I really, really wanted to love this. James Oswald is one of my favourite authors, and although I didn’t enjoy the first Con Fairchild book as much as his Inspector McLean series, I hoped that this second Con Fairchild book would be different.
It wasn’t, only more so.
I shall therefore attempt to unpack why this is a three-star review for a book by someone I consider to be a five-star author.
Characters
Con Fairchild, the main character, is from a rich aristocratic family: she’s actually Lady Constance Fairchild. She is also a detective constable in the Metropolitan Police; in the last book, she was instrumental in breaking up a ring of corrupt police in her own unit. Now she’s suspended from duty and pretty much all her colleagues dislike her. This dislike is supposed to be because of what she did, but to be honest, the way she’s written, it comes across far more as if Con Fairchild is the kind of colleague whom, while you wouldn’t wish them to die in a fire, if you heard they’d been involved in a tragic accident you wouldn’t lose much sleep over it.
Con Fairchild is supposed to be a strong, independent woman, a maverick who goes her own way. To me, she comes across as a spoilt, entitled little rich girl playing at being ‘one of the people’ to annoy her family. Despite being 30 years old, she also comes across as rather immature: possibly because so much of what she does is directed against her family, and partly due to her admitted lack of desire for responsibility.
Other characters don’t really get much page-time. PC Karen Eve is back, and I expect she will be a fixture in the series. To honest, I think that will be a good thing – part of the reason Con seems so self-absorbed, I think, is because she doesn’t have a sidekick/friend. Not only does having a friend to relax with make a character seem less uptight, but it also performs the valuable narrative function of allowing the main character to discuss her ideas. Con doesn’t, at present, have that, which probably contributes to her seeming stand-offish.
There are also hints that other characters will become more important – Superintendent Diane Shepherd and DCI Ed Bain (a side note – I wonder if Oswald has read the Dan Shephard and Ed McBain books?) are promising, although in this book they only flitted on and off the page.
Plot
To be honest, I could live with Con’s tiresomeness if the plot had been as exciting/dark/weird as Oswald’s McLean books. Unfortunately, Con is not in McLean’s league in any respect. She doesn’t appear to be much of an investigator – she spends much of the book wandering around aimlessly, occasionally stumbling into a clue. She also goes to a family wedding and two funerals, and stays with family friends. At no point did she seem to really care about the murders she was allegedly investigating (or indeed about her job).
The plot… lacked. I kept waiting for Con to start acting instead of reacting, or actually investigating – about the most investigative thing she did was to watch some CCTV footage. Even the grand finale isn’t due to anything she did, but due to her wandering aimlessly and then having the narrative equivalent of a piano fall on her head.
When Con does stumble across a clue, she often doesn’t follow it up – on several occasions, she notices something important, and I expected that the next scene would show her investigating further – but she never did.
Setting
Mostly this is set in London, although you can’t really tell. It’s obvious that for Oswald, Scotland is where his heart lives; London is just somewhere on the map. If you’re paying attention, you can tell the difference in the narrative: London gets just enough description so you know the action isn’t taking place in a black room, like a minimalist play with no scenery. However, when the action shifts to Edinburgh, you get a breeze blowing across the Firth of Forth and ‘traditionally Scottish ornate cornicework’.
Conclusion
The fact that I finished this book at all, and until near the end was contemplating giving it four stars is a testament to Oswald’s skill as a writer. I don’t like Con Fairchild, but the story kept me going until close to the end – it was only then, and when I sat down to think about what I’d read, that the weaknesses became apparent.
If you’ve never read any of Oswald’s books before, this is not a good place to start – not only is this not the first in the series (although it will stand alone) but the McLean books are a much better display of the author’s talent.
Will I carry on? I honestly don’t know. I hope that this series gets better; I wonder if some of the weaknesses come from the difficulty inherent in trying to write a police procedural when the main character isn’t on active duty for most of the book, especially with a main character who seems to have no friends to interact with.
In short, I think Con Fairchild could learn a lot from Tony McLean!