Wealhtheow's Reviews > Death Comes To Pemberley
Death Comes To Pemberley
by P.D. James
by P.D. James
Wealhtheow's review
bookshelves: historical, regency
Jun 08, 12
bookshelves: historical, regency
Recommended to Wealhtheow by:
Richard
Recommended for:
people who neither understand the past nor care about Pride and Prejudice or mysteries.
Read from May 15 to 17, 2012
Some years after Pride and Prejudice, Lydia Wickham (nee Bennet) stumbles through the front door of Pemberley in hysterics. There were gunshots in the woods, and she's sure her husband has been murdered. Darcy and some of the other men go out in search, and find (view spoiler) Darcy summons the magistrate and then spends the entire rest of the novel thinking anachronistic thoughts and doing absolutely nothing related to the murder investigation. In fact, there really isn't a murder investigation; the most the characters do in regards to the murder is sit around the fire talking about whether or not the alleged murderer has the mindset possible to do the deed. No evidence turns up, nor do the characters make any attempt to find any. The full story of the murder is randomly turned up in a deathbed confession, and then another character equally randomly confesses the rest of the plot.
It's a very odd book. Usually a murder mystery involves a long period of finding out clues, or talking to witnesses, or figuring out the motives--and instead the characters just go over the same three facts ad nauseum. For example: we see the discovery of the body through Mr. Darcy's eyes, and then he relives the discovery a few times, and then he recounts the discovery several times to various law enforcement personnel. His story and view of the facts never change, so there's no point to going over it all again almost word-for-word.
It's no good as historical fiction, because although James has clearly done some research into the period (which she infodumps randomly; for example, apropos of nothing, Darcy soapboxes about the need for an appeals court) she doesn't seem to get the underpinnings of Regency society. The characters are worried that they might upset the police by moving the body--even though they would have no reason to expect an autopsy, and the police of the time were a distrustred force of ill-trained, ill-paid, low class dudes who barely existed yet. And even a century later the police wouldn't be going in the front door, let alone questioning rich gentlemen about their alibis in the parlor!
And it doesn't work as a continuation of Pride and Prejudice, either. The spirit and wit of Austen is completely missing, but then I expected that. But the characters are all wrong as well! Elizabeth is a quiet, maternal figure in the background, who has about three scenes total. She and Mr.Darcy hardly speak to each other, except to utter platitudes about how happy they are to have children or to rehash old lines from P&P. Colonel Fitzwilliam gets a complete character assassination--far from the wry, practical man who bantered with Lizzy, here he's a prig who despises her. It doesn't ring true.
Death Comes to Pemberley just doesn't satisfy on any level. If you're looking for murder mysteries set in the Regency period, I suggest the Julian Kestral series by Kate Ross instead.
(The review I used to have up, before I read the book, was "Ooh, I hope Wickham's been murdered! That child-molesting, predatory lying scumbag.")
It's a very odd book. Usually a murder mystery involves a long period of finding out clues, or talking to witnesses, or figuring out the motives--and instead the characters just go over the same three facts ad nauseum. For example: we see the discovery of the body through Mr. Darcy's eyes, and then he relives the discovery a few times, and then he recounts the discovery several times to various law enforcement personnel. His story and view of the facts never change, so there's no point to going over it all again almost word-for-word.
It's no good as historical fiction, because although James has clearly done some research into the period (which she infodumps randomly; for example, apropos of nothing, Darcy soapboxes about the need for an appeals court) she doesn't seem to get the underpinnings of Regency society. The characters are worried that they might upset the police by moving the body--even though they would have no reason to expect an autopsy, and the police of the time were a distrustred force of ill-trained, ill-paid, low class dudes who barely existed yet. And even a century later the police wouldn't be going in the front door, let alone questioning rich gentlemen about their alibis in the parlor!
And it doesn't work as a continuation of Pride and Prejudice, either. The spirit and wit of Austen is completely missing, but then I expected that. But the characters are all wrong as well! Elizabeth is a quiet, maternal figure in the background, who has about three scenes total. She and Mr.Darcy hardly speak to each other, except to utter platitudes about how happy they are to have children or to rehash old lines from P&P. Colonel Fitzwilliam gets a complete character assassination--far from the wry, practical man who bantered with Lizzy, here he's a prig who despises her. It doesn't ring true.
Death Comes to Pemberley just doesn't satisfy on any level. If you're looking for murder mysteries set in the Regency period, I suggest the Julian Kestral series by Kate Ross instead.
(The review I used to have up, before I read the book, was "Ooh, I hope Wickham's been murdered! That child-molesting, predatory lying scumbag.")
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Death Comes To Pemberley.
sign in »
Reading Progress
| 05/17/2012 | page 86 |
|
28.0% |
"'And has Dr.McFee in any way interfered with Captain Denny's body? I take it that you have ensured that it is inaccessible to anyone until my arrival.' '***'s body is laid out on a table in the gunroom and is under lock and key. I thought that nothing should be done to ascertain the cause of death until your arrival.' 'You were right. It would be unfortunate if anyone could suggest that there had been any ..." 3 comments |
| 05/17/2012 | page 89 |
|
29.0% |
""Elizabeth wondered whether washing **'s face had been wise. Wasn't it possible that Sir Selwyn, when he arrived, would expect to see *** in the same state as he had been when discovered stooped over the body?" Lizzie, this isn't a crime show. Why are you thinking like this? How many murder investigations could she possibly have encountered before this, to have all these opinions? gah, reads unrealistic." |
| 05/17/2012 | page 104 |
|
34.0% | "'You will, of course, undertake any further examination of the body that you feel to be necessary, I have no wish to curb the progress of scientific knowledge...' Uh, really? Cuz decades later, the English are still RIOTING over dissections, not happily turning over murder victims (who are gentlemen!) to be dissected." |
| 05/17/2012 | page 111 |
|
36.0% |
"'Better leave it to me...Hardcastle is on the alert for any interference on your part. He is in charge. You can't afford to antagonise him.' It is 1803. Are you seriously telling me that a wealthy landowner whose family has had a mansion for years in one place "can't afford" to antagonize a policemen? Policemen are just considered servants at this point! They barely existed, wouldn't even go in the front door!" |
| 05/17/2012 | page 111 |
|
36.0% |
"'Better leave it to me...Hardcastle is on the alert for any interference on your part. He is in charge. You can't afford to antagonise him.' It is 1803. Are you seriously telling me that a wealthy landowner whose family has had a mansion for years in one place "can't afford" to antagonize a policemen? Policemen are just considered servants at this point! They barely existed, wouldn't even go in the front door!" |
| 05/17/2012 | page 147 |
|
47.0% | "Two pages of infodump in the form of a very unconvincing dialog between Darcy, Colonel Fitzwilliam, and a lawyer, regarding how juries work and the limits of trial law. So awkwardly shoe-horned in!" |
Comments (showing 1-10 of 10) (10 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Richard
(new)
-
rated it 2 stars
Nov 30, 2011 10:57pm
LOL!
reply
|
flag
*
Wealhtheow wrote: "Obviously I don't have particularly strong feelings on this issue."I like to refer to the character as Wickedham myself.
lol - have to admit when I started reading the description I was thinking 'but it can't be Lizzie! Or Darcy! Or Jane! Or Bingley!' b/c all the favorites have to be safe of course.
This was unbelievably bad but your review was great, especially the original review; that would have been a better book.


