, tobacco, cocaine, etc.). But how everything connects under a single subheading worked better with some subheadings vs others, which can make processing and connecting the information harder.

Information Depth: This is completely a me issue; I just like more depth in my information. Most of the nonfiction I read comes from science articles, so I’m using review papers as a comparison here, which is not fair. But I also found the depth inconsistent: some topics felt like they needed 2-3 additional paragraphs, while others dragged on for 2-3 extra paragraphs. Sometimes the depth related to a person, and other times it focused on the practice, so I found that inconsistent while listening too. Obviously, the amount of information we’d get is related to how much archival information the authors can find, and I don’t think every single topic reviews more than 1 page, but there were just a few instances while listening where I would pause and rewind because the end of the topic felt too abrupt/incomplete.

Audiobook: I liked the narrator; they reminded me of some of my professors with their sassy/humourous tone. My advanced biochemistry professor told us, in a really sassy tone, that he would only spend half a lecture on vampires, unprompted, during syllabus day (and he did). My cell biology professor told us at the end of the first lecture that if any of us decided to get cancer, he recommended thyroid cancer and then spent 2 mins laughing at his joke (love that dude). All this to say, I liked the narrator's humorous tone. My issue with the narration is more about flow/order. Without the book in front of you, I think it can be a little weird to understand the order of the topics or how they all connect in a single part of the book. For example, in the last part, called Mysterious Powers, under the subheading The King’s Touch, we go from the King’s touch to cure scrofula to weird ways to cure vision issues to cancer, and then we end the book. I actually had to look at the ebook to figure out how it all connected.

Shark: There is content about sharks 😈 . It’s related to the mystical powers of shark cartilage from the myth that sharks don’t get cancer. They do, unfortunately, get cancer. Please do not consume shark cartilage; sharks need their cartilage inside their living bodies. Thank you

Deduction of 1 star: I’m sorry, I do not tolerate corset hate. This was a silly jab at corsets, but I’m personally sick and tired of jabs at corsets. The author is explaining the use of wet dresses as part of hydropathy and hydropathic institutes and then states: “The only real benefit to wearing a wet dress was the refreshing break for your body from the crushing confines of a corset.” Pause. Corsets aren't crushing confinements; they’re supportive undergarments, and few women practiced tightlacing.