For me, the storyline of Fool’s Errand was compelling enough. 
Have you stopped reading the book altogether? I swear the rest of the series makes it worthwhile to endure a paragraph of "had"s.
-Kris
Am I the only person who has no idea what this is about?
John and Mary are writing papers, say. There was some dispute over whether, in a particular grammatical situation, one should write “had ‘had had’” or “had had ‘had had.’” John went for one usage, Mary went for the other. John and Mary’s colleagues chimed in as to which was correct, and decided John’s was the right usage.
John, where Mary had had “had ‘had had,’” had had “had had ‘had had.’” “Had had ‘had had’” had had more votes as the correct usage.
The cat the dog the mouse bit chased ran.
-FrL-
I don’t think you can use Reverse Polish Notation on English sentences.
Excellent! The cat ran. What cat? The cat that the dog chased. What dog? The dog that the mouse bit.
You know, you could take this to ridiculous extremes. 
Heh, hadn’t thought of that way 
But in fact, I guess, in a sense, you can:
The cat the dog chased ran.
That one looks okay to me grammatically, though its bad style.
-FrL-
I think the issue here is aspect, not tense, since it’s all in the past. Anyway, there are ways of indicating the sequence of past events without using the past perfect: “John went to the market after he ran out of milk.” But it’s really a question of style, often a way of putting new information toward the end of the sentence, or vice versa.
But if the style really bothers you that much, I suggest you read a different book.
That’s not the book I wanted to be read to up out of about.
Will you get your explanation of what you brought that book I don’t like to be read aloud to out of about Down Under up for over with?
Maybe, if that’ll get my point across.