Scan barcode
nocto's review against another edition
Ruth Rendell is so ubiquitously associated with the crime novel in the UK that it's easy to write her off as just another best selling author and forget what an excellent writer she is. Though the ending of this book was a little tangled up and the solutions to the minor mysteries got a little lost in the unveiling of the major mystery it didn't really detract from an excellent plot. There were a lot of characters to keep straight and if I'd read it at a slower pace I might have got irritated and forgetful. On the whole avery enjoyable read.
kiwi_fruit's review against another edition
4.0
I really enjoyed this police procedural that progresses slowly, it analyses the characters very well, both the police officers and the interviewees; you get the sense of the people involved in the case, their personalities and way of life. The novel is on the longish side, having a number of leads that results in a few dead ends, the conclusion effectively is a quite abrupt revelation (even if not a total surprise).
IMO this novel it’s worth the read by Ruth Rendell writing alone, which it is elegant and richly descriptive. 3.5 stars
Fav quote:
Queenie, the Persian, sat on the coping of the pool, looking into the mirror-like surface of the water. A lifted paw briefly distracted its attention. The cat contemplated the underside of fat grey pads, as if deciding on the paw’s fitness as a fishing implement, then tucked both paws under its chest, folded itself into the sphinx position and resumed its staring at the water and the circling fish.
IMO this novel it’s worth the read by Ruth Rendell writing alone, which it is elegant and richly descriptive. 3.5 stars
Fav quote:
Queenie, the Persian, sat on the coping of the pool, looking into the mirror-like surface of the water. A lifted paw briefly distracted its attention. The cat contemplated the underside of fat grey pads, as if deciding on the paw’s fitness as a fishing implement, then tucked both paws under its chest, folded itself into the sphinx position and resumed its staring at the water and the circling fish.
stefhyena's review against another edition
3.0
I've certainly read worse. The mystery itself was quite good although it was strange to me that Wexford did not consider the possibility earlier (there was a credible effort put in to distract him to make it almost plausible).
To me reading 410 pages of a mystery, the last thing I want is so much stuff about his family, his psychological problems and all of that. It seems like at some point someone decided that Agatha Christie's 2 dimensional detectives were flawed writing and we needed the psychological depth but to me that is a completely different sort of a novel. I don't mind Wexford having a wife and adult daughters, but I don't want details of his terrible attempts to relate to them (especially since we only ever get his perspective which is pretty "typical male" and tedious).
It was a very androcentric book in general, I kept staring at the cover to check I hadn't accidentally picked up a book by a male author (I do read male authors but proportionately a lot less). There was maybe a roughly equal number of men and women but the men had most of the active and speaking roles apart from Daisy who was written as a patriarchal construction of a young woman and not at all like a young woman from the perspective of someone who had been a young woman herself (again I googled the author to ensure "Ruth" was still a woman's name). What with Wexford's occasional conservativish observations about things and the constant anti-feminist grumbling by literally any character we saw the perspective of I was irritated throughout the book. Nevertheless it was a reasonably good mystery with some great touches (such as the flowers) and with enough of the suspects doing crazy but credible things to make the unravelling satisfyingly difficult (although I did consider the correct answer I was not sure until close to the end).
I would read more Rendell, because this is my favourite genre for relaxing and because this sucked less than most of them. I am not enthusiastic about aspects of it but it is better than the vast majority of what is out there. My sister pointed out to me that the problem with whodunnits is you get jaded, after a while you have seen every possible variation like with cryptic crosswords but more so. Given how jaded I am, the mystery in this was pretty good.
To me reading 410 pages of a mystery, the last thing I want is so much stuff about his family, his psychological problems and all of that. It seems like at some point someone decided that Agatha Christie's 2 dimensional detectives were flawed writing and we needed the psychological depth but to me that is a completely different sort of a novel. I don't mind Wexford having a wife and adult daughters, but I don't want details of his terrible attempts to relate to them (especially since we only ever get his perspective which is pretty "typical male" and tedious).
It was a very androcentric book in general, I kept staring at the cover to check I hadn't accidentally picked up a book by a male author (I do read male authors but proportionately a lot less). There was maybe a roughly equal number of men and women but the men had most of the active and speaking roles apart from Daisy who was written as a patriarchal construction of a young woman and not at all like a young woman from the perspective of someone who had been a young woman herself (again I googled the author to ensure "Ruth" was still a woman's name). What with Wexford's occasional conservativish observations about things and the constant anti-feminist grumbling by literally any character we saw the perspective of I was irritated throughout the book. Nevertheless it was a reasonably good mystery with some great touches (such as the flowers) and with enough of the suspects doing crazy but credible things to make the unravelling satisfyingly difficult (although I did consider the correct answer I was not sure until close to the end).
I would read more Rendell, because this is my favourite genre for relaxing and because this sucked less than most of them. I am not enthusiastic about aspects of it but it is better than the vast majority of what is out there. My sister pointed out to me that the problem with whodunnits is you get jaded, after a while you have seen every possible variation like with cryptic crosswords but more so. Given how jaded I am, the mystery in this was pretty good.
raehink's review
3.0
Inspector Wexford finds the connection between four seemingly unnrelated crimes and six deaths. This is a well-plotted mystery and I was captivated right up to the very end.
More...