Scan barcode
A review by ergative
Death In The Spires by KJ Charles
3.75
(Thanks to Netgalley for an ARC)
I enjoyed reading this, but I think that if I were not already a regular commuter on the K. J. Charles train, this would not be enough to get me there. Broadly, we have a sort-of-two-timeline story: First, there is a cohort of brilliant young Oxford students, who end their time in school when one of them is murdered (yes, it is all very Secret History). Circumstances make it clear that the murder was committed by one of the cohort, that is clear, but none of them (except the murderer) knows which it is.
Then, there is the main plot, ten years later, when one of the cohort decides to solve the murder once and for all, tracks down the old gang, and a series of grim and unfriendly reunions ensues. Charles does a very good job of evoking that sense of curdled, poisoned friendship, and the lurking suspicions even among people who were otherwise devoted to each other. The eventual unraveling of the secrets and revelations of the circumstances surrounding the murder were very emotionally satisfying.
I can absolutely see why Charles chose this narrative structure, but the fact remains that by putting key details in the flashback chapters, she also has to make us wait for details that everyone knows but isn't telling us in the main narrative. I found that rather irritating. I hate when a book is obviously keeping secrets from me for reasons of structural convenience, rather than for reasons related to plot. If the viewpoint character knows a thing, I really ought to know it too. So once the flashback chapters were done, I found the plot much more entertaining. Yet I don't think they could have been dispensed with altogether, because the emotional punch of the ten-years-later plot really does require that you have experienced what the cohort of students were like in their prime.
So maybe, in the end, my trouble with this book is that I don't much care for dual timelines, and that's not Charles's fault.
I enjoyed reading this, but I think that if I were not already a regular commuter on the K. J. Charles train, this would not be enough to get me there. Broadly, we have a sort-of-two-timeline story: First, there is a cohort of brilliant young Oxford students, who end their time in school when one of them is murdered (yes, it is all very Secret History). Circumstances make it clear that the murder was committed by one of the cohort, that is clear, but none of them (except the murderer) knows which it is.
Then, there is the main plot, ten years later, when one of the cohort decides to solve the murder once and for all, tracks down the old gang, and a series of grim and unfriendly reunions ensues. Charles does a very good job of evoking that sense of curdled, poisoned friendship, and the lurking suspicions even among people who were otherwise devoted to each other. The eventual unraveling of the secrets and revelations of the circumstances surrounding the murder were very emotionally satisfying.
I can absolutely see why Charles chose this narrative structure, but the fact remains that by putting key details in the flashback chapters, she also has to make us wait for details that everyone knows but isn't telling us in the main narrative. I found that rather irritating. I hate when a book is obviously keeping secrets from me for reasons of structural convenience, rather than for reasons related to plot. If the viewpoint character knows a thing, I really ought to know it too. So once the flashback chapters were done, I found the plot much more entertaining. Yet I don't think they could have been dispensed with altogether, because the emotional punch of the ten-years-later plot really does require that you have experienced what the cohort of students were like in their prime.
So maybe, in the end, my trouble with this book is that I don't much care for dual timelines, and that's not Charles's fault.