Ratings1
Average rating4
Near the very end of the novel, Rendell mentions schadenfreude and I wondered if she wasn't having a playful dig at the reader. I for one was taking pleasure in Gray's slow realisation of what was happening to him. Taking pleasure only because it was obvious that he was being played and his cringeworthy lovesick thoughts had become insufferable. Many times I wanted to reach into the book and shout “Wake up, you idiot!” Still, the punishment did seem spectacularly harsh.
The quite dull first two thirds had me wondering when the mystery might begin, but the final third did win me over in the end. It was well done, however I felt there were a number of plot holes which dragged it down.
- I've read enough detective stories to know that the copper should be asking himself one question after a murder – “Who stands to benefit the most from this?” and so I found it pretty unbelievable that the blame would fall on Gray and the cop wasn't willing to entertain any notions of the wife being involved.
- Wouldn't a perennially broke Gray just phone the vet to give him permission to operate on the dog rather than travelling over from France just to say “go ahead”?
- Potentially not a plot hole, but it wasn't really explained... the letter Gray wrote to Tiny was from June 6th in the previous year. Did Drusilla plan this that far in advance and hope that Gray would contact her a year later, or did she just see her opportunity when he happened to call her again after so many months?