I usually really enjoy Sophie Hannah's books and I would still recommend them to any new readers. Having said that, this particular instalment is the weakest I've read so far.
A number of people have said they find the characters unlikeable and I agree. The only character I liked by the end of the book was Simon Waterhouse, and I was beginning to soften towards Proust a little bit. Charlie, I did not like this time around; it seems as though her relationship with Simon is a form of self-deprivation for her, and while that's not unrealistic it is depressing to read. Maybe it's naive to demand to like the characters in a book but presumably these books are being sold as entertainment, and 400 pages of immature behaviour from characters I don't like is just not that enjoyable.
I'm making the assumption that the heroine, Sally Thorning, is supposed to be sympathetic, but maybe she isn't. When she reads what is supposed to have been Geraldine Bretherick's (the murder victim's) diary, she assesses Geraldine's character as "narcissistic... her way is the only right way" yet every detail of the description could be applied to Sally if you take an uncharitable view of her, even though Sally is orders of magnitude less toxic. If Sally has been made deliberately unsympathetic then I admire the author's taking that risk, but it didn't pay off for me.
We all know that having two or more children under five is the very definition of hell on earth, and holding down a job at the same time is a few circles down that hell. But just to make the point, a major section of the beginning of the book is dedicated to Sally's complaints about basically every component of her privileged lifestyle and her disdain for everyone who supports it, especially the childminder whose criticisms of Sally seem quite accurate (and whose later actions come close to saving Sally's life). From the start, she is completely contemptuous and dismissive of her husband, whom she regards as an extra child who has to be fobbed off and kept strictly in the dark about everything. By the end of the book, this has not changed. In fact, all of the fathers in the book are disconnected, ineffectual and utterly incapable of protecting their families in an emergency. The one possible exception is Kombothekra, who is portrayed as possibly a good father but makes notably little impact in solving this case.
My biggest problem with Sally is her utter self-centeredness. The setup isn't new: heroine discovers emergency, cannot rely on police, does own investigation and finds the killer. What is different is that, this time, the problem isn't that the police are too dumb to solve it themselves (although they are rather dumb this time) but that Sally doesn't want to have to tell the police her secret, which, if it got out, would ruin her marriage. But, you know, this is an emergency: someone tried to push her under a bus, and now she's being followed.
Sally has to do SOMETHING, so what she does is... write a rambling anonymous letter - really emotional and overfilled with irrelevant detail while withholding anything actually useful, just to maximize the chances that the police will dismiss her as a crank - and leave it in the police inbox where it will lie unattended for several days. THEN she goes barging into the home of the grieving widower, asks him intrusive questions, rummages through his things, and steals photos of said wife and daughter. Pretty insensitive and hurtful, right? But surely she has a higher purpose. She's going right to the police with what she's found, right? Because two people have DIED here, the killer is at large, and the grieving widower is in danger of being accused of their murders.
But no. For reasons passing understanding, Sally's priority is still preserving her marriage, so off she goes to the victim's school and hamhandedly interrogates the staff, leaving them a false name to make sure the cops will take longer to find her when she disappears. Which of course she does, having painted a target the size of Wales on her foolish head.
When she finds a decapitated cat next to her car with tape over its mouth (a horrifying incident in a public place, which you'd think SOMEONE besides her would have noticed, but apparently not) her response is, of course, to dial 999 immediately, right? NO of course not. She goes into a cafe, sits down and starts scrawling yet another letter for the cops to find when they get round to it. Returning to her car (now with added dead cat feature), she finds that her water bottle has been moved; therefore she drinks from it and wakes up in what is basically Bluebeard's Castle.
Of course, Sally does manage to escape, and then she does one thing that others have criticised and in which I actually feel compelled to defend her. Once she gets outside the house and sees a clear path to the street, she is naked except for a thin dressing-gown which is heavily stained with menstrual blood. Deciding that she has solid reason to believe that her kidnapper won't be back soon, she breaks back into the house to wash and dress before she leaves, rather than walk down the street soiled and nearly naked. Honestly, I don't blame her for this. No doubt it's irrational, but she had just had a head injury and besides I think a lot of people would do the same.
It's just her *reasons* for doing it that I don't like, and her reasons are consistent with every choice she's made from the beginning: she wants to save face and keep up appearances in her marriage. I say this knowing how uncharitable it must seem, especially when she's traumatized and, as I mentioned, had a recent head injury. But on her way out of the house, she steals evidence, and you would think she'd be doing that to preserve it, right? Wrong. On her way home, she *disposes* of the evidence and the police only learn of its existence because she keeps part of it for herself and drops it on the stairs when she comes in. Because she doesn't want anyone to find out what happened to her.
I'd like to think she wouldn't have done these things if she hadn't been injured and traumatized, but like I said it's consistent with her reasoning from the very beginning of the story. Even at her most sympathetic, this character bothers me, because what happened *didn't just happen to her*. There's a murder investigation and in many ways she's obstructing it, and all because she values secrecy even over her own life, let alone anyone else's.
But she gets home safely and goes to bed and it was all a dream. So mission accomplished, right? Her family are all still there, all playing their old roles and hitting their marks and saying their lines, and she refuses to ever tell her useless husband anything because she has no real relationship with him anyway, and she returns to her mummy role having... learned... nothing? From a series of horrifying, life-changing and traumatic events.
There is a remark made by the sociologist about appearances being a matter of life or death to upper middle class families, so maybe the author is making a point about that too, but I doubt it. I just. Don't think much of the main character. I guess it's good that not every female lead needs to be a mega-competent Mary Sue, and it's great that Sally is human and flawed, but because I didn't think much of her I wasn't especially delighted at her happy ending.
Also, reviewers complaining about how hard it is to keep the large cast of characters straight, are right. It was hard to tell when they were referring to the two jerk cops versus the nicer ones, because all the detectives seem to have names beginning with S.
Also, Sally's best friend Esther, and Charlie's sister, both seem rather cocky and aggressive. I think they're the same character cloned with different names. The jerk cop's wife coming over in her nightgown to ask Charlie about her French homework is a scene that serves no purpose other than to trigger Simon into BRILLIANTLY! solving the crime, even though the line of reasoning should have been just as obvious to Charlie given her background in language teaching (or to anyone with any knowledge of computer forensics/a competent end user of word processing packages, even). If the diary was planted, how could anyone have thought that whoever planted it would leave the killer's real name in there?!? I've seen the "car chase where Simon explains it all" scene before and it was good the first time.
IDK, guys. I just had to get that off my chest. But like I said, normally I love Sophie Hannah's books so I'll just have to read another one as soon as I can so I can give it a glowing review.