#BookReview Ashes of Rebellion by Michael Jecks #Vitaine (out 19th of October)

For the first decades of my life, I would read anything I could get my hands on. But in the last decade or so I started to read more and more of the same genres, it doesn’t mean they’re better than others, just that the more you read a genre, the more you like it. But I know this is not good because it creates “bubbles” – yes, just like in social media networks. So now and then, I like to read something out of this comforting zone and when I was offered the opportunity to read the upcoming book Ashes of Rebellion, the fourth instalment of the #Vitaine Series by Michael Jecks, I decided to give it a go.

And, oh my, what a journey!

14th Century. North of France. After the Battle of Poitiers, King John of France is being held captive by the King of England and the French Dauphin must fight the King Charles of Navarre to get France back.

We are following a vintaine of Englishmen that go through France to make their fortune, taking villages and castles. But we are not the only ones. Others are also following these men and we need to get to the end of the book to know how this mystery is solved. And let me tell you, I didn’t see it coming! If you like when authors surprise you (I do), you’re in for a treat.

We also follow other characters, like the English William and his friend Perkins. William is a second son, which means that his elder brother will get their father’s manor and land, so he decides to go to France to seek his fortune. Will he get it? How will William and Perkins see the violence and destruction of entire villages being burned to the ground and the villagers decimated? But we can still hold onto some characters: it’s not the same to fight an army, or the rich, or the powerful and to fight the poor or vulnerable. Something I fear today’s world may have forgotten.

The story does have several themes that I find we are still confronted to today and are too close to us:

“They only see the latest insult, the latest foolishness (…) much of it based on misunderstanding (…)”

All the story lines will be converging perfectly with the superb Jeck’s writing: we can really get a sense of place and story action. Everything fits and I can only imagine the deep research work the author must have done to make it as good as it is. This book is really a page turner, but you will also be knowing more about that period in history, as a bonus.

The book is published by Boldwood (check their website for more info) and I would like to thank both Michael Jecks and Boldwood for giving me an advance reading copy.

Michael Jecks is a member of The Detection Club and you can check his website for info on his other books here, he also has a YouTube channel, where he talks about his books, but also about all forms of stationery, and which I really recommend following and is also on BlueSky.

#books #HistoricalFiction #MichaelJecks #Vitaine

Some notes on “Ten Things I Look Out For When Writing Reviews” by Kate Jackson

First things first, my congratulations to Kate Jackson for her 10th year blog anniversary, Cross Examining Crime!

Kate Jackson’s blog is a reference in Classic Crime Fiction: many times I find myself going through her backlog to read about a book I’ve read before (even if I read it a long time ago) or to decide about reading a new one. The amount of knowledge she has and the insights in her reviews are truly precious. If you like Classic Crime Fiction, her blog is a must to follow.

Kate has been publishing some posts in celebration of her blog’s 10 years this June and was kind enough to tag me regarding an article about what things to look out when writing reviews or what criteria matters to you when reading. Go here to read her post (given her extensive knowledge of the genre, we’ll also get several examples of books). I mostly agree with her, but I thought I would add some notes for my case. I’ll follow her ordered list:

Characters
The best reading for me is when I can relate with the characters. As Kate says, sympathising with characters helps us “to invest in the story”. I don’t need to relate or love the characters to still be a good reading though, but at the same time it’s also not enough for them to be interesting. I need at least one character I can hold on to, they did not need to be perfect, but I need to have hope they’ll do the right thing at some point and their faults are not irreversible. I need to have at least a character that it’s like a life line.
One would think that in a classic crime fiction book at least the detective would be it, but sometimes it goes wrong. Recently, I was quite disappointed by Heads of a Traveller by Nicholas Blake because the detective had an unacceptable behaviour and that spoiled the reading for me.
This doesn’t happen only with classic crime fiction and I suspect it has to do with the fact that in the last decade I’m using reading like a comfort, regeneration, me-time, escapism, to help me deal with things from the real world.

The Writing Style
I would differentiate two types of writing style: let’s say “author’s personal style” and “genre style”. I know it’s weird, let me try to explain.

By “personal writing style” I’m referring to those writing characteristics of an author that allows us to identify a new to us work/excerpt without seeing its author’s name. Like when you see a Picasso from his cubism period, you would recognise it as a Picasso, even if it’s the first time you’re seeing it.
The most visible example I have is not from crime fiction: the Portuguese writer José Saramago wrote some books without almost no punctuation, using only commas and periods. Readers complained, it’s was difficult to know who was talking, etc.. I must confess I’m not a fan, I do like a well punctuated reading, but I’ve read some of his books and loved them at the time (then he went and very deservedly got the Nobel).

For “genre writing style” I need to give some context. Some time ago there was an episode of Shedunnit Show, where Caroline Crampton interviewed Sophie Hannah about Agatha Christie’s criticism – I have a draft post to publish on this blog where I try to go a step further and argue that those characteristics’ criticisms may actually help to explain Christie success-, but for now, in that episode, Hannah was saying people criticise Christie’s writing as not literary enough, or simple, or functional, etc., and added, quite right, that we wouldn’t criticise a painter because of their style (to continue with Picasso example, we wouldn’t criticise him because he painted people as cubes). But I think that in the case of Agatha Christie is more than that: the fact the language is simple or functional gives the readers the perception they are in control, that the story is clear, they can follow the characters and they have a chance to find out who done it. That’s why we also hear sometimes that Christie hides her clues in plain sight. And I think that’s part of her genius: she found a best fit between writing style and the type of story she was telling.

The reason I’m thinking about this is that some years ago, I pick up a book as crime fiction (although I would say maybe it’s more like a thriller), where something weird happens and we follow the main character in their quest to find out an explanation, so we do also have a puzzle. But since the beginning I noticed the language, long sentences, diversity in the vocabulary, etc. Don’t get me wrong, it was very well written, but I couldn’t help my brain to question if the author was using the language to distract me from picking up clues. I’m sure I’m being totally unfair with the author, but I kept being distracted by the writing style. I don’t think I would notice it if I picked it up as a “literary novel”, but I think it impacted in my low opinion of the book.

So, I would say that if I perceive the writing style as a specific characteristic of that author, like in Saramago’s, even if I don’t like it that doesn’t really impact my opinion of a book, but if the writing style doesn’t fit the genre very well, the type of story that is being told, I may be influenced by it.

The Grip factor
The grip factor makes me read a book more quickly, but I don’t think that means I find it a good read. I have read books quickly because I wanted to know what happened next, but in the end were not very good reads. I also have read books with a high grip factor that I loved. Gallow’s Court by Martin Edwards, one of the examples Kate cites, was a five star read for me, and I keep saying I didn’t read that book, instead I *experienced* that story (that’s how good it was).
I mean, I love to read nature writing, where most of the times nothing happens, so the grip factor is not decisive for my evaluation of the book, I think. If the book is fast paced, I try to say it in my reviews though, because I know that’s important for some readers.

The Plotting
I mostly agree with Kate on this one.

Contemporary quotes
I found the collected reviews of Dorothy L. Sayers when I was looking for books written by Martin Edwards (he edited that volume) and I love to pick it up now and then to know what she thought about the books that were being published at the time and to find new reads. You can find other collected reviews in Kate’s post.

The Historical/Social details
I do like historical fiction in general and also historical mysteries, but I do have some preferences of some eras (19th century and the first half of 20th century). And I do love old books set in the contemporary era of the author.

Funny quotes and details
I keep a commonplace notebook, but use it more to note down the list of books by an author I love and want to read all their works, the books I buy, some personal thoughts or nature observations (it’s not only book related), and also some notes about the book I’m reading, but not many (maybe I should).

Connections within a series or genre
I think I don’t make many of these connections, but I love to read about them.

Beginnings and endings
I don’t DNF much, but sometimes it happens when I can’t get into the story because lack of clarity, as Kate mentions. It happened to me with some type of science fiction, where I couldn’t make sense of the world being described since the beginning. I don’t remember to DNF crime fiction for this reason though.
For me, in crime fiction, endings are more important than beginnings. Like Kate I don’t like long explanations with the backstory and I need things to be tied in. If the end is a surprise it gets bonus points, but I think I value more the development of the story than the end itself. I also think that for me the ending is more important in a short story than in a novel: the stunning ones are those that have the satisfying “shock of surprise” that P. D. James talks in the preface to The Mistletoe Murder (Faber edition).

How Well the Mystery Balances Reader Knowledge of the Case/Situation with the Detective’s Understanding
Again, like Kate I don’t like when the reader is kept in the dark, and also when the solution appears from nowhere in the end. But I don’t mind (ok, I confess, I quite like it) when, now and then, I know/guess more than the detective, even when the detective is seeing the situation exactly in a opposite way. In these cases I always have the curiosity to find out how the detective reacts when he realises he was seeing the situation in a totally different perspective. I’ve found this in a recent read The Piazza Murders by Michael Jecks and I wrote: “(…) when a character views a certain situation in a certain angle and we, the readers, start to suspect it is exactly the opposite and makes us want to warn/tell that character. I always find this type of scene quite satisfying in a book, maybe because it’s a time when we know a little more than the characters?”. I also like this in other genres: To Say Nothing of the Dog by Connie Willis, science fiction/time travel/historical fiction and another five star reading of this year, also uses this type of situation.

Extra Entry – Playfulness, experimentation, or what the author is trying to do
I’m really bad at titles, but I wanted to add a characteristic that I know influences my opinion of a book and I have the perfect example: The Detection Club’s books.
Since the 1930s, the members of The Detection Club have been publishing works created collaboratively. I have 12 (of around 15) and read nine and an half. I love and recommend them all in a way that if The Detection Club publishes a new book I will add it to my to buy list without even knowing what it’s about (it happen with the last two).
But if I look at each of these books in terms of final result or only the story I do have different opinions: I would say Motives for Murder and Playing Dead were 5 star readings for me with no hesitations (I loved them), but if looking at The Floating Admiral (with two of my favourite writers, Christie and Sayers) I would give it a 3 maybe, because I did struggle with the story at some point. But I still love it, I’ve read it more than once and probably will be reading it again. The reason is that the book was written with a different method, known as round-robin or exquisite corpse, where each author writes a chapter that continues the story by only reading the previously written chapters without knowing the final solution, although in this case each author would need to have a specific solution in mind that they would write and send with their chapter to Dorothy L. Sayers that was coordinating the project. So, when you get the book, you also get all this context by the Sayers’ introduction and also the solutions each chapter’s author had in mind when writing, and I find this fascinating.
If you look at other books by The Detection Club, there are other round-robin novels, some with a few differences, like in Ask a Policeman, where authors exchange detectives. You also have other different types of works: in Six Against the Yard, members of the Club write a murder mystery and then a real ex-superintendent comments the stories trying to find the flaws in the story that would not let the culprit go free. The Anatomy of Murder sees these fiction writers commenting and adding explanations to real life murders. Howdunit gathers a collection of non-fiction essays about crime fiction writing. In Motives for Murder or Playing Dead, written to honor the 80th birthday of Peter Lovesey and Simon Brett, we get short stories, but even so there is a diversity of places, eras, genres, use of fellow writers’ detectives in new settings, etc. that it’s truly absorbing. I’ve written about Playing Dead here.
As a reader I find these works with such high level of experimentation, innovation, and even playfulness that even in the case the story per se is not stunning, the context does really augment my interest in the work.

If you got up to this point, thank you for reading. I loved going through Kate’s entries and reflect about what I find more or less important. I also realise that sometimes some of these don’t fully pass through my reviews, so this is something I can improve on. Thank you again to Kate Jackson.

It’s now over to you. What makes a good reading for you? What criteria are more important to you while reading a book? Are some criteria more important than other? Do they compensate each others? Let me know in the comments, and if you prefer to talk about this in your blog or social networks, do let me know below so I can go there and read you.

#BookReview #BookReviews #books #ClassicCrimeFiction #ConnieWillis #CrimeFiction #fiction #JoséSaramago #livros #MartinEdwards #MichaelJecks #Policiais #RachelSavernake #reading #readings #Reflection #Reviews #RoundRobinNovel #WritingBookReviews

#BookReview The Piazza Murders by Michael Jecks (out 1st July)

The third instalment of The Art of Murder is out on 1st of July and takes you to Italy.

Nick Morris is an artist and amateur sleuth. This time he goes to Italy to teach a course to a group of people that decided to take the art retreat. Of course, there are murders, which Morris starts to investigate. At the same time there is a literary festival in the city with authors and publicists getting involved, meaning that you get themes about books, publishers, and publishing industry, which I never say no to 🙂 (you also get themes about pens, drawing, painting, as expected :-)).

Each of the people in the art group is different and has their own story, specific situation, reasons for being there, and I liked the way we get to know them throughout the first part.

I found the descriptions of the place and Italian atmosphere (monuments, buildings, cafes, streets) stunning. I was quite impressed how easy it was to imerse myself into the place, and in this sense it was perfect for an “escapism reading” which I love.

It was a quick read, I wanted to know what would happen next and there are several twists and turns, including one of my favorites: when a character views a certain situation in a certain angle and we, the readers, start to suspect it is exactly the opposite and makes us want to warn/tell that character. I always find this type of scene quite satisfying in a book, maybe because it’s a time when we know a little more than the characters? I didn’t guess the murderer, though, which is good. Although, now that I think of it, the author gives you a hint in the beginning, but skillfully turns you away from it 🙂

Albeit in a series, I think the book reads as a standalone. It also made me want to read the first two, it seeems the second in the series has a manor house in the English countryside, which is one of my favorite settings for murder.

Michael Jecks is a member of The Detection Club and you can check his website for info on his other books here, he also has a YouTube channel, where he talks about his books, but also about all forms of stationery, and which I really recommend following.

The Piazza Murders is published by Severn House and it will be out on 1st of July.

(I got an ARC from NetGalley).

#BookReview #BookReviews #BookLook #books #CrimeFiction #DetectiveFiction #fiction #ItalianSetting #Italy #MichaelJecks #Mystery #NewBook #readings #TheArtOfMurder