David Schwinghammer's Blog - Posts Tagged "unsolved-murder"
THE CROOKED HOUSE
Alison's family was murdered and she was whisked away by her aunt Polly, an equally introverted sort. She had no plans to ever return to to the village by the sea where she lost her father, mother, brother and two twins sisters.
But then she met Paul, a thirty-ish sort, thirteen years her senior; Paul was a historian with an interest in traumatic shock, the sort of thing Alison (formerly Esme) went through. Then he invited her to attend a wedding where he would be the best man in her home town. Of course, she was reluctant, but Paul convinced her it would be good for her, in a way. And she had this somewhat subconscious desire to prove her father, who got the blame for the murders, was innocent.
Paul forgets to tell Alison that he once had a relationship with the bride, and not only Morgan, but also the entire family who treated him like some kind of emotional adviser.
I read a lot of mysteries, and author Christobel Kent seemed to be giving this one away from the start. Mystery writers are supposed to introduce the murderer early on. It's too convenient to bring on somebody totally new at the end. But Kent keeps pointing at this person like a blackboard. I thought I was wrong when it appeared someone else had murdered the family, but that proved to be misdirection. What Kent's plot is missing is motivation. Why in the blazes would this person do what he or she did? Sure Kent is British and maybe she did show why, and I was just clueless when it came to her psychological goings on. But it doesn't seem so.
Take the ending for instance. Alison has visited the old homestead for the umpteenth time. Someone else is there and Alison is in dire straights. Detective Sarah Hamilton is on the way, but an old friend of Alison's is there to save the day. Kent pulls a jump cut between his/her arrival and the demise of the killer. We don't know how the savior pulled it off. This really chapped my hide. The person who saved the day was sort of a misanthrope in the first place. Would he/she actually be a knight in shining armor? The book ends with Alison talking to her brain dead father. “Look, Daddy, I proved you didn't do it.” It's easy to miss that as well. Kent uses pronouns instead of names. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Kent's style is really annoying.
But then she met Paul, a thirty-ish sort, thirteen years her senior; Paul was a historian with an interest in traumatic shock, the sort of thing Alison (formerly Esme) went through. Then he invited her to attend a wedding where he would be the best man in her home town. Of course, she was reluctant, but Paul convinced her it would be good for her, in a way. And she had this somewhat subconscious desire to prove her father, who got the blame for the murders, was innocent.
Paul forgets to tell Alison that he once had a relationship with the bride, and not only Morgan, but also the entire family who treated him like some kind of emotional adviser.
I read a lot of mysteries, and author Christobel Kent seemed to be giving this one away from the start. Mystery writers are supposed to introduce the murderer early on. It's too convenient to bring on somebody totally new at the end. But Kent keeps pointing at this person like a blackboard. I thought I was wrong when it appeared someone else had murdered the family, but that proved to be misdirection. What Kent's plot is missing is motivation. Why in the blazes would this person do what he or she did? Sure Kent is British and maybe she did show why, and I was just clueless when it came to her psychological goings on. But it doesn't seem so.
Take the ending for instance. Alison has visited the old homestead for the umpteenth time. Someone else is there and Alison is in dire straights. Detective Sarah Hamilton is on the way, but an old friend of Alison's is there to save the day. Kent pulls a jump cut between his/her arrival and the demise of the killer. We don't know how the savior pulled it off. This really chapped my hide. The person who saved the day was sort of a misanthrope in the first place. Would he/she actually be a knight in shining armor? The book ends with Alison talking to her brain dead father. “Look, Daddy, I proved you didn't do it.” It's easy to miss that as well. Kent uses pronouns instead of names. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Kent's style is really annoying.
