Scan barcode
taylorelm's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
A fun idea for a story - each chapter written by someone else, with no idea of the original solution. I enjoyed some chapters more than others, but overall it was enjoyable and did really have a sense of fun about it. You could tell each author enjoyed writing their bit.
Also loved the different solutions at the end, and being able to see how the story and outcome changed through the process.
Also loved the different solutions at the end, and being able to see how the story and outcome changed through the process.
elmewhy's review
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25
maplessence's review against another edition
3.0
3.5★
The Detection Club must have been the coolest club around.
A group of highly successful mystery writers getting together sharing their love of mysteries & detective fiction over regular dinners in London.
The idea of a group of the members each writing a chapter to a murder mystery was intriguing - & with writers as skilled as [a:Agatha Christie|123715|Agatha Christie|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1321738793p2/123715.jpg] & [a:Dorothy L. Sayers|8734|Dorothy L. Sayers|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1519840173p2/8734.jpg] involved - what could go wrong?
Unfortunately quite a bit.
After [a:G.K. Chesterton|7014283|G.K. Chesterton|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1365860649p2/7014283.jpg]'s introduction (which I have already forgotten) [a:Victor L. Whitechurch|1035041|Victor L. Whitechurch|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/m_50x66-82093808bca726cb3249a493fbd3bd0f.png] got the story off to a cracking start. & all the writer's kept to a similar tone. But [a:Milward Kennedy|610903|Milward Kennedy|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1363130100p2/610903.jpg] "read"completely different than the other writers. It really didn't flow well at all! Dorothy L. Sayers did her best to get the story on track, but unfortunately the writer that followed her, [a:Ronald A. Knox|17830840|Ronald A. Knox|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png] followed with an incredibly dry list of questions & possible suspects. Able writing by the rest of the writers (including a wonderful twist from [a:Clemence Dane|425398|Clemence Dane|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1473576863p2/425398.jpg]) couldn't save this book for me after that. I would recommend skipping Knox's chapter altogether. It does nothing but drag the book down. A problem with writing with your mates I guess. Sayers wasn't ruthless enough as an editor.
& the appendix where each writer gave their solution? Another disappointment as for me the most interesting person to hear from would have been the writer of Chapter 1, but Whitechurch & the writers of Chapter 2 (The Coles) didn't give their solutions. I would have loved to have read where he thought the story would go. & Knox gave another dull list before offering his solution. No surprise here but I liked Christie's ideas the best!
So in Whitechurch, Dane & [a:John Rhode|280354|John Rhode|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1320143165p2/280354.jpg] I have found new writers I want to try & others I will quite definitely avoid.
The Detection Club must have been the coolest club around.
A group of highly successful mystery writers getting together sharing their love of mysteries & detective fiction over regular dinners in London.
The idea of a group of the members each writing a chapter to a murder mystery was intriguing - & with writers as skilled as [a:Agatha Christie|123715|Agatha Christie|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1321738793p2/123715.jpg] & [a:Dorothy L. Sayers|8734|Dorothy L. Sayers|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1519840173p2/8734.jpg] involved - what could go wrong?
Unfortunately quite a bit.
After [a:G.K. Chesterton|7014283|G.K. Chesterton|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1365860649p2/7014283.jpg]'s introduction (which I have already forgotten) [a:Victor L. Whitechurch|1035041|Victor L. Whitechurch|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/m_50x66-82093808bca726cb3249a493fbd3bd0f.png] got the story off to a cracking start. & all the writer's kept to a similar tone. But [a:Milward Kennedy|610903|Milward Kennedy|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1363130100p2/610903.jpg] "read"completely different than the other writers. It really didn't flow well at all! Dorothy L. Sayers did her best to get the story on track, but unfortunately the writer that followed her, [a:Ronald A. Knox|17830840|Ronald A. Knox|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png] followed with an incredibly dry list of questions & possible suspects. Able writing by the rest of the writers (including a wonderful twist from [a:Clemence Dane|425398|Clemence Dane|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1473576863p2/425398.jpg]) couldn't save this book for me after that. I would recommend skipping Knox's chapter altogether. It does nothing but drag the book down. A problem with writing with your mates I guess. Sayers wasn't ruthless enough as an editor.
& the appendix where each writer gave their solution? Another disappointment as for me the most interesting person to hear from would have been the writer of Chapter 1, but Whitechurch & the writers of Chapter 2 (The Coles) didn't give their solutions. I would have loved to have read where he thought the story would go. & Knox gave another dull list before offering his solution. No surprise here but I liked Christie's ideas the best!
So in Whitechurch, Dane & [a:John Rhode|280354|John Rhode|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1320143165p2/280354.jpg] I have found new writers I want to try & others I will quite definitely avoid.
moreader's review
mysterious
medium-paced
5.0
A murder mystery with each chapter written by a different mystery writer leading to the end when the killer is revealed.
adrianas's review against another edition
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
readymadereader's review against another edition
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
emmae's review against another edition
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.0
helena_chris's review
adventurous
lighthearted
mysterious
medium-paced
4.0
Definitely the best book from the bunch that were written by the Detection Club. You can just see the fun they must have had while writing this book. Obviously the ending doesn't make proper sense, but that is to be expected after the final writer, Anthony Berkeley, was left to clear up the mess made by the precious chapters' writers.
ashleylm's review against another edition
2.0
Superficially this sounds like a great idea—what's better than one great mystery author? Several great mystery authors!—but no. We don't read books by these authors because their individual sentences are so pleasant, we read them because of their skill shaping the mystery and characters and retaining our interest throughout, and when each write only has to muster it up for one chapter, you end up with very little of actual merit. I read this as a kid, and even then I knew it wasn't one for the ages.
(5* = amazing, terrific book, one of my all-time favourites, 4* = very good book, 3* = good book, but nothing to particularly rave about, 2* = disappointing book, and 1* = awful, just awful. As a statistician I know most books are 3s, but I am biased in my selection and end up mostly with 4s, thank goodness.)
(5* = amazing, terrific book, one of my all-time favourites, 4* = very good book, 3* = good book, but nothing to particularly rave about, 2* = disappointing book, and 1* = awful, just awful. As a statistician I know most books are 3s, but I am biased in my selection and end up mostly with 4s, thank goodness.)