Scan barcode
sariel's review against another edition
challenging
mysterious
tense
medium-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? It's complicated
3.75
ahinks's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
pokecol's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
This is a hard one to review as I'm not really sure what I want to say. I left the review off for a while and then forgot about it for nearly a month. The thing is a good part of that was I wasn't really certain where I wanted to levy my thoughts at the time.
As with all things, there are positives and negatives with this book, however, in this case some of the positives and negatives, both, overlap making it weird to digest.
As there is no particular starting point or end point I wish to make at this introduction, the digest of this will mostly be at random with thoughts about things that stuck out to me as worth talking about.
The book, firstly, leaves a very strange first impression. The initial chapter is enormous at around 60+ pages which is more than 10% of the total length. Then is immediately followed by a chapter that is under 10 pages (around 3 if I recall correctly).
This is where the bizarreness starts because I can evaluate this through both a positive and negative lens. 60+ pages right off the bat is, frankly, nuts - it feels like it is about to set a precedent for the scope and pace of the book but then immediate rebukes itself with the following chapter. Talking critically, this means a lot of initial work to pass the investment test and then what feels like a very strange detour from where we began - especially with how different the subject matter is in these two chapters.
Alternatively, this is a positive; the first chapter of the book does all its establishing work and puts forth the pieces we need to know as the foundation before resetting itself in the following chapter for us to resurface threads in the future. It also makes it easy to say you are into a portion of the book by the time you've tested if it is for you - and the investment test flowing in one long variance for the first chapter does good at grasping that attention.
This first chapter is a bit all over the place though, in that we get a, what feels like, entirely off-subject horrible rape scene, then talk of an unrelated criminal-miscarriage case and then a diatribe of analysis from a completely separate party. It's, in ways kind of cool in that we get the world scope of the time and technology presented in an interesting way and that we can gain a broader understanding of response to the narrative subject at hand - additionally it makes its statement piece in the fiction clear very fast and apparently, which is nice.
It was hard to know what my initial feelings were because of this first chapter though because it is very polarising. The rape scene is first thing, and as someone with strong feelings about the frustrating proliferation of sexual abuse in adult novels, it is hard to stomach as the very first thing in the story. It is also strange in that we immediately distance ourselves from it, which I don't know how to feel about: this is because, it feels like it is trying to set the stage to return to, but it is otherwise easily forgotten for a good first third of the book. Meaning that this scene, upfront and horrific, would have serviced itself fine later in the book, (obviously at the expense of presenting something to return to later) which would make stomaching it a lot easier than the first foray into the story. It does however, at the start, set expectations for some of, what ends up being, really really dark social exploration.
This is all to say that there is a lot to digest from the first chapter alone and its hard to know what to actually say because there is so much book after it.
The use of excerpts from 'in fiction' fiction and journalism is a very original way to present views and information though, and something that I thoroughly enjoyed - and it makes it presence well-used across the duration of the novel.
The rest of the novel comes to explore the testimony of a presumably wrongly accused youth, where the claim of blame is for the benefit of a societal image rather than truth of justice. Something that directly opposes the ethics of George and Jonathan. The way this translates to investigative journalism, social subterfuge and a slew of emotional abuse is enjoyable at the most basic level.
For a book over 500 pages, it is of a digestible presentation.
I do not think Minette Walter's writing style is exceptionally impressive or anything but it is very good. Scene flows well, vocabulary is exciting but not punishing and it feels intellectual in its topics and intentionally a little pretentious, without straying from accessibility to the average reader.
However, most notable is the character work, Minette Walter's characters are incredible. The cast ends up being fairly huge for the scope of the novel and though there is some space where ancillary cast could have gotten more development and personality, it still manages to let all characters feel like characters. Jonathan and George spend the first quarter of the book just existing on flaws alone in a way of true manufactured conflict which is resolved off-screen. Not poorly, but necessarily, as the actual conflict did not matter, but the presentation of it did - and this very showing in how people interact overtime keeps returning throughout the story to illustrate the dichotomy of a person from the 'now' and the 'then'.
Some characters could do with more to them, strictly in the sense they feel a little less than Jonathan, George and Andrew, but in terms of the role and page-time, they do very well (except maybe Sasha).
There is such a good presentation of pride and tandem with communication in a way I've not read before. I do not think it is the best as there is ample room to really dig into it further but its done just so well that a good majority of it feels like something I do not really have reason to criticise.
The book is all round a mix of weirdly focused and unfocused. The pacing is odd in that the divisions of time and progress from state-of-action to state-of-aciton makes it feel fast, but also that the speed which each element is digested and the overall arc of Priscilla crawls in its rebound from every piece of the story makes it feel very slow.
There are multiple months at play in the story and some beats feel removed from others and some feel overly closely connected given the time of removal - I don't really have much else to say about this, its just a bit strange.
The plot itself is fine. Sort of. It depends which plot you want to talk about, because the central plot doesn't really exist - Jonathan and George want to exonerate Howard Stamp but all elements in play bounce around the outside of the issue because there is no easy through-line to that conclusion. Thereby making the "rape" and issue with Priscilla, as entreated in the first few pages, the actual central plot - though it feels more like it is the B plot but also... not. It functionally IS the B plot, but takes centre-stage for nearly the whole duration of the novel when we understand where the children at the time of the initial murder managed to be involved.
This isn't necessarily bad, as the deconstruction of this story is just as satisfying and enjoyable as it is with how Howard Stamp was tackled due to the fact they both play at intersecting roles, but it is a little bizarre that the whole focus on the criminal injustice and negligible evidence and testimony exists on a platform beside what the characters end up discussing for it to be affected.
I don't have much negative to say about the overall plot or much too positive either, it works well enough, if a little challenging to grasp the exacts of - specifically for how often elements are reiterated to different characters and portions are called into question. Its nice that not everything is wrapped up in a neat little bow, and makes exact details hard to know in a pretty excellent way - it makes the actually criminal apprehension and allegations as grey as they would otherwise have to be in reality - however it also makes the ending less than satisfying because while we get what amounts to a "reasonably" profound account of events that is plot has involved with Priscilla, we are still left in the dark as to whether the bully-boys actually killed Howard's grandmother.
The things I didn't like about the story are a bit more clear cut - not narrative, as the plotline in centre is fine, but the outside story with, for the most part, great characters - this being Emma, Sasha and Andrew (mainly).
Sasha is the first weird part, a hot-headed young detective/police on the ground to take the matters George and Jonathan have been appended to in legal authority. Its a necessary step in not being a citizen oriented case as is more required in a realistic setting such as this, but she is introduced very late and is otherwise much more flat than the stellar cast already present. Not to say she is bad, the first interview she conducts does a good job of setting expectations for her and some of the portions of the interviews, and her psychology in tackling them, is actually really good, but Sasha herself just isn't very interesting. And when we move to her being a more core component of the story's resolution it feels somewhat dissatisfying to follow.
Second is Emma, or Jonathan's ex-girlfriend he was going to marry, that comes up as if to act as a B plot but has nearly no point at all. It feels like it was trying to give something to the relationship George and Jonathan could talk about beyond the professional engagement - as well as something he could emotionally overcome in the arc of character - but it feels very forced and unrelated. We get only a couple of scenes where the discussion is brought up but it is overall contrite and shown to a minimal enough degree that if it weren't in the book or substituted for mundane banter, the story would actually be better for it. If Jonathan really needed an emotional arc from start to finish, there would definitely be better ways to do it, I haven't an exact idea of 'what' for a case solution, but a backseat non-existent romance repercussion put through the lens of new relationships does not service for this in anyway but a reflection of themes already present in the story.
Lastly is Andrew, who, as a character is perhaps my favourite, smart, forthright and otherwise only as powerful as he is allowed to be when involved with the story because he has his own business going on. It's excellent because each scene he ends up being a part of is better for it, showing his power and presence as a character but not missed when gone because his role is not pivotal to plot (but is pivotal to social relationships). Where Andrew slips up is this weird idea he too needs to have some kind of story we see - his previous relationship with his wife is brought up numerous times and explained in detail his emotional setting for his life's present moment in regards to family, and its just downright strange this was necessitated for character. I don't think anything about Andrew needed to be said in this way and the time taken for it to be questioned and utilised in story a few times over was more or less not necessary - a passing mention during the point with his unexpected visitor might've been fine, but it acting as a weird pseudo-foil of choice to Jonathan just felt pointless.
On the other-hand something I really liked in character was Rachel, or William Burton's wife. In just a few scenes she was given a brilliant psychological spotlight in the same way that Andrew had been given. And without delving into it more than I need to, her closing email near the end of the book was a true MVP moment and had me do a little bit of a reflexive hype dance, someone getting that, "Yes, girl!" kind of a moment.
A few other things at random.
The biggest weirdness in the book is how the plot structure actually works. The narrative is very good, and the pacing and roles are serviceable as said above, however, the structure itself is very... strange. Everything folds into itself in weird plausibility, the bar at the start being owned potentially by the very rapist/murderer of the books focus, Louise stealing Jonathan's briefcase in what is otherwise the only inciting point to continue delving into the investigation. How Louise's convenience of life ended up with her tackle-able in the same town she was raised and how her cycle of abuse has no claim to fleeing abusers in the length of time. The, aforementioned, sidelining of the actual case of Howard Stamp for a good majority of the book. And, while necessary for set-up and flow, the weird pacing of Jonathan's arrest. There are also some other points but these are what strike up off the top of my head because at times things feel a little 'convenient', its very easy to ignore thanks to the realism that otherwise pervades everything else and the arguments made in the case of these contrivances, but in isolation they are all standout oddities in an otherwise fairly competent novel.
The whole Louise and Priscilla relationship was something that was actually hard to read near the end. It is disturbingly real and disturbingly atrocious, while Louise does not say anything ridiculously egregious in her time in modern day, the fact she is so cunning enough to make the reader question if all other information could be baseless against her 'first-hand account of things' makes the unreliability super uncomfortable - in a good way. I've never seen a character so level on not being good or bad in world, whilst openly being the antagonist of the story in a fashion.
The thing is it gets so real that the subject matter of how horrible Cill's life was through the issues of childhood ends up being really challenging to consume. While there is a lot to be said about the horrors Louise had to suffer and metes an understanding of why she justifies a social equilibrium, Cill's is something else. I've never felt so truly sick as the way it was described that she was killed, my heart pumps with anxiety just thinking about leaving the house to see your rapists again all leading to a long slide of ramping destruction of autonomy and what amounts to 'manslaughter' purely by the fact she was no longer treated as a living person by the time she had chocked at some point mid impromptu-rape. To then be thrown into, and buried in a construction site, never found. It's just about the worst thing I've ever had be put to thought, imagination and viewing on a real human horror level. Louise's position on it all from a range of ambivalence to justification makes it all the harder to stomach. I almost feel I should praise the author for how well it was done to provoke the reaction in me, but the other-side of me is just revolted for the fate of an entirely fictional girl who become subject to pure circumstance - circumstance so terrible, it instigates a fear for chance in reality.
A few other points I've loosely neglected to mention that fit into other parts above. George's Cancer as a weird half-C-plot like Jonathan's Girlfriend and Andrew's Wife-retrospective. How much the core 3 cast would be great to visit in additional stories, even as they do well in this book alone. Some weird relationship progress in how characters tackle each-other beyond the scope of the story, especially Jonathan and Sasha's out-of-the-blue relationship presentation because, hetero-normative necessity for romance.
Overall, the book was very good. There are things holding it back in the primest sense that its not tackling anything too crazy. If the subject matter of the story was entirely about the criminal justice system itself there is a lot more powerful a message that could be said, though that also makes eking out an enjoyable and diverse narrative a bit more of a challenge.
I ended up liking most aspects of the story in the story fashion, and the presentational differences of eras, past and present, were a delight. The newspaper clippings and messages were a great pace-breaker. The cast was diverse and unconventional in lacking a primary white, young, or male cast, which was a really nice surprise. The representation of the neighbourhood and more intimate relationships of community were stellar, and the fashion which thoughts and information permeated at a time of social focus and fear was portrayed very well. The way information was always presented openly and truthfully but not necessarily accurately made decoding smaller details a lot of fun. And of course as said before; the characters were just so good - not out of this world memorable or iconic, but very , very good.
As what is probably the final book in this genre I will read for a long while it was very satisfying. And most of all, its a book that lets you feel smart for keeping up without preaching to a higher intellect nor talking down to a lesser one, which is a feat all in of itself in my opinion.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Sexual assault, Domestic abuse, Rape, Child abuse, Child death, and Incest
Moderate: Emotional abuse, Grief, Bullying, Murder, Pedophilia, Addiction, Toxic relationship, Physical abuse, Toxic friendship, and Adult/minor relationship
Minor: Alcoholism, Blood, Suicidal thoughts, Torture, Ableism, Mental illness, Panic attacks/disorders, Racism, Abandonment, Alcohol, Schizophrenia/Psychosis , Self harm, Sexual violence, Drug abuse, Injury/Injury detail, Classism, Infertility, Kidnapping, Violence, and Body shaming
fabelfuchs's review against another edition
mysterious
slow-paced
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
2.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual assault and Rape
Moderate: Drug abuse and Sexual violence
asharilan89's review
4.0
This book was such a pleasant surprise. It was one of those books that you buy at a charity store for a dollar and don’t expect much from. But it was so interesting. It had great characters that had distinct personalities and clear psychologies. Plot line that follows a possible false conviction, murder mystery and false/maybe stolen identity? All twisted threads that weave together to form an intriguing story. It was not what I was expecting and I’m so glad I finally pulled it off my shelves closing on 10 years after purchase. And an Australian author to boot. Love it!
claudia_is_reading's review against another edition
3.0
Yes, I'm in a Minette Walters' kick, although I didn't like this book as much as the other ones I've listened.
Yes, the mystery is interesting but the plot gets a bit too convoluted for my taste, and even when I really liked the original characters, Jonathan, Andrew and George I resent that we miss all of Jonathan's evolution :/
I still found the story captivating and I admire how three-dimensional are all the characters involved in the crime but the ending? I seriously don't appreciate being left hanging in there, waiting for a real resolution *laughs*
Anyway, I'll still be listening to more books by her, as no matter what, I still find her writing fascinating.
Yes, the mystery is interesting but the plot gets a bit too convoluted for my taste, and even when I really liked the original characters, Jonathan, Andrew and George I resent that we miss all of Jonathan's evolution :/
I still found the story captivating and I admire how three-dimensional are all the characters involved in the crime but the ending? I seriously don't appreciate being left hanging in there, waiting for a real resolution *laughs*
Anyway, I'll still be listening to more books by her, as no matter what, I still find her writing fascinating.
cucumberedpickle's review against another edition
1.0
Too much going on. Too many undeveloped relationships. Not enough emphases to make me care about the “good guys”. No real resolution. Overall a disappointment.
emzbaa23's review
dark
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5