I was bitterly disappointed with this book after reading so many good reviews and having had a friend recommend it to me. I found the story lack lustre and repetitive, with the same points being repeated continuously, as if Rendell just needed to fill space. The writing to me was childish and immature, not suggestive of an accomplished author in the slightest but rather seemed to be the work of a primary school student in places. I know this is quite petty but when you read a book by such a highly-esteemed author you expect the editing to be of an extremely high standard, however I noticed several mistakes throughout the book, ranging from spelling mistakes to bad sentence construction to down right terrible grammar. For example when talking in terms of money, Rendell actually used the phrase 'fifty pee', now I am by no means an author myself, but I am sure that that should be written as pence! As I said, this seems petty but it all makes for quite shoddy work and distracts from the already dull story. The characters were all hugely annoying and easy to dislike and I found the story to be too lengthy in the introduction and body while the ending was swiftly wrapped up in a few pages leaving much to be desired. Some parts of the story were never even explained, for example why did Jonathan Nicholson's nephew decide to spend hours in the bus stop outside Francine's house? This was featured heavily throughout the mid to latter part of the book and made me feel like it would actually have some significance, yet this was never explained. I was left feeling as if Rendell had got bored of writing and needed a quick easy ending to get it over with rather than thinking out an appropriate conclusion to wrap everything up and tie up loose ends. Overall not a book for me and I won't be reading any of her other work.
I am in love or should I say infatuated with Ruth Rendell's writing ability. This book was a treat especially the audio version with the great narrator, Jenny Sterlin. I loved it so much I downloaded it so I could read and really relish Rendell's prose. Yes, she does all those things you aren't supposed to do as a writer--multiple POVS, leaving clues along the way with hints that we should remember them, but it all works beautifully. Those clues. You think the books is slow at first but then it all adds up. Each little clue means something to the whole story. The diamond ring, the manhole cover, the slippery wet leaves, the Edsel. It all adds up to an engrossing psychological story about the unusual Teddy who is an artist at carving wood but completely lost in dealing with social relationships. Very much own the autism spectrum. Francine, recovering from the brutal murder of her mother, left in the hands of a twisted therapist/step-mother, the no longer beautiful Harriet and her penchant for lovers thirty years her junior. And then there's the beautiful Orcadia cottage in London with it's own secrets.And the coolest thing is the ending and how it is nicely tied up for us but not completely so. The book that follows this, The Vault, takes up where this one left off with another murder to solve, and the body is found at Orcadia cottage.In the space of just two weeks I've read three of her works and have started another one. It's wonderful to love reading again and finish a book completely satisfied.
What do You think about A Sight For Sore Eyes (2000)?
A standalone prequel of sorts for The Vault, an entry in the Inspector Wexford series. I think I actually enjoyed this one better reading it out of sequence and knowing exactly where folks were going to end up! It helped me understand why she had so little to say about the victims in the first book. It had all been revealed here, and Wexford stumbles into it while batting clean up on a separate, more-recent incident. 90's era pyschodrama. Psycho as in psychopath! Horrors! But as usual with Rendell, one with an improbable artistic bent--just like Inspector Wexford. Artists loving other artists. Writers loving other writers. I wonder how many inspectors REALLY take such an interest in the arts!
—Stacey
This book is populated by enough psychologically damaged characters to fill an asylum. The two craziest of the bunch would have to be Julia, the overprotective stepmother, who also happens to be, probably the worst psychologist in the history of the profession; and Teddy, a neglected boy who grows to be a beautiful but scary psychopath. Around this collection of kooks, who fall victim to an unusual amount of miscalculations and misunderstandings, Rendell, as usual manages to weave a fascinating, suspenseful story; one of her best (although I do say that about many of her books.)
—M. Newman
I reread this after reading The Vault, which follows on from it, many years later. It is one of her darker, psychological novels - no detective, no mystery as such, just a tale of two fractured families and the children they produce: beautiful, gentle, sheltered Francine, and Teddy, who is amoral, unsocialised, handsome, and loves beautiful things. As with many Ruth Rendells there is a strong sense of chance - the small choice that leads to a larger catastrophe - and the fatal misunderstanding. It is good, and compelling, but a bit depressing.
—Eva
