Review: The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie by Alan Bradley

The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie
by Alan Bradley
Mystery, Historical Fiction
374 pages
published: 2008
4.5 of 5 stars

About

It is the summer of 1950–and at the once-grand mansion of Buckshaw, young Flavia de Luce, an aspiring chemist with a passion for poison, is intrigued by a series of inexplicable events: A dead bird is found on the doorstep, a postage stamp bizarrely pinned to its beak. Then, hours later, Flavia finds a man lying in the cucumber patch and watches him as he takes his dying breath.
For Flavia, who is both appalled and delighted, life begins in earnest when murder comes to Buckshaw. “I wish I could say I was afraid, but I wasn’t. Quite the contrary. This was by far the most interesting thing that had ever happened to me in my entire life.” - from Goodreads

Reaction

I don't read many mysteries, and must confess that the "mystery" is usually the least interesting part of the story for me, so I was surprised to find myself happily reading Flavia's ruminations. I can attribute this only to the awesomeness that is Flavia de Luce. She is indefatigable. (Ha! Never thought I'd actually use that silly word!) She is refreshing. And precocious is not the right word for her. (But I'll discuss that later.) If it wasn't Flavia solving this mystery, I would have not cared a wit. But it was!

I loved how she tormented her sisters.

Quote alert:  "I found a dead body in the cucumber patch,' I told them.
       How very like you,' Ophelia said, and went on preening her eyebrows."

I loved her drive and curiosity and spunk and chutzpah and independence. I love that she was rarely scared and always had a plan. I love that she named her bike and treated it like a horse. I loved her love of chemistry and poison. I loved her allusions and well-read-ed-ness. She was amusing. She was bubbling under that surface all the time, and yet so very....English on the outside.

Quote....right now: "Anyone who knew the word slattern was worth cultivating as a friend."

I don't have my book on hand to look up other things that tickled my fancy. Dang it. But I loved that she loved herself, even though she thought no one else did. How refreshing among all the characters out there who struggle for any personal sense of worth!

Now, about the writing. Yummy. A winking fest of happy meaning-rich words and allusions. I found I couldn't read it as rapidly as I normally do. I must have been wallowing.

My one caveat? The reason this isn't a glowing 5 star rating? Well, as much as I loved Flavia, she isn't a believable 11 year old. Qualifier: isn't a believable 11 year old all of the time. Sometimes she reeks of eleven-ity. Her response to a dead person, her petty revenge, her occasional naivete, her energy and creativity...all were very 11. But I just couldn't swallow the depth of her chemistry, literature, and music knowledge. But I mentioned I loved it, you squawk?! I did. I do. I forgave her. I moved past it. I don't really care. You might, but I made my peace. Perhaps she is a prodigy. Perhaps she is writing this looking back. Whatev.

I enjoyed nearly every moment of this novel. Highly recommend.

Review: And Only to Deceive by Tasha Alexander

And Only to Deceive
by Tasha Alexander
Historical Fiction, Mystery
336 pages
published: 2005
For: Book Club assignment from last summer *chagrin*
3 of 5 stars

About

For Emily, accepting Philip's proposal was an easy way to escape her overbearing mother. And when Philip dies on safari soon after their wedding, she feels little grief; she had barely known him. Now, nearly two years later, she learns that her husband was very different from the man she thought she had married.
Eager to find out more, Emily begins to study the priceless Greek statues her husband collected. Her search leads to the British Museum, where she discovers that a ring of forgers is stealing artifacts from the Greco–Roman galleries. Solving the crime will lead to more discoveries about Philip and cause Emily to question the role in Victorian Society to which she, as a woman, is relegated.  - from Goodreads

Reaction

I had a good time reading this. It wasn't anything amazing or compelling, but a good time. I found the situation of having to mourn someone you don't miss and then falling in love with your dead husband intriguing and sorrowful. The pain of regret and lost opportunities is awful. I liked the journal entries from Philip and freedom afforded a widow. I appreciated how Emily's character wasn't so radical she thought she didn't have to marry, but did what was necessary to ensure what she hoped was the most happiness she could find. I liked how she woke up out of her own selfishness and began broadening her education.

I got annoyed with the mystery. But that might have more to do with me than the book. I rarely read MysteryMystery books. Maybe you mystery readers can tell me if impatience is a normal emotion while reading mystery. I wanted more to be going on while it took forever to figure out 'who done it.' And I got truly annoyed with that woman who kissed back every time. Pick a side, Lady.

So, while I had fun with this book I don't have any plans to read the sequels. This one ended at a nice satisfying place. The mysteries were resolved, the romance progressed enough. I'm just fine.

Review: Rebecca by Daphne de Maurier

Rebecca
by Daphne de Maurier
Classic/Mystery/Romance
410 pages
published: 1938
For: Book Club
1 of 5 stars

Well, you know what I thought of the beginning, but I hadn't finished the book and had not formed my final opinion. I was hoping it would change. Ironically, about half a chapter after my rant, things started to improve. Wanna know why?? People started talking!!!

I didn't before realize how important conversation was to me.

About:

Maxim de Winter brings a young new wife home to his estate where the presence of his late wife, Rebecca still lingers. The new Mrs. de Winter has trouble learning to run a house, trouble with the scornful housekeeper, and trouble staying close to her troubled husband. What happened to Rebecca?

Reaction:

Things had picked up after the first 100 pages. There were new characters, there was confusion, there was mystery. And then there was the freakish housekeeper. Makes me think about traveling asylums, perhaps like door-to-door salespeople:

Ding Dong.
"May I help you?"
"We were just wondering if you had any crazy people you would like us to take off your hands?"
"Why yes. My housekeeper is worshiping a dead sociopath and tried to kill me!"
"Well, we can take care of that for you! Load her up, Frank!"
"What a relief. I'm so glad you were in the neighborhood today."
"No problem Ma'am. That's our job."

But I digress.

So I was enjoying the book finally. I was truly thinking it might all be salvageable. It got creepy. There were several layers of "bad guys." There was the fear of getting found out. There were a few fewer descriptions of flowers and definitely fewer imaginings of Nameless. There was rising action...dramatic action...relief....more rising action...

Then splat.

It didn't finish. It just stopped. I searched the back matter. I searched the crease of my book in case pages had been ripped out. Nope. The book just didn't have an end. ???? I tried to read the included "alternate" epilogue and choked. I re-read the epilogue in the second chapter, choked, tried harder, skimmed, and then called it good. I gave this book more than it deserved already.

Questions Not Answered: (Spoilers Alert!!)

1. Why didn't Nameless have a name? (In the author notes, Mrs. du Maurier said something like not being able to think of one, then writing no name as a sort of challenge.) Not good enough reasons!! Why didn't she have a name! Or a face! Or an age! This wasn't any sort of a deal breaker, but it was annoying.
2. Why stop the book before the end?
3. Did everyone die? Did everyone live?
4. Did Favell not call Mrs. Danvers in time? Why did she set the house on fire? Did she even do it?
5. Why did it go all Jane Eyre at the end?
6. Why did they leave the country? Their life had some rough spots, yes, but leave the whole country??
7. If they "had" to leave the country, why live a boring, sad life? Why not go adventuring like on their honeymoon? These people are easily broken!!
8. Why was Mrs. Danvers so dedicated to a sociopath?
9. Why didn't Max produce proof of adultery as evidence to divorce Rebecca and get out of his nightmare long before that night? Didn't they such things as personal dectectives?
10. But most importantly: WHY STOP THE BOOK BEFORE THE END?!?!?!?

I may have listed something twice, but so what? Endings are important. A whole book can be ruing by a bad end.

I'm done.