Scan barcode
A review by dawn_marie
Edinburgh Midnight by Carole Lawrence
1.0
Edinburgh Midnight, the third book in the Ian Hamilton series is not good. At all. It was bad; a thoroughly unpleasant read.
The strengths that Carole Lawrence demonstrated in the first two books, notably in tone, atmosphere, and prose, was completely missing in the third book. The prose that evoked 1880 Edinburgh was replaced with pedantic passages detailing the historic significance of various buildings or statues (and at one time a funeral prayer hymnal). I have no issue infusing historic details in a novel, just not to the point where the book feels less like a novel and more like a history text (as is the case here). These passages brought the story line to a screeching halt.
In Edinburgh Midnight, Detective Inspector Ian Hamilton is so busy pursing not one, not two, but three separate cases (séance murders, fire that killed his parents, and police/informant corruption) that he manages to miss three dates with (the still horrible) Fiona Stuart. – I continue to be baffled as to why I am supposed to root for a romantic paring that is based on petty and spiteful, childish behavior (which continues in this novel); even when Ian and Fiona “apologize”, the apology comes across as condescending and surly. Not only does the reader have to content with a convoluted plot and romantic angst, (s)he is treated to middle school antics when Dickerson’s jealousy over DI Hamilton’s friendship with Arthur Conan Doyle sends him into the arms of the school, erm, police station bully and all around bad guy Turnbull.
So many of the characters have devolved, becoming flat and boring - Lillian is a plot device, Donald stands in for an exposition dump, and Derek has become deus ex machine. DI Hamilton started the series as a smart, determined, and dedicated investigator - we are told by everyone that DI Hamilton is “brilliant” and “the best;” however, I have my doubts as Hamilton has the stuffing beat out of him on a regular basis, has been ambushed several times, is completely oblivious to the fact that he is constantly followed (by Derek, by Corbin, by Doyle, by the murderer(s), by street gang members, etc.) and misses key clues (that are often pointed out to him by others). It seems (to me anyway) that Hamilton “solves” the case by the efforts of others and not his “brilliant” investigative prowess.
I do not know if there will Ian Hamilton mysteries published in the future, regardless, I plan on taking a hard pass on them. If I want to reach about a brilliant detective solve unusual crimes in Victoriana Era England/Scotland, I will stick with the original (and still the best) Sherlock Holmes.
The strengths that Carole Lawrence demonstrated in the first two books, notably in tone, atmosphere, and prose, was completely missing in the third book. The prose that evoked 1880 Edinburgh was replaced with pedantic passages detailing the historic significance of various buildings or statues (and at one time a funeral prayer hymnal). I have no issue infusing historic details in a novel, just not to the point where the book feels less like a novel and more like a history text (as is the case here). These passages brought the story line to a screeching halt.
In Edinburgh Midnight, Detective Inspector Ian Hamilton is so busy pursing not one, not two, but three separate cases (séance murders, fire that killed his parents, and police/informant corruption) that he manages to miss three dates with (the still horrible) Fiona Stuart. – I continue to be baffled as to why I am supposed to root for a romantic paring that is based on petty and spiteful, childish behavior (which continues in this novel); even when Ian and Fiona “apologize”, the apology comes across as condescending and surly. Not only does the reader have to content with a convoluted plot and romantic angst, (s)he is treated to middle school antics when Dickerson’s jealousy over DI Hamilton’s friendship with Arthur Conan Doyle sends him into the arms of the school, erm, police station bully and all around bad guy Turnbull.
So many of the characters have devolved, becoming flat and boring - Lillian is a plot device, Donald stands in for an exposition dump, and Derek has become deus ex machine. DI Hamilton started the series as a smart, determined, and dedicated investigator - we are told by everyone that DI Hamilton is “brilliant” and “the best;” however, I have my doubts as Hamilton has the stuffing beat out of him on a regular basis, has been ambushed several times, is completely oblivious to the fact that he is constantly followed (by Derek, by Corbin, by Doyle, by the murderer(s), by street gang members, etc.) and misses key clues (that are often pointed out to him by others). It seems (to me anyway) that Hamilton “solves” the case by the efforts of others and not his “brilliant” investigative prowess.
I do not know if there will Ian Hamilton mysteries published in the future, regardless, I plan on taking a hard pass on them. If I want to reach about a brilliant detective solve unusual crimes in Victoriana Era England/Scotland, I will stick with the original (and still the best) Sherlock Holmes.