Scan barcode
maggie73's review
3.0
Dated, as I believe RR has said herself, but still enjoyable. The debut of Wexford.
lisa11111's review
3.0
It was an interesting mystery, but a little jumpy. They seemed to assume things in figuring out the case, without solid proof. This was the first novel of MANY however and I understand she gets better. I enjoyed it and will try the next one.
slipperose's review
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
Can’t believe this was my first Ruth Rendell. Absolutely loved it. A bit genre defying. Is it murder mystery, a psychological thriller, or just great literary fiction? Not sure where to put it. This was her first published novel, so looking forward to seeing how her writing develops from here.
kittykornerlibrarian's review
4.0
This started out as a simple "missing person" story, introducing the detective, Inspector Wexford, and his colleague Inspector Burden, in a truly unspectacular way. A young and ordinary housewife, Margaret Parsons, does not return home to her husband as she does every evening without fail. As Inspector Wexford follows his leads, the story adds layers of complexity to result in a highly original and satisfying conclusion. This is my next mystery series for sure.
ibookalatte's review against another edition
mysterious
relaxing
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
avidreadergirl1's review against another edition
emotional
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
This is quite an opening on a series with slow but constant things evolving towards an unforeseen conclusion.
Detective Wrexford and his team are trying to solve the case of a woman strangled and abandoned in the woods nearby.
Overall, I liked that there was no stereotypes and the plot didn’t get lost in too many inane details. The characters are well defined and the evolution of the investigation was very interesting.
This is definitely a series I’ll keep reading.
Detective Wrexford and his team are trying to solve the case of a woman strangled and abandoned in the woods nearby.
Overall, I liked that there was no stereotypes and the plot didn’t get lost in too many inane details. The characters are well defined and the evolution of the investigation was very interesting.
This is definitely a series I’ll keep reading.
arsinoeb72fd's review
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
brandt_sch's review
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
3.5
deeclancy's review
4.0
I bought a 50th anniversary edition of this first Inspector Wexford novel the other day, and read it in two sittings. To avoid spoilers for those who are interested in going back and reading Rendell's oeuvre, I will not describe the plot, except to say that the woman murdered is a fairly unremarkable character. It has a good foreword by Ian Rankin and an afterword by the author. Rendell points out that, in many ways, the book could be read as an historical novel - Wexford and Burden are doing lots of leg work and there is no searching of computer databases or text messaging.
It is more of a traditional murder mystery than Rendell's later works in other ways also, with the pieces of the puzzle gradually pointing toward the culprit and the various players gathered together at the end for the final revelation, a formula that seems to have started with Agatha Christie. I am still a little unsure of the logic of how the characters all ended up in the attic for the final confrontation, but somehow they did. However, aspects of this plot were probably regarded as risque 50 years ago, dealing as it does with a form of love that was considered scandalous at the time, but is thankfully not anymore. Certainly, this book makes it obvious that Rendell was making a strong individual mark on the genre from the very beginning.
Despite Rendell's brilliance as a writer and commentator on human nature, her portrayals of certain aspects of humanity sometimes strike me as a little bleak, particularly her depiction of the aging process. Her writing can be unforgiving toward characters if they refuse to age gracefully (in her definition of aging gracefully) after about 30, which these days is considered young. It is interesting to see that this foible began early on in her career, though it may not have been regarded as a foible by earlier generations, for whom prolonged adolescences were not always an option.
I guessed the murderer probably a bit earlier in the reading process than I would wish in a murder mystery, though the clues were a little more obvious than they might have been to an audience of 50 years ago, and are of a literary nature. I did not guess the level of repression and unaddressed neurosis behind the murder, so it was not without suspense of a psychological nature, something that Rendell became masterful at portraying as her career progressed.
While Rendell's later work provides more to chew on, this book is definitely worth a read in tribute to a writer who has provided several generations with many hours of enjoyment (and may she rest in peace).
It is more of a traditional murder mystery than Rendell's later works in other ways also, with the pieces of the puzzle gradually pointing toward the culprit and the various players gathered together at the end for the final revelation, a formula that seems to have started with Agatha Christie. I am still a little unsure of the logic of how the characters all ended up in the attic for the final confrontation, but somehow they did. However, aspects of this plot were probably regarded as risque 50 years ago, dealing as it does with a form of love that was considered scandalous at the time, but is thankfully not anymore. Certainly, this book makes it obvious that Rendell was making a strong individual mark on the genre from the very beginning.
Despite Rendell's brilliance as a writer and commentator on human nature, her portrayals of certain aspects of humanity sometimes strike me as a little bleak, particularly her depiction of the aging process. Her writing can be unforgiving toward characters if they refuse to age gracefully (in her definition of aging gracefully) after about 30, which these days is considered young. It is interesting to see that this foible began early on in her career, though it may not have been regarded as a foible by earlier generations, for whom prolonged adolescences were not always an option.
I guessed the murderer probably a bit earlier in the reading process than I would wish in a murder mystery, though the clues were a little more obvious than they might have been to an audience of 50 years ago, and are of a literary nature. I did not guess the level of repression and unaddressed neurosis behind the murder, so it was not without suspense of a psychological nature, something that Rendell became masterful at portraying as her career progressed.
While Rendell's later work provides more to chew on, this book is definitely worth a read in tribute to a writer who has provided several generations with many hours of enjoyment (and may she rest in peace).