You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
informative
mysterious
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
Interesting bedside mystery attempting to solve the question of who was responsible for the disappearance and deaths of the Princes in the London Tower in 1483. History books attribute their deaths to Richard lll. If Ricard lll did not to do it, then who did it?
What a fun way to become more interested in the War of the Roses! I didn't know the story behind all this and I found the mystery intriguing. This book doesn't have a lot of action, but plenty of drama.
Comments in <20 words: Pre-Internet detective/author tackles historical mystery entirely from hospital bed and books. Good real-life case, mediocre entertainment—such promising start!
I expected a mystery, and it isn't, really. It's more of a historical research book. I think I would have enjoyed it more if I were more familiar with English history and the succession of the throne. I can barely keep Henry VIII's wives in my head, so this, even with a family tree in the front, just didn't work well for me (other than for putting me to sleep.) Still, if that is something you enjoy (history! research! kings!) I think you will like it.
Despite my strange love for Maisie Dobbs, I still wouldn't really classify myself as a mystery reader -- which probably allowed me to enjoy this way more than actual mystery readers do.
I thought this was a fun gimmick -- the inspector is in bed so he tackles an age-hold assumption: that King Richard III was a monster who murdered his young nephews out of greed. The novel is a play-by-play of Inspector Grant's discoveries, with help from a young American researcher, all the way up and through the part where they learn that there's nothing new about what they've discovered: that Richard III was neither monster nor murderer.
The novel's goal seems to be to shine a light on this false history, and the fact that our understanding of history is full of these, at best, misinterpretations and, at worst, outright lies.
Richard III is my favorite Shakespeare play of all time, and I've always had a soft spot for Richard, even though he is definitely a monster in the play (a sympathetic monster, I'd say). This was a really fun read for me as it was brand new information -- I always assumed Shakespeare's take was more or less correct. I'm interested to read the play again, in light of this new knowledge.
I thought this was a fun gimmick -- the inspector is in bed so he tackles an age-hold assumption: that King Richard III was a monster who murdered his young nephews out of greed. The novel is a play-by-play of Inspector Grant's discoveries, with help from a young American researcher, all the way up and through the part where they learn that there's nothing new about what they've discovered: that Richard III was neither monster nor murderer.
The novel's goal seems to be to shine a light on this false history, and the fact that our understanding of history is full of these, at best, misinterpretations and, at worst, outright lies.
Richard III is my favorite Shakespeare play of all time, and I've always had a soft spot for Richard, even though he is definitely a monster in the play (a sympathetic monster, I'd say). This was a really fun read for me as it was brand new information -- I always assumed Shakespeare's take was more or less correct. I'm interested to read the play again, in light of this new knowledge.
I knew within the first few pages I would like this book - if nothing else for the language and phraseology.
The general plot moves along like a general mystery worked backwards - knowing the outcome from the start and working through the facts to find the motive. What makes it interesting and compelling are the subject matter and the storytelling techniques.
There are a lot of epistolary qualities to the book, coupled with traditional mystery elements and an exquisite command of British style and wit.
It's not often anymore I learn new words in a book, but I learned several in this one, as well as a handful of brilliant phrases I never saw in print before.
I don't know as I would want to read her other books, only because half of what I enjoyed about this book was the topic, and how the typical mystery style applied to an infamous historical event. However, her style of writing leaves me in awe of her talent and for that alone I may someday look into her other novels.
I also have a desire now to explore other famous 'histories' in a new light - how very post-modern of me...
The general plot moves along like a general mystery worked backwards - knowing the outcome from the start and working through the facts to find the motive. What makes it interesting and compelling are the subject matter and the storytelling techniques.
There are a lot of epistolary qualities to the book, coupled with traditional mystery elements and an exquisite command of British style and wit.
It's not often anymore I learn new words in a book, but I learned several in this one, as well as a handful of brilliant phrases I never saw in print before.
I don't know as I would want to read her other books, only because half of what I enjoyed about this book was the topic, and how the typical mystery style applied to an infamous historical event. However, her style of writing leaves me in awe of her talent and for that alone I may someday look into her other novels.
I also have a desire now to explore other famous 'histories' in a new light - how very post-modern of me...
Being violently sick with a vicious cold, I am re-reading old favourites. Josephine Tey's The Daughter of Time is one of those partly because of the framing narrative she uses to explore the historical evidence pertinent to the matter of the deaths of the young Yorkist heirs in the tower - police detective with a broken leg going crazy from boredom takes on a historical mystery - and partly because her interpretation of the evidence cited supports my own totally unresearched belief that Richard III did not do the vile deed, or order it done. (By unresearched, I mean that I've read a number of books arguing the case this way or that but never sat down to look at all the existing evidence one way or the other and make an unbiased assessment for myself.)
It's a very enjoyable - and quick - read, and much to be recommended to anyone interested in the mystery of the princes in the Tower.
It's a very enjoyable - and quick - read, and much to be recommended to anyone interested in the mystery of the princes in the Tower.
fun historical mystery. How bad was Richard III? Recommend audio narrated by Derek Jacobi.
This is a good book and very well-written! My only issue with it is that it isn't quite my cup of tea. I love character development and I'm sorry to say this novel did not contain as much as I'd like! Still very good.