Ben’s Comments (group member since Apr 08, 2020)

Ben’s comments from the Death on the Shelf group.

I wonder if Aaron and Abby might make a good detective team. Journalism and justice.

Ben's comments:
I’m partial to books about writers, especially newspaper writers. I’m also partial to books that don’t take themselves too seriously. So, in general, I enjoyed this book.
Authors like Agatha Christie or Dorothy L. Sayers or Ngaio Marsh or Kate Atkinson write serious mysteries, but their detectives are quirky and their situations often have some elements of absurdity. I’m not putting Cohen at the level of these authors, but I think he’s a good writer, and I found myself smiling at several twists and turns throughout the book, often having nothing to do with the mystery itself. I enjoyed Aaron’s interactions with his wife, with his kids, with his editor and with the police chief. I especially enjoyed the more authentic interactions with the newspaper situation. Some – like a rich man paying a publisher to hire him to look into a story – were beyond my particular belief, but I suppose that could happen. Unlikely. But generally, I felt those interactions were possible and authentic.
Once Aaron got around to solving the mystery, however, I found myself losing interest. He really was out of his depth. The fact that he pursued “the story” even though he wasn’t getting paid for it seemed like a bona fide reaction to me, something any reporter might do. He had been used, after all. But his methods were inept and downright risky. And the key to solving the mystery came from one source, basically, not a methodical piecing together of the clues. It was a disappointing ending to a fairly atypical, complex and entertaining start.
In response to the questions, I enjoyed the references from the era. I was alive and paying attention two decades ago, and it was fun to think back to that time.
I thought Aaron’s family added rather than subtracted from the unfolding story – and created a little suspense during the muddled ending.
I would hesitate to read another of the books in the series because of what I considered the weak ending of the first one.
The first part of the book was better than the last part. It was funnier and made better sense, whereas the mystery itself didn’t make much sense at all.
I thought their marriage was a good one because they liked each other and seemed to work together well in the raising of their kids. His wife obviously put up with a lot from Aaron. He obviously respected Abby’s knowledge and career because, when he found the body, he phoned her first. Every spouse should consider doing that when a pivotal moment in their lives arises.
The resolution did not seem believable to me. The jokiness did. I liked Aaron, his family, his friend and the police chief.

Linda Wolfe's comments:

Apparently Jeffrey Cohen is conflicted as to whether he wants to be a mystery writer or a comedy playwright. He is clever but I found his relentless quest for laughs to be tiring. I did, however, think that his skirmishes with the English professor regarding proper grammar to be amusing. The plot could have been a lot more realistic and the romantic ardor between Aaron and Abby was overkill from my perspective. The only characters I cared for were Aaron’s friend who helped with the carpentry tasks and the police chief.

Maybe I soured on this book because Hoopla kept erasing it from my smartphone and it had to be downloaded three times.
All in all I would rate this book with a one out of a possible five stars. If the plot had been more well-developed and if we’d had fewer gags, I would have been more enthusiastic.

In response to the questions, I did notice it was older because of his reference to TV programs, stuff like that. In fact, the reference to V.I. Warshawski prompted me to phone the library to help locate some of her books.

I’d say the references to family was a strength. It wasn’t a traditional family. And the kids were kind of interesting. It was realistic to mention the son, who had a disability.
I’m not interested in following the series. I thought the two sections of the book were about the same. I thought the strength in the marriage was the humor and that Aaron doesn’t seem to be threatened by her.

I didn’t think any of it was too realistic. Didn’t think the resolution, that the two of them drove the kid out there to murder her, was very realistic.

I like a light mystery every once in a while, but I’ve read light ones I like better.

I guess not. Well, here are my comments on A Carrion Death:

I liked the book. I liked the main characters, or at least the good guys. I wouldn’t hesitate to give a second book by the same author a chance. A Carrion Death wasn’t perfect but it was a good start, with plenty of interesting avenues opened for exploration in future episodes.
I came away with a good understanding of Kubu’s methodology and his appetites, a quirky, thoughtful detective. I liked his boss, who surprised me with his willingness to put politics aside for good police work, to set aside his preconceptions about his friend, the scheming head of BCMC, in favor of the facts of the case. He and Kubu were a healthy contrast in styles and personalities; though different, they found a way to work together.
I was less thrilled – one might even say put off – by some of the literary devices used. Particularly perturbing was the sequence in which the author withheld the identity of the prisoner who was accidently killed. I understand that he was trying to build some mystery and suspense, but it ended up not being that much of a secret anyway. Another bit that troubled me was during Kubu’s phone call to Angus/Jason/Diana, in which whoever was speaking slipped up about the gender of their old teacher. Kubu didn’t seem to pay it much mind at the time. That was the BIG clue to the whole charade.
The timeline was fuzzy, the book was meandering and the loose ends at the conclusion a bit troubling, but the characters were interesting people whom I came to care about, and the pivot point – that there were two puzzles to solve, not just one – was intriguing.

Well, it's past 6:30 on the third Tuesday of the month and time to comment on the book. I thought perhaps there would be a live discussion, but maybe not. Anyone else out there?

Linda Wolfe offers these comments and questions ( Spoiler alert):
Overall I enjoyed A Carrion Death. The African setting was a change from the modern locales we usually find in mysteries. I was surprised at how contemporary the law enforcement capabilities were, although they did dump some of the scientific task on to the South Africans. The presence of BMWs as well as upscale restaurants was an eye-opener for me as I had expected a more primitive atmosphere. As for the characters, Kubu's quirks and well-developed investigative insights made him likeable. I sense Bongani, although socially inept, was a straight arrow. Kubu's boss, Mabaku , had a tough job trying to walk a tightrope between politics and investigation. It was apparent that Diana was a psych case, probably in large part due to her lousy parenting. Preferably the ending would have tied things together more neatly. Redbeard was still in the wind and we don't know if Cecil's secrets were ever revealed and how long he would remain on the BCMC board. Is the author teeing us up for a sequel?

Questions:
1. Was Diana behind Jason's murder or was Redbeard tying up loose ends?
2. Why did Kubu's boss suggest that Bongani had not fully cooperated with the investigation?
3. What is ginger beer?
4. Why was the witch doctor thrown into the story?
5. What nationality is the author? And had he actually lived in Botswana?

Your comments on Mabaku are interesting. I've read (listened to) about half the book. He continues to exhibit many of the qualities you mention, but he's growing on me as the plot thickens. He's being tested: Will he pass the test? I'm anxious to find out.

This book spends a lot of time on character development, and I think that's paying off. There are many things I don't like about the book, but I'm wrapped up in the main characters, and that is holding my interest.

The quotations from Shakespeare plays that begin the various parts of the book seem a little out of place to me. I realize the plot is somewhat Shakespearean; still, it jars me every time I encounter one of them as my brain shifts from modern-day Botswana to Elizabethan England and back again.

I can do that on Thursday, maybe. I'll let you know if I succeed and, if so, which she prefers.

How about contacting others in the group? Any progress on that front?

Here are answers to the questions from Linda Wolfe and myself. Let us know what you think, especially any disagreements with us!

1. The Circular Staircase is a short book-- what do you think of its pace? Do the events occur too quickly, too slowly, or exactly as they should? Did you feel excited to keep reading, or bored?
LINDA: The first part was kinda slow; then it seemed OK
Ben: It was off to a slow start, a leisurely pace, to be sure, as many books are, setting the tone, setting the scene, but once the action picked up, I didn’t have any trouble with the pace. I was never too excited about the story, to be honest. Too many details were withheld to make it very tantalizing. I just kept reading, waiting for the next revelation.

2. What was your initial reaction to the book, when you first began? How did that first impression hold up as you kept going?
LINDA: It was slow, too much description about the manor house. I wanted it to get to the mystery right away.
Ben: My initial reaction was “This certainly is old-fashioned,” with the fainting ladies, the deference to men, class attitudes towards servants on full display. No cellphones. A period piece.

3. What did you think of the setting of Sunnyside? What role does it play in the novel? Could it have taken place anywhere else?
LINDA: Probably not. They had to have a stealthy place big enough to keep the bonds, papers, whatever.
Ben: It could have happened somewhere else, but that other place would have needed a circular staircase or they would have had to change the name of the book. Maybe that’s why they named the play based on this book “The Bat.” No fancy staircase needed. But I don’t remember reading about a bat. Was there a bat in “The circular staircase”? Anyway, it would seem that any huge, old home might serve as a place for this mystery to unravel.

4. NoveList compares this book to a variety of domestic mysteries ranging from Agatha Christie to Agatha Raisin; does it remind you of anything? Does it benefit or suffer from the comparison?
LINDA: It reminds me of Agatha Christie. The fact that it was in the manor house and kind of a cozy. I like Christie a little better. Seems to me she gets into the meat of the mystery quicker.
Ben: I’ve already mentioned in this discussion that this book reminds me of “The Woman in White,” by Wilkie Collins, written and set in times long ago. I feel like we’ve worked hard to move beyond that particular era in terms of equality and respect. Unlike, say, “Huckleberry Finn,” which tries to deal with and (often) make fun of the conventions of the day, “Staircase” is deeply mired in them without seeming to notice.

5. Were you surprised by any of the answers the book provides in its final chapters?
LINDA: I was surprised that the man Paul was not dead (until they exhumed the casket). I’m not saying I had it all figured out but I did think there was something funny about the phony gardener. I had it figured he was working with the detective, that there was some sort of collaboration going on there.
Ben: I was surprised by how well the various loose ends were tied up. I thought the author, through her narrator, did that well. I wasn’t surprised that the missing documents were found in Sunnyside nor too much surprised by who turned out to be the bad guys, or that Halsey got the girl, but the other explanations (who went down the laundry chute? And others) did come as a surprise and I was pleased to learn about them.

6. What did you think of the characters? Are Rachel, Liddy, Halsey, Gertrude, Louise et al people you can imagine existing in a more contemporary setting?
LINDA: I liked Rachel but Gertrude, Halsey and the detective were annoying because they weren’t telling all that they knew and I find that annoying. I thought Liddy was a ditz.
Ben: As I mentioned before, I didn’t think character development was a strong suit of this book. We knew Rachel pretty well, and Liddy, but the rest of the characters were seen through a very narrow lens. I liked the sometimes strained but very loyal relationship between Rachel and Liddy and the humor they added to an otherwise pretty bland narrative.

7. Some parts of the novel were deliberately humorous. Did you laugh when Rachel mentioned her “wrinkle eradicators”? Did you notice any other instances?
LINDA: No, because I still see wrinkle eradicators advertised. I didn’t find it particularly humorous
Ben: See above, No. 6.

8. The Circular Staircase was adapted into a successful Broadway play under the title The Bat, which itself spawned several film adaptations. Have you seen any of the movies? If not, do you think you would like to?
LINDA: I don’t think I have seen any. If I were out in NYC I might like to go see it, see what they would have done with it.
Ben: I have not seen the play or movie adaptations. I would like to see them. The novel had an interesting plot. A filmmaker might make better use of it using different points of view. I thought the first-person approach was perhaps not best in serving the goings-on.

9. The original publication date was over 100 years ago, in 1908. How do you think the time that’s passed affects your experience as a modern reader?
LINDA: Sometimes I like to read those old-time books. They take you to another era. I don’t want a steady diet of it.
Ben: See above, No. 4

10. What role does social class play in the events of the book? Do you think it has similar effects today?
LINDA: It was very important back in those days, everybody had their place, not too much of an effect today.
Ben: The class system was part of the story, as it is/was in “Downton Abbey.” It wouldn’t have been the same book if those “Upstairs/Downstairs” attitudes had not been in place. It would be a different story if the same plot was portrayed in the 21st century.
11. Did you feel like you could trust Rachel as a narrator? Why or why not?
LINDA: I think she was a pretty sharp observer and had a lot of courage, wandering around at night. I think I could trust her. She seemed like your aunt, someone you could talk to.
Ben: It took me awhile to trust Rachel, but her portrayal of herself in sometimes a less than favorable light, as not able always to rise to the occasion, helped me trust her more as the novel went on.

Here are some comments from Linda Wolfe:

Reminded me of the old Agatha Christie cozy. Since most of the action occurred in the manor house. It took me a while to get interested but when it grabbed me, I stuck with it.
I think it was probably once the murder got going. All the descriptive stuff didn’t grab me.
I was frustrated with Halsey, Gertrude and the detective because they kept hinting that they knew certain facts but failed to reveal them. Information baiters annoy me.
I did appreciate that Rinehart revealed how all the facts fit together at the end. She did not leave us hanging.
Overall, I would rate this book as 3.5 stars out of a possible 5.

I told her I would share any discussion questions with her by phone on Tuesday, and would relay her answers.

As for having both virtual and physical meetings, I'll be interested to see how that might work. I'm not opposed. Are we talking about this sort of virtual meeting or are we including a live video/audio feed into the actual meeting?

I finished the book recently and the ending was much better than the rest of the book led me to believe it would be. There was no genius detective who gathered the group of suspects together to name the suspect or suspects, but I found the ending in keeping with the book's tone and texture, and the mystery or mysteries were displayed in a manner that I found harmonious with the rest of the book.

Will we "meet" Tuesday at 6:30 to carry on this discussion? Or is this just a running discussion? You'll note I haven't spoiled the ending for anyone who might not have finished the book.

It's difficult for me to get too involved in the plights of the characters; I don't find that much depth to anyone but Liddy. She's a pretty entertaining character, but the others remain cloaked in lack of detail. I could blame Rachel, since she is the narrator, but I tend to fault the author.

I'm far enough along in the book to figure out the "why." Still waiting to learn the "who," although, of course, I have my suspicions.

"The Turn of the Screw" was written and published about the same time as "Staircase," back when women fainted a lot. It's not my favorite era in literature.

"Staircase" reminds me of Wilkie Collins' "The Woman in White," which I also found difficult to adore. It was written about half a century before, but they seem very much cut from the same cloth. I don't remember so much fainting, though.

I spoke to Linda just now by phone. I recently lent her an old smartphone -- no SIM card -- onto which I put the Audible app and downloaded some books. We're still working out the kinks in this system -- from a safe distance. Still, she'll be unable to participate in the discussion, but maybe she can tell me her impressions over the phone and I can relate them. We'll see!

To get the email addresses of the group, I'd suggest looking at the library's record to see who checked out that March's Mycroft Holmes book. Does the library attach email addresses to the library card info? If so, that might be a way to find the addresses of members of the group.

Too bad I read the "Crocodile" book. I'll see what I can do to get up to speed on this one.

I learned about this group when I signed on to the afternoon group. Did I miss the email alerting group members to its existence?

Has anyone tried to contact Linda Wolfe? If she's interested, and if it's available, I'll be glad to try to get/download the audiobook for her. But I don't see how she can contribute to the discussion.