You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.96 AVERAGE
3.96 AVERAGE
I am really unsure why this book has got so many rave reviews. It was so utterly dull and then it had another utterly dull book within it
This started slowly, but I really enjoyed the book within the book and the ending. Susan Ryeland is turning into one of my favorite characters. She is complex and intelligent. I appreciate her direct nature, and I love that she is not intimidated by the other strong players in this investigation.
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
I enjoyed the book overall, and I actually liked the mystery in the book within the book more than the mystery Susan Ryeland was trying to investigate.
I’m just so angry at this book. Magpie Murders was fun and clever, but besides the fact that this sequel didn’t do anything new, it was ruined by simmering homophobia. The trite and cartoonish characterization of the two gay characters that I had rolled my eyes at in the first book (just used to problematic characterization and lack of diversity from older white male writers) became downright ugly. The homophobic threads crescendo to a character having a full hate filled rant at the end. He’s a despicable person, but his rant goes unchecked, and it really feels like the author is finally getting to say it all out loud.
The regular “I don’t care if he’s gay BUT…” comments of characters added up and seemed to serve only to illustrate “reasonable” homophobia. The few gay characters are silly, mean, and evil, but most horrifyingly, a (very side) person having AIDS is used as a plot point—the fact he died from AIDS actually clues you in that he was secretly having sex with dudes. I kept reading thinking this couldn’t possibly be going where it was, but it went there.
The story was entertaining, which is why I kept reading, and I did enjoy the classic-mystery-within-modern-mystery structure (that the first book did much more interestingly), but I am mad I spent time on it now. Save yourself.
The regular “I don’t care if he’s gay BUT…” comments of characters added up and seemed to serve only to illustrate “reasonable” homophobia. The few gay characters are silly, mean, and evil, but most horrifyingly, a (very side) person having AIDS is used as a plot point—the fact he died from AIDS actually clues you in that he was secretly having sex with dudes. I kept reading thinking this couldn’t possibly be going where it was, but it went there.
The story was entertaining, which is why I kept reading, and I did enjoy the classic-mystery-within-modern-mystery structure (that the first book did much more interestingly), but I am mad I spent time on it now. Save yourself.
I was not expecting to really like this. I read it because my parents sent it to me, not because I really really wanted to read it. That said, it really sucked me in and I ended up really enjoying it. It’s a very quick read too. A fun story, with an ending that I didn’t really see coming.
I mistakenly checked out this audiobook again from the library after not rating it in GR after the first listen, but I listened to it again, anyway. I picked up on a lot of subtle stuff that I might have missed the first time, like how . Susan feels like a submissive female character (giving up her life in the UK to follow her man to Crete, ), and I don't like it.
I don't think I missed it the first time, but I was reminded of how unkind Horowitz is toward homosexual characters and how he likes to call out common mystery tropes or plots from other authors' works only to end up using them in his own stories.
The mystery-within-a-mystery is kind of fun, but I think I'll stick to more open-minded authors.
Spoiler
Susan needed to have Andreas around for protection or reassurance when she was confronting the suspectsSpoiler
having Treherne make the check out to Andreas, melting into a puddle when Andreas suddenly shows up in the UKI don't think I missed it the first time, but I was reminded of how unkind Horowitz is toward homosexual characters and how he likes to call out common mystery tropes or plots from other authors' works only to end up using them in his own stories.
The mystery-within-a-mystery is kind of fun, but I think I'll stick to more open-minded authors.
Clever and mostly good but I hate when the killer turns out to be an evil sociopath. It feels cheap.
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Long, clever, perhaps just a tad much of each
Interesting plot device using a book within a book, and the format in each case of a classic whodunnit is solid. At times I found myself tumbling through too many characters in trying to keep track of it all. I feel that some good editing could have made this tighter.
Interesting plot device using a book within a book, and the format in each case of a classic whodunnit is solid. At times I found myself tumbling through too many characters in trying to keep track of it all. I feel that some good editing could have made this tighter.
Just like 'Magpie Murders', I thought this was a good murder mystery, within a murder mystery. I thought the plot was both comforting in its tropes and unpredictable to keep me guessing. The audiobook was well read and really kept me wanting to listen to the rest of the story.