Take a photo of a barcode or cover
katbancroft 's review for:
Death Comes to Pemberley
by P.D. James
This started off so promising and then just got worse and worse. I was initially delighted by the voice, by Meryton’s perceptions of how Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy got together, and by the Darcys’ and the Bingleys’ happy lives post-“Pride and Prejudice.” The murder mystery setup was compelling, and I loved the feeling of being back among friends as the story started.
But then Colonel Fitzwilliam entered the scene — or rather, the original character masquerading as Colonel Fitzwilliam entered, because the Colonel Fitzwilliam I know would never allow a recently-acquired aristocratic title to make him arrogant and presumptuous. He’d never feel that Mr. Darcy abandoned his familial duty by marrying Elizabeth, and he’d certainly never consider Georgiana — nearly 20 years his junior and to whom he’s been a father figure — as a marriage prospect.
The blatant mischaracterizations continued as the story progressed. Who is this Mr. Darcy who doesn’t take charge of an emergency on his own property and who gets squeamish when faced with difficulties? Who is this Mr. Darcy who adamantly defends George Wickham, of all people? And who is this Elizabeth who rather passively sits by as significant events occur?
Perhaps I would’ve been more forgiving of the characterizations if the mystery hadn’t become so bland. There was no sense of urgency, no shocking revelation revealed in a clever twist, or even justification for why the reader should care that a character as strongly disliked as Wickham is facing the gallows. Instead, P.D. James took the reader through a plodding police procedural that had me questioning both the story’s pacing and its historical accuracy. I’m no expert on British police and court procedures, but a lot of the legal events felt far too modern for this time period. And then, instead of allowing the characters to discover the truth behind Captain Denny’s death, James neatly laid the whole thing out through a conversation between several characters. I feel like this type of “detective explains all” ending only works if the mystery has been wonderfully twisted — i.e., if the reader is truly begging for Sherlock or Poirot to make sense of the madness. But here, I was just impatient for an explanation so that I could get on with finishing this book.
Another issue was the way James unnecessarily rehashed large portions of the “Pride and Prejudice” story. For instance, why did Mr. Darcy feel the need to pull Elizabeth aside and explain all over again that he was wrong to separate Jane and Mr. Bingley, and that her rejection of his Kent proposal made him reevaluate who he was? They’ve been married for six years by this point, haven’t they moved on by now? James also spent a lot of time “telling” rather than “showing” important scenes, and a number of the side characters’ actions didn’t add up. It got old fast.
This book wasn’t all bad — I especially enjoyed the glimpses of Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy’s deep, abiding love, and how the ending wrapped things up satisfactorily. But “Death Comes to Pemberley” largely felt like someone trying and failing to pay homage to one of the most beloved English novelists of all time. Like James herself said in the author’s note, if Jane Austen had wanted to write this kind of story, she would have, and she would have done it better.
But then Colonel Fitzwilliam entered the scene — or rather, the original character masquerading as Colonel Fitzwilliam entered, because the Colonel Fitzwilliam I know would never allow a recently-acquired aristocratic title to make him arrogant and presumptuous. He’d never feel that Mr. Darcy abandoned his familial duty by marrying Elizabeth, and he’d certainly never consider Georgiana — nearly 20 years his junior and to whom he’s been a father figure — as a marriage prospect.
The blatant mischaracterizations continued as the story progressed. Who is this Mr. Darcy who doesn’t take charge of an emergency on his own property and who gets squeamish when faced with difficulties? Who is this Mr. Darcy who adamantly defends George Wickham, of all people? And who is this Elizabeth who rather passively sits by as significant events occur?
Perhaps I would’ve been more forgiving of the characterizations if the mystery hadn’t become so bland. There was no sense of urgency, no shocking revelation revealed in a clever twist, or even justification for why the reader should care that a character as strongly disliked as Wickham is facing the gallows. Instead, P.D. James took the reader through a plodding police procedural that had me questioning both the story’s pacing and its historical accuracy. I’m no expert on British police and court procedures, but a lot of the legal events felt far too modern for this time period. And then, instead of allowing the characters to discover the truth behind Captain Denny’s death, James neatly laid the whole thing out through a conversation between several characters. I feel like this type of “detective explains all” ending only works if the mystery has been wonderfully twisted — i.e., if the reader is truly begging for Sherlock or Poirot to make sense of the madness. But here, I was just impatient for an explanation so that I could get on with finishing this book.
Another issue was the way James unnecessarily rehashed large portions of the “Pride and Prejudice” story. For instance, why did Mr. Darcy feel the need to pull Elizabeth aside and explain all over again that he was wrong to separate Jane and Mr. Bingley, and that her rejection of his Kent proposal made him reevaluate who he was? They’ve been married for six years by this point, haven’t they moved on by now? James also spent a lot of time “telling” rather than “showing” important scenes, and a number of the side characters’ actions didn’t add up. It got old fast.
This book wasn’t all bad — I especially enjoyed the glimpses of Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy’s deep, abiding love, and how the ending wrapped things up satisfactorily. But “Death Comes to Pemberley” largely felt like someone trying and failing to pay homage to one of the most beloved English novelists of all time. Like James herself said in the author’s note, if Jane Austen had wanted to write this kind of story, she would have, and she would have done it better.