David Schwinghammer's Blog, page 8
January 4, 2018
Big Little Lies
I first heard of BIG LITTLE LIES on the Emmy Awards when it won a sack full of trophies for the HBO movies. I didn't know the setting was an Australian elementary school, and I had no idea they had that kind of parental involvement.
The three protagonists are Madeline, Celeste, and Jane. Madeline is a live wire just turning forty. She's driving her daughter to school; she keeps complaining out loud “I'm forty!” Chloe, her daughter has the funniest line in the book. She says, “I'm five!' Celeste is a beautiful woman, so beautiful that she literally stops traffic. You wouldn't think she was undergoing spousal abuse. Jane is a young single mother who claims she doesn't know the name of her son Ziggy's father; he was the result of a one-night stand.
The action starts during kindergarten orientation when a little girl is choked. There's a line-up of sorts and Amabella fingers Ziggy as the culprit. Jane is 99% sure he didn't do it, and boy, does she have reason to think he just might have.
There are further complications. Madeline's first husband, Nathan, walked out on her when her daughter Abigail was just a baby. He married Bonnie, a hippy type whom Abigail worships. Jane does know who Ziggy's father is and Celeste, who seems to have the perfect marriage (her husband is loaded and they live in a mini-mansion, is thinking of leaving him.
The book works in reverse order. Usually, in a mystery, you're looking for the killer. In this one you're being teased about the identity of the victim. It all points toward trivia night. Everybody is supposed to dress up as either Elvis or Audrey Hepburn. Jane, who thinks she's plain, gets a new haircut, and she looks like she could get a job as a stand-in in an Audrey movie. She also gets a surprising new boyfriend.
I have not seen the movie, but I just don't see Reese Witherspoon as Madeline. Reese could pass for twenty-five. Otherwise, I found myself thinking this could work with America as a setting. It would have to be an elite elementary school, the kind you have to sign the kid up for when he/she is born. I'm an ex-teacher, and I have never seen this kind of parental involvement, especially a trivia night. That's one of the main grouches you hear in the faculty lounge. The wrong people show up at parent/teacher conferences. Those that should never show up.
The three protagonists are Madeline, Celeste, and Jane. Madeline is a live wire just turning forty. She's driving her daughter to school; she keeps complaining out loud “I'm forty!” Chloe, her daughter has the funniest line in the book. She says, “I'm five!' Celeste is a beautiful woman, so beautiful that she literally stops traffic. You wouldn't think she was undergoing spousal abuse. Jane is a young single mother who claims she doesn't know the name of her son Ziggy's father; he was the result of a one-night stand.
The action starts during kindergarten orientation when a little girl is choked. There's a line-up of sorts and Amabella fingers Ziggy as the culprit. Jane is 99% sure he didn't do it, and boy, does she have reason to think he just might have.
There are further complications. Madeline's first husband, Nathan, walked out on her when her daughter Abigail was just a baby. He married Bonnie, a hippy type whom Abigail worships. Jane does know who Ziggy's father is and Celeste, who seems to have the perfect marriage (her husband is loaded and they live in a mini-mansion, is thinking of leaving him.
The book works in reverse order. Usually, in a mystery, you're looking for the killer. In this one you're being teased about the identity of the victim. It all points toward trivia night. Everybody is supposed to dress up as either Elvis or Audrey Hepburn. Jane, who thinks she's plain, gets a new haircut, and she looks like she could get a job as a stand-in in an Audrey movie. She also gets a surprising new boyfriend.
I have not seen the movie, but I just don't see Reese Witherspoon as Madeline. Reese could pass for twenty-five. Otherwise, I found myself thinking this could work with America as a setting. It would have to be an elite elementary school, the kind you have to sign the kid up for when he/she is born. I'm an ex-teacher, and I have never seen this kind of parental involvement, especially a trivia night. That's one of the main grouches you hear in the faculty lounge. The wrong people show up at parent/teacher conferences. Those that should never show up.
December 20, 2017
The Templars
The Templars began as a small group of soldier/monks whose goal was to protect Christian pilgrims from being harassed by Saracens on their way to the Holy Land. Eventually they expanded, were given money and land by Western monarchs and nobles and became soldiers in the Crusades.
If you recognize the name Templar, you've probably read Dan Brown's best seller THE DA VINCE CODE, Umberto Eco's FOUCAULT'S PENDULUM or watched the cable series about the treasure supposedly buried on Oak Island in Nova Scotia. The Templars have also aroused the interest of various conspiracy theorists who think they're still around and involved in world dominance.
There are some familiar names that crop up while reading Dan Jones's book on The Templars. There are two that are equally famous: Richard the lion-hearted and Saladin, the Moslem sultan who won back Jerusalem. The first Crusade was successful because of the disarray of the various Moslem sects, who hated each other as much as the Christians. The first Crusade captured Jerusalem and crowned their own king Baldwin I. I knew about Baldwin but I didn't no the kingdom lasted, off and on, from 1099 until the early thirteen hundreds. Appendix III lists all the kings and queens. Saladin is important because he united the various Moslem sects into a fighting force able to win back Jerusalem. As you read about the various crusades it appears the Moslems usually had the upper hand, sometimes because the Christian leaders were such terrible tacticians with giant egos, constantly bickering. But the Crusaders had success under Richard (although he never attacked Jerusalem) and later under Frederick II Hohenstaufen, the Holy Roman emperor, who negotiated a truce with the Egyptian sultan to allow Christian soldiers to visit Jerusalem.
The thread that runs through the book is “How did the Templars meet their demise”? If you want to blame somebody, blame Phillip IV of France who thought he was God on earth. Phillip needed money; at first he tried to get it by expelling the Jews from France and confiscating their money and lands. It wasn't enough. What the average history freak doesn't know (I certainly didn't) was that the Templars were so good at handling money that some of the Western monarchs used them as a treasury. Phillip knew they were loaded. I was also under the impression that the Templars were rounded up on one fateful day. Actually it was a long involved process, and Pope Clement V came to their defense. He didn't want some secular king punishing his soldier monks. But Phillip used torture to elicit confessions. He even got one from James of Molay, the master of the Templars who was in France trying to work up enthusiasm for another Crusade. There's another glossary that lists the various Templar masters from Hugh of Payns to James of Molay.
If you recognize the name Templar, you've probably read Dan Brown's best seller THE DA VINCE CODE, Umberto Eco's FOUCAULT'S PENDULUM or watched the cable series about the treasure supposedly buried on Oak Island in Nova Scotia. The Templars have also aroused the interest of various conspiracy theorists who think they're still around and involved in world dominance.
There are some familiar names that crop up while reading Dan Jones's book on The Templars. There are two that are equally famous: Richard the lion-hearted and Saladin, the Moslem sultan who won back Jerusalem. The first Crusade was successful because of the disarray of the various Moslem sects, who hated each other as much as the Christians. The first Crusade captured Jerusalem and crowned their own king Baldwin I. I knew about Baldwin but I didn't no the kingdom lasted, off and on, from 1099 until the early thirteen hundreds. Appendix III lists all the kings and queens. Saladin is important because he united the various Moslem sects into a fighting force able to win back Jerusalem. As you read about the various crusades it appears the Moslems usually had the upper hand, sometimes because the Christian leaders were such terrible tacticians with giant egos, constantly bickering. But the Crusaders had success under Richard (although he never attacked Jerusalem) and later under Frederick II Hohenstaufen, the Holy Roman emperor, who negotiated a truce with the Egyptian sultan to allow Christian soldiers to visit Jerusalem.
The thread that runs through the book is “How did the Templars meet their demise”? If you want to blame somebody, blame Phillip IV of France who thought he was God on earth. Phillip needed money; at first he tried to get it by expelling the Jews from France and confiscating their money and lands. It wasn't enough. What the average history freak doesn't know (I certainly didn't) was that the Templars were so good at handling money that some of the Western monarchs used them as a treasury. Phillip knew they were loaded. I was also under the impression that the Templars were rounded up on one fateful day. Actually it was a long involved process, and Pope Clement V came to their defense. He didn't want some secular king punishing his soldier monks. But Phillip used torture to elicit confessions. He even got one from James of Molay, the master of the Templars who was in France trying to work up enthusiasm for another Crusade. There's another glossary that lists the various Templar masters from Hugh of Payns to James of Molay.
December 1, 2017
City of Lights, City of Poison
In 1665 and 1666 Jacques Tardieu, criminal lieutenant of Paris, and Dreux d'Aubray, civil lieutenant of Paris under Louis XIV were murdered. They were two of Louis's principal advisers.
As a result, Louis appointed one of his most trusted advisers, Nicolas de La Reynie, as the first police chief of Paris. At the time Paris was known as the “crime capital of the world.” De La Reynie set to work installing gas lights in the city, hence the moniker “City of Lights.” The streets were also muddy and mixed with animal refuse as beef cattle were regularly herded through the city on their way to the slaughter house. De La Reynie required that shopkeepers and home owners get up early in the morning to sweep the mud and refuse into the middle of the streets so that street cleaners could collect it more readily.
Still, Montorgeuil neighborhood, the center of crime and poverty, remained a nuisance and the murders kept happening, particularly poisonings. But that's where de La Reynie centered his investigation, rooting out apothecaries, pick pockets, rogue priests, witches, and poisoners. It was here he found his most reliable witnesses, women who cast spells and made love potions or poisons to attain revenge. Ultimately de La Reynie questioned 442 people, put 218 in prison, executed 34, and sentenced another 28 to life in prison or the galleys. Nothing much has changed since the late 17th century. If you were found guilty and were a nobleman or woman, you were decapitated; an ordinary citizen was either hanged or burned alive.
De La Reynie acquired so much evidence he couldn't make sense of it. Eventually King Louis called a tribunal to sift through the evidence. De La Reynie also gave the king a black box with evidence that pertained to his former mistresses. The king was adamant they should be left alone. His second mistress, the marquis of Montespan, had been mentioned by numerous witnesses as participating in rituals, asking for potions to make the king love her and perhaps even murder. She remained at Versailles for ten years after the poisoning scourge ended, then retired to the south of France.
This is a hard book to read. There are so many poisoners, rogue priests, relatives of amateur apothecaries who testified, that when author, Holly Tucker, mentions them, the reader can't remember who they are. This book definitely needs a glossary. It does have a very nice picture segment. What is rather surprising is how essentially decent Louis XIV was. Yes, de La Reynie practiced torture that would make Dick Cheney look like a boy scout, but this happened everywhere. The king was faithful to his wife, in his way, throughout their marriage. When she died he married the former governess, because she was pious and easy to talk to.
As a result, Louis appointed one of his most trusted advisers, Nicolas de La Reynie, as the first police chief of Paris. At the time Paris was known as the “crime capital of the world.” De La Reynie set to work installing gas lights in the city, hence the moniker “City of Lights.” The streets were also muddy and mixed with animal refuse as beef cattle were regularly herded through the city on their way to the slaughter house. De La Reynie required that shopkeepers and home owners get up early in the morning to sweep the mud and refuse into the middle of the streets so that street cleaners could collect it more readily.
Still, Montorgeuil neighborhood, the center of crime and poverty, remained a nuisance and the murders kept happening, particularly poisonings. But that's where de La Reynie centered his investigation, rooting out apothecaries, pick pockets, rogue priests, witches, and poisoners. It was here he found his most reliable witnesses, women who cast spells and made love potions or poisons to attain revenge. Ultimately de La Reynie questioned 442 people, put 218 in prison, executed 34, and sentenced another 28 to life in prison or the galleys. Nothing much has changed since the late 17th century. If you were found guilty and were a nobleman or woman, you were decapitated; an ordinary citizen was either hanged or burned alive.
De La Reynie acquired so much evidence he couldn't make sense of it. Eventually King Louis called a tribunal to sift through the evidence. De La Reynie also gave the king a black box with evidence that pertained to his former mistresses. The king was adamant they should be left alone. His second mistress, the marquis of Montespan, had been mentioned by numerous witnesses as participating in rituals, asking for potions to make the king love her and perhaps even murder. She remained at Versailles for ten years after the poisoning scourge ended, then retired to the south of France.
This is a hard book to read. There are so many poisoners, rogue priests, relatives of amateur apothecaries who testified, that when author, Holly Tucker, mentions them, the reader can't remember who they are. This book definitely needs a glossary. It does have a very nice picture segment. What is rather surprising is how essentially decent Louis XIV was. Yes, de La Reynie practiced torture that would make Dick Cheney look like a boy scout, but this happened everywhere. The king was faithful to his wife, in his way, throughout their marriage. When she died he married the former governess, because she was pious and easy to talk to.
November 23, 2017
Bible Nation
Most people who keep up with the news know about Hobby Lobby's law suit over whether business owners whose religious convictions forbid participating in the part of Obamacare that requires the business to cover contraceptives. They won the Supreme Court case.
What most Americans don't know is that Hobby Lobby is owned by the Green family, worth approximately four billion dollars, and that they are involved in other religious endeavors such as a Bible curriculum for the public schools and the construction of the Museum of the Bible in Washington DC, near the mall.
Authors Candida R. Moss and Joel S. Baden are both religious educators, Moss a professor of theology and Baden a professor of the Hebrew Bible at Yale. They are careful not to condemn Steve Green (chairman of Hobby Lobby) and his sincere religious beliefs. But they have some objections, such as Green's reluctance to share the 40,000 antiquities that will or have been donated to the Museum of the Bible with experts in the field. Green wants the Bible to speak for itself and has passed on anecdotes claiming that it has converted several atheists and agnostics. Green also claims the museum is and will be nonsectarian. The Vatican and a Jewish collection of antiquities concerning the Old Testament have been given room on the fourth floor of the recently opened Museum of the Bible. But the president of the museum says he will not tolerate any Catholic “goofiness”.
Another problem Moss and Baden have with the museum is that it centers on the King James Bible and has a definite Protestant bent. It appears to skip a thousand years of Bible history, jumping form the Old Testament to the Protestant Reformation. You can't talk about the Bible without giving Emperor Constantine his due. When Constantine converted, he called Catholic bishops together at the Nicean Council to urge them to come up with a canon law for their faith. At the time Arianism, a sect of Christianity, claimed Christ was not divine but a created being. This led to the creation of the New Testament, which took about a hundred years to formulate. The Arians hung in there for about forty years. The orthodox bishops won out with traditional “holy” texts, such as the gospels (anonymous BTW) and St. Paul's letters winning out.
I thought it was strange that Moss and Baden referred to Bart Erhman, author of JESUS INTERRUPTED, as an agnostic. He is a former evangelical minister who now claims he was taught that the apostles did not believe Jesus was God and that St. Paul was a heretic.
Moss and Baden do argue that experts should be given access to the antiquities and different interpretations, including the Mormons and the gnostic gospels, should be given room at the museum. This would make the impact of the Bible even greater and spur discussion.
Green also argues that America was established as a Christian nation and Moss and Baden don't have too much of a problem with that contention. But the First Amendment is pretty clear that a religion is not allowed to impose itself on American citizens. Yes, you can worship a golden calf if you want, but there is no such thing as a state religion, which the Green family seems to think is praiseworthy. Also, a number of our founding fathers (Franklin and Jefferson especially) were Deists (God created the world, then left) and Washington, who was a deacon in several churches, hardly ever attended Sunday services, and when he did, refused to kneel.
This could have been a fascinating book, but the authors are too worried about appearing biased and leave out a lot of fascinating material.
What most Americans don't know is that Hobby Lobby is owned by the Green family, worth approximately four billion dollars, and that they are involved in other religious endeavors such as a Bible curriculum for the public schools and the construction of the Museum of the Bible in Washington DC, near the mall.
Authors Candida R. Moss and Joel S. Baden are both religious educators, Moss a professor of theology and Baden a professor of the Hebrew Bible at Yale. They are careful not to condemn Steve Green (chairman of Hobby Lobby) and his sincere religious beliefs. But they have some objections, such as Green's reluctance to share the 40,000 antiquities that will or have been donated to the Museum of the Bible with experts in the field. Green wants the Bible to speak for itself and has passed on anecdotes claiming that it has converted several atheists and agnostics. Green also claims the museum is and will be nonsectarian. The Vatican and a Jewish collection of antiquities concerning the Old Testament have been given room on the fourth floor of the recently opened Museum of the Bible. But the president of the museum says he will not tolerate any Catholic “goofiness”.
Another problem Moss and Baden have with the museum is that it centers on the King James Bible and has a definite Protestant bent. It appears to skip a thousand years of Bible history, jumping form the Old Testament to the Protestant Reformation. You can't talk about the Bible without giving Emperor Constantine his due. When Constantine converted, he called Catholic bishops together at the Nicean Council to urge them to come up with a canon law for their faith. At the time Arianism, a sect of Christianity, claimed Christ was not divine but a created being. This led to the creation of the New Testament, which took about a hundred years to formulate. The Arians hung in there for about forty years. The orthodox bishops won out with traditional “holy” texts, such as the gospels (anonymous BTW) and St. Paul's letters winning out.
I thought it was strange that Moss and Baden referred to Bart Erhman, author of JESUS INTERRUPTED, as an agnostic. He is a former evangelical minister who now claims he was taught that the apostles did not believe Jesus was God and that St. Paul was a heretic.
Moss and Baden do argue that experts should be given access to the antiquities and different interpretations, including the Mormons and the gnostic gospels, should be given room at the museum. This would make the impact of the Bible even greater and spur discussion.
Green also argues that America was established as a Christian nation and Moss and Baden don't have too much of a problem with that contention. But the First Amendment is pretty clear that a religion is not allowed to impose itself on American citizens. Yes, you can worship a golden calf if you want, but there is no such thing as a state religion, which the Green family seems to think is praiseworthy. Also, a number of our founding fathers (Franklin and Jefferson especially) were Deists (God created the world, then left) and Washington, who was a deacon in several churches, hardly ever attended Sunday services, and when he did, refused to kneel.
This could have been a fascinating book, but the authors are too worried about appearing biased and leave out a lot of fascinating material.
November 13, 2017
The Unquiet Grave
The first Sharyn McCrumb novel I read was THE HANGMAN'S BEAUTIFUL DAUGHTER, part of her Appalachian ballad series, featuring Sheriff Spencer Arrowwood and Nora Bonesteel, an old woman who had the gift of sight. She was a “seer”; she could see into the future. I was hooked, but gradually the stories became more about Nora Bonesteel and the sheriff disappeared. These days McCrumb picks a strange historical happening and fictionalizes it. But she's till writing about the hill people.
THE UNQUIET GRAVE is set in two different era, 1897 and 1930. In 1897, Zona Heaster is murdered by her husband after only a few months of marriage. But she returns as a ghost and tells her mother what her husband did to her. She goes to the county prosecutor and tells him what she saw. Remarkably he believes her, and they dig up the body; Zona had a broken neck as well as finger marks around her neck. This is one of the holes in the story. The doctor who had been called to the scene was not allowed to take a close look at the body as her husband hovered over her.
Then we move ahead to 1930 at the colored asylum for the insane where we meet James P.D. Gardner who defended the husband as second chair. Dr. James Boozer is a psychiatrist at the asylum. The only reason Gardner is there is because he tried to commit suicide after losing his second wife. He tells Boozer about the case where a ghost testified against her murdering husband.
Okay, was there a real case? McCrumb says “The Greenbrier Ghost is West Virginia's best-known tale of the supernatural, but the incident has always been treated as folklore, a jumble of hearsay and supposition built on a handful of facts. McCrumb's original source was from a book of folklore that took up a page and a half, but by the time she was finished researching the incident she had a file of documents six inches thick. The implication is that these census records, birth and death certificates, maps and photographs fired her imagination and THE UNQUIET GRAVE is the result.
I think McCrumb would do herself a service if she brought back the sheriff and Nora Bonesteel. The characters in THE UNQUIET GRAVE are not as vivid as the lawman and the old lady, and some of the plot is just unbelievable as was the part about the county prosecutor agreeing to dig up Zona Heaster based on her mother's claim that she appeared to her as a ghost.
THE UNQUIET GRAVE is set in two different era, 1897 and 1930. In 1897, Zona Heaster is murdered by her husband after only a few months of marriage. But she returns as a ghost and tells her mother what her husband did to her. She goes to the county prosecutor and tells him what she saw. Remarkably he believes her, and they dig up the body; Zona had a broken neck as well as finger marks around her neck. This is one of the holes in the story. The doctor who had been called to the scene was not allowed to take a close look at the body as her husband hovered over her.
Then we move ahead to 1930 at the colored asylum for the insane where we meet James P.D. Gardner who defended the husband as second chair. Dr. James Boozer is a psychiatrist at the asylum. The only reason Gardner is there is because he tried to commit suicide after losing his second wife. He tells Boozer about the case where a ghost testified against her murdering husband.
Okay, was there a real case? McCrumb says “The Greenbrier Ghost is West Virginia's best-known tale of the supernatural, but the incident has always been treated as folklore, a jumble of hearsay and supposition built on a handful of facts. McCrumb's original source was from a book of folklore that took up a page and a half, but by the time she was finished researching the incident she had a file of documents six inches thick. The implication is that these census records, birth and death certificates, maps and photographs fired her imagination and THE UNQUIET GRAVE is the result.
I think McCrumb would do herself a service if she brought back the sheriff and Nora Bonesteel. The characters in THE UNQUIET GRAVE are not as vivid as the lawman and the old lady, and some of the plot is just unbelievable as was the part about the county prosecutor agreeing to dig up Zona Heaster based on her mother's claim that she appeared to her as a ghost.
November 1, 2017
Robert B. Parker's The Hangman's Sonnet
As many of you know, Robert B. Parker is no long among us. Since his passing, Michael Brandman (never read him) and Reed Farrel Coleman have continued the Jesse Stone series.
The hardest part to capture is Jesse Stone's dialogue, which is most evident when he's having a discussion with his deputy, Suit, who is almost as laconic. Reed Farrel Coleman, an experienced mystery writers captures Jesse's style rather well, although he sometimes over does it. Coleman has written the last four episodes.
In this one, Jesse is on an alcoholic binge due the murder of his fiancee'. But he tries to keep it together because Suit is getting married, and he's the best man. Meanwhile, an old woman is murdered. Jesse finds out who the culprits are through his connections with the Boston underworld. In short order, one of them turns up dead.
So . . . who hired these ex-cons to do the job? They weren't looking for money and the old woman's jewelry is still there, except for one valuable ring one of them takes without the other's knowledge. The other guy finds the key to a safety deposit box without telling his partner.
Meanwhile Jesse wards off the ambitious mayor and her assistant who know about his drinking and want him gone. He finds a connection to the missing album, THE HANGMAN'S SONNET, which was recorded by a Bob Dylan clone, Terry Hester, who was supposed to be as good or better than Dylan. Jesse finds out the old woman rented out rooms, and he has his deputy search her house for some kind of registration book. As a result he gets a lead as to who might have stolen the album. The culprit is also taunting the police and Jesse. He sends a poem written by Hester to Roscoe Niles, who used to be the Dick Clark of New England disk jockeys, who has been going to seed lately. Jesse quickly posits the man behind the murders is trying to stir up the press so that the bids are higher for the missing album if he indeed has it. The plot clues us in on how the old woman was connected to the missing album.
Okay, so is this enjoyable enough to contend with Robert B. Parker?This might seem trivial but, there is no dog. Jesse usually talks to his dog when he's muddling through his latest challenge. Ozzie Smith takes the dog's place in this episode (Jesse has a picture on one of his walls of Ozzie doing his acrobatics). For you non-baseball fans, Ozzie Smith may have been the greatest defensive shortstop to ever play the game, the same position Jesse played until he hurt his arm. You probably won't be able to guess who was behind this mess, but the number of possible candidates will keep you turning the pages.
The hardest part to capture is Jesse Stone's dialogue, which is most evident when he's having a discussion with his deputy, Suit, who is almost as laconic. Reed Farrel Coleman, an experienced mystery writers captures Jesse's style rather well, although he sometimes over does it. Coleman has written the last four episodes.
In this one, Jesse is on an alcoholic binge due the murder of his fiancee'. But he tries to keep it together because Suit is getting married, and he's the best man. Meanwhile, an old woman is murdered. Jesse finds out who the culprits are through his connections with the Boston underworld. In short order, one of them turns up dead.
So . . . who hired these ex-cons to do the job? They weren't looking for money and the old woman's jewelry is still there, except for one valuable ring one of them takes without the other's knowledge. The other guy finds the key to a safety deposit box without telling his partner.
Meanwhile Jesse wards off the ambitious mayor and her assistant who know about his drinking and want him gone. He finds a connection to the missing album, THE HANGMAN'S SONNET, which was recorded by a Bob Dylan clone, Terry Hester, who was supposed to be as good or better than Dylan. Jesse finds out the old woman rented out rooms, and he has his deputy search her house for some kind of registration book. As a result he gets a lead as to who might have stolen the album. The culprit is also taunting the police and Jesse. He sends a poem written by Hester to Roscoe Niles, who used to be the Dick Clark of New England disk jockeys, who has been going to seed lately. Jesse quickly posits the man behind the murders is trying to stir up the press so that the bids are higher for the missing album if he indeed has it. The plot clues us in on how the old woman was connected to the missing album.
Okay, so is this enjoyable enough to contend with Robert B. Parker?This might seem trivial but, there is no dog. Jesse usually talks to his dog when he's muddling through his latest challenge. Ozzie Smith takes the dog's place in this episode (Jesse has a picture on one of his walls of Ozzie doing his acrobatics). For you non-baseball fans, Ozzie Smith may have been the greatest defensive shortstop to ever play the game, the same position Jesse played until he hurt his arm. You probably won't be able to guess who was behind this mess, but the number of possible candidates will keep you turning the pages.
October 23, 2017
Bones Are Forever
I've been a long-time fan of “Bones” on TV. I've seen Kathy Reichs mentioned as the author of the books on which the series was based. I hadn't realized she also writes some of the scripts.
The Temperance of the TV series is as different from the original as night and day. In the books she's also a forensic anthropologist, but she works in Canada and North Carolina. She also has several ex-boyfriends. One of them, Detective Ryan, is a major player in BONES ARE FOREVER. The TV Temperance would never let a man know she cares about him, unless he's Booth. The original can't seem to help herself. She's also not as vain and conceited. Some might say Temperance, the TV character, is only stating a fact, but she is somewhat off-putting.
Unforgivably there are no “Squints” in BONES ARE FOREVER. Love them. The original character is also more willing to get out into the field on her own. I don't remember her being in the field without Booth, the FBI agent, in the TV series.
This book is about dead babies. A woman turns up at a hospital, bleeding from her nether regions. She's obviously just had a baby, but when Temperance has been called in to offer her expertise on a dead baby, and she and the detective identify the woman, who has several aliases, as the mother. A forensic test reveals she may be Native America. During the investigation they find two more dead babies traced to the same woman. She has a record as a prostitute.
The story then moves to Edmonton, where Ryan and Temperance team up with a sergeant in the RCMP; there's sexual tension between Temperance and Ollie, too. And they find another dead baby.
The plot then takes a twist. Adults are turning up dead, including relatives of the prostitute. And the whole thing involves diamond mining. I didn't even know there were diamonds in Canada, the Northwest Territory, specifically.
There's no doubt there's more characterization in the TV series, and minor characters “The Squints” and other lab technicians play a much larger role. The Reichs series is much more traditional mystery series, except for the main character's occupation, which Reichs also claims.
The Temperance of the TV series is as different from the original as night and day. In the books she's also a forensic anthropologist, but she works in Canada and North Carolina. She also has several ex-boyfriends. One of them, Detective Ryan, is a major player in BONES ARE FOREVER. The TV Temperance would never let a man know she cares about him, unless he's Booth. The original can't seem to help herself. She's also not as vain and conceited. Some might say Temperance, the TV character, is only stating a fact, but she is somewhat off-putting.
Unforgivably there are no “Squints” in BONES ARE FOREVER. Love them. The original character is also more willing to get out into the field on her own. I don't remember her being in the field without Booth, the FBI agent, in the TV series.
This book is about dead babies. A woman turns up at a hospital, bleeding from her nether regions. She's obviously just had a baby, but when Temperance has been called in to offer her expertise on a dead baby, and she and the detective identify the woman, who has several aliases, as the mother. A forensic test reveals she may be Native America. During the investigation they find two more dead babies traced to the same woman. She has a record as a prostitute.
The story then moves to Edmonton, where Ryan and Temperance team up with a sergeant in the RCMP; there's sexual tension between Temperance and Ollie, too. And they find another dead baby.
The plot then takes a twist. Adults are turning up dead, including relatives of the prostitute. And the whole thing involves diamond mining. I didn't even know there were diamonds in Canada, the Northwest Territory, specifically.
There's no doubt there's more characterization in the TV series, and minor characters “The Squints” and other lab technicians play a much larger role. The Reichs series is much more traditional mystery series, except for the main character's occupation, which Reichs also claims.
October 11, 2017
Girl in Snow
The most impressive aspect of GIRL WITH SNOW, is Danielle Kukafka's ability to make the reader think each of the suspects is capable of killing Lucinda Hayes, a fifteen-year-old, found near a merry-go-round on an elementary school playground.
Perhaps the number one suspect is Cameron who's a known stalker or peeping Tom. Actually he's so bewitched by Lucinda he can't stop watching her, especially at night. Cameron's father doesn't help either. He was a former police officer who was tried for assaulting a woman who later turned out to be his mistress. He disappears after being found not guilty.
Russ is the patrolman assigned to the case, and Lee Whitley, Cameron's father, is Russ Fletcher's former partner. Russ has a secret involving Lee. Before Lee left he asked Russ to take care of his son, so Russ does everything he possibly can to make sure Cameron is not charged. That's not the secret.
Perhaps number two on the list of suspects is Jade, a somewhat overweight Goth girl who was jealous of Lucinda. Lucinda was a blond cheerleader type, and her friends made fun of Jade, but her main reason for hating her was Lucinda's relationship with Zap, Lucinda's childhood friend who grew distant when they started high school. Lucinda and Jade also babysat for the Thornton's, and Jade was losing more and more babysitting work to Lucinda. Jade adds a stylistic device to the novel. She's writing a screenplay dealing with the murder: “What You Want To Say But Can't Without Being a Dick”.
Russ is married to a Mexican woman whose brother just got out of jail. He found religion there and has started his own church, but as an ex-con he's still a suspect.
I am a mystery aficionado. I can usually spot who done it almost immediately, but not with this one, and I can bet you a dollar to a doughnut (please excuse the cliché) you can't either. Let's just say that Lucinda was not the perfect little angel everybody thought she was. That's one of the faults of the book. It's hard to believe that a fifteen-year-old girl was this “experienced”.
Perhaps the number one suspect is Cameron who's a known stalker or peeping Tom. Actually he's so bewitched by Lucinda he can't stop watching her, especially at night. Cameron's father doesn't help either. He was a former police officer who was tried for assaulting a woman who later turned out to be his mistress. He disappears after being found not guilty.
Russ is the patrolman assigned to the case, and Lee Whitley, Cameron's father, is Russ Fletcher's former partner. Russ has a secret involving Lee. Before Lee left he asked Russ to take care of his son, so Russ does everything he possibly can to make sure Cameron is not charged. That's not the secret.
Perhaps number two on the list of suspects is Jade, a somewhat overweight Goth girl who was jealous of Lucinda. Lucinda was a blond cheerleader type, and her friends made fun of Jade, but her main reason for hating her was Lucinda's relationship with Zap, Lucinda's childhood friend who grew distant when they started high school. Lucinda and Jade also babysat for the Thornton's, and Jade was losing more and more babysitting work to Lucinda. Jade adds a stylistic device to the novel. She's writing a screenplay dealing with the murder: “What You Want To Say But Can't Without Being a Dick”.
Russ is married to a Mexican woman whose brother just got out of jail. He found religion there and has started his own church, but as an ex-con he's still a suspect.
I am a mystery aficionado. I can usually spot who done it almost immediately, but not with this one, and I can bet you a dollar to a doughnut (please excuse the cliché) you can't either. Let's just say that Lucinda was not the perfect little angel everybody thought she was. That's one of the faults of the book. It's hard to believe that a fifteen-year-old girl was this “experienced”.
October 2, 2017
The Girl Who Takes An Eye for an Eye
Despite what some reviewers claim, Lisbeth Salander is on stage much more in Lagercrantz's second novel, than in any of Larsson's originals.
At the beginning she's in jail and she must deal with one of the two major villains in the novel, Benito, a crewcut mauler, who makes the warden's life hell. Benito likes to torment Faria Kazi, a Moslem woman in jail for murder. Lisbeth is her protector.
Mikael Blomkvist, editor of MILLENIUM, an investigative magazine, has an always will be the major character, if not the most popular, in the novel. He takes his cue from Salander to investigate the mistreatment of identical twins. Salander and her malevolent sister were involved in the program. It involved nature versus nurture. The twins were separated early on. One would go to a relatively poor family, the other to a rich family. The theory was that environment would play a role on how both personalities developed. The second villain in the novel, Rakel Greitz, is a psychoanalyst who has gone to insane lengths to keep the program under wraps, including the murder of a significant character.
Two other identical twins , Dan Brody and Leo Mannheimer also play a role. Brody was put with a farmer who worked his charges nearly to death. Leo Mannheimer is located with an investment broker and his family. Brody's salvation is the guitar; he becomes a jazz virtuoso; Leo, although adopted, has been tagged to run the company as he has an extremely high IQ. But Leo is miserable; he loves to play the piano, and goes so far as to play concerts.
Lisbeth's mentor, Holger Palmgren, who, as we know, saved her from a sexual predator, goes to see her in prison, despite being confined to a wheelchair. He has been given papers by a secretary who worked at the institute that ran the identical twin experiment. It names names and Lisbeth passes them on to Blomkvist.
As the story moves along, we eventually find out why Faria Kazi is in jail. It has to do with her family's disapproval of her boyfriend. Her brothers are jihadists; he's much more moderate. Conveniently, Faria's two brothers and Benito join forces against Lisbeth. Of yeah, there's also a motor cycle gang we've met before in the other books, and Dr. Greist employs a thug to do her dirty work.
At the end of the novel, Lagercrantz thanks Larsson's brother and father for giving him a chance to continue Larsson's work. According to what I've read, the forth novel was almost complete. Lagercrantz is no Larsson; we shouldn't expect him to be, but he does a capable job developing Lisbeth Salander. My only complaint is the ending sort of fizzles and Lagercrantz leaves room for more torment for Lisbeth as some of her enemies are still alive, and that doesn't include her evil sister who did not appear in this episode.
At the beginning she's in jail and she must deal with one of the two major villains in the novel, Benito, a crewcut mauler, who makes the warden's life hell. Benito likes to torment Faria Kazi, a Moslem woman in jail for murder. Lisbeth is her protector.
Mikael Blomkvist, editor of MILLENIUM, an investigative magazine, has an always will be the major character, if not the most popular, in the novel. He takes his cue from Salander to investigate the mistreatment of identical twins. Salander and her malevolent sister were involved in the program. It involved nature versus nurture. The twins were separated early on. One would go to a relatively poor family, the other to a rich family. The theory was that environment would play a role on how both personalities developed. The second villain in the novel, Rakel Greitz, is a psychoanalyst who has gone to insane lengths to keep the program under wraps, including the murder of a significant character.
Two other identical twins , Dan Brody and Leo Mannheimer also play a role. Brody was put with a farmer who worked his charges nearly to death. Leo Mannheimer is located with an investment broker and his family. Brody's salvation is the guitar; he becomes a jazz virtuoso; Leo, although adopted, has been tagged to run the company as he has an extremely high IQ. But Leo is miserable; he loves to play the piano, and goes so far as to play concerts.
Lisbeth's mentor, Holger Palmgren, who, as we know, saved her from a sexual predator, goes to see her in prison, despite being confined to a wheelchair. He has been given papers by a secretary who worked at the institute that ran the identical twin experiment. It names names and Lisbeth passes them on to Blomkvist.
As the story moves along, we eventually find out why Faria Kazi is in jail. It has to do with her family's disapproval of her boyfriend. Her brothers are jihadists; he's much more moderate. Conveniently, Faria's two brothers and Benito join forces against Lisbeth. Of yeah, there's also a motor cycle gang we've met before in the other books, and Dr. Greist employs a thug to do her dirty work.
At the end of the novel, Lagercrantz thanks Larsson's brother and father for giving him a chance to continue Larsson's work. According to what I've read, the forth novel was almost complete. Lagercrantz is no Larsson; we shouldn't expect him to be, but he does a capable job developing Lisbeth Salander. My only complaint is the ending sort of fizzles and Lagercrantz leaves room for more torment for Lisbeth as some of her enemies are still alive, and that doesn't include her evil sister who did not appear in this episode.
September 20, 2017
The Orphan's Tale
Perhaps the most impressive aspect of the ORPHAN'S TALE is the versatility of the author, Pam Jenoff. She has a bachelor's degree in international affairs, a masters degree in history from Cambridge and a law degree from the University of Pennsylvania, besides her writing credits.
As a diplomat she handled Holocaust affairs in Poland. She got the idea for this book from the archives of Yad Vashem, the WWII Jewish museum. One of the lead characters, Noa, gets pregnant by a German soldier and is thrown out of her home by her father. The only job she can find, after the Nazis take her baby, is as a cleaning lady at a railroad terminal. One day she hears an eerie sound coming from one of the cars. It's a carload full of dead and dying babies. But one is still alive; she reaches in, grabs him, and starts walking. She could never hold her job and keep the baby. Also at Yad Vashem, Jenoff ran across a circus that rescued Jews. Noa is taken in by a fictional circus and taught how to be an aerialist. The second main character is Astrid, who teaches her how to work on the flying trapeze in a matter of weeks. Astrid is a Jewish woman who was married to a German soldier until Hitler outlawed such marriages. He told her to hit the bricks. Astrid was raised as a feature performer on the flying trapeze at another circus. They were disbanded because the owner, Astrid's father, was Jewish. But their main competitor takes her in.
Here's the rub. Did you believe the part about the Jewish babies? Well, that part was true, except that many were toddlers. Jenoff emphasizes that the “babies” didn't even know their names. When Jenoff needs to move the story she will very often grasp at straws, so to speak. There's a convenient heart attack; the circus tent catching on fire, making the ending possible; the owner's son fires 2/3 of the support staff, who could have put out the fire easily; they were concerned about fires. They practiced dealing with this very thing. We also have two lovers, one of whom is the teenage son of a local mayor who is in cahoots with the Nazis. The woman can't help herself; she only knows she loves him. Actually, Jenoff needs the love affair more than she needs credibility. Then there's the part where Astrid's ex-husband shows that not even Nazis are all bad as he provides an escape for Astrid. Does he regret what he did to Astrid? Not enough to stand up for her. In the real version of this story, the husband refuses to give up his Jewish wife and joins the circus with her. But Jenoff needed Astrid to be another outcast.
I was a history major and teacher. Certainly the Yad Vasehem anecdotes were interesting, but the Nazi atrocities stand on their own. You don't need fiction when the real thing is so horrible. If you want to know about the Nazi regime, read THE RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH. You'll find out what happened to the animals who thought murdering Jews was “The final solution”.
As a diplomat she handled Holocaust affairs in Poland. She got the idea for this book from the archives of Yad Vashem, the WWII Jewish museum. One of the lead characters, Noa, gets pregnant by a German soldier and is thrown out of her home by her father. The only job she can find, after the Nazis take her baby, is as a cleaning lady at a railroad terminal. One day she hears an eerie sound coming from one of the cars. It's a carload full of dead and dying babies. But one is still alive; she reaches in, grabs him, and starts walking. She could never hold her job and keep the baby. Also at Yad Vashem, Jenoff ran across a circus that rescued Jews. Noa is taken in by a fictional circus and taught how to be an aerialist. The second main character is Astrid, who teaches her how to work on the flying trapeze in a matter of weeks. Astrid is a Jewish woman who was married to a German soldier until Hitler outlawed such marriages. He told her to hit the bricks. Astrid was raised as a feature performer on the flying trapeze at another circus. They were disbanded because the owner, Astrid's father, was Jewish. But their main competitor takes her in.
Here's the rub. Did you believe the part about the Jewish babies? Well, that part was true, except that many were toddlers. Jenoff emphasizes that the “babies” didn't even know their names. When Jenoff needs to move the story she will very often grasp at straws, so to speak. There's a convenient heart attack; the circus tent catching on fire, making the ending possible; the owner's son fires 2/3 of the support staff, who could have put out the fire easily; they were concerned about fires. They practiced dealing with this very thing. We also have two lovers, one of whom is the teenage son of a local mayor who is in cahoots with the Nazis. The woman can't help herself; she only knows she loves him. Actually, Jenoff needs the love affair more than she needs credibility. Then there's the part where Astrid's ex-husband shows that not even Nazis are all bad as he provides an escape for Astrid. Does he regret what he did to Astrid? Not enough to stand up for her. In the real version of this story, the husband refuses to give up his Jewish wife and joins the circus with her. But Jenoff needed Astrid to be another outcast.
I was a history major and teacher. Certainly the Yad Vasehem anecdotes were interesting, but the Nazi atrocities stand on their own. You don't need fiction when the real thing is so horrible. If you want to know about the Nazi regime, read THE RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH. You'll find out what happened to the animals who thought murdering Jews was “The final solution”.
