Thu 6 Jun 2019
Archived Review: ROBERT RICHARDSON – The Book of the Dead.
Posted by Steve under Reviews[3] Comments
ROBERT RICHARDSON – The Book of the Dead. St. Martin’s Press, hardcover, 1989. First published in the UK by Victor Gollancz, hardcover, 1989. No US paperback edition.
Fans of Sherlock Holmes pastiches will be pleased to know that the core of this third case of murder in which playwright Augustus Maltravers is involved is a newly discovered manuscript of “The Atwater Firewitch,” one written by Doyle himself and included in full in this book. Even better, it is sharp enough to have actually been written by Doyle, a statement that cannot always be made in cases such as this.
When the current owner is found murdered, it is up to Maltravers to find the killer, which with some quibbles, he does in the best Holmesian tradition.
Quibbles: I have to wonder why Richardson gave so much of the mystery away so early by telling us the thoughts of so many of the characters, including the one who’s guilty. This leaves Maltravers not knowing what we the reader know and having to deduce it on his own, which he does, and at the end of the book he reveals his thought processes, and in detail.
But truth be told, the culprit is really a challenge only to the dullest reader. There’s plenty of puzzle remaining, however — how? and why? — and the enjoyment that comes from watching Maltravers put the pieces together is more than satisfying — that and the enjoyment, of course, of seeing how neatly the solution to the new Holmes “discovery” is woven into the heart of the story that surrounds it.
[FOOTNOTE] Having thought about this some more, I can still see no real reason why we (the reader) had to know as much as we are given. If Richardson had told the mystery for the reader to have solved as well — and I think he could have — there’s no doubt in my mind he’d have had the best modern fair-play detective story that I’ve read in a long time. As it is, this one’s merely good, but not great.
June 7th, 2019 at 1:53 pm
I have a copy of this I picked up recently on a whim solely because of the Doyle bibliomystery angle. I started reading it and despite the two intriguing opening chapters decided to put it aside. Then zoomed through about five other books in rapid succession. I’m not sure I want to return to it now.
June 8th, 2019 at 12:53 pm
Understood, John. I’ve often found that many book have a small window of time in which I’m in the mood (for lack of a better term) I’m likely to read them. Once that moment is past, the chances I ever will get awfully slim.
I’ve been looking for contemporaneous reviews of the book, but so far haven’t found any. Its star rating on Goodreads is 3.86 out of 5, which agrees with my assessment.
June 8th, 2019 at 8:56 pm
I enjoyed this one for much the same reasons, but also wondered why so much had to be given away rather than discovered.