Read The Dirty Duck by Martha Grimes Online

the-dirty-duck

"Nothing ever happens in Stratford, " insisted Superintendent Richard Jury of Scotland Yard. Unfortunately, he was wrong. Besides the stage murders commited nightly at the Royal Shakespeare Theatre, a real one had been performed not far from the Dirty Duck, a popular pub. The victim had been a member of an exclusive group too: Those rare homicidal maniacs compelled to leav"Nothing ever happens in Stratford, " insisted Superintendent Richard Jury of Scotland Yard. Unfortunately, he was wrong. Besides the stage murders commited nightly at the Royal Shakespeare Theatre, a real one had been performed not far from the Dirty Duck, a popular pub. The victim had been a member of an exclusive group too: Those rare homicidal maniacs compelled to leave an intentional clue - in this case, a fragment of Elizabethan verse....

Title : The Dirty Duck
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780440120506
Format Type : Mass Market Paperback
Number of Pages : 126 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

The Dirty Duck Reviews

  • Joyce Lagow
    2018-11-12 00:50

    4th in the Richard Jury series.[return][return]Jury is in Stratford-on-Avon, using the return of Jenny Kennington's emerald necklace as an excuse to see the attractive widow once more. While there, he is prevailed upon by Detective Sergeant Sam Lasko of the local constabulary to talk with an American family, the Farradays, visiting Stratford as part of a tour group, about progress on finding their 9 year old son who has gone missing. But soon Jury finds himself far more involved--unofficially--as one of the tour group, an American woman, is found murdered in a most brutal way.[return][return]Melrose Plant is in Stratford desperately trying to avert the visit to Ardry End of Agatha's numerous American cousins. Thus he is right on hand when yet another female member of the tour group, this time a member of the Farraday family, is murdered in the same manner. Meantime, Melrose has inadvertently acquired a companion, Harvey Schoenberg, a young American computer specialist (this is in 1983) tour group member, who is an enthusiast of a bizarre theory about Christopher Marlowe's death. The tour group makes its way to London, where yet more murders occur. What adds to the fear in the case is that the murders appear to be occurring according to the lines in a 16th century poem, raising the possibility of many more murders to fit the poem.[return][return]Much as I love Martha Grimes and the Richard Jury series, this book is boring. Her plots are usually quite good; this one is too strained for belief. Her strong point in this series is her characters. Here, all the new ones are stock cardboard cutouts, dragged from every unflattering American (and some English) stereotype possible. Even Plant and Jury are not up to par, and Agatha does not have a large enough role to figure into any fun. Grimes' wit is a major part of the enjoyment of her books; in this one, it is greatly subdued. The climax, basically, is unbelievable.[return][return]There are some interesting aspects to the book, especially the part about the computer Schoenberg lugs around. In 1982, there were exactly 88 connections to the Internet; the computer phenomenon had not taken hold by 1983, when the book was written. Schoenberg's computer was hardly a laptop; in fact, the first portable computers weighing around 35 lbs were not really available until the late 1980's. And Schoenberg uses his computer strictly as a storage device; there is no mention of the Internet. So it's interesting that in 1983, Grimes was able to incorporate the very beginnings of what would be a world-wide phenomenal explosion of technology.[return][return]As usual, Grimes has an engaging child character, the 9 year old James Carlton Farraday. He is the typical resourceful Grimes child, and is one of the brighter spots in an otherwise dim book.[return][return]Grimeism: "Some men went for their guns under stress,some for their cigarettes. Wiggens went for his cough drops."[return][return]Overall, this is a boring book and quite untypical of the series.

  • Dyana
    2018-11-22 02:50

    Scotland Yard Superintendent Richard Jury goes to Stratford on Avon to see Jenny Kennington, a character from a previous novel that he is interested in. Women from an American touring group begin to be murdered - the first after a performance at the Royal Shakespeare Theatre which is near a tavern called the Dirty Duck. Left at the scene of each murder is a fragment of Elizabethan verse. Sergeant Sam Lasko of Stratford, a friend of Jury's, enlists him in helping find the murderer. Martha Grimes always has children involved in her novels, and this time it's the adopted son and daughter of a rich American from the tour. James Carlton has vanished and his sister Penny thinks there is foul play involved. Jury enlists his aristocratic friend Melrose Plant to help him on the cases. Once Jury is back in London his partner, Detective Sergeant Wiggins, the hypochrondriac, helps with police procedure. The novel contains the requisite quirky characters. Slow reading and an odd ending - not one of my favorites from the series.

  • Abbey
    2018-10-24 03:49

    #4 Superintendent Jury/Melrose Plant, Stratford-on-Avon, London; cosy police procedural. A group of wealthy touring Americans heads into deadly waters when they come to Shakespeare’s birthplace. As bodies and complexities in the case increase, Jury and Plant try to keep to the script, one as old as The Bard himself. Overly broad caricatures of Yanks-at-play almost doomed this at the start, but the plotting was very good, with just enough hints given to maintain interest and keep things from seeming *too* simple-minded. Unfortunately one of the main themes was extremely similar to the previous book (young girl Jury befriends is in jeopardy!!) and that was annoying, but the many twists and the good pacing made up for it. Enjoyable, but only *just* this side of “precious”. Grimes needs to be careful or she’ll become a parody of herself, and that would be a shame. Unfortunately, rumor has it that she only gets worse... “we’ll see...”

  • Jane Snyder
    2018-11-20 05:33

    The reason I enjoy Martha Grimes' Richard Jury Series is because I love her characters and actually miss them when I'm between books. Then, there's often a side topic that I learn about. In a later book, I learned about the theory behind Schroedinger's Cat, so when Sheldon mentions it on Big Bang, I proudly think, "I know about Schroedinger's Cat; Martha Grimes taught me about it." In THIS Richard Jury mystery, Shakespeare and Marlowe are discussed, which makes me want to reread "A Dead Man in Deptford" by Anthony Burgess, again, to review the politics of Elizabethan times. So, I really enjoy Martha Grimes mysteries for her lovable characters and her interesting side issues. I really don't care much "who done it." I just float through the murders and enjoy the fun ride.

  • Sandra
    2018-11-13 03:38

    People from an American tourist group in England get killed and the same time a 9 year old boy disappears.I was looking forward to this one. For one I liked the setting and I expected a cozy mystery novel a la Agatha Christie but I didn't get it. For one it was actually pretty gruesome, I didn't expect that at all. I read the German translation so I'm not sure if that might have played a part in it but I didn't like the writing. Very odd dialogues and all these strange names didn't help to have a fluent read. And who on earth cares about the Story with Shakespeare and Marlowe? This is my first (and last book) from this series and also I had really trouble getting connected to the main characters. Mostly because there was no description or any type of backstory. The story with the little boy was the only somewhat enjoyable part and I liked how it all came together at the end. But unfortunately one of these books where I was "fighting" my way trough (because it was so early in the year I didn't want to put a book on my dnf shelve already...).

  • Jazz
    2018-10-29 06:41

    3 STARS | As for the writing and humor, I enjoyed this Richard Jury mystery as much as the previous novels—until the very end. The motive didn't make a lot of sense for it to justify four murders. Two of them seemed fairly pointless to me, other than to throw the reader off the track. The ending was rushed and I had the feeling Grimes may have pulled it out of a hat at the last moment. However, I like the series too much to give it any less than three stars. And the setting in Stratford-on-Avon was captivating, especially when I looked up pictures online of the Dirty Duck pub, across the street from the Royal Shakespeare Theatre. It's always a fun ride with Martha Grimes, even if this one ended a little less satisfactorily for me.

  • Nancy
    2018-11-11 07:50

    Ok. Just like it says with 2 stars. I would read more of her stuff if I didn't have tons of interesting stuff on my list. I do like the mystery part of her books, and she is trying to make me like Jury, but her writing style is annoying. She is an American writing mysteries based in England, but in 2 of 2 books, she has put in Americans and uses interactions with them to explain English culture, mannerisms, words, titles, etc. I have never been to England, but I don't need the author explaining so much to me. It's more fun to read real British authors and try to figure it out from how they use it...I had reserved several more at the library assuming I would like them (since she was so popular), but like Lilian Jackson Braun, I don't get the interest and will not be reading on....

  • Janet
    2018-11-08 06:52

    Set in Stratford on Avon. I particularly liked the resourcefulness of the little kidnapped boy. The best of Grimes mixes the partnership of Jury and Plant, a child or two acting precociously, the faithful but hypochondriac Wiggins, a bunch of idle pub friends, the hateful but comic boss Racer, and maybe a lady in distress who wins the heart of both Jury and Plant. Each book mixes the ingredients into another tasty tale.

  • Brian
    2018-10-28 07:47

    The blurb told this was a murder mystery set in stratford upon avon - Perfect! The opening was good, the locations accurate the murder suitably gruesomeThen it rambled and meandered slower than the Avon. Stereotyped characters, all cold and uninteresting, the detectives lacking charm, wit or characterMurders bloody but not shocking, and the ending was rubbish and unconvincing2 stars only because it was set (partly) in Stratford!

  • Kyrie
    2018-11-09 05:44

    Lots of Shakespeare and Marlowe involved. I'm really not sure how it all worked out. I know who did it, and why, but all the convoluted past history was bewildering. I liked Penny and Jury and Plant. Heck, I'm even getting to like Wiggins. Obviously, I'm not enough of an Anglophile to be up on all the Shakespearian history.

  • Helen
    2018-11-14 03:55

    I read this a long time ago and rediscovered it when dusting shelves. This should be a 3.5 star book. I have always liked Melrose Plant in this series, and he features prominently here. It also takes place largely in Stratford-upon-Avon, in sites I have visited, so reading the book is like revisiting old friends and locales. Also, the book features much ado about Shakespeare and his contemporary Marlowe, another plus for someone who studied the Bard.Catching an apparent serial killer who is targeting members of a tour group presents Jury and company with a great challenge, so the plot intrigues. However, I've never cottoned to Jury himself. He's too ... wounded, and while he has friends, I'm not sure how much he really likes them. In fact, I'm not sure the author actually likes her characters. There's always a sense of subtle snark in the descriptions. Some of it comes from world-weary Jury's point of view, to be sure, but that's one reason I stopped reading the series as the books grew longer.

  • IslandRiverScribe
    2018-11-09 03:44

    I don’t know what was up with Martha Grimes back in 1984 when she wrote this book. But whatever it was, it surely tripped her tongue-in-cheek bone and her sarcastic impulses, because, for 240 pages of relatively small font, we are taken for one heck of a verbal ride.Just like the previous three entries in this series, Richard Jury, from Scotland Yard, and Melrose Plant, from Ardry End, find themselves in the same place at the same time as a murder. This time the action takes place in touristy Stratford, the burial place of Shakespeare. And the victim is a member of a tour group from America, a very rich female member of the group.This murder takes place in the first chapter. The victim-to-be is at a pub, The Dirty Duck, after attending a performance of Shakespeare’s “As You Like It.” She has a companion with her, who is surreptitiously getting her drunk. Grimes lets us into the woman’s thoughts and we discover that she is a plain Jane spinster, living with her Dowager Empress of a mother back in Sarasota, Florida. She’s socially inept, sexually repressed and looking to break free of both ills.So when her companion asks to escort her back to her B&B by way of a stroll by the river, Gwen gladly accepts. And she is both ecstatic and hopeful when her companion pauses them in the shadows along the pathway.Oh, yeah! We know that set-up. We know exactly what’s coming. Martha Grimes has led us seriously and straightforwardly right to the cusp of the action. And then she writes:“…felt hands on her shoulders, felt breath on her neck…it was to her credit that instead of fighting off this affront to her person, she said to herself, ‘The hell with it, Mama! I’m about to be ravished.’And when she felt that funny tickling sensation somewhere around her breast, she almost giggled, thinking, ‘The silly fool’s got a feather…’The silly fool had a razor.”And then I nearly fell out of my chair. My jaw dropped to the floor and the words “Oh. My. God.” came out of my mouth. The simplicity of that last sentence just sucked me in. And this type of writing, a droll, succinct, eye-rolling understatement of fact, follows us all the way through to the end.Grimes in not making fun of the victims – and Gwen is just the first – with this tone of voice. In fact, the plays on words and the punctuated metaphors just drive the viciousness of the situation farther into the reader’s consciousness. And to use this tactic with the internal monologues of Jury and Plant is just short of brilliant. Their internal sarcasm just further highlights the inanity, the stupidity, the selfishness and the callowness of many of the people they have to question.We may be chuckling and smiling as we read but we are also desperately trying to follow the clues along with Jury. Very quickly, there is another victim, a nine-year-old boy who has disappeared from his adoptive family, which is also on the same tour as the first victim. He is an intelligent and independent lad and has disappeared before. No one but his ugly duckling of a big sister – and Jury – seems to be truly worried. But we know for a fact that he hasn’t just gone off exploring like those last times; he has been kidnapped.More victims fall prey to the razor and the boy remains unfound. The action moves from Stratford to London. And then, at the denouement, the story falls apart.As Jury and Plant subdue the suspect, we get an explanation of why the murders and the kidnapping occurred. We even learn, somewhat, how they came to piece the clues together. But the explanation is missing several very important details. You feel it go sideways and ultimately it requires too much suspension of disbelief for a person in 2014 to accept easily. In a word, there are just too many coincidences. There are too many things that happened that, by all that’s holy with Murphy’s Law, shouldn’t have happened. And the explanation for that: the murderer had a long time to plan out the details.Granted, back in 1984, instant media communication was not yet in place – no cell phones, let alone smart phones, and no satellite television. Without those instant photos, videos and voice recordings to contradict the national media, it was much easier for the general populace, and thus the fiction readership, of that time to believe in “coincidence.” It simply took more time then than it does now for things that seem disassociated to reveal their connectedness.In addition, there is a subplot to this story that also rings false in its details. In that subplot, Grimes revisits Jury’s relationship with not only Vivian Arrington, but with Lady Kennington. Both these relationships occurred in previous books as part of murder investigations that Jury was involved with. And both of these “relationships” ended without any real beginning and were essentially dismissed. But here they are again, resurrected and alive, as if only days had passed instead of years.Again, “coincidence” rules the outcome for each situation. And in several scenes, particularly the ones revolving around Lady Kennington, Grimes’ writing seems geared to providing an emotional internal drama for Jury, without regard to the common sense of the reader. It also seems geared to a new direction in her story arc.Grimes has crafted in Jury a character who is highly intelligent, innately deductive, well educated, well contained, and who approaches his suspects and persons of interest calmly and obliquely. Plant is fast becoming a useful Watson to Jury’s Holmes. Frankly, neither Jury nor Plant needs “coincidences” or contrivances manufactured by an author to help their characters as currently established. They weren’t in use in the first three novels, but then, Grimes didn’t have to write herself out of a box in those novels, either.

  • Julie
    2018-10-31 07:45

    There is a serial murderer in Stratford Upon Avon who seems to be targeting tourists from America. A small boy has also been kidnapped. Jury is already on the scene - on vacation. Plant is there trying to avoid his Aunt and her relatives. Together they try to catch the killer.I found this book to much darker than the first three in the series. The language is also much coarser than in previous books. Other than Plant and Jury none of the characters seem to have any redeeming qualities.

  • Duncan
    2018-11-07 01:33

    Mystery set in Stratford, though Shakespeare doesn't end up playing all that prominent a part. Most of the suspects are Americans and mostly they play to British stereotypes of Americans, which was an interesting choice considering the author is American. Perhaps the audience for her books is British? At any rate, the mystery was well put together, though it relied a fair amount on coincidences and unlikely connections, and there's some sly humor sprinkled throughout.

  • Cindy
    2018-11-04 23:42

    I was in the midst of several other books already but nothing appealed so I went for a British whodunit. Can't go wrong there. I didn't like this as much as some of the other Richard Jury books I've read (I think the main thrust of the humor here was how ridiculous the American characters were - and I didn't think that was especially funny. Wonder why?). But it was a good mystery and I'll definitely keep reading the series.

  • M. White
    2018-11-16 00:59

    I am a huge Martha Grimes fan, and reread her books frequently. This is one of my favorites as it's set in Stratford-on-Avon--one of my favorite places. Richard Jury and Melrose Plant again work their magic to solve the case, and along the way the reader gets to learn interesting facts about Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe.

  • Lynne Tull
    2018-11-08 03:57

    This one had a little too much Shakespeare and Marlowe in it for me. Either someone was murdered or I was reading about how Marlowe died. I still like the characters and the mystery. Still recommending.

  • Carmen
    2018-11-08 00:46

    A visiting American is found dead in Stratford upon Avon. Jury is asked to help by a friend. She is found with a note which turns out to be part of a poem. Before Jury gets too far more deaths occur. Melrose Plant is called in to help.

  • Katie Hilton
    2018-11-04 03:48

    Inspector Jury and his helpers try to sort out a series of murders in Stratford-on-Avon, the home of the Bard. Members of a tour group, mainly Americans, are being bumped off. Jury tries to find the connection and untangle the motive. A good read.

  • Dawn
    2018-11-22 02:42

    Best one in the series so far. Very satisfying. I judge a mystery by whether or not they give me enough clues to figure out the murderer. And then how they trick me into suspecting the wrong person.

  • Jeff
    2018-11-07 04:43

    This is my favorite in the series so far--a clever blend of Shakespeare, throats-slitting, and wistful romance.

  • Andy Klein
    2018-11-01 00:44

    Best one in this amusing series so far. Loved all the Marlowe - Shakespeare minutiae.

  • Megan
    2018-11-17 07:40

    3 stars. This one was let down a bit by the very stock portrayals of the Americans; I'm a little surprised an American author couldn't/didn't do them better. Still, I'm really getting into this series. Jury's a great protagonist and Plant/Wiggins strong seconds.

  • Vicky
    2018-11-21 02:37

    4th Richard Jury. I love her characterizations of children and dogs/cats, but her dialogue in "West Virginian" left a lot to be desired. Still, a good mystery."Superintendent Richard Jury of New Scotland Yard is visiting a friend in Stratford-on-Avon and hoping for an encounter with the intriguing Lady Kennington whom he met in the last book in the series, The Anodyne Necklace. His friend Melrose Plant is in town, too, along with Aunt Agatha, seeing Shakespeare plays and waiting - in Agatha's case - for some visiting cousins from America.It is summer and the town seems full of visiting Americans, including a group traveling with Honeycutt Tours. This particular group, however, does not stay intact for very long. After having a drink at a pub called "The Dirty Duck" one night, one of the tourists, Gwendolyn Bracegirdle from Sarasota, Florida, is killed in a public restroom behind a church. Her throat is slashed ear to ear and another slash rents the body from sternum to pelvis. There are no clues and Miss Bracegirdle was a quiet sort who did not seem to have any enemies.The local constabulary take advantage of the fact that they have a Scotland Yard Superintendent in town and ask for his help in investigating. Jury reluctantly agrees - without informing his superiors in London.Soon, though, all of the police have as much as they can handle because a second member of the tour, a seventeen-year-old beauty from Georgia named Honey Belle, is killed in the same manner. There doesn't seem to be anything to connect the two victims other than the fact that they were both with the same tour group.Meanwhile, another member of the group, a young boy has gone missing. He is Honey Belle's stepbrother, James. He has been known to disappear and reappear before so no one is concerned at first, but days go by and he doesn't turn up. It appears the police may have a kidnapping on their hands in addition to two murders.But that is not to be the end of it all. Honey Belle's mother, James' stepmother, makes a trip to London and there she, too, is killed in the same way as the other two women. As the body total climbs, Jury gets assistance from D.S. Wiggins and his friend Melrose as they race to find a murderer, a missing boy, and attempt to protect the other members of the tour group who may be in danger.Finally, a man on the tour, a Christopher Marlowe fanatic, is also killed - once again by being slashed. It seems the killer may be branching out from targeting only women.After the last killing, Jury begins to put it all together. He develops a theory that perhaps only one of the victims was a true target and the others were only window dressing. Red herrings, as it were. The trick is to figure out which one was the target. That may lead him to the motive and to the murderer. ""As Jury and Plant subdue the suspect, we get an explanation of why the murders and the kidnapping occurred. We even learn, somewhat, how they came to piece the clues together. But the explanation is missing several very important details. You feel it go sideways and ultimately it requires too much suspension of disbelief for a person in 2014 to accept easily. In a word, there are just too many coincidences. There are too many things that happened that, by all that’s holy with Murphy’s Law, shouldn’t have happened. And the explanation for that: the murderer had a long time to plan out the details.Granted, back in 1984, instant media communication was not yet in place – no cell phones, let alone smart phones, and no satellite television. Without those instant photos, videos and voice recordings to contradict the national media, it was much easier for the general populace, and thus the fiction readership, of that time to believe in “coincidence.” It simply took more time then than it does now for things that seem disassociated to reveal their connectedness.In addition, there is a subplot to this story that also rings false in its details. In that subplot, Grimes revisits Jury’s relationship with not only Vivian Arrington, but with Lady Kennington. Both these relationships occurred in previous books as part of murder investigations that Jury was involved with. And both of these “relationships” ended without any real beginning and were essentially dismissed. But here they are again, resurrected and alive, as if only days had passed instead of years."

  • Dorothy
    2018-11-09 00:38

    Superintendent Richard Jury of New Scotland Yard is visiting a friend in Stratford-on-Avon and hoping for an encounter with the intriguing Lady Kennington whom he met in the last book in the series, The Anodyne Necklace. His friend Melrose Plant is in town, too, along with Aunt Agatha, seeing Shakespeare plays and waiting - in Agatha's case - for some visiting cousins from America.It is summer and the town seems full of visiting Americans, including a group traveling with Honeycutt Tours. This particular group, however, does not stay intact for very long. After having a drink at a pub called "The Dirty Duck" one night, one of the tourists, Gwendolyn Bracegirdle from Sarasota, Florida, is killed in a public restroom behind a church. Her throat is slashed ear to ear and another slash rents the body from sternum to pelvis. There are no clues and Miss Bracegirdle was a quiet sort who did not seem to have any enemies.The local constabulary take advantage of the fact that they have a Scotland Yard Superintendent in town and ask for his help in investigating. Jury reluctantly agrees - without informing his superiors in London.Soon, though, all of the police have as much as they can handle because a second member of the tour, a seventeen-year-old beauty from Georgia named Honey Belle, is killed in the same manner. There doesn't seem to be anything to connect the two victims other than the fact that they were both with the same tour group.Meanwhile, another member of the group, a young boy has gone missing. He is Honey Belle's stepbrother, James. He has been known to disappear and reappear before so no one is concerned at first, but days go by and he doesn't turn up. It appears the police may have a kidnapping on their hands in addition to two murders.But that is not to be the end of it all. Honey Belle's mother, James' stepmother, makes a trip to London and there she, too, is killed in the same way as the other two women. As the body total climbs, Jury gets assistance from D.S. Wiggins and his friend Melrose as they race to find a murderer, a missing boy, and attempt to protect the other members of the tour group who may be in danger.Finally, a man on the tour, a Christopher Marlowe fanatic, is also killed - once again by being slashed. It seems the killer may be branching out from targeting only women.After the last killing, Jury begins to put it all together. He develops a theory that perhaps only one of the victims was a true target and the others were only window dressing. Red herrings, as it were. The trick is to figure out which one was the target. That may lead him to the motive and to the murderer. The Dirty Duck is another wonderful stroll through the villages of England and, in this case, along the streets of London as well. It is written with Grimes' typical light touch and is full of interesting characters, which, of course, include a couple of charming and precocious kids and a couple of cats who play their roles. It is a lovely lazy summer read that whets the appetite for more in this series. I suspect I'll be cracking open the next Richard Jury novel on my Kindle very soon.

  • Diane
    2018-11-10 03:52

    When a tourist is brutally murdered while touring Stratford-on-Avon, Richard Jury and Melrose Plant are called in to investigate. The victim, Gwendolyn Bracegirdle*, was a wealthy American, like the other members of her tour group, and there is a lot of pressure on Jury to solve the crime. Two more members of the tour group also ended up slashed to death and a fourth person is beaten and slashed to death. On each body is found a slip of paper with lines from the same poem. To complicate matters, a 9-year-old boy, James Carlton Farraday, a member of the same tour group, has been missing for two days - but his father and stepmother haven't reported his disappearance to the police. Apparently, he has run off before, but always returned. However, this time is different - Jimmy has been kidnapped and the precocious boy is doing all he can to free himself. I really enjoyed this Jury/Plant outing. I like Jury and Plant and their friendly, easygoing partnership. They're not so much opposites as they are different sides of the same coin. The secondary characters like Wiggins, the hypochondriac officer, young Jimmy Farraday, and the delightfully wicked old Lady Dew. The motive behind the crime is pretty far-fetched, but it's still a fun ride and one I recommend to fans of British mysteries. *Interesting note considering the importance of drama in general and Shakespeare in particular in this book: Anne Bracegirdle (1671-1748) was a noted English actress who played several Shakespearean roles such as Lady Anne in "Richard III" and Desdemona in "Othello."

  • Jaksen
    2018-10-22 04:58

    Strangely disappointed in this book, and most my reviews tend to be very positive. Martha Grimes is an excellent writer. She can make three words hum, whether it be dialogue, a brief bit of description, or narration itself. She's witty and her characters are distinct, unique. I never get mixed up and think now which one was she? And he's the cop who does what? Never.But I have one major problem with this book. She introduces a certain, important character far too late to the party, or story. With a mystery, one just doesn't do this, right? This character isn't even mentioned until near the end of the novel itself.So, for that reason two stars, though I will continue to read Grimes' mysteries. I enjoy her writing and I've read novels later in her series (This one is her fourth, I think,) that were outstanding. I went back to read her earlier novels so I could see how the characters appear early on and notice how they change or 'evolve' over the course of this, the Richard Jury series.Anyhow, perhaps this will simply be the one novel out of her many that I found fault with.

  • Mark
    2018-11-13 07:59

    Another enjoyable Jury adventure, even if the ending was a bit tortured and the criminal motives murky. I did like the satirical fun Grimes had with Shakespeare tourism and conspiracy theories about Elizabethan writers. I was just telling a student a couple of weeks ago that someone ought to write a historical detective novel about the mysterious death (possibly murder) of Christopher Marlowe, Shakespeare's contemporary and rival (?) playwright. And here is Martha Grimes, not exactly doing that, but mocking the whole notion at great length. Another recurrent element I appreciate in her series is the precocious but not precious child. Among the most interesting characters in all her novels are children who are wiser than the adults and strangely independent of them, to varying degrees. Her unstated thesis seems to be that children survive and even thrive in spite of their parents, who are irresponsible, hapless, unaware, abusive, or just absent. Not just English kids; in this story the main characters are Americans. While crime isn't directly inflicted on the children (as in way too many psychopath thrillers), it affects them in all sorts of ways.

  • Cirrus Minor
    2018-10-27 00:46

    Dieser Jury hat mir etwas besser gefallen als die Vorgänger. Das Setting kam mir viel moderner vor, aber Jury und Plant sind noch ganz die alten. Den Mörder hätte ich dieses Mal sogar erraten, das Motiv fand ich nachvollziehbar, aber so ganz komme ich noch nicht in die Schreibweise von Martha Grimes rein. Aber ich habe ja noch einige Bände vor mir.

  • Jennifer
    2018-11-04 02:31

    This book was written in the eighties and it is very humorous to read about how one of the characters actually carried around a COMPUTER and how it was mostly perceived as an annoyance to his acquaintances. How funny to hear them say things like "What poem could this line come from? There's no way to examine every stanza of every poem ever written." :) Oh how quickly we forget. I barely remember the days before pay-at-the pump, cell phones and ATM cards. I do recall my first experience with the internet, after wondering for months "what is that commercial about? It's annoying. What is this 'internet?' " Lol The 80s don't seem that far away to me... But wow. I guess it was! I like Richard Jury, Melrose Plant, and Sargeant Wiggins. The stories aren't top drawer but they are fun and enjoyable. It suit my mood this week!