Book 50 - "...all the secret agents following each other round and round Geneva, all knowing each other by sight, and often ending up at the same bar"

Title: Cat Among the Pigeons (1959)

Author: Agatha Christie

Why this book:
I, um, accidentally tripped into a second-hand bookshop, and then I bumped into a bookshelf and this book just happened to fall into my hands, and then as I was trying to get rid of it I dislodged my cash and it just flew onto the counter, and for some reason the bookseller thought I was trying to buy it, and I was too flustered to explain that that wasn't what I had intended to do at all. Honestly.

What's it about?
Murder most foul, of course!

In the fictional Middle Eastern country of Ramat, a revolution is about to take place. Warned ahead of time, Prince Ali Yusuf entrusts a very important package to his friend and pilot, Bob Rawlinson. Bob hides it away for safekeeping, then does his best to fly Ali to safety. But the plane is lost...

...and some months later, at his niece's school, a gymteacher is shot dead in the brand new Sport Pavilion. She won't exactly be missed, since she's very new and she's not very likeable, but for a school like Meadowbank reputation is everything, and having a murdered teacher in one's sport pavilion does not exactly increase the school roll. What exactly was Grace Springer doing there that night, and who would have a reason to kill her?

The school headmistress, the successful Miss Bulstrode, has felt since the beginning of term that something is wrong - but what? It's not just that one of her new staff members is a government spy, or that the Prince Ali Yusuf's former fiancee may get kidnapped at any time. Luckily, one of the school's best and brightest pupils, Julie Upjohn, knows just who to ask for help - a certain Belgian detective...

The Good and the Bad
I was always going to love a book which melded my two favourite genres - detective fiction and girls' boarding school stories - and Cat Among the Pigeons was everything I had wanted. Thrills! Murder! Tennis! I think I read the entire thing with a goofy grin on my face. The plotting, the insight into the characters, the twists and turns and red herrings, everything about this book screams that this is Christie at her best.

But - and this is a big but - this should never have been a Poirot novel. He only turns up more than halfway through the book, and feels like an interloper, an uncomfortable presence. He solves the mystery - of course - but the book simply feel imbalanced after he appears. I can't exactly blame Christie for Poirot's appearance. She was constantly being hounded to write more about him; she got to the point where she came to loathe her own creation (and even invented a fictional detective writer, who obviously represented herself, who similarly hated her most famous detective, obviously an outlet for Christie's frustration.) But she could have worked him more naturally into the story, if she had to have him, rather than have him appear at the end like a thunderstorm raining down the denouement on the unprepared reader.

Other issues? Well, there's some dodgy racial opinions going on - Ramat will never be a democracy because, it's implied, the people of Ramat aren't capable of understanding the benefits of it. Prince Ali Yusuf, of course, has the benefit of a superior Western education, which is why he wants to reform his country. A Middle Eastern country rejecting Western values could almost be a contemporary storyline - but the suggestion in Cat Among the Pigeons is that the prince's subjects simply aren't enlightened enough to want to change. Completely usual thinking for someone of Christie's age and era, I guess, but that doesn't make it grate any less.

I loved the melding of thriller and detective yarn, though - and, given that I also enjoyed Destination Unknown I'm definitely keen to read a few more of Christie's thrillers, however far-fetched they may be.

So should I read it or what?
The day I find a Christie I wouldn't recommend will be a traumatic day indeed.

Book 45 - "I don't know how you stay in business, Warshawski. You seem to reason with your endocrines instead of your synapses."

An update, just three days since the last! I know, I'm as surprised as you are.


Title: Tunnel Vision (1994)

Author: Sara Paretsky

Why this book?
I've read a few of Paretsky's books and enjoyed them, on the whole. This one I picked up in a second hand bookshop when I was hunting for Agatha Christies.

So what's it all about? V. I. Warshawski is a P.I. with more than a few problems. Looming largest is the fact that the building she works in is falling apart, and she can't afford to move. One of her clients has suggested - well, OK, decided - that she's going to be in charge of the rehabilitation of his delinquent college son. There's a family of homeless kids living in her basement who are too scared to seek the help of the state. Oh, yeah, and the dead body of a former law school buddy's wife has just turned up in her office.

Who killed Deirdre? Her husband, Fabian, who likes to keep up appearances when guests are visiting, but beats his wife and abuses his kids behind closed doors? Or her daughter Emily, whose own wants and needs have been suppressed for years, and who can't remember exactly what happened that night? Or is this something else, something even more sinister - something to do with the construction company that V.I. has been trying to investigate, even though everyone who knows anything has been telling her the case is too hot, that she better just give it up?

V.I. doesn't give up that easily - but then, neither does Deirdre's killer. V.I. is walking head-first into trouble, and if she doesn't back-off someone's going to get hurt - and this time, V.I. might not escape with her life...

The Good and the Bad First of all, ugh. I don't know what it was about this book, but I just couldn't get into it. I usually love Paretsky's books - I've been reading them since I discovered her short stories at high school, but this one just didn't click for me. I usually like V.I., but she was just too hard in this story - something which does have consequences for her, but it just sort of made it difficult to like her. And the plot I just found to be too confusing - V.I. is investigating several things for several clients at once, and I could never straighten out who was who in the huge cast of characters. A thumbs down, then, albeit a reluctant one.

So should I read it or what? Obviously this is not a book that I am enamoured with, but I hate to think that this review would put anyone off Peretsky's books, because usually I really enjoy them. Instead, I'll say - don't read this, but do read other books in the V.I. Warshawski series - I particularly enjoyed Fire Sale (2005) in which she goes back to coach her old high school basketball team and gets involved with local corruption and teenage romance.

Link of the day: How about some fanfiction? In this highly enjoyable Futurama fic, the Planet Express crew are attacked by space ninjas - Just Desserts.

Book 44 - "I have no patience with the modern neurotic girl who jazzes from morning till night and uses language that would make a fishwoman blush!"

It's been a while since I read any Agatha Christie! It's also been almost a year since I first read this book. Sometimes I'm a little slow to blog things, I guess!


Title: Murder on the Links (1923)

Author: Agatha Christie

Why this book:
Agatha Christie! Poirot! Hurrah!

So what's it all about?
When his good friend, Captain Hastings, returns from a trip, Poirot receives a letter bidding him to come at once, for the writer - Paul Renaud - fears his life may be in danger. When Poirot and Hastings arrive, they find they are too late; he has already been murdered, stabbed in the back and half-buried on the golf green.

Poirot is determined to find the culprit, and is highly amused at the arrival of another detective who is fails to take note of the clues which are, to Poirot, extremely important - while the other detective sees a flowerbed with no footprints in it, Poirot sees a flowerbed where there should be footprints. Hastings, however, can't help but doubt his old friend. Poirot seems to be doing nothing but asking irrelevent questions, and making increasingly bizarre statements - how does the length of a man's coat have anything to do with his death?

Paul Renaud's son is arrested for his murder, and he will surely be found guilty if Poirot can't find a way to convince the police that he didn't do it. But then, who did? Renaud's wife, who is clearly lying about just what happened that night? His blackmailer, who may or may not have been his mistress? The two mysterious South American men Mme Renaud claims to have seen? Or the English performer who was in love with his son - the very same girl that Hastings can't help becoming increasingly fascinated by...?

The Good and the Bad
I read this book through twice, and hated it the first time; the second time I loved it. The problem I had with it the first time through is simply that the end seemed to drag on a little too long. Agatha Christie is queen of the twist ending, by the ending here was so twisted that reading was both exhausting and confusing. The narrative also irritated me on my first read - it is told, in the first person, by Captain Hastings, and I quickly grew frustrated by him forever jumping to the wrong conclusion and his apparent lack of confidence in Poirot.

On my second read, however, I found the books a lot easier to enjoy. As I wasn't racing through it to find out what was going to happen next, it was a lot easier to enjoy Christie's style, her observations of human behaviour and her well-crafted plot - because, despite the overly-long conclusion, the story as a whole is well-crafted. I also found myself warming more to Hastings. He may be a bumbling idiot, but his heart is in the right place - besides, Poirot's love of his friend gives the detective a human side he might not otherwise have.

It also took me two reads to figure out what the "links" was. I was so sure it was going to be some kind of train, and was exceedingly confused when (despite at least one very important train ride in the story) Renaud was murdered in the middle of a field. As I now know, a links is in fact a type of golf course, and the fact that his murder took place there is yet another important clue.

So should I read it or what?
This is, I think, one of the better books in the Poirot series. Christie has yet to become fed up with her own creation, Captain Hastings meets someone who is to become very important to him in the future, and the mystery is set not in England but in France, giving it rather a different flavour. Highly recommended, but then I almost always say that about Christie's works, don't I?

Books 33 and 34 - Double your (mystery-solving) pleasure.

Titles: Shock Waves (1989) and Dangerous Games (1991)
Author: Carolyn Keene

Annnnyway, a while ago I read some Hardy Boys books and mentioned that Nancy Drew was about a million times cooler than they were. But! Having now read two Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys Super Mysteries I can inform you that it's probably only about a hundred times when they're hanging out together. I assume Nancy's coolness rubs off on Frank and Joe.

The first thing to tell you is that both of these books have HORRENDOUS puns as their titles. Shock Waves takes place during a seaside holiday, and Dangerous Games is set (during another holiday) at some kind of international athletic competition. The second important thing is that the characters have "grown up" a bit since their earlier books. By "grown up" I mean that Joe's girlfriend (or his favourite date) Callie... died. In a terrorist bombing. And now Frank and Joe work for some mysterious international organisation where they do undercover work. In other words, you need to suspend your disbelief even further than you had to back in the 70's.

Since Nancy is a girl, her equivalent grown-upness is that she occasionally has fights and/or temporarily breaks up with her boyfriend, Ned. Perhaps the writers went to the Todd Wilkins and Elizabeth Wakefield school of relationship writing. In the course of these two books, Ned proves himself to be jealous of pretty much every guy Nancy spends time with, particularly Frank Hardy. To be fair, Nancy thinks Frank is hot like jalapeños, but she loves Ned and would never do anything to hurt him, so Ned kind of comes across as a huge dick. Since in Nancy's own books he's generally really sweet and supportive, I'm going to choose to believe he's been corrupted by the Hardys.

Anyway, in Shock Waves, Joe's dead girlfriend's ring that is the only thing he has to remember her by, (sob), gets stolen. The boys are determined to track the thief down. Nancy, meanwhile, starts to think that someone wants her new friend Buck dead when he first claims to have seen a dead body and is then attacked by poisonous jellyfish. The cases turn out to be related! I did not see that coming. Most of the plot surrounds Buck hitting on Nancy, and Nancy not noticing, and Ned getting jealous. This is actually not what I look for in a mystery, Nancy dear.

Dangerous Games is so much more awesome. Nancy and the boys are both seperately called to investigate when an international sporting star starts getting threatening notes, and everyone, including Nancy's friends Bess and George (yay!) go undercover. George (who's the sporty one) turns out to be so good at swimming that she considers taking it up professionally, and the sporting star's sister is totally hot for her. This is awesome, because usually it's Bess (the pretty, girly one) that all the guys want. Sorry, did I say I don't want to read about relationships in my mysteries? I meant I don't want to read about melodramatic relationships in my mysteries. Meanwhile Nancy and the Hardys realise that the threat has something to do with a drugs scandal that happened five years before, and I totally called who the bad guy was going to be ages before any of them did. Clearly I would make a much better teen detective than the Hardy Boys! But not Nancy. Her and I would just hang out with George and Bess and solve mysteries and be BFFs for ever and ever and ever.

Sometimes I guess we'd let the Hardy Boys join us and, IDK, fight vampires or something.



In conclusion: I need to get my hands on some more of these books.

One last thing - I know I'm late posting again! But here's why:

His name is Frosting. Frosting the Snowman. He took a while to make.

Book 30: Fables, Legends in Exile, or: "You look out of breath, Jack. Been climbing beanstalks again?"

Title: Fables: Legends in Exile (2003)

Author: Bill Willingham

Why this book?
I was doing quality control for my mother - she buys graphic novels, I have the arduous task of reading them and deciding if they're appropriate for impressionable young women.

So what's it all about anyway?
After their various homelands and kingdoms were attacked by a mysterious and powerful evil, known only as "the Adversary", many fairytale creatures and mythological figures were forced to find refuge somewhere else entirely - in New York, in a part of the city which becomes known as Fabletown.

The Big Bad Wolf - aka Bigby - acts as Fabletown's sheriff, so when the infamous Jack discovers Rose Red's apartment trashed and covered in blood, it falls on him to find the culprit behind the vicious attack - and to discover what has happened to Rose. Has someone discovered the truth of the Fablefolks origins? Or is the person behind it a little closer to home? Rose Red's sister, the intelligent and capable Snow White, has never quite forgiven her sister for sleeping with her husband. Then there's Jack, who had a recent and very public break-up with Rose; and Bluebear, her current squeeze, used to have the happy little habit of cutting off his wives' heads. And what, exactly, is Prince Charming doing back in town...?

If Bigby doesn't solve the case, and quickly, it might just be the beginning of the end of Fabletown. He's sure there's more going on than meets the eye - but who's lying, and why? And hey - if he does solve it, it might just be that he gets his very own Happily Every After.

The Good and the Bad
It'll probably come as no surprise to you that I loved this graphic novel to pieces. It had my two favourite things: a murder mystery, and fairytale characters! That is pretty much the literary equivalent of a peanut butter and jam sandwich. And for a change, I have nothing bad at all to say about it.

Which isn't to say that it's perfect, but its biggest fault is that it's the first story arc in an ongoing series, so while it is a complete story, there are loose ends - the biggest being we have no real idea who the Adversary is, or why he or she forced the Fables into exile. Still, that didn't actually bother me: Legends in Exile was a full enough story that I didn't even feel the need to rush out and buy the next story arc to find out what happens next.

The way the various characters have been interpreted is definitely one of the book's highlights. Prince Charming was particularly fun, as a womaniser who has managed to schmooze his way across most of Europe. The illustrations were perfect, too - "gritty" and realistic, but not what I'd call ugly. As for the writing - it was dark without being angsty, funny without being silly, and noir-ish without being forced. In conclusion: Awesome.

So, should I read it or what?
Highly recommended.

Some time this century: The biography of a fashion icon, the lacklustre return of Winnie-the-Pooh, and Queen Victoria: Demon Hunter. That is seriously the name of a book. I'm pretty excited.

Books 28 and 29: "There was nothing the two brothers liked more than tackling a tough case."

Do you know what teenagers love doing best? No, it's not drugs. No, it's not groping each other in their parents' cars. No, it's not dressing all in black and talking about how anti-establishment they are. Teenagers love solving mysteries! And I know what I'm talking about, because I spent about two hours last week hangin' out with the Hardy Boys.

Titles: The Flickering Torch Mystery (1971 revised edition)
The Secret of the Old Mill (1972 revised edition)

Author: Franklin W. Dixon, although he's not actually an actual person as far as I know.

Why these books?
Well... I found them at a flea market. And they were cheap! And they reminded me of my childhood! I couldn't resist.

So what's it all about anyway?
OK, I'm going to do my best to remember the actual plots of these books, but they are honestly so convoluted I can barely separate the two.

In Flickering Torch, the Hardy's detective father is busy on a case involving the constant theft of government property, so he fobs off a new client on to Frank and Joe. Needless to say the client is unimpressed that this famous detective is telling him that his teenage sons will take his case. But! Frank and Joe are used to being treated like this, because it is hard to believe they're so brilliant! The mystery has something to do with silkworms being stolen, and the brothers start working on the farm next door to the silk-worm farm, where they talk like the inbred country bumpkins so no one will actually know their true identities. For some reason, this actually works. Then, um, I guess there's a whole lot of detecting that goes on, mostly at night, and there's flickering torches involved somehow, and the boys' case improbably has something to do with their father's, and there's illegal mining involved? I don't even know.

The Old Mill was less confusing. There is money forging going on, and... you know what? It's not less confusing. The counterfeiting is somehow inexplicably tied to this new technology company that has just moved into Bayport, which keeps having its projects sabotaged. For some reason the criminals behind this scheme set their base in the titular mill, which is far less exciting than, say, an underground lair inside a hollowed out volcano. But! Frank and Joe nevertheless solve the mystery! Oh, and I just remembered there was some kind of motor-boat shenanigans in there. The Hardy's boat is called the Sleuth, just in case you were wondering.

The Good and the Bad
Man, these books are hilarious. Frank and Joe are pretty much indistinguishable, except that Joe is slightly more impulsive because he's a whole year younger than Frank (he was the one I had a crush on when I was a kid, incidentally). Neither of them have actual personalities, though. You can tell their best friend Chet Morton is comic relief because not only is he Fat, but he also isn't Super Keen About Mysteries! He is a Reluctant Mystery Solver! Is there anything more hilarious than that? Chet's hobbies involve eating, and also getting a new hobby every book (hilarious!) Alos, you can tell that this is a book for boys, because unlike Nancy Drew, who has a boyfriend she spends quite a lot of time with, Frank and Joe just have "favourite dates", both of whom are not only pretty, but also excellent cooks. That's what every boy wants in a favourite date!

So yeah, really, really outdated. Everything is "swell", everyone is a stereotype, and each page is so dripping with wholesomeness that it is difficult not to choke on it. These books were written at a time when children's books had Bad Guys and Good Guys and zero moral uncertainty. I mean, the Hardys are so amazing that they can tell who the bad guys are just at looking at them. This because bad guys are Surly and Unpleasant, whereas good guys have Honest Faces! Oh Hardys. If only it were really that easy.

Relatedly: You might want to check out Kate Beaton's comic about Mystery Solving Teens. I found it amusing and accurate!

So, should I read it or what?
Ahahahahahaha... hahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Do yourself a favour and don't ruin your childhood.

Later this week, probably: Fairytale characters that are alive! And, in some cases, dead.

Book 26 - A pocket full of rye, or: "I simply can't swallow this nursery rhyme business."

I'm so sorry! I have spent the last three weeks working on a research proposal, which left me with very little time for doing any non-research-proposal-related writing. Actually, I spent about two weeks doing the proposal, and one week doing a different assignment that I didn't have time to do because of the time I was spending on the proposal. That's the magic of university!

BUT I am all done with due date now until next February, which leaves me plenty more brain-room for books, and the reviewing of. Today we have the promised Agatha Christie write-up! It's only short, because I'm only just getting back into the swing of things, and my brain still feels a little bit like a lump of cottonwool.


Title: A Pocket Full of Rye (1953)

Author: Agatha Christie

Why this book?
Yes, it's another Agatha Christie. Yes, I'm now a Christie addict. Don't judge me.

So what's it all about anyway? When Mr Fortescue dies horribly after drinking a cup of tea, foul play is immediately suspected - especially after his pocket is found to be full of rye. Someone has poisoned him - but who? There's certainly plenty of suspects. There's his wife, who's having an affair; his two sons, who he constantly played off against each other; and his daughter, who he refused to let marry the man she was in love with. And if that wasn't complicated enough, then the Fortescue's maid is found dead in the garden - with her nose cut off. Inspector Neele does his best to sort through the lies and motives, but he is more than happy to accept the help of Miss Marple when she arrives on the scene. What do these murders have to do with a children's rhyme? Or is this about something else entirely?

The Good and the Bad Sadly, Miss Marple takes away more from this mystery than she gives to it. Inspector Neele, we're told from the beginning, looks completely uninspiring but is in fact a fairly astute detective. He proves to be a very good detective, but not quite capable of the leaps of logic that is required of any truly excellent mystery solver in Christie's world - that's where Miss Marple comes in, of course. Unfortunately in this case, what that means is that we see Neele's thought process, we get to know him, and then every time he hits a dead end Miss Marple pops up to give him a clue, and then fades into the background again. Her place in the book is more like that of a plot device than an actual character, and it's exceedingly annoying.

One thing I did like about this book was that for once everything wasn't tied up all neatly at the end. Oh, sure, you find out whodunnit and why, but Inspector Neele doesn't have enough evidence to put the murderer away for it - yet. It's going to take time, and a lot more hard work. The ending is also pretty sad - it's obvious that no surviving members of the Fortescue family are going to lead very happy lives, even after the murder has been solved.

So, should I read it or what? Despite my dislike for the story's style, I nevertheless enjoyed the actual mystery. I definitely wouldn't recommend it for a Christie newbie, but for the experienced Marple reader it's still worth a go.

Later this week, probably: vampires (and no mention of the T-word, I promise)

Link of the day: Upside down dogs. Oh internet, you really do have everything a girl could ever want (and more!)

Book 15 - The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, or: Millennium: not just a shitty Robbie Williams song

I had one of my wisdom teeth out on Tuesday, so I spent most of the day on Wednesday in bed, reading this book. I should have my teeth removed more often.

Image from My Good Friend Wikipedia. Thanks, Wikipedia!

Title: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2008)
Originally published as Män Som Hatar Kvinnor (2005)

Author: Stieg Larsson
Trans. Reg Keeland

Why this book? Because my Mum said, "Oh, I've heard this book is quite good," and bought it for me. I can't say no to a free book.

What's it all about anyway? Mikael Blomkvist is a fairly talented financial journalist who has just been convicted on 15 counts of libel, landing him in jail for three months. To Blomkvist, this seems like the end of the road - not only of his own career, but of the newspaper Millennium which he part-owns, which will never survive this hit to his credibility.

Then comes a completely unexpected offer. Henrik Vanger wants Blomkvirst to find the truth behind the mystery that has been haunting him for forty years. Who killed his beloved great-niece, Harriet? And, since Harriet's death, who has continued to taunt him by sending him a single, pressed flower, every year on his birthday - exactly as Harriet used to do? Vanger will not only pay Blomkvirst for a year's worth of his time, but he also offers to get the Millennium back on its feet. Blomkvirst reluctantly agrees to investigate Harriet's case, and slowly finds himself being drawn into the bizarre world of the Vangers, who are more a corporate dynasty than they are a family.

As Blomkvirst is pulled deeper into the story behind Harriet's disappearance, he takes on Lisbeth Salander as a research assistant - the girl with the dragon tattoo. Salander is possibly mentally ill, definitely emotionally warped, and entirely incapable of believing that not everyone is out to get her - but she's also a probable genius and an amazingly good private investigator.

Together, Blomkvirst and Salander realise that the Vanders have a lot to hide - and some of them are willing to go to any length to keep it hidden...

The Good and the Bad I started off reading this book expecting it to be just another thriller, but it turned out to be one of the best contemporary mystery books I've read in a very long time. So often I read mysteries where the solution is so obvious that I get frustrated that the detective hasn't figured it out yet - and I also hate it when mysteries are so over-complicated that their answer is just completely unbelievable. Larsson manages a perfect balance, laying down clues that are subtle enough that the reader can see the shape that the answer is going to take without being able to put a finger on the exact solution.

In some ways this book is almost a revenge fantasy - Salander, after being sexually abused, manages to turn the tables on her abuser in a way that might be described as poetic, while Blomkvirst's revenge on the man who set him up to go to prison is so enjoyable you can almost taste it. But in neither case does the revenge seem too far-fetched; in Salander's case, it shows us that while everyone else sees her as a victim she's never really felt that way, and in Blomkvirst's the story needed it to feel properly finished.

There are two main threads running through the book: abuse of women (the Swedish title of the book translates as "Men who hate women") and criticism of big business. Overall, Larsson handles the abuse of women part very well - generally such a topic makes me put down a book, since I just find it so hard to read about, especially when it involves rape and sadism. But the only part of the story which made me slightly uncomfortable was Salander's inability to understand that not all victims can fight back - is Larsson trying to argue that all victims should fight back (which to me sounds a lot like blaming the victim), or is he trying to point out how silly this argument is by putting it in the mouth of a character who doesn't really understand how other people work?

So should I read it or what? Without being a challenging read, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is engaging and really will keep you guessing until the end. I came to love Blomkvirst and Salander dearly, and I can not only tell you that you should read this book, but I'm going to go ahead and tentatively also recommend its sequel The Girl Who Played with Fire, which I haven't actually read yet.

Unrelated link of the day: The 10 worst subjects for a pop song. "Erectile dysfunction" isn't one of them, so I guess this Times writer is a Lily Allen fan.

Books 11 and 12 - Gorky Park and Polar Star, or: Russophiles love Soviet detectives

Vaguely related link of the day: Should libraries have e-books? I'm not sure they should.

And now, to business. Sorry for the slightly extended time between posts - I have MILLIONS of assignments to write at the moment (and by MILLIONS I mean... three). BUT I decided to blog two-books-in-one-post to make up for the delay, and also to make up for the fact I might not have time to read anything next week. Woe.


Title: Gorky Park (1981)
Polar Star (1989)

Author: Martin Cruz Smith

Why this book?
One of my co-workers is a total russophile. I asked her if she'd read Child 44, and she was so incredibly excited to find out that I'd read it that she immediately leapt at the chance to recommend to me every book written about Russia or by Russians, ever. Which is actually pretty cool, because she has an awesome taste in books.

What's it all about anyway?
Arkady Renko is a Soviet detective who is assigned the case of a triple murder when three dead, faceless bodies are found in the titular Gorky Park. At first, Renko assumes that this has been a political killing, and that the case will soon be taken off his hands - but this never comes to pass. Drawn into investigating further despite himself, Renko finds out that things are more complicated than he had first imagined - involved are American businessmen and spies, Russian loyalists and traitors, and corruption, everywhere, even in his own police force. Yet Renko is unable to let things go, even as his own life is torn apart, and is determined to follow the truth, wherever, and to whomever, it leads him.


Polar Star begins sometime after the events of Gorky Park, with Renko hiding from his past, as best he can, on board a fishing factory ship. Renko is more than happy to keep his history and his thoughts to himself, but when a young crew member turns up dead he suddenly finds himself once more investigating a murder. This time, Renko finds himself in a different quandary; while he has nothing left to lose, his crewmates have plenty, and if he refuses to label the death as an accident or a suicide they're not going to be happy. But once again Renko's doggedness and curiosity make him refuse to let things go, which is how he finds himself trapped amongst the snow and ice with a man he convicted of murder in his former life - a man who is now intent on revenge...

The Good and the Bad
That classic, noir-ish detective feeling just worked so well for a Soviet detective story. Renko is jaded, tired of working in a country where there the truth is whatever his superiors tell him it is. Renko's wife is perfect as a woman who is more interested in her husband's career trajectory than in his own feelings, and Irina contrasts strongly with her as the femme fatale who is as much victim as she is a threat.

Probably the most interesting character arc across the two novels is that of Pribluda. When we first meet him he is everything that Renko hates: a political tool, and man who sees no problem with shooting prisoners and then claiming they were trying to escape. His loathing for Renko goes even further - when Renko is captured by Soviet authorities and tortured for being a dissident, Pribluda hopes that he will be the one who gets to finally kill him. And yet Renko's steadfastness and dedication to the truth, the very things that make Pribluda despise him, also make him the only person Pribluda can turn to when he himself is forced to see the corruption in the system he loves. Instead of killing Renko, he ends up helping him to survive. By the events of Polar Star, the two are actually good friends.

Something I really enjoyed was Renko's contact with America. To so many of his people, to the young, especially, America is almost a mythical place, a country without corruption, where people can think and say whatever they like. To Irina, almost any price is worth paying to get there; but Renko's trip to America sees him dealing solely with men who are just as corrupt as those he has left behind. In the end, Renko realises, he is too Russian to ever be truly happy in America, and he knows however much trouble he'll be in for his actions he'll have to return home.

In Gorky Park, there is no sign that Soviet Russia is anything other than the strong, proud, Communist nation is projects itself to be; but by the time Renko is at work on the Polar Star there are cracks showing around the edges. The books don't hold any of the chilling atmosphere found in Child 44 - Renko's jaded view of the world simply doesn't allow for that - but Cruz Smith portrays what were current events for him so accurately, and with surprisingly little bias, that this could just as easily be a contemporary, historical novel.

So should I read it or what?
My vote is yes, and yes. I actually enjoyed Polar Star more than Gorky Park, but I don't think there's any point reading the second novel without having read the first. There are actually four further books in the series, and you can bet I'm going to read them as soon as I can lay my hands on them (and when I've finished my MILLIONS of assignments).

Book 7 - Evil under the Sun, or: Mrs Peacock had nothing to do with this one

Kind of vaguely related link of the day: Bow Street Runner. Prostitutes! Hangings! Illicit gin stilleries! This game has it all. You play as a 'runner', a kind of early policeman, in 18th Century London, tracking down murderers and other villains. The game is pretty intense - in one episode you get to perform a rough autopsy - but that's what I like about it! It's pretty historically accurate, and has awesome graphics, and I can't beat the last goddamn level.

The People Have Spoken: The results of my last poll are in, and it turns out that pretty much everyone wants to see more Muppets-inspired politi-thrillers. I can only approve: the Muppets' version of any thriller would be safe from weirdoes. And they'd be professional about it, too!

This weeks' poll honours both today's book choice, a classic whodunnit, and one of my favourite board games ever. In case you're wondering, it was in the library with a lead pipe. Just in case that influences your suspicions.

And now, to business: I actually meant to write this up yesterday, but I accidentally spent most of the day eating chocolate-marshmallow easter eggs and watching the extras on my Return of the King: Extended Edition DVD. I now have no more chocolate-marshmallow easter eggs and an unreasonably large crush on Elijah Wood.

I couldn't find any pictures of my copy of this book, and am currently sans scanner, so please to enjoy this picture of David Suchet as Hercule Poirot instead (thanks, Wikipedia!)

Poirot: owner of the sexiest moustache ever?

Title: Evil Under the Sun (1941)

Author: Agatha Christie

Why this book?
I've always loved mystery/detective stories, and Agatha Christie still reins supreme as Queen of the Whodunnit, so when I came across this book going cheap at my favourite second-hand store I just had to buy it and read it immediately.

What's it all about, anyway?
Poirot is an internationally renowned detective who, we learn as the story opens, is treating himself to a holiday in a secluded resort near Devon. Amongst the other guests is Arlena Marshall, a former actress who is known for her beautiful looks and flirtatious manner with men - even married men. Poirot senses that the scene is already set for tragedy, and his instincts prove right when Arlena is found, strangled to death, on an isolated beach. Poirot takes on the case, sure that everything is not as it appears - not even Arlena herself

The suspects include:

• Captain Kenneth Marshall, Arlena's husband, who claims to have seen nothing untoward in his wife's conduct but who has obviously noticed it on more than one occasion.
• Linda Marshall, Arlena's step-daughter, who hated her step-mother with a passion, and who acts increasingly confused and suspiciously after her death.
• Patrick Redfern, who was carrying on an affair with Arlena, right under the noses of the other hotel guests - including his own wife.
• Christine Redfern, a mousy woman who is very hurt by her husband's infedelity and lies
• Rosamund Darnley, a childhood friend of Captain Marshall who obviously still cares for him very deeply
• Reverend Steven Lane, a priest of the fire-and-brimstone variety who claims to sense great evil from Arlena

Then there's the Gardeners, an American couple with a very odd dynamic to their relationship, and Mr Horace Blatt, a nouveau riche yachtsman with his own secrets to hide - such as why, exactly, he spends so much time out sailing by himself.

Naturally, no one is prepared to tell Poirot the whole truth, scared that their own discretions will impliment them in the murder; but Poirot is nothing if not persevering, and he slowly but surely sorts through the lies to find the truth - but will he be in time to stop another innocent dying...?

The good and the bad
OK, I'll admit it: this is the first Agatha Christie I've ever read. Why, I don't know - I suppose after a childhood of reading Nancy Drew and The Hardy Boys mysteries I expected her books to be horribly formulaic. In my opinion, there's a place in this world for books in which you can guess the ending before you are halfway through, but that place is not for whodunnits. And that's not a place where Agatha Christie lives, either. Every time I started to suspect I really knew who the murderer was, a new piece of evidence would drag my suspicions in a whole new direction.

Christie walks that fine line between "wow, this is an intricate plot" and "wow, this plot is so intricate it's not at all believable" without once putting a foot wrong. Her characters are deceptive, but humanly so - some seem good but are bad, some seem bad but are good, some are exactly as they appear but have their own, understandable reasons for being the way they are. Poirot's incredibly ability to solve this case - any case, in fact - could have rendered him almost too perfect, but for all his dedication to pursuing truth and rationality, he is capable of succumbing to emtions; and this, coupled with his sometimes eccentric behaviour, make him thoroughly likeable as well as completely believable.

So should I read it or what?
For the love of God, yes! Better yet, get yourself a copy of the very first Poirot book, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, which is available from Project Gutenberg here.