Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.72 AVERAGE
3.72 AVERAGE
My favorite British Mystery yet: here's a more extended review.
This book must be read through the lens and background of the author, Raymond Postgate, a communist periodical editor who branched out to create this delightful mystery novel.
Postgate's argument in his novel follows the premise of Marx's theory that "it is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but [that] on the contrary their social existence determines their consciousness". In line with this perspective, Postgate introduces the book by providing brief biographical sketches of each juror, encompassing their distinct experiences, social and financial backgrounds, and acquired worldviews. This approach enables the reader to understand any potential preconceptions or tendencies towards harsh judgments that each juror may possess and situates each as a flawed individual subject to the bias of their life experiences and politics. Indeed, politics are discussed heavily through the book, which is set in a courtroom. Rather than being a neutral place of justice, the court is scene as a stage where biases may be carried out.
Postgate’s own likeness is Francis Allen, a Communist who publishes “poems which had appeared in the Left Review” and reads “a great deal of Marx, after Marx some of Lenin, and after Lenin a very little Stalin” as well as learning from “Auden, Isherwood, Lewis and Spender, and if he had not been afraid of being unfashionable they would have been Shelley and Swinburne, too.” is described by, “Can there be any greater happiness than to be young, unworried by money troubles, filled with desire to reform the world?” (p64) He may be the character described in the most positive terms, “he was not a warrior deserting the field, but a comrade seeking and giving strength, uniting himself more closely with his fellow warrior and doubling both their power” (p65) and deeply in love and happy. Through Allen, Postgate is able to imbue the novel with his personal dogma, writing,
“Capitalist society had manufactured a highly complex machine to protect itself, and he was to see its workings from the inside. He knew too little of the legal system; it would be good to know how it really worked. He might be going to see corruption and oppression, the crushing of an individual. Or he might merely be going to be shown a picture of the decay of bourgeois life, a miniature of the death of a once powerful society” (p66).
Whether intentional or not, the novel leaves the reader with a favorable view of communism and a negative view of its opponents: the fanatical religious man and the slimy, capitalist salesman who hawks unwanted encyclopedias, or the classist university don.
More of the texts is spent introducing the nuances to each character rather than setting up the narrative of the murder. When the trial is shown, the biases, often based on politics, take center stage. This likely represents Postgate’s own literary background as a communist journalist: he had experience writing about politics, not creating entertaining stories for the masses. Thus, when creating a mystery with mass-market appeal, his own writing background crept in.
While less famous than Agatha Christie, Raymond Postgate’s mystery Verdict of Twelve deserves recognition as a both an enjoyable read and a book that encapsulates the genuine—rather than idealized and fictional—political climate of 1930s and 40s Britain.
This book must be read through the lens and background of the author, Raymond Postgate, a communist periodical editor who branched out to create this delightful mystery novel.
Postgate's argument in his novel follows the premise of Marx's theory that "it is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but [that] on the contrary their social existence determines their consciousness". In line with this perspective, Postgate introduces the book by providing brief biographical sketches of each juror, encompassing their distinct experiences, social and financial backgrounds, and acquired worldviews. This approach enables the reader to understand any potential preconceptions or tendencies towards harsh judgments that each juror may possess and situates each as a flawed individual subject to the bias of their life experiences and politics. Indeed, politics are discussed heavily through the book, which is set in a courtroom. Rather than being a neutral place of justice, the court is scene as a stage where biases may be carried out.
Postgate’s own likeness is Francis Allen, a Communist who publishes “poems which had appeared in the Left Review” and reads “a great deal of Marx, after Marx some of Lenin, and after Lenin a very little Stalin” as well as learning from “Auden, Isherwood, Lewis and Spender, and if he had not been afraid of being unfashionable they would have been Shelley and Swinburne, too.” is described by, “Can there be any greater happiness than to be young, unworried by money troubles, filled with desire to reform the world?” (p64) He may be the character described in the most positive terms, “he was not a warrior deserting the field, but a comrade seeking and giving strength, uniting himself more closely with his fellow warrior and doubling both their power” (p65) and deeply in love and happy. Through Allen, Postgate is able to imbue the novel with his personal dogma, writing,
“Capitalist society had manufactured a highly complex machine to protect itself, and he was to see its workings from the inside. He knew too little of the legal system; it would be good to know how it really worked. He might be going to see corruption and oppression, the crushing of an individual. Or he might merely be going to be shown a picture of the decay of bourgeois life, a miniature of the death of a once powerful society” (p66).
Whether intentional or not, the novel leaves the reader with a favorable view of communism and a negative view of its opponents: the fanatical religious man and the slimy, capitalist salesman who hawks unwanted encyclopedias, or the classist university don.
More of the texts is spent introducing the nuances to each character rather than setting up the narrative of the murder. When the trial is shown, the biases, often based on politics, take center stage. This likely represents Postgate’s own literary background as a communist journalist: he had experience writing about politics, not creating entertaining stories for the masses. Thus, when creating a mystery with mass-market appeal, his own writing background crept in.
While less famous than Agatha Christie, Raymond Postgate’s mystery Verdict of Twelve deserves recognition as a both an enjoyable read and a book that encapsulates the genuine—rather than idealized and fictional—political climate of 1930s and 40s Britain.
"Verdict of Twelve" is a pleasant read with an unconventional plot. In some way, there isn't much a mystery as the case is pretty straight forward. Postgate's writing, though, helps to maintain a good level of puzzlement that keeps me wonder from time to time. I was "nervous" while "waiting" for the jury's verdict. When the case is closed, I couldn't help but smirk because the accused "innocence" is simply an irony.
The book is divided into three sections:
Section One- Background and the past history of the 12 jurors that would ultimately govern their trains of thought during the trial and their decisions of the final verdict
Section Two- The case: The feud between the deceased and the accused. The day of the incidence. Motives. Witnesses. Investigations. Suspects.
Section Three- The trial, the verdict, and the "confession."
The book is a great read overall but I was expecting a heavier emphasis on the psychological impacts/biases of the jurors based on their own individual histories which I believe is the supposed focus of the book. What has offered by the author is adequate to illustrate the jurors' struggles/biases.
Such a great and unique read. Highly recommend!
Thanks Netgallery and Poisoned Pen Press for the opportunity to preview the title prior to the official release.
The book is divided into three sections:
Section One- Background and the past history of the 12 jurors that would ultimately govern their trains of thought during the trial and their decisions of the final verdict
Section Two- The case: The feud between the deceased and the accused. The day of the incidence. Motives. Witnesses. Investigations. Suspects.
Section Three- The trial, the verdict, and the "confession."
The book is a great read overall but I was expecting a heavier emphasis on the psychological impacts/biases of the jurors based on their own individual histories which I believe is the supposed focus of the book. What has offered by the author is adequate to illustrate the jurors' struggles/biases.
Such a great and unique read. Highly recommend!
Thanks Netgallery and Poisoned Pen Press for the opportunity to preview the title prior to the official release.
What a fascinating perspective! This story is about a trial by jury seen through the eyes of each of the twelve jurors as they listen to the evidence and try to reach a unanimous verdict.
In part one of the book, the reader is introduced to the jury, with the author giving short biographies of each juror in which he describes their individual experiences, their social and financial background, the outlook on life which each of them has acquired over time, and also any possible predisposition to judge others harshly. The author presents the reader with all these factors in order to show that they prevent the jurors from considering evidence objectively, and that they will respond to the case emotionally rather than realistically.
In part two of the book, the reader is presented with the case and meets the defendant, a middle-aged, childless widow who comes into money when her late husband’s only relatives die, leaving her to become guardian to the sole survivor, her husband’s young nephew. The two don’t get on well at all, and when young Philip dies of poisoning, it is suspected that his aunt may have had a hand in it, as she stands to inherit the family fortune. The reader is kept in suspense as to whether or not the defendant is guilty right up until the end of the book, after the trial is over.
This was another book for the Maidens of Murder read-along on Instagram, and I enjoyed it very much! I thought it was such an interesting examination of trial by jury!
In part one of the book, the reader is introduced to the jury, with the author giving short biographies of each juror in which he describes their individual experiences, their social and financial background, the outlook on life which each of them has acquired over time, and also any possible predisposition to judge others harshly. The author presents the reader with all these factors in order to show that they prevent the jurors from considering evidence objectively, and that they will respond to the case emotionally rather than realistically.
In part two of the book, the reader is presented with the case and meets the defendant, a middle-aged, childless widow who comes into money when her late husband’s only relatives die, leaving her to become guardian to the sole survivor, her husband’s young nephew. The two don’t get on well at all, and when young Philip dies of poisoning, it is suspected that his aunt may have had a hand in it, as she stands to inherit the family fortune. The reader is kept in suspense as to whether or not the defendant is guilty right up until the end of the book, after the trial is over.
This was another book for the Maidens of Murder read-along on Instagram, and I enjoyed it very much! I thought it was such an interesting examination of trial by jury!
Excellent read. A court room story, where we are introduced to diverse members of the jury before we learnt about the crime.
In Verdict of the Twelve, author Raymond Postgate tell us about a murder case through the different participants at the trial.
The book is barely 250 pages long yet offers so much to its reader. On the face of it, the book deals with a murder case and the trial after. But the way the author has presented it to the readers makes it so much more than a murder case or a trial drama. In the first section of the book, the author takes his time in introducing each of the twelve jurors in detail with details about their lives and their backgrounds. That is when we realize the diversity of the society we live in. The second section of the book deals with the murder case and its representation in the trial. This is where the readers get to consider the nitty-gritties of the evidence and motives of the case. The final section of the book we see the jurors as they deliberate and reach a verdict. Will you agree with it or will the ending drive you crazy?
The wide variety of characters involved keeps the book interesting as the readers are kept on their toes by wondering how each piece of information is being received by each individual and how that would affect the big picture. The case itself was interesting as it could be seen as open and shut case and yet leave you wondering if there was something more going on. The author’s language and style of narration is in line with that of typical British crime classics and build up a feeling of nostalgia at the same time.
Have you ever considered how you can experience something that millions other have before you, yet the way you experience it is never exactly the same with any of them? Have you ever realized, while in a crowd, that you may have nothing in common with any of the others? Have you ever considered why you think the way you do or how you react to a situation can be a culmination of several past experiences or how you can build up prejudices or mistrust of some people or something without even realizing it? These are just some of the things that the book will compel you to think about long after you have turned the last page.
I recommend this book to all crime genre enthusiasts and to people who like books that highlight various aspects of human nature.
The book is barely 250 pages long yet offers so much to its reader. On the face of it, the book deals with a murder case and the trial after. But the way the author has presented it to the readers makes it so much more than a murder case or a trial drama. In the first section of the book, the author takes his time in introducing each of the twelve jurors in detail with details about their lives and their backgrounds. That is when we realize the diversity of the society we live in. The second section of the book deals with the murder case and its representation in the trial. This is where the readers get to consider the nitty-gritties of the evidence and motives of the case. The final section of the book we see the jurors as they deliberate and reach a verdict. Will you agree with it or will the ending drive you crazy?
The wide variety of characters involved keeps the book interesting as the readers are kept on their toes by wondering how each piece of information is being received by each individual and how that would affect the big picture. The case itself was interesting as it could be seen as open and shut case and yet leave you wondering if there was something more going on. The author’s language and style of narration is in line with that of typical British crime classics and build up a feeling of nostalgia at the same time.
Have you ever considered how you can experience something that millions other have before you, yet the way you experience it is never exactly the same with any of them? Have you ever realized, while in a crowd, that you may have nothing in common with any of the others? Have you ever considered why you think the way you do or how you react to a situation can be a culmination of several past experiences or how you can build up prejudices or mistrust of some people or something without even realizing it? These are just some of the things that the book will compel you to think about long after you have turned the last page.
I recommend this book to all crime genre enthusiasts and to people who like books that highlight various aspects of human nature.
According to the evidence...
A trial is about to commence and the jury is being sworn in. A death has occurred in unusual circumstances and a woman has been charged with murder. But the evidence is largely circumstantial so it will be up to the jury (and the reader) to decide whether the prosecution has proved its case…
The book has an unusual format, almost like three separate acts. As each jury member is called to take the oath, we are given background information on them; sometimes a simple character sketch, at others what amounts to a short story telling of events in their lives that have made them what they are. These introductions take up more than a third of the book before we even find out who has been murdered and who is on trial. When the trial begins, the reader is whisked out of the courtroom to see the crime unfold. Finally we see the evidence as it is presented at the trial and then follow the jury members as they deliberate. Despite this odd structure, I found it completely absorbing – each section is excellent in itself and together they provide a fascinating picture of how people’s own experiences affect their judgement of others.
In that sense, it’s almost like a precursor to Twelve Angry Men, although the comparison can’t be taken too far – in this one, we spend more time out of the jury-room than in, and the crime is entirely different. But we do get that same feeling of the jurors having only the limited information presented to them on which to form their judgement, and of seeing how their impressions of the various lawyers and witnesses affect their decisions. And we also see how, once in the jury room, some jurors take the lead in the discussions and gradually bring others round to agree with their opinion – a rather cynical portrayal of how the evidence might be distorted in either direction by people with strong prejudices of their own.
What I found so interesting about the first section is that Postgate uses his jury members to give a kind of microcosm of society of the time, The book was first published in 1940, but feels as if it’s set a couple of years before WW2 begins. Instead, the war that is mostly referred to is WW1, showing how the impact of that conflict is still affecting lives a couple of decades later. Postgate also addresses some of the issues of the day, lightly for the most part, though he does get a little polemical about the dangerous growth of anti-Semitism in British society – very forgivably considering the time of writing. A jury is an excellent device to bring a group of people together who would be unlikely to cross paths in the normal course of things – here we have a university professor, a travelling salesman, a domestic servant, a pub landlord, etc., all building up to an insightful look at the class structures within society. But we also see their interior lives – what has formed their characters: success, failure, love and love lost, greed, religious fervour.
I was also surprised at some of the subjects Postgate covered. One of the jurors allows him to give a rather more sympathetic portrayal of homosexuality than I’d have expected for the time. Another juror has clearly been used and abused by older men in his youth and has learned the art of manipulation and blackmail as a result – again in a very short space Postgate gives enough information for us to understand even if we can’t completely empathise with the character. There is the woman whose character was formed early by her hideous parents and a state that was more concerned with making her a valuable worker than a decent person. Each character is entirely credible and, knowing their background means we understand how they come to their individual decisions in the jury room.
The crime itself is also done very well. I’ve not given any details of it because part of the success of the story comes from it only slowly becoming obvious who is to be the victim and who the accused. It’s a dark story with some genuinely disturbing elements, but it’s lifted by occasional touches of humour. Again characterisation is key, and Postgate provides enough background for the people involved for us to feel that their actions, however extreme, are quite plausible in the context. After the trial, there is a short epilogue where we find out if the jury, and we, got it right.
I thoroughly enjoyed this – excellent writing, great characterisation, insightful about society, lots of interesting stories within the main story, and a realistic if somewhat cynical look at the strengths and shortcomings of the process of trial by jury. Easy to see why it’s considered a classic – highly recommended.
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, Poisoned Pen Press.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
A trial is about to commence and the jury is being sworn in. A death has occurred in unusual circumstances and a woman has been charged with murder. But the evidence is largely circumstantial so it will be up to the jury (and the reader) to decide whether the prosecution has proved its case…
The book has an unusual format, almost like three separate acts. As each jury member is called to take the oath, we are given background information on them; sometimes a simple character sketch, at others what amounts to a short story telling of events in their lives that have made them what they are. These introductions take up more than a third of the book before we even find out who has been murdered and who is on trial. When the trial begins, the reader is whisked out of the courtroom to see the crime unfold. Finally we see the evidence as it is presented at the trial and then follow the jury members as they deliberate. Despite this odd structure, I found it completely absorbing – each section is excellent in itself and together they provide a fascinating picture of how people’s own experiences affect their judgement of others.
In that sense, it’s almost like a precursor to Twelve Angry Men, although the comparison can’t be taken too far – in this one, we spend more time out of the jury-room than in, and the crime is entirely different. But we do get that same feeling of the jurors having only the limited information presented to them on which to form their judgement, and of seeing how their impressions of the various lawyers and witnesses affect their decisions. And we also see how, once in the jury room, some jurors take the lead in the discussions and gradually bring others round to agree with their opinion – a rather cynical portrayal of how the evidence might be distorted in either direction by people with strong prejudices of their own.
What I found so interesting about the first section is that Postgate uses his jury members to give a kind of microcosm of society of the time, The book was first published in 1940, but feels as if it’s set a couple of years before WW2 begins. Instead, the war that is mostly referred to is WW1, showing how the impact of that conflict is still affecting lives a couple of decades later. Postgate also addresses some of the issues of the day, lightly for the most part, though he does get a little polemical about the dangerous growth of anti-Semitism in British society – very forgivably considering the time of writing. A jury is an excellent device to bring a group of people together who would be unlikely to cross paths in the normal course of things – here we have a university professor, a travelling salesman, a domestic servant, a pub landlord, etc., all building up to an insightful look at the class structures within society. But we also see their interior lives – what has formed their characters: success, failure, love and love lost, greed, religious fervour.
I was also surprised at some of the subjects Postgate covered. One of the jurors allows him to give a rather more sympathetic portrayal of homosexuality than I’d have expected for the time. Another juror has clearly been used and abused by older men in his youth and has learned the art of manipulation and blackmail as a result – again in a very short space Postgate gives enough information for us to understand even if we can’t completely empathise with the character. There is the woman whose character was formed early by her hideous parents and a state that was more concerned with making her a valuable worker than a decent person. Each character is entirely credible and, knowing their background means we understand how they come to their individual decisions in the jury room.
The crime itself is also done very well. I’ve not given any details of it because part of the success of the story comes from it only slowly becoming obvious who is to be the victim and who the accused. It’s a dark story with some genuinely disturbing elements, but it’s lifted by occasional touches of humour. Again characterisation is key, and Postgate provides enough background for the people involved for us to feel that their actions, however extreme, are quite plausible in the context. After the trial, there is a short epilogue where we find out if the jury, and we, got it right.
I thoroughly enjoyed this – excellent writing, great characterisation, insightful about society, lots of interesting stories within the main story, and a realistic if somewhat cynical look at the strengths and shortcomings of the process of trial by jury. Easy to see why it’s considered a classic – highly recommended.
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, Poisoned Pen Press.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
A classic British mystery with a host of colorful characters with interesting back stories. Set in three acts we meet the jurors, see the crime occur, witness the whole trial, and the verdict. A delightful read.
adventurous
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
A very interesting approach, with enjoyable characters, but not really much of a mystery
informative
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
This books makes me soo mad... it’s awful.... that’s it’s brilliant for the first time you get to witness a scene in a courtroom and how the jury decides on its verdict of “guilty” or “not guilty”... the deplorable crime makes the ending feel to real and too cynical a view on jury’s and their views... but I fear that sometimes what may seem unpalatable a truth might be terribly true. This book thoroughly deserves to be brought out into the light. It’s well worth a read