The Girl Next Door

by Ruth Rendell

In this psychologically explosive story from "one of the most remarkable novelists of her generation" (People), the discovery of bones in a tin box sends shockwaves across a group of long-time friends.

In the waning months of the second World War, a group of children discover an earthen tunnel in their neighborhood outside London. Throughout the summer of 1944—until one father forbids it—the subterranean space becomes their "secret garden," where the friends play games and tell stories.

Six decades later, beneath a house on the same land, construction workers uncover a tin box containing two skeletal hands, one male and one female. As the discovery makes national news, the friends come together once again, to recall their days in the tunnel for the detective investigating the case. Is the truth buried among these aging friends and their memories?

This impromptu reunion causes long-simmering feelings to bubble to the surface. Alan, stuck in a passionless marriage, begins flirting with Daphne, a glamorous widow. Michael considers contacting his estranged father, who sent Michael to live with an aunt after his mother vanished in 1944. Lewis begins remembering details about his Uncle James, an army private who once accompanied the children into the tunnels, and who later disappeared.

In The Girl Next Door Rendell brilliantly shatters the assumptions about age, showing that the choices people make—and the emotions behind them—remain as potent in late life as they were in youth.

Genres: Mystery, Fiction, Crime, Thriller, Audiobook, British Literature, Historical Fiction

288 pages, Hardcover

First published August 14, 2014

About the author

A.K.A. Barbara Vine

Ruth Barbara Rendell, Baroness Rendell of Babergh, CBE, who also wrote under the pseudonym Barbara Vine, was an acclaimed English crime writer, known for her many psychological thrillers and murder mysteries and above all for Inspector Wexford.

Reviews

[J. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ruth Rendell has now officially gone around the bend with the large-ensemble mystery and she doesn't care if you don't like it.

This is her fourth in a row, by my count, that features at least twenty characters and shows no mercy to the reader who's slow to pick up the thread. One of the hallmarks of this late style of hers seems to be just shoving a handful of characters right out onto the stage in the opening moments of the drama. And then more in the early going, and then, more in the middle.

Very often you get an introductory paragraph where you have to flick through your mental rolodex of characters : "Relatives came to visit George; Stanley and Helen, of course, and Norman come over from France, bringing Eliane with him. Maureen didn’t want any of them. All she wanted was to stay at home alone with George. The day came when she was due to take Clara ..."

All of the primary wave of characters are fairly old, so with that comes a long list of associations and memory. And the obligatory trail of parentage, exes, children, new spouses, business partners, grandchildren and beyond. A machine with lots of moving parts generates many perspectives, but let's be honest here. She's taunting you with the size and scale of her cast :

"Michael decided this not entirely out of altruism and not at all from duty. He had no duty to George. But since his visit to Daphne and Alan, he had reproached himself for having given up nearly all social life after Vivien’s death. He had kept up with Zoe, of course he had, but abandoned all his friends. There had been that single visit to George, and that was about it. Zoe would have wanted him to keep an eye on Brenda, but ..."

You get to the point where someone dies --of natural causes!-- and you're cheering for the reduction in sheer numbers you'll need to be shepherding along the way. You get to a funeral, you're thinking, ah, finally, the numbers subside, there is a natural falloff to be seen here, but then, in the bleak light of the church:

"Michael got there early, and was shown to a pew halfway down by a man in his fifties who said he was Stanley’s son. Four rows ahead of him he could see Lewis Newman, and near the front on the other side of the aisle Norman Batchelor was with a woman in a smart black suit and pillbox hat who couldn't be anything but French. Michael hoped Alan and Daphne might be there but realized that they couldn’t be because it was far more likely that Rosemary would be... A lot of grown-up and even late-middle-age children of George’s two marriages came in. One young woman was carrying a baby, which must, Michael guessed, be George’s great-grandchild or even great-great. Rosemary wasn’t there. Maureen arrived ... "

It's contradictory, it's perplexing, but it's Rendell, so you go with it. And it's worth it for the ornery experimental quality, the poignance of the elderly cast, and the sheer quirk factor. Four stars for the dark mistress of quirk, Baroness Lady Ruth Rendell CBE. Because she's the best there is at this game.

[Carol - Reading Writing and Riesling · Rating 2 out of 5]

My View:
The beginning is intriguing- we see a murder taking place as described by the cold, emotionless murderer. From the beginning you know who the murderer is, you know who the victims are and you wait for more action or revelations to occur. You wait…and you wait.

The narrative then morphs into a study on aging; a group of school friends reunited by gruesome discovery of decayed severed hands in a biscuit box buried in the tunnels the friends used to play in. We visit their lives now and their relationships and learn a little about what has transpired in their lives during the 70 odd years since they all went to school together. The intriguing start flounders…the rest of the book is disjointed, people die of old age, marriages break up, new relationships start (and one of those in particular is a bit distasteful to me but no reveal here). This is a story largely concerned with secrets, lies and ageing…but there is nothing inspiring or intriguing for this reader, I read to the end expecting something…something outrageous or mysterious or suspicious to happen. It didn’t.

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have had a decades-long love affair with Ms. Rendell and it's because she never disappoints. The Girl Next Door, although it has her trademark dark-deeds murderous premise, is a bit of a departure, because I saw the book as more of a meditation on aging than the mystery/psychological suspense novel it's being marketed as. A wonderful, true (in the sense of humanity and genuine emotion) read....

[Amanda Patterson · Rating 1 out of 5]

The idea of the ensemble cast in 'The Girl Next Door' reminded me of Ruth Rendell when she was writing as Barbara Vine. I loved those books. They were intricately plotted, filled with dark motives, ordinary lives and richly textured characters.

Unfortunately, this novel made me wish Rendell would stop writing before she makes a fool of herself. After an inspired start where ‘Woody’ kills his wife and her lover in the 1930s and chops their hands off, concealing them in a biscuit tin, everything falls flat.

Rendell amasses an embarrassing number of irrelevant characters in this book with too many storylines to engage a busy reader. At 84, I think she’s lost the plot, or she may be incredibly clever because the book is filled with characters in their 70s and 80s, and she’s showing how disjointed one’s mind becomes with age.

I have read almost every novel Rendell has written and enjoyed them tremendously, but I found I had the same problems in her last stand-alone novel, 'The Saint Zita Society'. Life is too short to wade through this maze of a book when there are so many great books waiting to be read.

[Lisa]

I got a quarter of the way through and decided this wasn't going to be my cup of tea even though on the face of it it has everything I enjoy...but for some reason it didn't work for me.
The murderer is revealed at the beginning of the book which is fine but as it went on I sensed we wouldn't learn much more about it.
I like books about older people but this one was starting to drag and I'm not keen on books about extra-marital affairs (depending on how it's handled). If a person just says their spouse is boring but has never said or done anything to try and change this then I have no sympathy I'm afraid.
The opening section was great but as it continued downhill I decided to jump ship!

[Madonna Valentine · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book and read it in one afternoon. It is not a conventional murder mystery because we know at the start of the novel who committed the crime and why. The action begins when a biscuit tin is found in the foundations of a house built post WWII. This tin contains a mummified pair of hands that appear to have been in the tin for 70 years.

Alan Norris, now in his 70's, reads about the hands' discovery in the newspaper and connects them to the location they were discovered to the qanats, or tunnels he and his friends used to play in during the war. He and his wife, Rosemary (who was a childhood friend) contact their former tunnel buddies and meet to discuss what they can remember about their time playing in the tunnels. They also contact the police officer in charge of the case, who shows little interest in their memories or in solving the 70 year old case.

After the old friends have been brought together, chaos ensues in their personal lives. Rendell skillfully takes the reader through the characters' lives as they change irretrievably as the mystery of the hands is eventually solved by the police with the help of a few of the main characters.

Several aspects of this novel contributed to my enjoyment. First, Rendell's main characters are all unapologetically elderly. This does not prevent them engaging in illicit love affairs, attempting murder or even adopting a puppy. Life goes on even if the future seems short. Second, Rendell does not create stereotyped characters. The very elderly "char woman" in her late '80's is as intelligent and sharp as the other characters who have more impressive careers. Third, the novel tackles difficult issues such as ageing, illness, grief, love and loss in a sensitive yet unsentimental manner. Rendell is never easy on her characters. They frequently have a torrid time. The good are not always rewarded and the bad often get away with little punishment. Her novels are never predictable.

The large cast of characters is sometimes difficult to follow and perhaps a few could have been eliminated. Apart from this, I liked the novel and would recommend it to anyone wanting an entertaining read.

[Susan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This novel, more literary than traditional crime fiction, veers between the present and the past. During the Second World War a group of children in Loughton, Essex, played together in some underground tunnels they found and renamed ‘the qanats.’ Nobody really remembers why, but time has passed and the group of children have grown up, grown old and, mostly, dispersed. However, the discovery of a pair of severed hands, buried in a biscuit tin so long ago, now brings many of those who played there so long ago back together again. Daphne Jones, three times married and still glamorous, Michael Winwood, whose father chased them from the tunnels and Lewis Newman, both now widowed, childhood sweethearts Alan Norris and Rosemary Wharton and the Batchelors – of whom George, Stanley and Norman are still alive.

The police are asked to investigate the crime – of which the reader is already aware of both victims and murderer . However, this book is more about the impact of the discovery and of unearthing old memories on those involved. In many ways this is a poignant and touching read – of both how age limits and frees us. It reunites old lovers, wreaks huge changes and forces people to confront their loss and childhood traumas. Ruth Rendell manages to make all the characters sympathetic, so you really care about what happens to them. Despite the length of time between the crime and the investigation, making even the police involved cynical about finding a conclusion, there is little doubt that confronting what happened at that time will help solve unanswered questions, make some characters doubt the way they are living their lives and, in some cases, make enormous changes. I really enjoyed this novel, even though it was not a traditional ‘whodunnit’ and it made me question why I have not read more of Ruth Rendell’s novels. Luckily, that is something I can, and do, intend to rectify. Lastly, I received a copy of this book from the publishers, via NetGalley, for review.

[Nancy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is more a novel on aging than a mystery. The discovery of a decades old murder brings together a group of adults, all well past 70, who had been neighbors and friends as children. There are a lot of characters. Some are fully formed. Some are plot devices. A number of them die during the course of the book. At times Rendell really captures the mood of aging. For that I choose four stars rather than the three which plot alone might justify.

[Sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book description makes this sound like a detective/whodunnit story which it isn't; the murderer and victims are revealed to us early on. I wasn't bothered by this and to be honest I didn't really expect it be that type of book. I have long been a fan of Ruth Rendell's stand alone novels, a lot more so than her Wexford series. I love the way the tension in them gradually builds, secrets are revealed and you are constantly wondering what will happen next.

It started well and the part set in the past around the time of the murders had me gripped. After this the story moved on to the lives of the children as adults in their seventies. A lot of people were introduced and it was difficult for me to remember who was who away from the main characters. I found the novel became less interesting in its last quarter, when it became apparent to me that the twists, turns and shocks weren't going to happen, or at least not to the level I was hoping for. However I did enjoy the book despite it not being one of the author's best. It is more a story about the lives of the friends and how the gruesome discovery affects them so if you're hoping for a crime novel then this may not be for you. If you've not read anything by Ruth Rendell before then I suggest you start with one of her earlier novels (and there are plenty to choose from); fans of her work should enjoy this though.

[Laura · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not her normal book ….

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was surprised after reading the reviews that I enjoyed this novel. The story starts with a bang and two murders by John Winwood a lazy good looking nutcase. Then the story leaps sixty years into the future. The elderly characters were part of a group of friends who played together during the war in a suburb of London in Epping Forest.

The story follows their lives, marriages, some death’s and the piecing together of the murders long ago with the murderer approaching a hundred will he be revealed. As I am now in my sixties the characters resonated with me. Michael the son who escaped his horrible father. Alan a man who did not know the grass was greener where he was and surprisingly the rebirth of Rosemary. Lots of other characters who all add to the story.

[Mary Lins · Rating 5 out of 5]

While most of her novels are mysteries, "The Girl Next Door", by Ruth Rendell, is less a mystery and more a wonderful character study of a group of septuagenarians who were once childhood friends. (Yes, of course there is a murder - but it's peripheral.) I adore Rendell/Vine's writing style; it is straightforward and the prose is gorgeous and Rendell is always witty with rapier-sharp satire. But where her truest talent lies is in creating a cast of characters that are at once compelling and grotesque! This psychological study - in a large part about the ramifications of infidelity among the elderly - had me absolutely enthralled. I loved it as much as my other Rendell favorite; "A Judgement in Stone".

[Ms.pegasus · Rating 4 out of 5]

At first, it seemed to them like an intriguing ghost story from over half a century ago. A half dozen families were linked only by the close proximity of their homes in Loughton near London. One day, perhaps the spring of 1944, the children discovered a tunnel, the aborted excavation for a house. It was perfect as a secret hiding place. They brought candles and roasted potatoes and best of all, evaded any adult supervision. A romantically inclined child named Daphne dubbed it the Qanats from a Persian word she had read. The exotic name stuck. Then, Michael's father, John Winwood cleared the children out of the qanats, and in a rage, told them to never come back there again. The frightened children complied. Shortly after that, Michael was packed off to live with John's cousin. It was for the best. Michael's mother ignored him. There was even a story that she knocked him down in her haste to attend some social engagement and never even paused to help him up. John, the father, was no better. Then, shortly after Michael left, the house burnt down and John Winwood moved away. It was assumed that his wife, Amanda, had run off with one of her many paramours.

The children have long since grown up and gone their separate ways. Two of them, Alan Norris and Rosemary Wharton reconnected, married at a young age, lived steady conventional lives, and are now grandparents. Michael Winwood and Lewis Newman are both widowers. Bill Johnson became a diplomat and lives abroad with his wife. Two of the Batchelor boys, George and Stanley are married and their brother Norman moved off to France where he lives with a significant other, but the three brothers still maintain a close relationship. Daphne, the girl who lived next door to Michael, is a well-provided for widow living in London. These former playmates haven't thought much about each other in over 50 years. Then, they read an interesting article in the paper. Two skeletal hands concealed in an old biscuit tin have been dug up by a builder in the area of the qanats. The discovery piques that most human of impulses, curiosity, and that curiosity sets in motion a series of reconnections.

For the reader, there is no apparent mystery about the hands. The first chapter introduces John Winwood, destined to stain all the lives he ever touches. He discovers his wife is having an affair, murders her and her lover, cuts off their hands, and buries the grisly trophy in the middle of the qanats. All of this occurs in the first chapter.

The unearthing has far-reaching consequences as long-buried memories, some painful, are resurrected. Michael, Alan, Rosemary and the Batchelor boys all remember the beautiful and exotic Daphne quite vividly. Michael and the Batchelors seem to remember Rosemary more vaguely. She always seemed to be around. Everyone remembers Stanley Batchelor fondly. He'd bring his dog Nipper with him everywhere. Stanley maintained occasional contact with Lewis who became a doctor and actually attended Cambridge at the same time as Daphne. The irony that this succession of reunions has come about by an apparent murder is not lost among these people. ”Death, thought Lewis, brought old friends, long separated, back together. He had liked Stanley Batchelor very much when they were children. Would he like him now?” Thinking of the qanats also triggers a memory of his Uncle James, his mother's brother, who lived briefly at their house and then disappeared just before Michael was sent away. The family always assumed James had gotten called up to military service and was either killed at the front, or might just turn up one day.

Rendell coaxes the reader along from the opening of a standard mystery to curiosity about the lives of these now aged people to a gradually intensifying sympathy with each of the characters. The pace is slow but never dull. When Stanley unexpectedly appears during one of Norman's visits, the two brothers embrace affectionately. Stanley fondly recalls Nipper and all the other dogs he has owned during his long life. The still grieving Michael still keeps his deceased wife's room as it was and communes with her daily. He's grateful his two children are busy with their careers and seldom have time to visit. George still looks in on Clara Moss, his family's old housekeeper. Coincidentally, she was also the Winwood's housekeeper. Michael remembers her vaguely, but never kept contact, part of his attempt to erase any childhood memories of that dreadful life with his parents. Alan and Rosemary seem to have drifted comfortably into the habits of marriage. Alan silently chafes at Rosemary's inept and compulsive sewing; Rosemary dutifully conforms to the rhythms of her husband, her children, and even her grandchildren. Despite her smug prudishness, the reader is drawn to this woman, still pricked by the memory of a “plain Jane” girlhood. All of the characters are constantly reminded of their age. Alan reflects on the apparent dullness of his long life. The characters are constantly being reminded that the expressions they grew up with are anachronistic. When police investigator Quell interrogates them, he seems to be speaking from another world. ” 'When you say you were playing there [in the qanats], what did you play? I mean, there can't have been much to do in underground passages. Why did you?' They looked at Quell pityingly. He spoke from the age of computers and online games, from e-books, DVDs, and CDs, Bluetooth and Skype, smartphones and iPads. They spoke from a distant past when everyone read books and most people had hobbies, made things, played cards and chess, dressed up and played charades, sewed and painted and wrote letters and sent postcards.”

This was one of those books that grew on me the more I read. Rendell skillfully involves the readers in the lives of her characters, while never neglecting the opening premise of a mystery suggested in the first chapter. Each character will eventually come to recall a separate piece of a puzzle. Yet, she ultimately exploits the interesting characters she has created to involve the reader in a contemplation of old age. We watch the characters struggle to find connection, heal newly unearthed wounds, and resolve disjointed memories. This book was published in October 2014 and is all the more poignant due to the fact that the author died in May 2015 at age 85.

[Maxine (Booklover Catlady) · Rating 2 out of 5]

I received a copy of this book thanks to the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for a fair and honest review, my thanks for the opportunity.

My most read genre of book is crime and thrillers, yet I have never read a Ruth Rendell book until now. Her style of writing is not for me, however I will give an objective review based on the book itself, then explain more why it's not my style of crime thriller or mystery book.

When the bones of two severed hands are discovered in a box, an investigation into a long buried crime of passion begins. And a group of friends, who played together as children, begin to question their past. The crime committed in the 1940's reconnects a group of elderly people with each other as the police bring them together to ask questions about the discovery of the hands in the box.

I loved the beginning, where we were inside the killers head and watching the crime be committed and evidence disposed off, I felt we were off to a really good start. The book then begins to delve into the different characters, of which there are quite a few and I had trouble keeping track of them all, mainly because I didn't feel they "came alive" on the page for me, so I did not connect with them, they were like floating names on paper.

Many sideline events occur around the discovery of the hands in the box and family relationships, loyalties and friendships are tested and tried. There is not a huge amount more in the book until towards the end around the crime itself, this is my main reason for not enjoying the book as I would have hoped, it was like the book switched into another genre of novel after the crime was committed.

I think loyal fans of Ruth Rendell or other fans of crime may like this novel, it's just not one for me personally, however it's still a well written book, again my main criticism is the lack of connection made with the characters, I felt they could have had more substance to them.

At the end of the book things heat up a bit as truths are revealed and past crimes are accounted for. So I enjoyed the start and the end but found most of the content in between hard going. But I will say again, it's personal taste and I think many may enjoy this style of writing. I had to choose between 2 stars (it was ok) and 3 stars (I liked it) but really sit in the middle of the two with a 2.5 rating.

[Tanja Berg · Rating 2 out of 5]

Since I reserve 1* ratings for books I truly hate, this gets 2* out of 5. I did not hate this, but I am deeply disappointed. I have been led astray. This is not a true crime novel, but a story of what happens to a bunch of very old, mostly ex-friends after a pair of chopped off hands from the 1940's emerge. The book starts off with the tale of how that came to be. The cast is large, there is hardly any plot and even less forward-tension. Not at all recommended.

[Cheyenne · Rating 1 out of 5]

Ik scoor boeken eigenlijk nooit lager dan 3 sterren, maar wat was dit een vreselijk boek. Totaal pointless. Eigenlijk weet je vanaf de eerste twee hoofdstukken het hele verhaal al en ik adviseer ook echt om daarna te stoppen met lezen. De volgende 311 pagina's voegen letterlijk niks toe, behalve voor mij gevoelens van verdriet, boosheid en frustratie.
Bovendien zijn het een partij nare karakters. Buiten Michael is er niemand sympathiek. Ik was voor helemaal niemand aan het rooten. En zelfs Michaels verhaallijn voelt niet af, dus die zal na waar dit boek eindigt uiteindelijk ook wel ellendig worden.
How disappointing.

[Ron · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is about growing old in the 21st century, about finding new powers when the necessity strikes, about recovering old loves and not being able to forgive both old and new hurts. Some good people die young, and the horrible old shithead just goes on and on, staying as miserable as ever as he nears 100. There is a murder, of course, two, actually, a maiming of corpses, and then much later, an attempted murder, but no one gets punished, and the attempted murderer even comes out on top of things. Another late Rendell focus on a group of increasingly interesting people who are drawn together by circumstance and work out their destinies together.
The direction of the story was not clear for a while, and the beginning was even sort of slow and the structure seemed to wander laxly, but by the middle it became clear what she was getting at, the way all these one-time neighbor kids who have grown into a typically diverse assortment of adults with a range of responses to the way their lives turned out, and how having grown up through one era of history they now confront the quite different present, and their own limited time in the future, with equally varying attitudes.
Woody, the totally amoral and self-involved murderer; Daphne, the sexpot throughout her life, from the time she was twelve all the way into her 70s; Michael, the damaged child who mostly recovers from emotional neglect, though he is still haunted by his cruel father who just won't die; Alan, who briefly rekindles his teenage passion for Daphne by simply walking out on his wife, who collapses, then rebuilds herself into something new and stronger. And there is a happy ending–-although it is a Ruth Rendell kind of happy ending, one soaked in cruel irony.

[Theresa · Rating 1 out of 5]

Oh boy!! I'd really like to give this book zero stars. I just cannot bring myself to do that though, so my final decision is 1 star. I'll round up...but only begrudgingly!!

I'm sure this author must have at one time been beloved and wrote adequate stories. Otherwise how could she have published so many? As for this one....uggh...it probably needed to not have been published. It was so stinking boring and mundane that I still wonder the point. It was NOTHING like the marketing blurb on the back cover. This was not suspenseful as the entire mystery is revealed not even in the first chapter but the prologue. The book primarily consisted of some old fart cheating on his ever faithful wife of over 50 years. Why? I'm still not sure. He was bored? Dunno, don't much care! The rest of book was the characters telling us they were old and telling us how the younger generation doesn't do this or that. Seriously, there was a half a page about how nobody calls a basin a basin anymore. We're told like children that it's a sink now like the bloody Americans who mangled the word. A sink should ONLY be in the kitchen. Blah, blah, blah!!!! What I found the most disturbing is the fact these people were portrayed as old as dirt and about ready to kick the bucket at any minute. However, they would be contemporaries to my parents who are not by any means 'old' and live full exciting lives. I have another book by this author on my shelf, I'm pretty sure it's going to the used book store unread. Yech...

[Lisa R. · Rating 3 out of 5]

I didn't care about the whodunit (which was somewhat anti-climactic since we know that from the beginning). What I cared about was the fundamental premise that we are all always growing and changing, works in progress, even in the later stages in life. I am somewhat obsessed with this notion, so a book involving septuagenarians falling in love, finding happiness, and "finding themselves" is right up my alley...mystery aside.

[Colleen · Rating 1 out of 5]

1 Star

*A dreadfully dull novel with misleading marketing*

**This review contains minor spoilers that are not hidden**


Ruth Rendell is apparently a prolific and well-liked Mystery writer. Based on The Girl Next Door, I doubt I will ever read another book by her.

The book blurb was so misleading. This really shouldn't even be classified as a mystery. The prologue literally tells the reader every detail of the crime. One would think from there that the story would focus on catching the murderer, but no! The majority of this book has nothing to do with the murder case! You may ask what is this book about then? Well, dear reader, The Girl Next Door is basically a soap opera of seventy-to-eighty-year-olds who are brought back together by the discovery of body parts in their childhood neighborhood. For most of the book, the only references to the murders are characters repeatedly saying, “Oh, none of this would have happened if we hadn’t been thrown together again by those hands being discovered!” Several characters say that repeatedly just in case you somehow forgot.

Rather than being about a murder investigation, this book is a damn soap opera about selfish people acting shitty. The central focus of the story is two of the characters having an affair. The wronged wife fulfills every stereotype of the desperate, pathetic, crazy woman. It was disgusting to read. In fact, the whole book centers on stereotypes – mostly ageism. Rather than make any insightful commentary about generational divides, this chronological snobbery instead wallows in every possible age-related stereotype! The older characters were snobby, senile, frumpy, and constantly disparaging the younger generations and throwing out “Back in my day…” comments. The younger characters were portrayed as insensitive, loose, lacking in morals, obsessed with technology, and all-around reprobates who naturally resented anything to do with the older characters. It was myopic, stereotypical, and boring as hell to read. Halfway through the book characters started dying… not from the killer but from old age. But I think they died of boredom from being in such a pedantic, contemptuous book.

I didn't hate The Girl Next Door enough to rant about it, but I can't think of a single redeeming quality or moment in the entire book. This was a total waste of time to read.


RATING FACTORS:
Ease of Reading: 2 Stars
Writing Style: 1 Star
Characters and Character Development: 1 Star
Plot Structure and Development: 1 Star
Level of Captivation: 1 Star
Originality: 1 Star

[Bruce Beckham · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’m approaching the final few of Ruth Rendell’s 28 stand-alone suspense novels, and although I have read them out of chronological order, this was the last to be published in her lifetime, in 2014. She died aged 85 a year later.

The subject matter perhaps reflects her own circumstances: an unsolved wartime mystery that impacted an inquisitive group of local children; now they are in retirement, battling ill health, decline, boredom and loneliness.

The author employs an intriguing approach, which I don’t think is a spoiler. A little reading between the lines soon gives you the perpetrator and his victims. It is a gruesome domestic murder, now come to light. But instead of focusing on solving the historical crime, the author follows the interlaced lives of the survivors, and the ways in which past events return to trouble them.

I found the large cast tricky to process, as blandly named characters drift in and out, and it can be hard to assess their importance. Likewise, there emerge several potential protagonists, and I was unsure of whom to root for. Notwithstanding, despite the author’s advancing years, she had lost none of her talent for creating suspense, and I had no trouble reaching the end.

[Ellen · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Girl Next Door by Ruth Rendell.

The story begins towards the end of WWII not far from the London area. Children are finding adventure playing in the tunnels until they are told by one of their father's to stay away. Construction workers, decades later, find a box in that same are. The box contains the remains of male & female hands.

The characters and their relationships with each other are followed from early childhood until their later years. They become reacquainted with each other and reminisce about lives in years past.

I found this book fascinating and quite different than Ruth Rendell's other Inspector Wexford books. In this story the characters are described in detail in their elderly years. Their fondness for each other is also apparent.

[Lizzie · Rating 5 out of 5]

During WWII, a group of children in the suburbs of London discover underground tunnels beneath a house which become their clubhouse. They play games, have pretend tea parties, read aloud. One girl tells fortunes. The fun lasts for a few months until one of the neighborhood dads yells at them to get out and don't come back.

Years later when the remains of the tunnels are demolished, workers find a metal box containing two mummified human hands. We readers know part of how they got there. The investigation brings the neighborhood gang of kids, now old, back together. Some have been friends all along, others have lost touch. Soon there are new friendships and romances among the group, proof that you don't have to be young to feel passion and anger.

The story is from the point of view of several of the older characters, but we get to see how their children and grandchildren see them, too. When they tell the young detective about their days playing the tunnels he asks, "But what did you do there?" They look at him in astonishment. Can't he imagine the kind of fun they made? Other characters observe changes, like how nobody says "quarter to" the hour any more, just "9:45". A woman rolls her eyes when her granddaughter refers to the bathroom "sink" - the proper term is "basin" and only the kitchen has a "sink".

It's a completely satisfying novel and mystery - not a who done it, but who was done to, and what happened after.

[Ellinor · Rating 2 out of 5]

The bones from a crime committed towards the end of the second World War which were burried in a secret tunnel system are found when a house is built some 70 years later. The story then tells how a group of friends who used to play in these tunnels now start questioning their past and their friendships.

I really liked how the book started: you see how the crime is committed through the eyes of the killer. This sounded very promising. But then the book started to get boring. When the friends hear about the discovery of the bones they think back on their lives. They re-consider their friendships and start questioning many things they thought were true. My problem was that there were too many different personalities but none of them enough elaborated for me to really get to know them. They just stayed names and whenever a character made a second appearance I had trouble remembering who he/she was. The whole book just seemed to drag on and on.

Ruth Rendell writes two types of mysteries: There are the Insepctor Wexford novels, which are classic murder mysteries. And then there are the stand-alone novels (like The Girl Next Door). Books from first category I really enjoy reading. But books from the latter category never seem to appeal to me. I usually find them quite boring. This is quite surprising as I'm really a fan of the books Ruth Rendell writes under her pseudonym, Barbara Vine: those are psychological thrillers too. I can usually guess what's going to happen or what happened. But the difference is that when I read a Barbara Vine book I always think "No, what I think can't be true, nobody could be that mean." When I read a Ruth Rendell stand-alone book it's more like, "Well, I knew that was about to happen, it was quite obvious." It's actually a pity that Ms Rendell couldn't entertain me more with this book as she is actually a really good writer.

2 to 2.5 stars.

(I received a free digital copy via Netgalley. Thanks for the opportunity!)

[Barb H · Rating 3 out of 5]

It should be no surprise to my friends at Goodreads to find that I have read another book written by one of my most admired writers, Ruth Rendell. Sadly, she died in 2015, but her numerous, remarkable novels remain, many of which I have yet to explore.

This was not one of her better offerings, but it certainly held my interest. Briefly, it is the story surrounding the discovery of two severed, entwined hands packed in a biscuit tin buried in a tunnel in an English village. These qanats , which actually meant a subterranean passage for carrying water, were the playgrounds for the many children of the neighborhoods. The narrative focuses indirectly and recurrently on the mysterious finding.

The major concentration is of the numerous members of the playgroup as they age, particularly when they become retired senior citizens and face their associated dilemmas. It was frequently difficult to become well acquainted with these individuals because there were so many and their tales were often related many pages apart. I had to flip back and forth to refresh my view, especially if I left my reading for any length of time! However, it was interesting to observe the quirks and actions of Rendell's characters, as is usual in her novels.

I will not introduce any “spoilers” here, but I must remark that the author failed to interject her usual surprise ending for me in her plot. It does not discourage me from pursuing further of her offerings, because her writing contains an elegant, magnetic spell for me. I would rate this 3.5...

[Biblio Files (takingadayoff) · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Girl Next Door reminded me of some of the earlier Ruth Rendell books that were more psychological thriller than murder mystery, such as One Across Two Down. Unlike the earlier novels, The Girl Next Door had quite a large cast of characters, and I had some trouble remembering who a few of the less important ones were. The major characters were easy enough to keep track of as it was impossible to look away as they made disastrous decisions and rationalized their bad behavior.

The characters in this story had been childhood friends during World War II, so they are in their seventies and eighties as the story unfolds. A few characters are even older than that. But Rendell has a great time showing us that age doesn't necessarily go hand in hand with wisdom. Having spent some time visiting relatives in nursing homes, I found The Girl Next Door completely believable in its portrayal of old people as very much like young people in their behavior. They form cliques and say things they wish they could take back, they gossip about each other and have affairs and treat each other badly.

As a murder mystery, The Girl Next Door is not especially remarkable, but as character studies, it's a winner.

[Astrid · Rating 5 out of 5]

A book about a bunch of old people, and it's great! No big mystery, guy kills his cheating wife and lover, cuts off their hands and puts them in a box which is found during construction 60+ years later. This brings a group of old-timers together and it is their story that is told. The killer is the dad of one of them and he lives in a luxurious rest-home, at age 99. Murder pays, I guess. This is all laid out early on, so I'm not giving anything away. The fun is in what happens with all those old folks because of the appearance of the box with the hands. Great book.

[Barbara Nutting · Rating 4 out of 5]

It started out slow and dull and continued that way until the end!! I probably enjoyed its look at “old people”, since I am the age of the main characters. As she was also elderly at the time she wrote this book I loved these lines “Why do anything at all I don’t enjoy? I won’t. That’s how it is for me now”. I’m sure that was her philosophy, as it is mine. The joy of being old, independent and healthy!! Was sorry to see that she passed away in 2015 at 85 - I’ve been reading her for 50+ years. Just a note - every novel by an English author includes a cat, tea and scrambled eggs!!

[Chava · Rating 1 out of 5]

Just bad. Horrible, can't believe I kept going. Initially it was interesting and then it just got duller than dull. Seriously, a whole case study about ageing and what 70 year olds get up to.
Not worth the time!

[Jo Ring · Rating 4 out of 5]

A bit disappointing from the reading the blurb on the back of the book.