I loved the way it was split up too: part 1, 2, 3, and HEA. I remember this story when it was on Tumblr and it works so well as a full length story, somewhere between a long novella and a short novel. CMN and Lillian Lark are my monster queens - the ones who write about everything from an orc to a shifter to a demon to a mothman. But I would be straight up if I didn't enjoy this book and GODS, I enjoyed it so much.ĬMN is one of my queens of monster romance. Full disclosure we've been mutuals on IG probably since 2020 and I'm on her Patreon. I wouldn’t necessarily call it hot, but it was definitely funny and weird. tallied up, it made for a narrative that didn't really do anything for me on any level.Īnd lastly- our mothman's anatomy was essentially a penis hidden behind a vagina-like crevice that self-lubricates when aroused and I'm not gonna lie, I was kind of living for that. On their own, none of these individual points are enough to make me dislike a book, but.

She didn't seem like a confident woman embracing her sexuality- she just seemed unstable. Our heroine is so casually, nonchalantly, insanely horny that she was giving me secondhand embarrassment. Writing style aside, this was both weirdly vulgar and weirdly boring. She needs an editor who's extremely Type A and has heavy Virgo placements. But, regardless of your intention, if you're not clear and thoughtful with your communication, your audience isn't going to be able to receive your message so what's the point? Your writing style shouldn't pull the reader out of the story, you know? I don't want to sound like an asshole who thinks they're qualified to offer advice to a published author, but I really think CMN would benefit from less convoluted writing. I tend to like unconventional things and I understand what she's trying to do.

but compelling this was not.ĬMN is great with details. Nascosta's insane, labyrinthine, Inception-inspired writing style if the story is, at least, compelling.

Sweet Berries by C.M. Nascosta