Why is an American author trying to write mystery novels about a Scotland Yard detective? The whole thing is bizarrely derivative, like bad fanfiction ("bad" because any decent fanfic writer from the U.S. who penned a mystery set in England would get a beta reader to "Britpick" it, i.e., flag and help them edit out any stray Americanisms. Martha Grimes hasn't done that -- and her press hasn't bothered to either -- so that every once in a while, you get these supposedly very English people saying whlly un-English things like "You had a Twelfth Night party, right?" or using terms like "sidewalk" and "parking lot"). Grimes supposedly spends (or spent -- this book dates from the 1980s) six months a year in England doing research for her novels, and the "research" shows through in the form of unrelentingly detailed descriptions of the narrow streets and clammy fogs in the Yorkshire fishing village where what passes for a plot mostly unfolds. The ponderous accumulation of minute detail about locale, cuisine (I like a good Scotch egg myself, but it's hard to escape the feeling that it and the various kippers, fish paste sandwiches -- which one character improbably selects to eat at a party even though she knows in advance that they "always" disagree with her -- bacon rashers, etc., are being flashed at us by way of credentials, to "prove" that the author knows her stuff about England despite being an American), hunting etiquette, the English procedure for getting a driver's license, etc., weighs down the novel to no real purpose: it's there to provide an opportunity for purple prose (as in the descriptions of the weather) and to shore up the supposedly "English" atmosphere of the book (which fails miserably when all the characters talk like Americans putting on an accent). Similarly, the author has her detective, Richard Jury, quote Vergil inappositely and for no apparent reason. Here the purpose is clearly to make him appear erudite and the product of a proper old-fashioned English education, complete with Latin and poems to memorize, but it doesn't work because the author herself isn't that sort of person, and doesn't know enough Vergil -- or enough poetry in general -- to make it convincing. Similarly irritating, because stupid and ridiculous, is the moment when a character says of her mother, "She died young," and Jury responds "_The Duchess of Malfi_?" Yes, "She died young" is a line (or part of a line) from that play, but surely no one in their right mind, however steeped in English literature they might be, would jump to the conclusion that a person was quoting _The Duchess of Malfi_ when talking about their ACTUAL mother who ACTUALLY died young (and in the context of answering a policeman's questions, to boot). No one this out of touch could ever rise to be an Inspector at Scotland Yard, surely? Here as elsewhere, the puppeteer's hand looms far too large and ungainly over her obviously-cardboard characters.The reference to _The Duchess of Malfi_ is presumably a tip of the hat to Agatha Christie (_Sleeping Murder_, which like this book features a 15- or 20-year-old "cold case"), from whom the various components of the murder plot, such as it is, are assembled (for most of the book it's fairly easy to forget that there's been a murder; we're so busy being treated to seemingly irrelevant conversations and plot threads featuring extraneous characters that go nowhere, not to mention the seemingly-obligatory-these-days existential angst of the detective, who mostly seems like quite a sensible bloke but out of nowhere will get a moody fit on where he gazes at himself in the mirror and wonders if he's really cut out to be a policeman, etc. etc.). Basically, a lady in a very striking black-and-white fancy dress is found dead, she bears a puzzling resemblance to the long-lost heiress from the manor house, there's a hunting scene (blood on the snow), a dramtic cliffside rescue, etc. etc. In short, a collection of cliches that never quite cohere into an actual plot, and a "mystery" that one tends to forget about from page to page, as the author never actually succeeds in creating any suspense about the outcome. What are they investigating, again? Oh, right.
I was not sure I was going to like this book or not. I had never read anything by Martha Grimes. However, she won the Nero Wolfe Award for best mystery of the year for "The Anodyne Necklace," which is the next book in this series. I figured I would give the book a try and was pleasantly surprised. The story starts off with a murder. A young woman is dressed in a startling costume of half-black and half-black. Even her face is painted half-black and half-white (an important clue later on). The setting is very atmospheric - it is nighttime and there is heavy fog that obscures everything. As the young woman is walking down the street, she meets her killer. Richard Jury of Scotland Yard and his friend, Melrose Plant, an aristocrat who has given up his titles, begin to investigate independently, but quickly join forces. The twist in this murder case is that no one is exactly sure who the victim really was. Was she Dillys March, the former ward of Colonel Crael, or Gemma Temple, an imposter? And how is the Colonel's son, Julian Crael, involved? A very intriguing and interesting read, one I would like to revisit - that's something I can't say for most of the mysteries I read.
What do You think about The Old Fox Deceiv'd (2003)?
When a young woman is murdered in Yorkshire, Jury goes to work trying to find the killer. He first has to find out her true identity. Was she the missing heiress returning after 15 years or was she an imposter? Also, was she the intended victim?There are interesting twists and characters. My favorite character was 12 year old Bertie and his loyal dog Arnold. Bertie's been deserted by his horrible mother, but he seems to be soldiering on with the help of several ladies in the village.It's a solid
—Grey853
Second in the Richard Jury series, originally published in the early 1980s. A costumed visitor to a remote fishing village is murdered while ascending steep outdoor stairs on Twelfth Night. To find the murderer, Jury, his sergeant Alfred Wiggins, and friend Melrose Plant must untangle the multiple hidden secrets and shames that explain the recent history of the community. The characters are all distinct and memorable, including a precocious 12 year old who appears to have been abandoned by his ne'er do well mother, an echo of the book's larger themes. Jury's latent depression gives the story depth, while Plant lightens the plot with droll humor. There's also something oddly skew about the main characters that makes the story especially appealing.
—Grady McCallie
The Old Fox Deceiv'd is the second in Richard Jury series written by Martha Grimes. The setting this time around is in Rackmoor. Many years ago, Dillys March disappeared . Dillys was Colonel Crael's niece. She stood to inherit quite nicely, but in all those years no one ever heard from her.Now, a woman calling herself Gemma Temple has arrived in Rackmoor. This woman bears a striking resemblence to Dillys. So much so, the Colonel Crael appears to believe it is Dillys.However, the woman is murdered before her identity can be established. Scotland Yard is called in to help get to the bottom of things.If Dillys was back, family and friends may have been knocked out of the inheritance they were counting on. But, not only that, some people still harbored jealousies and resentment toward Dillys. I enjoyed the first book in this series so much. I just feel in love with Richard Jury. The secondary characters added charm and wit to the story and are equally likeable. Happily, we find Alfred Wiggins is still partnered with Jury and still nursing his health. Melrose Plant is also back giving Jury a sounding board and a little advice here and there.This second mystery has quite a few surprises and twist in it. A very solid, absorbing and even atmospheric mystery. Having basically established the characters in the first novel, this second installment focuses more on the mystery and the folks in Rackmoor. However, this one did take on a darker tone, which is fine, but I did miss the charm and banter that was so prominent in the first novel. Richard Jury didn't feel quite as vulnerable in this one. We still saw glimpes of his soft side,but Jury was all business in this one. Wiggins role was also slightly diminished. He was there but not nearly as involved as I would have liked him to be. But, the most glaring ommission was the absence of Melrose's Aunt Agatha. The banter between those two in the first novel was hilarious. Aunt Agatha does make an appearance, but takes no part in the investigation. The murder mystery though was more detailed and quite cleverly plotted. Overall a B-
—Julie
