A Shot in the Dark

by David Garnett

A Shot in the Dark

Genres: Italy, Fiction

156 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1958

About the author

David Garnett, known as "Bunny", was an English writer and publisher. A prominent member of the Bloomsbury Group, Garnett received literary recognition when his novel Lady into Fox, an allegorical fantasy, was awarded the 1922 James Tait Black Memorial Prize for fiction. He ran a bookshop near the British Museum with Francis Birrell during the 1920s. He also founded (with Francis Meynell) the Nonesuch Press. He wrote the novel Aspects of Love (1955), on which the later Andrew Lloyd-Webber musical was based.

He was the son of Richard Garnett. His first wife was the illustrator and author Ray Garnett (née Marshall) with whom he had two sons including Richard Garnett. His second wife was Angelica Bell. His mother was the translator Constance Garnett.

Reviews

[George Facey · Rating 3 out of 5]

While there’s a fair few spelling errors, and sometimes poor dialogue, the plot is actually quite good. Great characters, and lovely descriptions of Italian culture. The plot contains romance, crime, politics and religion/cultism - packaged within the post war era. Enough for me. I’ll keep the copy.

[Kyle · Rating 2 out of 5]

1958. This book is ill-written and otherwise reads like some guy's sexual fantasy. He has two impossibly beautiful women who are wiling to sleep with him and they are also willing to sleep with other women or each other. The story basically makes out that one is evil and one good and eventually he marries the good one. The man gets everything he wants; so boring! Also he is brave and meanwhile sorts out all the political intrigue in a little Italian town. Yeah right.

Garnett wrote a number of novels, so hopefully they aren't all this bad, but it made me think: gosh, they'd publish anything in the 50s!

Interestly pagan in bits. The nominally Catholic peasants are following the cult of Diana without really knowing it. There are witches in the woods. Neither the Church nor the pagans are really criticised, they just hapen to be among the many ridiculous subplots of this poorly conceived work. Oh boy!