A Book Review! The Suspicions of Mr Whicher

I thought it was about time that for a blog about books and reading, I actually wrote about a book I've read! It seems to be ages since I last did a review.

The Suspicions of Mr Whicher or The Murder at Road Hill House by Kate Summerscale is a true-crime mystery set in 1860 England. A terrible murder, set in a house that was locked from within, so the only ones who could have done it are among the family members and servants sleeping within. What set this murder apart from the many appalling others, were two things: one, that it was in a locked house, and two, London had just formed the Metropolitan Police Force in 1829, and it had started, very quietly, forming the first detective division, which in June 1842 was officially allowed to exist by the Home Office. Jack Whicher is one of those first detectives, a police officer invited to become a plains-clothes detective, in 1842. He is a successful detective, and when the Road Hill murder can't be solved after two weeks, he is invited - because it is outside the Metropolitan City, the county officials have to ask the Met to lend one of its detectives to help solve the crime.

There was enormous publicity about the crime, partly due to the victim - a child - but also because of where and how it takes place - inside the safest place a family should be, inside the home. All of England watches as Mr Whicher investigates.

The incredible irony is that he solves it, but no one believes him, and because he has no proof - the only evidence has been disappeared, everyone is claiming innocence among the family members and servants, and no one is found with any evidence upon them - the murder is not solved immediately. When it is, it is unexpectedly.

This book was a fascinating read. I read it in 3 days. I could hardly bear to put it down, and even though I was on holiday, I read every chance I got. The first part especially is haunting. Kate Summerscale, the author, not only relates the history of the police force (which isn't much since it had just begun to exist!), she relates the idea of policing and investigating with the English society at that time. She quotes from existing newpapers, journals, letters, of that time. I felt like I was seeing the evolution of the detective force before my eyes. "Jack Whicher was one of the original eight Scotland Yard officers. In the eighteen years since the detective force had been formed, these men had become figures of mystery and glamour, the surreptitious, all-seeing little gods of London." prologue

She also relates the idea of a detective to the literature of the time - specifically, of course, to the first mysteries being written by Charles Dickens and Wilkie Collins, and Edgar Allan Poe. Dickens was fascinated by detectives, and Wilkie Collins wrote what many consider to be the best (and very first) of the locked-room mysteries, The Woman in White, which Summerscale says is based in part on the atmosphere surrounding the Road Hill mystery. Henry Wills, Dicken's editor at his paper, saw Whicher in action and described him as "A plain, honest-looking fellow, with nothing formidable in his appearance, or dreadful in his countenance....
"Whicher was a 'man of mystery', in Will's phrase, the prototype of the enigmatic, reserved investigator. He appeared from nowhere....Many of the traits that Wills saw in Whicher became the stuff of the fictional detective hero: he was ordinary-looking,keen-sighted, sharp-witted, quiet." Prologue

I don't normally read true-crime books, partly because the photos leave a bad feeling in my mouth, and the crimes are always horrible. I did read Helter Skelter, that terrible and chilling account of the Manson murders in the 1960's, and a few others that occurred in the 1970's, but they were often left unsolved - the accused never confesses, or the evidence isn't enough to convict. In fiction, the perpetrator usually confesses eventually. Life isn't that neat, and so The Suspicions of Mr Whicher is less thrilling in the second part, which deals with the aftermath of the investigation and what happened to everyone. I still found I couldn't put the book down. I had to know what happened, and how the world - English society - felt about what happened. I came away satisfied. This is a very good book.

I really enjoyed how she tied the development of the English mystery novel to the study of this real-life crime mystery. I learned a lot about crime in 1860's England, and how even then, it took a special kind of personality to be a good detective. This book is must-reading for anyone who reads mysteries.

I'm not the only one who thinks so - I'd seen this book reviewed since last summer in magazine and book review columns (no where in the blogging world though that I can recall), so I thought that while I was in England, I would look for it. It was sold out in York, in Grays Essex, and in London until New Year's Eve, when the publisher finally produced some more copies. It was one of 'the' books being bought in England for Christmas.

Inkheart

It's done! I finished it yesterday. And......it's okay. I can't give it a rave review, because I struggled through the early and middle parts of the book to keep reading. I had two major complaints about the book: the main characters for the most part are so wimpy and until Fenoglio comes along, there is nothing to really cheer for except Dustfinger (more about him in a moment), and second, the bad characters have no redeeming characteristics. They are just bad, not complex or having anything that softens the badness. As we all know, no one is all bad or all good.
This could be the result of a few things: one, the writer (Fenoglio) wrote a fiction book that had cardboard good and bad characters, from which Basta, Capricorn and everyone else bad spring; or Cornelia Funke herself is not such a good character writer herself. I still haven't quite made up my mind about this. I was so annoyed at Capricorn and Basta, and found some of their actions and dialogue painful. They were evil, and here is the strange thing: they acted like badly drawn villains in a book, along with stilted dialogue - either the author (Fenoglio) wrote a turn-of-the-century children's novel that these characters came from, or the author Funke forgot to give her characters different voices, shades of gray in their characterization. All of her characters speak in the same way, and yet most of the baddies can't read. How could Capricorn talk at the same level as one of his minions? Did Fenoglio write him that way, or Funke? Is she more skilled to show Fenoglio as a so-so writer, or....?
Against those flaws, are the writing and setting, the story itself, Dustfinger, and the resolution. I love the story idea, that characters can be read from a book into life. I love the switch Funke plays on this idea too - please, Gentle Reader, I am not going to give many plot points away, because my intention with any book review is to give my opinion, but I'd like you to read the book yourself, so I don't intend to tell you everything about it! - and how she has Fenoglio take responsibility as the author of Inkheart, and how he solves it - is amazing. That was truly remarkable, and lifted the book. I like that one of the baddies is still on the loose, and where they all end up. I like Elinor, and even Mo, and how Meggie decides on finding out what her gifts are.
Especially, I liked Dustfinger. He was a complex character, good and bad, with a motivating factor that drove him to do what he did. He is the best drawn of any in the book. Inkheart is worth reading for him alone. He is the tragic figure that moves the plot along. I was angry at him, wanted to hate him in the beginning, but I found I couldn't. I had sympathy for him, and am of two minds about whether I want him to go back into his world or not!
I did in the end like Meggie - for a long time I wanted her to do something, anything, and finally, finally she does several things - tries to run away, gets a secret message to her Dad (very cute touch, how it is done), and that at the end, she decides what she wants to do. She makes choices of her own. If nothing else, this is a good book to illustrate why characters need to do something, anything, to make the reader care about them.
What I can't figure out, is why this book is banned. Somehow it was challenged in one of our libraries or schools here in Ontario, and this is depressing, because this is a fun read for a child. It is not a great book, but it is a good book, with its flaws at least being starting points for discussions with younger readers! ("what would you do if you were Meggie? Why are you mad at her father?" etc). It is a solidly-told story, and has delightful fantasy elements, as well as darker tones that might frighten very young children, and thrill older readers. I do love the Shadow......I wish it had been around a bit longer, existed longer, because that was truly chilling and original. I love the fantasy elements in this book, the fairies, dwarves, etc, and if the book was challenged for these, then I can only shake my head. If it was for the plight of most of the women slaves/maids in the book, and being a "girlfriend' of a baddie, then again, this is only referred to, and certainly nothing overt is ever seen.
I certainly will keep this book for my daughter to read when she gets older (she's only 5), and even with its flaws, I know I am going to read Inkspell, the sequel - I have to know what comes next!
So if I were to give it a rating, it would be 3/5.
Links: Eva