Task: Sentiment Analysis
Input (English): Sinks like a stone, stinks like a monkey . This is the first book by Deaver that I have read.  Apparently there are a couple of prequels to this novel involving the same main characters -- I will never read them.    Deaver has adequate style and a talent for pacing a mystery thriller.  He also has some skill in character development; however, he only applies this skill to the secondary characters in this story.  Perhaps the main characters in this story appeared so flat to me because I have not read the other novels in this series, but judging by their inconsistent behavior, bizarre motivations, and the melodramatic dialogue in this novel I doubt the other books could be much better.  Worse than Deaver's hackneyed mystery cut-out-characters is his insistence that the reader be willing to accept the most unbelievable and unlikely situations for the sake of a dramatic situation or plot twist.  Like many other second-drawer mystery writers, Deaver portrays such notable organizations as the FBI, INS, US Coast Guard, and the NYPD as ridiculously inept and corruptible.  Nor has he made any attempt to research the actual policies and procedures that these organizations would follow in the situations presented in the story.  Deaver also has a poor grasp on the politics of international economics.  This is normally excusable in a mystery writer, but since Deaver sets Chinese/American economics as the foundation of his final plot twist the whole story comes crashing down in the final chapters of the novel.         A note to Deaver and other mystery writers:  it is not a requirement for a great detective to be a pompous jerk and an abrasive know-it-all.  It has been 115 years since Doyle introduced the world to Sherlock Holmes, and we have had 115 years of mediocre mystery writers plagiarizing Doyle's character.  Please try to be original.     And also, if the final "twist" in your story is so complicated and so unbelievable that you must expend two chapters in trying to explain it, perhaps it shouldn't be there in the first place.  I give this book a D.
Output (English): NEG