Scan barcode
gabmc's review
3.0
I enjoyed this very first book in Ruth Rendell's Inspector Wexford series that was first published in 1964. Margaret Parsons has gone missing and her husband is worried. Two days later she turns up dead. The only clues Wexford and Burden have are some books given to Margaret some 12 years previously from someone called 'Doon'. The crime novel has come a long way since 1964 and so it was interesting to read what was probably one of the first in the genre.
billymac1962's review
3.0
I've been listening to the Currently Reading podcast quite a bit these days.
One of the hosts, Meredith, is a huge Louise Penny fan, as I was for the first eight novels of her series. I hit my limit after nine, but this is the longest I have ever kept with a series. When I was into it, it was so great coming back to Three Pines.
In one of these podcasts, Meredith had recommended the Inspector Wexford series to Louise Penny fans. Same type of deal; a small village and developing characters throughout the series. And, great mysteries to boot.
One of my favourite books is A Sight for Sore Eyes, a standalone by Ruth Rendell, a mystery where she masterfully took a few storylines that ultimately converged. It's been almost twenty years since I read it, and there has always been a niggling in the back of my mind to get back to her eventually. So here we are.
This is, of course, the first in the series, her debut novel written in 1964. In her afterword, written in 2013, she says that she wanted to write a detective novel just to see if she could do it, but then the popularity of it drove her to write another, then another, and realizing that if she was going to live with these characters, she was going to have to develop them going forward.
So, this one doesn't really have much in the way of backstory of our Inspector, but it is quite a good police procedural. I must confess that as I reached the 40% marker or so, I was worried that this might get a bit dull and disuade me from the series. However, I am very pleased to say that at the 50% mark this changed and I became nicely engaged in the story.
This was a quick read, only about 200 pages, which I appreciated. Overall, I'm feeling three stars for this and am looking forward to reading the next one and hopefully many more after that. When Rendell is on her game, she is one of the best, so I'm glad to have this series on my to-read list.
One of the hosts, Meredith, is a huge Louise Penny fan, as I was for the first eight novels of her series. I hit my limit after nine, but this is the longest I have ever kept with a series. When I was into it, it was so great coming back to Three Pines.
In one of these podcasts, Meredith had recommended the Inspector Wexford series to Louise Penny fans. Same type of deal; a small village and developing characters throughout the series. And, great mysteries to boot.
One of my favourite books is A Sight for Sore Eyes, a standalone by Ruth Rendell, a mystery where she masterfully took a few storylines that ultimately converged. It's been almost twenty years since I read it, and there has always been a niggling in the back of my mind to get back to her eventually. So here we are.
This is, of course, the first in the series, her debut novel written in 1964. In her afterword, written in 2013, she says that she wanted to write a detective novel just to see if she could do it, but then the popularity of it drove her to write another, then another, and realizing that if she was going to live with these characters, she was going to have to develop them going forward.
So, this one doesn't really have much in the way of backstory of our Inspector, but it is quite a good police procedural. I must confess that as I reached the 40% marker or so, I was worried that this might get a bit dull and disuade me from the series. However, I am very pleased to say that at the 50% mark this changed and I became nicely engaged in the story.
This was a quick read, only about 200 pages, which I appreciated. Overall, I'm feeling three stars for this and am looking forward to reading the next one and hopefully many more after that. When Rendell is on her game, she is one of the best, so I'm glad to have this series on my to-read list.
geisttull's review
I had to pick a book published the year i was born and i have never read Ruth Rendell, so i picked this one. it was an interesting story, apparently the first in a series. don't know if i'll pick up others though!
But i got my Bingo square!
But i got my Bingo square!
symph_adventures's review against another edition
emotional
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
aaronreadabook's review against another edition
funny
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
bluestarfish's review
3.0
I'm new to Ruth Rendell and Chief Inspector Wexford so I was really pleased to find the first in the series. It doesn't start with Wexford at all and he takes a while to appear and doesn't seem to have much to do with the story at first which I found a bit confusing. But the story is interesting enough, if a tad formulaic, and its the characterisations rather than perhaps the plot which keeps it all together. So a solid if not spectacular read (but I liked the second one much more so glad I didn't give up here!).
aoosterwyk's review
4.0
I'm looking for another mystery writer since I'm blowing through so many others. I'm on the fence about this one. I'll have to try another before I commit. The plot was interesting, but I feel a great void around the main character. He lacks character.
smunro's review
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
andipants124's review against another edition
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
I was in the mood for an old fashioned English murder mystery so I picked this up. It was fine? It was originally published in 1964 so it was a bit dated. And although there weren’t great clues about the ending, I was surprised by it.
bkdrgn303's review
4.0
I have always loved Ruth Rendell but my experience with the Inspector Wexford series has been sketchy. I have resolved to read or reread all of the books in this series. Rendell is 78 years old this year and...well...I'm not sure how many more years she'll be writing. At any rate, "From Doon with Death" was published the mid 60s and it has stood the test of time remarkably well which is, I think, a testament to the skill of Rendell as a writer. Good stuff.