Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.76 AVERAGE
3.76 AVERAGE
challenging
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
relaxing
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
lighthearted
mysterious
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
A woman has been murdered. But it seems to have been an accident. Because there's no way that anyone could have predicted that Sir Eustace would have given his unexpected box of chocolates to Mr. Bendix. Nor could they have predicted that he would then pass the poisoned chocolates on to his wife. The police are stymied. So Roger Sherringham brings the problem to the Crime Club. And six different, all seemingly plausible, ideas are suggested. But who is the true murderer?
Another good recommendation from Classic Mysteries
Spoiler
loved that the main character want the one who solved itAnother good recommendation from Classic Mysteries
A fun dissection of a murder with six members of an amateur detection club taking turns presenting their own solution to the case - the reader comes to understand the layers of the case as each detective takes their turn before the final twist ending. Clever and arch and generally fresh as if it were written much more recently. Definitely want to read more Berkeley.
Not my thing at all. However the deconstructing of the murder using 6 variables is impressive.
Roger Sheringham sorbi din paharul de coniac pe care-l avea în faţă şi se instală mai comod în fotoliul său din capul mesei.
Prin fumul de ţigară, îi ajungeau la urechi, din toate direcţiile, voci însufleţite ― conversaţii vesele despre una şi alta ― asasinate, otrăviri şi morţi subite. Era Cercul Criminalistic, fondat, organizat, recrutat şi condus numai de el; şi când, la prima reuniune, cu cinci luni în urmă, fusese ales în unanimitate preşedinte, se simţise la fel de încântat şi mândru ca şi în ziua, pentru el de neuitat, când un înger, deghizat în editor, îi acceptase primul roman.
Se întoarse spre inspectorul-şef de la Scotland Yard, Moresby, oaspetele acestei seri, care stătea la dreapta lui, şi trăgea, cam stângaci, dintr-o enormă ţigară de foi.
― Cinstit vorbind, Moresby, fără să vreau să arăt lipsă de respect faţă de instituţia dumitale, sunt convins că în această cameră se găseşte mai mult geniu criminalistic (geniu intuitiv, vreau să spun; nu capacitate de a face eforturi epuizante) decât oriunde pe lume, afară de Süreté din Paris.
Prin fumul de ţigară, îi ajungeau la urechi, din toate direcţiile, voci însufleţite ― conversaţii vesele despre una şi alta ― asasinate, otrăviri şi morţi subite. Era Cercul Criminalistic, fondat, organizat, recrutat şi condus numai de el; şi când, la prima reuniune, cu cinci luni în urmă, fusese ales în unanimitate preşedinte, se simţise la fel de încântat şi mândru ca şi în ziua, pentru el de neuitat, când un înger, deghizat în editor, îi acceptase primul roman.
Se întoarse spre inspectorul-şef de la Scotland Yard, Moresby, oaspetele acestei seri, care stătea la dreapta lui, şi trăgea, cam stângaci, dintr-o enormă ţigară de foi.
― Cinstit vorbind, Moresby, fără să vreau să arăt lipsă de respect faţă de instituţia dumitale, sunt convins că în această cameră se găseşte mai mult geniu criminalistic (geniu intuitiv, vreau să spun; nu capacitate de a face eforturi epuizante) decât oriunde pe lume, afară de Süreté din Paris.
This was a big disappointment and I ended up reading the first 2-3 chapters and then skipping to the end. Too wordy, no particularly interesting mystery, and too much repetition. I would not recommend, even for golden age mystery lovers.
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
I felt a bit disappointed with this book. I have read many mystery and crime novels but it was the first time that I read Berkeley´s. The plot was incredible and the characters fit in perfectly, also did the six different explanations of the same crime but the solution was a bit dull for me. It seems that Berkeley wanted to end up the novel as soon as possible giving a fast and incomplete ending to it, "open" to the reader´s imagination. I don't mean that you don´t know who the killer is, I want to say that the way it is solved and the lack of a proper explanation is why I gave 3 stars to this supposedly classic of crime and mystery novels.
Also, I found some commentaries and descriptions in the book that were profoundly sexist (I don´t know if the author wanted to reflect the society of that time or if it was his own belief taking into account that the book is written in 1929).
Also, I found some commentaries and descriptions in the book that were profoundly sexist (I don´t know if the author wanted to reflect the society of that time or if it was his own belief taking into account that the book is written in 1929).