What do you think?
Rate this book
Julia Kydd #1
Relative Fortunes
In 1920s New York, the price of a woman’s independence can be exorbitant—even fatal.
In 1924 Manhattan, women’s suffrage is old news. For sophisticated booklover Julia Kydd, life’s too short for politics. With her cropped hair and penchant for independent living, Julia wants only to launch her own new private press. But as a woman, Julia must fight for what’s hers—including the inheritance her estranged half brother, Philip, has challenged, putting her aspirations in jeopardy.
When her friend’s sister, Naomi Rankin, dies suddenly of an apparent suicide, Julia is shocked at the wealthy family’s indifference toward the ardent suffragist’s death. Naomi chose poverty and hardship over a submissive marriage and a husband’s control of her money. Now, her death suggests the struggle was more than she could bear.
Julia, however, is skeptical. Doubtful of her suspicions, Philip proposes a glib wager: if Julia can prove Naomi was in fact murdered, he’ll drop his claims to her wealth. Julia soon discovers Naomi’s life was as turbulent and enigmatic as her death. And as she gets closer to the truth, Julia sees there’s much more at stake than her inheritance…
In 1924 Manhattan, women’s suffrage is old news. For sophisticated booklover Julia Kydd, life’s too short for politics. With her cropped hair and penchant for independent living, Julia wants only to launch her own new private press. But as a woman, Julia must fight for what’s hers—including the inheritance her estranged half brother, Philip, has challenged, putting her aspirations in jeopardy.
When her friend’s sister, Naomi Rankin, dies suddenly of an apparent suicide, Julia is shocked at the wealthy family’s indifference toward the ardent suffragist’s death. Naomi chose poverty and hardship over a submissive marriage and a husband’s control of her money. Now, her death suggests the struggle was more than she could bear.
Julia, however, is skeptical. Doubtful of her suspicions, Philip proposes a glib wager: if Julia can prove Naomi was in fact murdered, he’ll drop his claims to her wealth. Julia soon discovers Naomi’s life was as turbulent and enigmatic as her death. And as she gets closer to the truth, Julia sees there’s much more at stake than her inheritance…
320 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2019
6534 people are currently reading
6958 people want to read
About the author
Marlowe Benn
3 books121 followersBorn near Boston, Marlowe Benn grew up in an Illinois college town along the Mississippi River. Her debut novel, Relative Fortunes, was featured in the Amazon First Reads program, and CrimeReads named it one of 2019's best traditional mysteries. Her second novel, Passing Fancies, comes out in June 2020. A former editor, college teacher, and letterpress printer, Benn holds a doctorate from Berkeley in the history of books and publishing. She lives with her husband on an island near Seattle.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 630 reviews
July 1, 2019
Author Marlowe Benn book, “Relative Fortunes,” is a breath of fresh air amid the countless books that hit the market on a daily basis. While I hesitated, deliberating between this and a few other Kindle First books, I eventually chose this as my second choice of the month. Happily, it is the better of the two reads.
Ms. Benn displays a wonderful talent for stringing the right words together, and the novel is an endless stream of descriptive passages. Add to that the distinct characters that walk throughout the pages and you have something special.
The book is listed in both the Historical Fiction and Mystery rankings, both apt descriptions of the story. The author’s writing style easily place it in the historical fiction category. This is not merely a tale placed at a certain time in history. There are many references to the time period of the book (early 1920s), and through the expressive prose, one can easily imagine standing side by side with heroine Julia Kydd.
The overall plot reflects the era, when men made most of the decisions and women had to struggle to achieve any respect outside the home. Julia’s brother has posed a challenge that she is not able to refuse, as it offers the only possibility for her to gain control of money that is rightfully hers. Ms. Benn weaves an intriguing account of Julia’s efforts. Based upon the talent displayed, in the future I will not hesitate when I see another of the author’s books. Five stars.
Ms. Benn displays a wonderful talent for stringing the right words together, and the novel is an endless stream of descriptive passages. Add to that the distinct characters that walk throughout the pages and you have something special.
The book is listed in both the Historical Fiction and Mystery rankings, both apt descriptions of the story. The author’s writing style easily place it in the historical fiction category. This is not merely a tale placed at a certain time in history. There are many references to the time period of the book (early 1920s), and through the expressive prose, one can easily imagine standing side by side with heroine Julia Kydd.
The overall plot reflects the era, when men made most of the decisions and women had to struggle to achieve any respect outside the home. Julia’s brother has posed a challenge that she is not able to refuse, as it offers the only possibility for her to gain control of money that is rightfully hers. Ms. Benn weaves an intriguing account of Julia’s efforts. Based upon the talent displayed, in the future I will not hesitate when I see another of the author’s books. Five stars.
July 20, 2019
I gave this three stars because for about the first half of the book I thought this book would never get going and almost stopped reading it. But eventually I got caught up in the story. I’ll probably read future books of the series now that the probable recurring characters have been established.
August 15, 2019
My opinions about Relative Fortunes by Marlowe Benn went back and forth quite a bit. I downloaded the sample and enjoyed that enough to buy the ebook. I liked the book more or less but wouldn’t read another one, as this is apparently the first in what will be known as the Julia Kydd series.
Julia Kydd is an heiress living abroad in London. She is about to turn 25 and come into her full inheritance. Her brother Philip, the trustee of the will, has summoned her to New York City. He is contesting the validity of the will. Julia returns to New York after a long absence, not knowing what to expect as she does not know her brother (ten years or so her senior) very well. While in NYC, she runs into an old friend from school, Glennis Rankin. Glennis is also a member of an old, wealthy, respectable family. Julia attends a family party at the Rankin residence, a party that ends in disaster when Glennis learns that her older sister Naomi has been found dead. Glennis automatically assumes that Chester, the older brother, had something to do with her death. He hated Naomi because of her political activities. Julia agrees with Glennis that the family is hushing up her death to avoid a scandal and agrees to ask questions, mostly to calm Glennis. However, Julia is soon convinced that someone is hiding the full truth about Naomi’s death and she and Glennis embark on a dangerous investigation that ends up uncovering unsavory family secrets.
This isn’t a bad novel, but it’s not great either. I think the editor should have sent it back to the author (who, according to her bio, has also worked as an editor so I find that troubling) to cut some of the unnecessary details and tighten the pacing and plot. The supposed main plot is Naomi’s mysterious death but it’s often mired in Julia’s fight with her brother over the will. Before the lawyers announce their decision, she and Philip enter into a wager: he says Naomi died by suicide, she says it’s murder. If she proves him wrong, then he will drop his claim on her inheritance. If she loses, then she has to give up her inheritance no matter what the lawyers decide. It’s a stupid wager for her to make as her legal claims have never been questioned until now and she has a good chance of winning. But she agrees to it because she’s an idiot and because she’s goaded into it by Philip. She wants to prove him wrong—at the possible expense of giving up her inheritance, her only income.
The amateur sleuthing by Glennis and Julia into Naomi’s murder is very slow to start. The drama about Julia’s inheritance comes first, but even that is slowed down by lots of descriptions of the fine art of book printing. While I find this subject potentially interesting, it takes up way too much space in the novel. Julia goes on and on and on about it. I eventually began skimming those sections because the extra details don’t add anything to the story. The mystery itself isn’t too complicated. There’s something of a twist at the end, but nothing too earth-shattering. I pretty much had it figured out before Julia had even decided to start investigating—not because I’m a genius but because it wasn’t all that difficult.
The characters in the book are a problem for me. I didn’t care for any of them. Julia and her brother Philip are the only somewhat intriguing people but when I also don’t think the characters’ motivations behind their actions make any sense. Glennis freely admits she wasn’t close to her older sister and didn’t give a fig about her suffragette activities, yet when Naomi dies Glennis gets hysterical, makes a scene and continues demanding justice for her sister. Why does she care? She didn’t care about her when she was alive and being bullied by their older brother, didn’t care that she lived her life penniless inside the family mansion and so I find her ranting and raving and sudden concern for her sister to be unconvincing. Glennis comes across as a self-indulgent dipshit with zero intellectual curiosity who has nothing better to do than spend her family money and look for a husband. That’s all she seems to care about. The author has forced Glennis to care about her sister’s death in order to draw Julia into the scandal/investigation. Julia didn’t know Naomi either, so without Glennis’s hysteria, she wouldn’t have been involved. I don’t know why the author didn’t simply create a close relationship between Glennis and Naomi—then Glennis’s emotional demands for justice would have made more sense. They could have been close (or at least, closer) without Naomi giving up her secrets that are so vital to the plot.
Julia’s character is also inconsistent. When she learns how miserably Glennis lived, bullied and denied her share of the family money by the older brother who dislikes her political activism, she wonders why the woman didn’t just marry out of convenience to collect her inheritance and escape her brother. This is a head-scratching wtf moment because Julia herself (if she loses her inheritance) may be penniless as well and refuses to contemplate marriage: “As far as Julia could see, marriage meant trading freedom for security, a dubious bargain at best. A wife relinquished everything in exchange for whatever her husband chose or bothered to provide…Nothing but a man’s honor and good fortune stood between his wife and hardship” (45). So why the hell can she not understand Naomi’s refusal to give in to her bully of a brother or marry in order to get her inheritance? It’s possible that Naomi could jump from one bully to another—both having ultimate control of her money.
Philip’s character is also troubling. Julia knows him only as her trustee and, most recently, as the brother trying to cheat her out of her rightful inheritance. Eventually, his sometimes kind, sometimes cruel personality is somewhat explained but even the explanation reveals him to be something of a dick:
The ending itself is way too convenient. Not just for Julia’s inheritance, but the resolution of Naomi’s murder. It actually reveals that nearly everyone in the novel is a horrible person.
This isn’t a bad novel. Despite its pacing problems and too many useless details, it held my attention. However, all the characters—with no exceptions that I could see—were various degrees of awfulness. The final revealing scene in which all the suspects are brought together so that Julia can do her sleuthing magic is head-banging-on-desk exasperating. I mean, I can believe these people are this awful, but is Julia really this stupid? I just didn’t care for any of them. Plus the very unnecessary drama at the end about the will and the inheritance…sweet jesus. Just stop. I can’t really recommend this book because there’s much better brain candy reading out there, but you could do worse (that awful Gretchen book, my next review to write, is much, much worse).
Julia Kydd is an heiress living abroad in London. She is about to turn 25 and come into her full inheritance. Her brother Philip, the trustee of the will, has summoned her to New York City. He is contesting the validity of the will. Julia returns to New York after a long absence, not knowing what to expect as she does not know her brother (ten years or so her senior) very well. While in NYC, she runs into an old friend from school, Glennis Rankin. Glennis is also a member of an old, wealthy, respectable family. Julia attends a family party at the Rankin residence, a party that ends in disaster when Glennis learns that her older sister Naomi has been found dead. Glennis automatically assumes that Chester, the older brother, had something to do with her death. He hated Naomi because of her political activities. Julia agrees with Glennis that the family is hushing up her death to avoid a scandal and agrees to ask questions, mostly to calm Glennis. However, Julia is soon convinced that someone is hiding the full truth about Naomi’s death and she and Glennis embark on a dangerous investigation that ends up uncovering unsavory family secrets.
This isn’t a bad novel, but it’s not great either. I think the editor should have sent it back to the author (who, according to her bio, has also worked as an editor so I find that troubling) to cut some of the unnecessary details and tighten the pacing and plot. The supposed main plot is Naomi’s mysterious death but it’s often mired in Julia’s fight with her brother over the will. Before the lawyers announce their decision, she and Philip enter into a wager: he says Naomi died by suicide, she says it’s murder. If she proves him wrong, then he will drop his claim on her inheritance. If she loses, then she has to give up her inheritance no matter what the lawyers decide. It’s a stupid wager for her to make as her legal claims have never been questioned until now and she has a good chance of winning. But she agrees to it because she’s an idiot and because she’s goaded into it by Philip. She wants to prove him wrong—at the possible expense of giving up her inheritance, her only income.
The amateur sleuthing by Glennis and Julia into Naomi’s murder is very slow to start. The drama about Julia’s inheritance comes first, but even that is slowed down by lots of descriptions of the fine art of book printing. While I find this subject potentially interesting, it takes up way too much space in the novel. Julia goes on and on and on about it. I eventually began skimming those sections because the extra details don’t add anything to the story. The mystery itself isn’t too complicated. There’s something of a twist at the end, but nothing too earth-shattering. I pretty much had it figured out before Julia had even decided to start investigating—not because I’m a genius but because it wasn’t all that difficult.
The characters in the book are a problem for me. I didn’t care for any of them. Julia and her brother Philip are the only somewhat intriguing people but when I also don’t think the characters’ motivations behind their actions make any sense. Glennis freely admits she wasn’t close to her older sister and didn’t give a fig about her suffragette activities, yet when Naomi dies Glennis gets hysterical, makes a scene and continues demanding justice for her sister. Why does she care? She didn’t care about her when she was alive and being bullied by their older brother, didn’t care that she lived her life penniless inside the family mansion and so I find her ranting and raving and sudden concern for her sister to be unconvincing. Glennis comes across as a self-indulgent dipshit with zero intellectual curiosity who has nothing better to do than spend her family money and look for a husband. That’s all she seems to care about. The author has forced Glennis to care about her sister’s death in order to draw Julia into the scandal/investigation. Julia didn’t know Naomi either, so without Glennis’s hysteria, she wouldn’t have been involved. I don’t know why the author didn’t simply create a close relationship between Glennis and Naomi—then Glennis’s emotional demands for justice would have made more sense. They could have been close (or at least, closer) without Naomi giving up her secrets that are so vital to the plot.
Julia’s character is also inconsistent. When she learns how miserably Glennis lived, bullied and denied her share of the family money by the older brother who dislikes her political activism, she wonders why the woman didn’t just marry out of convenience to collect her inheritance and escape her brother. This is a head-scratching wtf moment because Julia herself (if she loses her inheritance) may be penniless as well and refuses to contemplate marriage: “As far as Julia could see, marriage meant trading freedom for security, a dubious bargain at best. A wife relinquished everything in exchange for whatever her husband chose or bothered to provide…Nothing but a man’s honor and good fortune stood between his wife and hardship” (45). So why the hell can she not understand Naomi’s refusal to give in to her bully of a brother or marry in order to get her inheritance? It’s possible that Naomi could jump from one bully to another—both having ultimate control of her money.
Philip’s character is also troubling. Julia knows him only as her trustee and, most recently, as the brother trying to cheat her out of her rightful inheritance. Eventually, his sometimes kind, sometimes cruel personality is somewhat explained but even the explanation reveals him to be something of a dick:
The ending itself is way too convenient. Not just for Julia’s inheritance, but the resolution of Naomi’s murder. It actually reveals that nearly everyone in the novel is a horrible person.
This isn’t a bad novel. Despite its pacing problems and too many useless details, it held my attention. However, all the characters—with no exceptions that I could see—were various degrees of awfulness. The final revealing scene in which all the suspects are brought together so that Julia can do her sleuthing magic is head-banging-on-desk exasperating. I mean, I can believe these people are this awful, but is Julia really this stupid? I just didn’t care for any of them. Plus the very unnecessary drama at the end about the will and the inheritance…sweet jesus. Just stop. I can’t really recommend this book because there’s much better brain candy reading out there, but you could do worse (that awful Gretchen book, my next review to write, is much, much worse).
July 25, 2020
“Sometimes death is the loudest voice you have.”
Right, so how to offer up my best review of this book – without giving away any (too many) spoilers!
I am already a dedicated fan of traditional / classic mystery stories, however many of these are by their very definition, English centric, so I was interested to see how well the genre would transfer across the Atlantic to the USA. I need not have worried, as in author Marlowe Benn’s expert hands the transition was seamlessly elegant, with a new and vibrant cast of characters, a textbook storyline beautifully executed, together with a satisfying conclusion which would have done Dame Agatha Christie, the great lady of the genre proud, whilst leaving the door firmly open for the expanded series to become the undoubted success I predict.
In fact at one point during the story, my favourite new amateur sleuth, Julia Kydd, is actually likened to someone hoping to emulate one of the protagonists from the books of the great progressive new author, Mrs. Christie. This set me thinking about the great lady’s characters of ‘Tommy and Tuppence Beresford’, with Julia’s “brother” Philip, unwittingly turning out to be a perfect Tommy, as a foil for Julia’s, Tuppence.
A delicious mix of fiction, blended with a little fact, well researched and presented, there is a strong opening chapter to the book, which really helps to set the scene in a no nonsense way. The storyline in which Julia then finds herself embroiled, moves along at a good pace, with a full cast of clearly defined characters, great easy to follow, clipped dialogue and some excellent descriptive narrative. The ending, whilst not perhaps as definitive as I would usually like, is definitely all left to the imagination of the reader, but is certainly going to have me looking out for the next time Julia Kydd crosses my path!
Set in a post WWI New York, with women having recently attained the right to vote and prohibition in full swing, it is all too apparent that for many families, it is still very much a man’s world and the women of the household are perceived both personally and financially to be the chattels of their male counterparts and not to be trusted with even the smallest modicum of independence, freedom of speech, or almost indeed, freedom of thought.
Julia, educated in the US, then leaving for London as soon as she was able, has now returned to New York at the behest of her step-brother, Philip and his lawyers, to try and unravel the nonsense of their late father’s will. It wouldn’t be giving too much away to reveal that Julia is something of a bibliophile, who dreams, with the help of her portion of the inheritance, of running her own small bespoke publishing and book binding house. Well! given what the times dictate and no matter how much more progressive the US is in some matters, than their UK counterparts, at least by Julia’s reckoning, you can imagine what happens next! – Or can you? I certainly didn’t, as the final pieces of the jigsaw puzzle which is Philip and Julia’s life, are only revealed right near the end of the story. Totally unexpected, although it really shouldn’t have been, as once again some excellent research has thrown up a scenario which was completely plausible for the times, I was left a little breathless, but somewhere in the back of my mind, a whole new plan was forming! Is Philip really the dark horse that I would like him to be?
Julia’s wealthy friend Glennis Rankin, contrives to involve Julia in her intense family traumas, where she quickly works out that, to a person, a more noxiously, complex group of pretentious individuals you would be hard pushed to find, with the exception of the lovely Glennis herself. At first she cannot wait to make her excuses and get away from the company of so many people it is almost impossible to connect with in any sensible fashion. But when a double disaster strikes, which involves both Glennis and herself personally, Julia is set a challenge by the ever erudite Philip, which she neither wants to, or cannot afford to, refuse and Glennis is certain that there is villainy afoot in the Rankin household. Thus setting off a chain of events, which through the astute written power of characterisation, showcases the entire Rankin family in all their disturbingly true colours and provides an excellent study of human behaviour and social commentary, completely in tune with the thinking of the times.
Typical of the tried and tested Agatha Christie case solving formula, Julia contrives to gather all the suspects around her in a place of her choosing, to finally ‘out’ the suspect. However, hand on heart, she only really actually knows half the story for certain, as every single one of them played some small part in bringing poor Naomi’s life to an end. So she throws down some timely seeds of doubt and stands back, as her cast of suspects begin to argue and bicker amongst themselves, unwittingly divulging, a little at a time, pieces of the puzzle which Julia hadn’t really known for certain. Eventually Julia can see the wood for the trees, confidently names her suspect and once again steps aside, a viewer to the most unseemly behaviour which then follows.
Definitely a case of ‘The female of the species is more deadly than the male’ – although only just!
A multi aspect, well constructed storyline, which offered a lovely blend of plot and character driven storytelling. Completely believable, observationally astute and descriptively very visual and tense.
I would have loved to read Passing Fancies, book #2 in the Julia Kydd series back to back, however previous commitments don’t make that possible. I shall definitely be boosting the book up my TBR at every possible opportunity and please keep the stories coming, Marlowe!
Right, so how to offer up my best review of this book – without giving away any (too many) spoilers!
I am already a dedicated fan of traditional / classic mystery stories, however many of these are by their very definition, English centric, so I was interested to see how well the genre would transfer across the Atlantic to the USA. I need not have worried, as in author Marlowe Benn’s expert hands the transition was seamlessly elegant, with a new and vibrant cast of characters, a textbook storyline beautifully executed, together with a satisfying conclusion which would have done Dame Agatha Christie, the great lady of the genre proud, whilst leaving the door firmly open for the expanded series to become the undoubted success I predict.
In fact at one point during the story, my favourite new amateur sleuth, Julia Kydd, is actually likened to someone hoping to emulate one of the protagonists from the books of the great progressive new author, Mrs. Christie. This set me thinking about the great lady’s characters of ‘Tommy and Tuppence Beresford’, with Julia’s “brother” Philip, unwittingly turning out to be a perfect Tommy, as a foil for Julia’s, Tuppence.
A delicious mix of fiction, blended with a little fact, well researched and presented, there is a strong opening chapter to the book, which really helps to set the scene in a no nonsense way. The storyline in which Julia then finds herself embroiled, moves along at a good pace, with a full cast of clearly defined characters, great easy to follow, clipped dialogue and some excellent descriptive narrative. The ending, whilst not perhaps as definitive as I would usually like, is definitely all left to the imagination of the reader, but is certainly going to have me looking out for the next time Julia Kydd crosses my path!
Set in a post WWI New York, with women having recently attained the right to vote and prohibition in full swing, it is all too apparent that for many families, it is still very much a man’s world and the women of the household are perceived both personally and financially to be the chattels of their male counterparts and not to be trusted with even the smallest modicum of independence, freedom of speech, or almost indeed, freedom of thought.
Julia, educated in the US, then leaving for London as soon as she was able, has now returned to New York at the behest of her step-brother, Philip and his lawyers, to try and unravel the nonsense of their late father’s will. It wouldn’t be giving too much away to reveal that Julia is something of a bibliophile, who dreams, with the help of her portion of the inheritance, of running her own small bespoke publishing and book binding house. Well! given what the times dictate and no matter how much more progressive the US is in some matters, than their UK counterparts, at least by Julia’s reckoning, you can imagine what happens next! – Or can you? I certainly didn’t, as the final pieces of the jigsaw puzzle which is Philip and Julia’s life, are only revealed right near the end of the story. Totally unexpected, although it really shouldn’t have been, as once again some excellent research has thrown up a scenario which was completely plausible for the times, I was left a little breathless, but somewhere in the back of my mind, a whole new plan was forming! Is Philip really the dark horse that I would like him to be?
Julia’s wealthy friend Glennis Rankin, contrives to involve Julia in her intense family traumas, where she quickly works out that, to a person, a more noxiously, complex group of pretentious individuals you would be hard pushed to find, with the exception of the lovely Glennis herself. At first she cannot wait to make her excuses and get away from the company of so many people it is almost impossible to connect with in any sensible fashion. But when a double disaster strikes, which involves both Glennis and herself personally, Julia is set a challenge by the ever erudite Philip, which she neither wants to, or cannot afford to, refuse and Glennis is certain that there is villainy afoot in the Rankin household. Thus setting off a chain of events, which through the astute written power of characterisation, showcases the entire Rankin family in all their disturbingly true colours and provides an excellent study of human behaviour and social commentary, completely in tune with the thinking of the times.
Typical of the tried and tested Agatha Christie case solving formula, Julia contrives to gather all the suspects around her in a place of her choosing, to finally ‘out’ the suspect. However, hand on heart, she only really actually knows half the story for certain, as every single one of them played some small part in bringing poor Naomi’s life to an end. So she throws down some timely seeds of doubt and stands back, as her cast of suspects begin to argue and bicker amongst themselves, unwittingly divulging, a little at a time, pieces of the puzzle which Julia hadn’t really known for certain. Eventually Julia can see the wood for the trees, confidently names her suspect and once again steps aside, a viewer to the most unseemly behaviour which then follows.
Definitely a case of ‘The female of the species is more deadly than the male’ – although only just!
A multi aspect, well constructed storyline, which offered a lovely blend of plot and character driven storytelling. Completely believable, observationally astute and descriptively very visual and tense.
I would have loved to read Passing Fancies, book #2 in the Julia Kydd series back to back, however previous commitments don’t make that possible. I shall definitely be boosting the book up my TBR at every possible opportunity and please keep the stories coming, Marlowe!
August 7, 2019
With Relative Fortunes, the first book in Marlowe Benn’s Julia Kydd series, I think it’s safe to say ‘it’s me, not the book’. Although I love a good historical crime, I am extremely picky about such reads, and in this case this one wasn’t quite for me.
Relative Fortunes is a book that takes a long time to start, much longer than I would have liked. With my mysteries, I like it when things start to come together much sooner than they did in this one, and there were plenty of points where I did consider putting this one down. It’s certainly an interesting book to continue reading, but it does require quite the commitment to get that payoff.
For the first book in a series, this one sets up things for later books. I’m sure the later books will be more interesting, more engrossing, but this one didn’t quite grab me in the way I had anticipated. For some, however, I’m sure this book will be perfect for them.
Relative Fortunes is a book that takes a long time to start, much longer than I would have liked. With my mysteries, I like it when things start to come together much sooner than they did in this one, and there were plenty of points where I did consider putting this one down. It’s certainly an interesting book to continue reading, but it does require quite the commitment to get that payoff.
For the first book in a series, this one sets up things for later books. I’m sure the later books will be more interesting, more engrossing, but this one didn’t quite grab me in the way I had anticipated. For some, however, I’m sure this book will be perfect for them.
June 16, 2021
I found the first part of this book somewhat enjoyable. The details of printing presses and imprints went over my head. I had no idea what she was talking about, so I looked up a few things but I was still confused. I found the characters to be rather one dimensional. And the disdain the protagonist shows her so-called friend was too much—I really disliked this woman by the end. She thought so much of herself and so little of others that I didn’t care about her at all. I wished it had been about her brother or her friend—both of whom she thought the worst.
The actual mystery seemed interesting but was convoluted in a ridiculous way. The solve was not satisfying, and the deceased was described in multiple contradicting ways. Many parts of the “crime” became implausible.
The actual mystery seemed interesting but was convoluted in a ridiculous way. The solve was not satisfying, and the deceased was described in multiple contradicting ways. Many parts of the “crime” became implausible.
August 3, 2019
I’m giving it a 3 because it frustrated me so much. I wanted to hear more of the beginnings of the Equal Rights Amendment and all the other social injustices that were brought up. I had no picture in my mind of what the main characters looked like. I will read the next in the series as it ended how I thought it should.
July 19, 2019
This was a slow, slow, slow burn of a novel. I liked Julia, she was a fun, independent, modern 192o's woman. Yet, for being 'modern' she was woefully ignorant to the women's rights movement that was happening all around her, in England and America. This was slightly unbelievable to me. If your character is championing her own free will, her disinterest in getting married, and her enthusiasm for starting her own company, you would think she would know how the political climate was changing because of women like her, fighting for women to have that free agency. I don't know, it just didn't fit the rest of the character's persona for her to be ignorant of such a large issue that effects her so prominently.
It honestly felt like it took FOREVER to get to the juice of this novel. The description says something like 'Julia places a bet with her brother that she can prove her friend's sister, a Suffragette, death was murder in order to win back her inheritance.' Cool. Except, you are 36% of the way through the novel before the bet is even mentioned. Then, there is a moment when you're supposed to think it won't even be necessary. Then, Julia needs to win the bet to win her inheritance to live this modern life she wants to lead and becomes obsessed with solving the murder/death/suicide. I get that we need a reason for Julia to become interested and invested in solving this crime, but it feels like it's for very selfish reasons. Her 'friend' believes her sister was murdered because her family is awful, so she is eagerly helping Julia. But Julia never tells her friends she's ONLY helping her because she wants to win her inheritance back. Then, she tells her brother (with whom the bet is placed) and his best friend all the private details of this family and the murder/death/suicide after explicitly telling the family she wouldn't tell anyone what she's discovered. But she has to in order to win the bet.
The mystery was okay. I thought it was fairly easy to figure out who the ultimate culprit was, but there were a lot of characters that played a very large and crucial role to the mystery, and some of those twists and turns were interesting. The one thing I hated was how cliche the reveal was. They were all sat in a room after being tricked there and Julia started 'interrogating' people and then they just all spilled their guts. C'mon. It's such a boring murder mystery trope that was tiring to find in this novel. There are more interesting ways to reveal the player's parts in the game then them simply standing around talking about it. There's even the part where Julia guesses it wrong and has to think quickly on her feet to figure out who it is right in that moment. UGH.
In the end, I'd probably read the second novel in this new Julia Kydd series because I genuinely liked Julia's character. However, I hope next go around we get to the meat and potatoes of the story a little quicker and the big reveal is a little more entertaining to read then just pages of dialogue.
It honestly felt like it took FOREVER to get to the juice of this novel. The description says something like 'Julia places a bet with her brother that she can prove her friend's sister, a Suffragette, death was murder in order to win back her inheritance.' Cool. Except, you are 36% of the way through the novel before the bet is even mentioned. Then, there is a moment when you're supposed to think it won't even be necessary. Then, Julia needs to win the bet to win her inheritance to live this modern life she wants to lead and becomes obsessed with solving the murder/death/suicide. I get that we need a reason for Julia to become interested and invested in solving this crime, but it feels like it's for very selfish reasons. Her 'friend' believes her sister was murdered because her family is awful, so she is eagerly helping Julia. But Julia never tells her friends she's ONLY helping her because she wants to win her inheritance back. Then, she tells her brother (with whom the bet is placed) and his best friend all the private details of this family and the murder/death/suicide after explicitly telling the family she wouldn't tell anyone what she's discovered. But she has to in order to win the bet.
The mystery was okay. I thought it was fairly easy to figure out who the ultimate culprit was, but there were a lot of characters that played a very large and crucial role to the mystery, and some of those twists and turns were interesting. The one thing I hated was how cliche the reveal was. They were all sat in a room after being tricked there and Julia started 'interrogating' people and then they just all spilled their guts. C'mon. It's such a boring murder mystery trope that was tiring to find in this novel. There are more interesting ways to reveal the player's parts in the game then them simply standing around talking about it. There's even the part where Julia guesses it wrong and has to think quickly on her feet to figure out who it is right in that moment. UGH.
In the end, I'd probably read the second novel in this new Julia Kydd series because I genuinely liked Julia's character. However, I hope next go around we get to the meat and potatoes of the story a little quicker and the big reveal is a little more entertaining to read then just pages of dialogue.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 27, 2019
This started slow but ended strong. Full RTC 3.5 stars
July 10, 2019
Set in Manhattan in a time of suffragists and prohibition, bootleggers and soap-box orators, Julia Kydd, a bibliophile and modern woman, finds herself in a situation that requires her to solve the mystery concerning the suspicious death of her friend's sister. As she delves into Naomi's life and death, she sees parallels between her situation in which her estranged brother controls her fortune, and Naomi's, whose brother forced her into dire circumstances by controlling her inheritance.
I loved that the author never preached about the issues and lets the readers draw their own conclusions while providing a clear view of the issues of the time. Women have been tortured and suffered in order to get the vote. A new type of "modern woman" is envisioned, a woman with independence and free will in all areas of her life. This type of woman is still held back by the norms of the day - a brother or father or uncle is required for them to set up a bank account, and it's the norm for the males to control the purse strings. Sexual independence is almost unfathomable. It's still the case that a woman must marry to secure her fortune.
The reader is dropped into this tumultuous time of great social change. There is a lot of food for thought. At the end, I realized that although so much was done to secure our right to vote, women's rights still have a long way to go to be considered equal. We still do not have equal rights enshrined in the Constitution, we still earn less than men for the same work. In the end, this novel reinforced my own commitment to securing those rights for all.
Beyond that, the novel moves along at a good pace with a good puzzle to be solved. I loved it and didn't want it to end.
I loved that the author never preached about the issues and lets the readers draw their own conclusions while providing a clear view of the issues of the time. Women have been tortured and suffered in order to get the vote. A new type of "modern woman" is envisioned, a woman with independence and free will in all areas of her life. This type of woman is still held back by the norms of the day - a brother or father or uncle is required for them to set up a bank account, and it's the norm for the males to control the purse strings. Sexual independence is almost unfathomable. It's still the case that a woman must marry to secure her fortune.
The reader is dropped into this tumultuous time of great social change. There is a lot of food for thought. At the end, I realized that although so much was done to secure our right to vote, women's rights still have a long way to go to be considered equal. We still do not have equal rights enshrined in the Constitution, we still earn less than men for the same work. In the end, this novel reinforced my own commitment to securing those rights for all.
Beyond that, the novel moves along at a good pace with a good puzzle to be solved. I loved it and didn't want it to end.
August 28, 2019
What a great debut novel ! An accomplished letterpress printer, Marlowe Benn holds a master’s degree in the book arts from the University of Alabama and a doctorate in the history of books from the University of California, Berkeley.
Her protagonist, Julia Kydd's desire is launch her own private press in New York City. But first, she has to secure funds from her impending inheritance. The only things in the way are a feud with her older half brother, an insistent suitor imploring her to sail back to Europe & marry him and a murder mystery to solve!
The setting is the 1920's, after the 19th ammendment granted women the right to vote in the US, but most laws still treated women as their husband's possession, even allowing another male relative to control her personal finances. Julia strikes up a wager with her brother to get her fair share of the inheritance, if she can solve the mysterious death of a wealthy friend's sister, who was an active suffergist.
The story is taken partly from actual events and people in the news at the time and feels accurate.
Julia and her half brother Phillip are both sharp witted and their dialogue is entertaining, as well as the many other well thought out characters.
I am so glad to see that this engaging story may be a series - looking forward to the next installment!
Her protagonist, Julia Kydd's desire is launch her own private press in New York City. But first, she has to secure funds from her impending inheritance. The only things in the way are a feud with her older half brother, an insistent suitor imploring her to sail back to Europe & marry him and a murder mystery to solve!
The setting is the 1920's, after the 19th ammendment granted women the right to vote in the US, but most laws still treated women as their husband's possession, even allowing another male relative to control her personal finances. Julia strikes up a wager with her brother to get her fair share of the inheritance, if she can solve the mysterious death of a wealthy friend's sister, who was an active suffergist.
The story is taken partly from actual events and people in the news at the time and feels accurate.
Julia and her half brother Phillip are both sharp witted and their dialogue is entertaining, as well as the many other well thought out characters.
I am so glad to see that this engaging story may be a series - looking forward to the next installment!
May 7, 2019
In Relative Fortunes, we meet Julia Kydd, a woman who is just shy of 25 but wise beyond her years. Julia encounters an acquaintance named Glennis who discovers her progressive sister has died..supposedly under some rather mysterious circumstances. Despite Julia's hesitation, she soon becomes engrossed in a very complicated plot. The book was very historically accurate; it was centered around the early 1920's when women had yet to vote. I felt as though the book was a bit plodding at times but overall, it was definitely well written. The book seems to be gearing up for a series, and I think mystery fans will enjoy this character.
July 20, 2020
maybe 2.5* but I am giving this book the benefit of the doubt as I liked the 1924 NYC setting. The mystery was OK but I really liked the riff on S.S. Van Dine... The feminist/suffragette angle was a bit heavy-handed.
July 17, 2019
Relative Fortunes was my Amazon First Reads pick for July, and overall I enjoyed it! The story line itself started out pretty slowly, but the intrigue and the mystery picked up significantly in the second half and I finished that bit off in a single evening. There were definitely some twists and turns that kept me guessing until the very end.
I think the more interesting aspect of the book was actually the historical context and social backdrop. I learned a lot about women's rights in 1924 and some of the political events surrounding the equal right movement at the time.
I knocked off a couple of stars though because I still thought the book was a bit dry, and pacing of the story line was a bit off. I also never really felt connected to the protagonist, or any of the characters for that matter. They felt just a bit unbelievable.
I think the more interesting aspect of the book was actually the historical context and social backdrop. I learned a lot about women's rights in 1924 and some of the political events surrounding the equal right movement at the time.
I knocked off a couple of stars though because I still thought the book was a bit dry, and pacing of the story line was a bit off. I also never really felt connected to the protagonist, or any of the characters for that matter. They felt just a bit unbelievable.
August 14, 2019
Arc courtesy of Lake Union and Little Bird Publicity in exchange for my honest review.
Julia Kydd sails from England to New York with the sole purpose of claiming her inheritance upon her 25th birthday. That evolves into a fight with her half-brother that keeps her in New York longer than she’d expected. They strike a deal – a bet, really – in which the winnings (the inheritance) will go to the victor. I won’t spoil by revealing more. What I can say is that fans of historical mysteries, a post WWI New York City setting, and snappy writing of the era will probably enjoy Relative Fortunes as much as I did. I’ll be watching for the second book in the Julia Kidd series.
Julia Kydd sails from England to New York with the sole purpose of claiming her inheritance upon her 25th birthday. That evolves into a fight with her half-brother that keeps her in New York longer than she’d expected. They strike a deal – a bet, really – in which the winnings (the inheritance) will go to the victor. I won’t spoil by revealing more. What I can say is that fans of historical mysteries, a post WWI New York City setting, and snappy writing of the era will probably enjoy Relative Fortunes as much as I did. I’ll be watching for the second book in the Julia Kidd series.
abandoned
October 18, 2019I gave up on this extra slow burn, if a book doesn't grab me when I'm 20% into it I'm moving on, too many good books out there to muddle through this one!
August 27, 2019
Julia Kydd returns to prohibition-era New York from the life she's created for herself in London, because her half-brother, whom she barely knows, is challenging her inheritance, which she's to receive in only a few weeks. She must consider what she would do, what she would be, without money, which she has always taken for granted, even though her half-brother Phillip keeps insisting that he doesn't really want her money, that it's a game. But while they wait for the lawyers to decide, Julia becomes involved in the affairs of the socially prominent Rankin family, whose black sheep daughter (a suffragette, really!) has just died. The family--except for Glynnis, Julia's boarding school friend--don't want the scandal of suicide, but murder would be far, far worse.
August 30, 2019
האמת שהספר הזה מתנדנד בין 2 כוכבים ל 3 ולא הצלחתי להחליט, לכן הכרעתי לתת לו ניקוד של 3 כוכבים כך שיזכה מההפקר של חוסר ההחלטיות שלי.
הספר אמור להיות הראשון בסידרת ג'וליה קייד ואני בספק אם אמשיך לספרים הבאים אלא אם יהיו עבורי בחינם כמו ספר הזה.
ג'וליה קייד כמעט בת ה- 25 חוזרת לארה"ב לאחר שהות ארוכה בלונדון לאחר שאחיה החורג, פיליפ,
מערער על הצוואה ועל זכותה לחלק בנכסיו של אביה. נישואי הוריה לא היו מרנינים, יחד עם זאת הוריה חיו יחד 6 שנים עד שאימא שלה נהרגה בתאונת דרכים. הצוואה שנמצאה, אינה מזכירה את ג'וליה ולכן אחיה סבור כי אין לה חלק בירושה.
השנים שנות ה 20 של המאה ה 20. נשים רק זכו בזכות הצבעה בארה"ב אבל הן לא רשאיות לנהל את הנכסים שלהן בעצמן. ג'וליה תלויה בטוב ליבו של אחיה שיעביר לה כספים ועתה, אם יוחלט שהיא אכן לא זכאית לכספי הירושה שלה, היא עומדת בפני משבר אמיתי שחייב אותה להתחתן בניגוד לרצונה.
קו עלילה אחד בספר עוסק בעירעור על הצוואה, על התוצאות של העירעור הזה ועל המשמעויות שלו. לטעמי החלק הזה בעלילה נמרח ותופס מקום נרחב ומשמעותי בלי הצדקה.
קו העלילה הזה לא בנוי טוב בכלל. אם הספר היה עוסק רק בו הוא היה מקבל אצלי כוכב אחד.
מסתבר שבארה"ב היה ניתן לבחון את תקפות הצוואה ע"י מעיין חבר מושבעים משפטי של משרד עורכי דין, או בפני שופט בבית משפט.
חבר המושבעים במקרה הזה היה לא הוגן בצורות קיצוניות כל שכן היה ברור שההחחטה שלהם תשאיר את ג'וליה ללא הכנסה ונתונה לחסדי זרים.
בנוסף, מסתבר שפיליפ מערער על הצוואה בשל הלחצים של דודתו שפשוט לא יכלה לסבול את אימא של ג'וליה. גם לאחר שדודתו מתה באופן מפתיע, הוא לא מושך ידו מהעירעור אף על פי שהוא יורש ממנה עושר רב ורק לאחר שג'וליה מזכירה לו התערבות בינהם, הוא מוכן להכריז עליה כמנצחת.
אבל, לטענתו הוא לא היה מנשל את ג'וליה מהצוואה והכל היה משחק.
בכלל הדמות של פיליפ עמומה ובלתי ברורה. לא חיבבתי אותו כלל, אבל נראה שהוא אדם בודד שמחפש חברה וחיזוקים מאחותו למחצה.
בקו העלילה השני, ג'וליה מנסה לפתור תעלומת מותה של נעמי רנקין, אחות של גלדיס רנקין שלמדה עם ג'וליה שנה.
העלילה הזו נקשרת לעלילה הראשונה בגלל שפיליפ מתמרן את ג'וליה להתערבות על פיה אם ג'וליה תצליח להוכיח שנעמי נרצחה, פיליפ יוותר על תביעתו לכספי הירושה. אם היא לא תצליח להוכיח, היא תוותר על הירושה שלה. התערבות מטופשת ומטומטמת שאין בה שום דבר עבור הגיבורה ורק נועדה ליצור איזה קשר מלאכותי בין העלילות.
דווקא העלילה השניה מעניינת יותר אף כי היא מתפתחת לאט וסובלת מהמון הפרעות בשל קו העלילה שעוסק בצוואה.
נעמי היתה סופרג'סטית ולוחמת לזכויות נשים. אחיה, צ'סטר נישל אותה מזכויותיה בצוואת הוריהם כך שהוא לא משחרר לה את כספה.
למעשה העובדה שהיא לא מקבלת את ירושתה מחייבת אותה לחיות בכלא תחת קורת גגו של צ'סטר ואישתו נולדה. הוא גם עושה לה תנאים דרקונים אותם היא לא מוכנה לקיים והיא מוכנה לחיות בעוני מחפיר רק כדי לא להיכנע לרצונותיו ולא להינשא.
גופתה של נעמי נמצאת ובתחילה קיימת סברה כי מדובר בהתאבדות. יחד עם זאת ככל שהעלילה מתפתחת והסודות מתגלים מתחילה להתגבש התחושה שמדובר דווקא ברצח ולא התאבדות.
מי שחוקרת את התעלומה בשם גלדיס, זו ג'וליה קייד כאמור בשל ההתערבות עם פיליפ וגם בשל הבקשה המפורשת של גלדיס שנמצאת עדין תחת חסותו של צ'סטר, האח האיום והנורא.
פרק החשיפה בעייתי ביותר ומצביע על כך שהסופרת לא חשבה עד הסוף על פתרון התעלומה. בפרק הזה נערמות עבירות על גבי עבירות, ופגיעות על פגיעות בנעמי, בזכותה על גופה ובפרטיותה. אבל בתירוץ מצוץ מהאצבע שצ'סטר יפעיל את הקשרים שלו במשטרה ובפרקליטות וכך תחסם כל חקירה, העבירות האלה והעבריינים שביצעו אותם נותרות בתוך המשפחה ולא נחקרות ולא מטופלות ע"י רשויות החוק.
ברור שרשויות החוק לא תמיד נקיות כפיים במיוחד כשמדובר במשפחה עשירה, אבל כשמדובר באונס, סימום, ביצוע אקט פולשני כירורגי בגוף של אחר בלי הסכמתו והפקרת האחר לדמם עד מוותר אני חושבת שזה קצת מוגזם להשאיר את הצדק נסתר בין כתלי בית האחוזה העשירה של המשפחה.
גם מוגזם לטעון שהמצפון שלהם יעשה את הצדק עם נעמי. נו, זו מחשבה נאיבית ומטופשת לחלוטין בקונסטלציה הקיימת. אם כוחות המשפחתיים חברו לבצע את כל האמור מעלה מבלי שמצפונם ייסר אותם, למה הסופרת סבורה שדווקא הוצאת העוולות האלה לאור ע"י ג'וליה קייד תפעיל את המצפון שלהם?
כל הדמויות המשפחתיות במשפחת רנקין מזעזעות עד מחפירות וחלקן ראויות לכיסא חשמלי בשל חלקן במוות של נעמי. יחד עם זאת התיאור התקופתי והגישה שמאפיינת אותן נאמנה היסטורית והסופרת מצליחה להשיג תיאור אוטנטי.
כשהיא מתגברת על בילבול השכל של הצוואה, העליחה בציר המוות של נעמי קולחת ודווקא קיצבית ומעניינת.
את הספר קראתי דרך אמזון אנלימיטד אולי אם יתר הספרים יהיו בהסדר הזה אשקול לקרוא אותם.
הספר אמור להיות הראשון בסידרת ג'וליה קייד ואני בספק אם אמשיך לספרים הבאים אלא אם יהיו עבורי בחינם כמו ספר הזה.
ג'וליה קייד כמעט בת ה- 25 חוזרת לארה"ב לאחר שהות ארוכה בלונדון לאחר שאחיה החורג, פיליפ,
מערער על הצוואה ועל זכותה לחלק בנכסיו של אביה. נישואי הוריה לא היו מרנינים, יחד עם זאת הוריה חיו יחד 6 שנים עד שאימא שלה נהרגה בתאונת דרכים. הצוואה שנמצאה, אינה מזכירה את ג'וליה ולכן אחיה סבור כי אין לה חלק בירושה.
השנים שנות ה 20 של המאה ה 20. נשים רק זכו בזכות הצבעה בארה"ב אבל הן לא רשאיות לנהל את הנכסים שלהן בעצמן. ג'וליה תלויה בטוב ליבו של אחיה שיעביר לה כספים ועתה, אם יוחלט שהיא אכן לא זכאית לכספי הירושה שלה, היא עומדת בפני משבר אמיתי שחייב אותה להתחתן בניגוד לרצונה.
קו עלילה אחד בספר עוסק בעירעור על הצוואה, על התוצאות של העירעור הזה ועל המשמעויות שלו. לטעמי החלק הזה בעלילה נמרח ותופס מקום נרחב ומשמעותי בלי הצדקה.
קו העלילה הזה לא בנוי טוב בכלל. אם הספר היה עוסק רק בו הוא היה מקבל אצלי כוכב אחד.
מסתבר שבארה"ב היה ניתן לבחון את תקפות הצוואה ע"י מעיין חבר מושבעים משפטי של משרד עורכי דין, או בפני שופט בבית משפט.
חבר המושבעים במקרה הזה היה לא הוגן בצורות קיצוניות כל שכן היה ברור שההחחטה שלהם תשאיר את ג'וליה ללא הכנסה ונתונה לחסדי זרים.
בנוסף, מסתבר שפיליפ מערער על הצוואה בשל הלחצים של דודתו שפשוט לא יכלה לסבול את אימא של ג'וליה. גם לאחר שדודתו מתה באופן מפתיע, הוא לא מושך ידו מהעירעור אף על פי שהוא יורש ממנה עושר רב ורק לאחר שג'וליה מזכירה לו התערבות בינהם, הוא מוכן להכריז עליה כמנצחת.
אבל, לטענתו הוא לא היה מנשל את ג'וליה מהצוואה והכל היה משחק.
בכלל הדמות של פיליפ עמומה ובלתי ברורה. לא חיבבתי אותו כלל, אבל נראה שהוא אדם בודד שמחפש חברה וחיזוקים מאחותו למחצה.
בקו העלילה השני, ג'וליה מנסה לפתור תעלומת מותה של נעמי רנקין, אחות של גלדיס רנקין שלמדה עם ג'וליה שנה.
העלילה הזו נקשרת לעלילה הראשונה בגלל שפיליפ מתמרן את ג'וליה להתערבות על פיה אם ג'וליה תצליח להוכיח שנעמי נרצחה, פיליפ יוותר על תביעתו לכספי הירושה. אם היא לא תצליח להוכיח, היא תוותר על הירושה שלה. התערבות מטופשת ומטומטמת שאין בה שום דבר עבור הגיבורה ורק נועדה ליצור איזה קשר מלאכותי בין העלילות.
דווקא העלילה השניה מעניינת יותר אף כי היא מתפתחת לאט וסובלת מהמון הפרעות בשל קו העלילה שעוסק בצוואה.
נעמי היתה סופרג'סטית ולוחמת לזכויות נשים. אחיה, צ'סטר נישל אותה מזכויותיה בצוואת הוריהם כך שהוא לא משחרר לה את כספה.
למעשה העובדה שהיא לא מקבלת את ירושתה מחייבת אותה לחיות בכלא תחת קורת גגו של צ'סטר ואישתו נולדה. הוא גם עושה לה תנאים דרקונים אותם היא לא מוכנה לקיים והיא מוכנה לחיות בעוני מחפיר רק כדי לא להיכנע לרצונותיו ולא להינשא.
גופתה של נעמי נמצאת ובתחילה קיימת סברה כי מדובר בהתאבדות. יחד עם זאת ככל שהעלילה מתפתחת והסודות מתגלים מתחילה להתגבש התחושה שמדובר דווקא ברצח ולא התאבדות.
מי שחוקרת את התעלומה בשם גלדיס, זו ג'וליה קייד כאמור בשל ההתערבות עם פיליפ וגם בשל הבקשה המפורשת של גלדיס שנמצאת עדין תחת חסותו של צ'סטר, האח האיום והנורא.
פרק החשיפה בעייתי ביותר ומצביע על כך שהסופרת לא חשבה עד הסוף על פתרון התעלומה. בפרק הזה נערמות עבירות על גבי עבירות, ופגיעות על פגיעות בנעמי, בזכותה על גופה ובפרטיותה. אבל בתירוץ מצוץ מהאצבע שצ'סטר יפעיל את הקשרים שלו במשטרה ובפרקליטות וכך תחסם כל חקירה, העבירות האלה והעבריינים שביצעו אותם נותרות בתוך המשפחה ולא נחקרות ולא מטופלות ע"י רשויות החוק.
ברור שרשויות החוק לא תמיד נקיות כפיים במיוחד כשמדובר במשפחה עשירה, אבל כשמדובר באונס, סימום, ביצוע אקט פולשני כירורגי בגוף של אחר בלי הסכמתו והפקרת האחר לדמם עד מוותר אני חושבת שזה קצת מוגזם להשאיר את הצדק נסתר בין כתלי בית האחוזה העשירה של המשפחה.
גם מוגזם לטעון שהמצפון שלהם יעשה את הצדק עם נעמי. נו, זו מחשבה נאיבית ומטופשת לחלוטין בקונסטלציה הקיימת. אם כוחות המשפחתיים חברו לבצע את כל האמור מעלה מבלי שמצפונם ייסר אותם, למה הסופרת סבורה שדווקא הוצאת העוולות האלה לאור ע"י ג'וליה קייד תפעיל את המצפון שלהם?
כל הדמויות המשפחתיות במשפחת רנקין מזעזעות עד מחפירות וחלקן ראויות לכיסא חשמלי בשל חלקן במוות של נעמי. יחד עם זאת התיאור התקופתי והגישה שמאפיינת אותן נאמנה היסטורית והסופרת מצליחה להשיג תיאור אוטנטי.
כשהיא מתגברת על בילבול השכל של הצוואה, העליחה בציר המוות של נעמי קולחת ודווקא קיצבית ומעניינת.
את הספר קראתי דרך אמזון אנלימיטד אולי אם יתר הספרים יהיו בהסדר הזה אשקול לקרוא אותם.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 22, 2019
Very much a story of two halves this one. One half was engrossing and atmospheric and the other was disjointed and felt very thrown together and almost bolted on to the tale.
First off, the good bit. Julia's life has been rather charmed, admittedly she has lost both her father and her mother but she has enough wealth to live her own life and is even dabbling in her own printing imprint - Capriole is very much a dabble at this point in time, no matter what Julia seems to think. As her 25th Birthday approaches she has to return to the States as her half-brother is disputing that she is entitled to the money left her under her father's will and she desperately needs to salvage her route to independence. Julia is fiercely independant but doesn't really see herself as that, she just sees herself as a modern woman living life on her terms. This is related so matter of factly that it does feel natural and sets the character well on the page.
The backdrop for the story is Prohibition New York, but it is in the world of privilege so there is plenty of alcohol flowing. Again, this is seen as being part of the natural order of things - if you have wealth you can have whatever you want and the law can be safely ignored. Private clubs and homes serve liquor with impunity and nary a whiff of the police raiding them. It is also very noticeable that the lives of wealthy women seem to just centre around which party or club they can visit that night and days are spent more or less idle. The descriptions of the locales and the clothing are brief but really place the reader in the setting.
Julia herself is feisty and sarcastic. She is clearly an intelligent woman and this does come across well on the page and her aversion to be shackled to a man (as she sees marriage) seems perfectly natural. I liked that although she sees the need for Equality For Women she is not politically active or motivated to be so, makes a nice change for female protagonists in books set in this era. As she spends more time with the Rankins and the Winterjays she does become more politically aware but still seems pretty laissez faire about it all, preferring to concentrate on saving her fortune by any means necessary.
The rest of the cast, and this is a large cast, are okay. Most of them are pretty much two dimensional shades of a particular type. Glennis is the flighty, society girl; happy enough to shock but all she wants is a husband. Phillip is a playboy type, only really interested in accumulating and creating art with a nice line in dissolution on the side. We never really get to know too much about the others, even Jack, Alice and the ill-fated Naomi.
The "bad" bit is really the mystery of Naomi's death. It just feels uncomfortable on the page and by Glennis convincing Julia that something is wrong with the circumstances the resulting investigation and suppositions really don't fit with the rest of the fictional world. It honestly felt bolted in to the story to add a bit of excitement, when there were so many ways this could have been added (should the author desire) without making the story feel like two separate stories. Honestly, for me it was clunky and just didn't work.
First off, the good bit. Julia's life has been rather charmed, admittedly she has lost both her father and her mother but she has enough wealth to live her own life and is even dabbling in her own printing imprint - Capriole is very much a dabble at this point in time, no matter what Julia seems to think. As her 25th Birthday approaches she has to return to the States as her half-brother is disputing that she is entitled to the money left her under her father's will and she desperately needs to salvage her route to independence. Julia is fiercely independant but doesn't really see herself as that, she just sees herself as a modern woman living life on her terms. This is related so matter of factly that it does feel natural and sets the character well on the page.
The backdrop for the story is Prohibition New York, but it is in the world of privilege so there is plenty of alcohol flowing. Again, this is seen as being part of the natural order of things - if you have wealth you can have whatever you want and the law can be safely ignored. Private clubs and homes serve liquor with impunity and nary a whiff of the police raiding them. It is also very noticeable that the lives of wealthy women seem to just centre around which party or club they can visit that night and days are spent more or less idle. The descriptions of the locales and the clothing are brief but really place the reader in the setting.
Julia herself is feisty and sarcastic. She is clearly an intelligent woman and this does come across well on the page and her aversion to be shackled to a man (as she sees marriage) seems perfectly natural. I liked that although she sees the need for Equality For Women she is not politically active or motivated to be so, makes a nice change for female protagonists in books set in this era. As she spends more time with the Rankins and the Winterjays she does become more politically aware but still seems pretty laissez faire about it all, preferring to concentrate on saving her fortune by any means necessary.
The rest of the cast, and this is a large cast, are okay. Most of them are pretty much two dimensional shades of a particular type. Glennis is the flighty, society girl; happy enough to shock but all she wants is a husband. Phillip is a playboy type, only really interested in accumulating and creating art with a nice line in dissolution on the side. We never really get to know too much about the others, even Jack, Alice and the ill-fated Naomi.
The "bad" bit is really the mystery of Naomi's death. It just feels uncomfortable on the page and by Glennis convincing Julia that something is wrong with the circumstances the resulting investigation and suppositions really don't fit with the rest of the fictional world. It honestly felt bolted in to the story to add a bit of excitement, when there were so many ways this could have been added (should the author desire) without making the story feel like two separate stories. Honestly, for me it was clunky and just didn't work.
Read
August 5, 2019DNF
This was a book I was so excited to get into - 1920s Manhattan, the suffrage movement, it all sounded right up my alley! Unfortunately, the execution was a little lacking for my tastes and I had to DNF this one.
Thanks so much to Little Bird Publicity for sending me an eARC for an honest review. As always, all opinions are my own.
This book follows Julia Kydd, a young woman who returns to New York after the death of her estranged father and the contestation of his will by her half-brother, Phillip. While visiting, one of her friend's sisters, Naomi, is found dead. An outspoken activist of women's suffrage, Naomi had more than one target on her back. However, when the death is ruled a suicide, Julia isn't convinced. Apparently, part of the plot included Phillip suggesting that if Julia can prove Naomi was murdered, he will drop the contestation - however, I didn't make it that far into the book.
As previously mentioned, I didn't end up finishing this book. There was a lot that, in theory, I was really on board with. But my biggest problem was the writing style and pacing, which made it difficult for me to get my usual 100 pages in before making the decision to DNF a book. The language used felt a little ~clunky~ is the best way to describe it. There were a lot of big words, which, I don't have a problem with, in principle, but they just felt like they were thrown in to make the book seem more intellectual than it actually was.
I know a few other reviews have also mentioned the pacing, so I won't discuss it ad nauseam but I think that things took too long to get going to the point where I was invested and wanted to continue. I made it 111 pages in and was still waiting for the wager with Phillip to appear. I don't mind a slower-burn, but if it's in the synopsis, I feel like it should be a part of at least the first third of the book.
I truly am disappointed because the subject matter of this one seemed like it would be something I would really enjoy. However, the lack of any real plot development in the third of the book that I read signalled to me that this one wasn't going to go anywhere any time soon.
Overall, I know some readers who have been able to push past the slower parts did really enjoy this book, and perhaps, if I had the patience to do the same I would have ended up really enjoying it. Even though this one had some problems for me, I would still say pick it up if it sounds interesting to you, who knows, you might love it more than I did.
This was a book I was so excited to get into - 1920s Manhattan, the suffrage movement, it all sounded right up my alley! Unfortunately, the execution was a little lacking for my tastes and I had to DNF this one.
Thanks so much to Little Bird Publicity for sending me an eARC for an honest review. As always, all opinions are my own.
This book follows Julia Kydd, a young woman who returns to New York after the death of her estranged father and the contestation of his will by her half-brother, Phillip. While visiting, one of her friend's sisters, Naomi, is found dead. An outspoken activist of women's suffrage, Naomi had more than one target on her back. However, when the death is ruled a suicide, Julia isn't convinced. Apparently, part of the plot included Phillip suggesting that if Julia can prove Naomi was murdered, he will drop the contestation - however, I didn't make it that far into the book.
As previously mentioned, I didn't end up finishing this book. There was a lot that, in theory, I was really on board with. But my biggest problem was the writing style and pacing, which made it difficult for me to get my usual 100 pages in before making the decision to DNF a book. The language used felt a little ~clunky~ is the best way to describe it. There were a lot of big words, which, I don't have a problem with, in principle, but they just felt like they were thrown in to make the book seem more intellectual than it actually was.
I know a few other reviews have also mentioned the pacing, so I won't discuss it ad nauseam but I think that things took too long to get going to the point where I was invested and wanted to continue. I made it 111 pages in and was still waiting for the wager with Phillip to appear. I don't mind a slower-burn, but if it's in the synopsis, I feel like it should be a part of at least the first third of the book.
I truly am disappointed because the subject matter of this one seemed like it would be something I would really enjoy. However, the lack of any real plot development in the third of the book that I read signalled to me that this one wasn't going to go anywhere any time soon.
Overall, I know some readers who have been able to push past the slower parts did really enjoy this book, and perhaps, if I had the patience to do the same I would have ended up really enjoying it. Even though this one had some problems for me, I would still say pick it up if it sounds interesting to you, who knows, you might love it more than I did.
July 13, 2019
I'm kind of sorry I wasted a First Reads pick on this book. I'll tolerate some things I don't like for the sake of a plot (murder in a mystery or thriller etc.) but I won't tolerate fortune telling, contacting spirits and the like--and that comes up in the first chapter of this book so I was done.
The part I did read reminded me of when I used to read Grace Livingston Hill novels--in that I had to remember it was set at a time when women had fewer rights and opportunities than we do in today's world. Julia seems to have a business idea (it sounds like she has a printing press) but doesn't have the money from her trust to fund her business ideas. She's trying to get that but her trustee is putting up roadblocks. (Though I didn't read that far, I'm going to suspect that he perhaps dipped into her trust fund and didn't want her to find out that the money she thought was there, wasn't.)
The part I did read reminded me of when I used to read Grace Livingston Hill novels--in that I had to remember it was set at a time when women had fewer rights and opportunities than we do in today's world. Julia seems to have a business idea (it sounds like she has a printing press) but doesn't have the money from her trust to fund her business ideas. She's trying to get that but her trustee is putting up roadblocks. (Though I didn't read that far, I'm going to suspect that he perhaps dipped into her trust fund and didn't want her to find out that the money she thought was there, wasn't.)
September 7, 2019
Julia is an interesting and strong character. I wonder how many women in 1924 in the USA would openly have a married lover and visa versa. This book was engaging on one level, but felt sometwhat flat with the other characters, with Naomi's death and ensuing inquiries into it. The twists and turns of that investigation and how it ended was pretty darn suspenseful and clever! I might read the next in the series. This was a Kindle First-Read.
I thought the writing style was inventive. It had the tone of a period piece. I loved how many wonderful words I looked up. Descriptions often included what one would see, smell, hear, taste.
An example is at the end of a dramatic seance, in the dark, an upset gullible woman was holding hands with Julia, jerked their hands to her own bosom, and started to cry. I had to read this paragraph very carefully to fully appreciate it.
I thought the writing style was inventive. It had the tone of a period piece. I loved how many wonderful words I looked up. Descriptions often included what one would see, smell, hear, taste.
A lot of subtle information was embedded in the seemingly descriptive passages. Early in the book we are introduced to Glennis’s sister, Vivian.
But downed gin and a swift getaway were not to be. Glennis’s sister lifted the phonograph’s needle. Vivian Winterjay stood across the room in a spotlight of wary silence, mustering one of those small, composed smiles meant to carry one through any occasion—the bare-knuckle refuge of impeccable breeding. Her party was clearly not going well, not well at all, yet her fair features glowed serenely in the lamplight. It seemed fate had lavished the family beauty on Vivian, leaving only scraps for the younger Glennis, and discreet swell of expectant maternity only deepened her radiance. A special treat was waiting, she announced, and they were all to proceed through to the dining room.
An example is at the end of a dramatic seance, in the dark, an upset gullible woman was holding hands with Julia, jerked their hands to her own bosom, and started to cry. I had to read this paragraph very carefully to fully appreciate it.
“the woman’s fingers twitched in Julia’s left hand. In a rattle of bracelets, she jerked it toward her bosom. Julia twisted to ease the angle of her elbow, pulled painfully toward a gullible nest of grief and crepe de chine. The woman began to cry.”Julia was obsessed with fonts and specialty printing. Writing about the special fonts was a distraction especially because we were not provided a visual.
September 3, 2019
At first I thought this book was about a woman in the mid 1920's who was losing her only income due to a scheming half brother and a poorly written will, but it turned out to be so much more. By the end we get incite into a time when women in the US had the vote but not much say over what happened to their own money and by extension to their own lives. We also get a murder investigation with an unexpected solution. The characters are diverse and interesting and range from the rich and powerful to the poverty ridden Alice Paul, an historical figure whose work with the National Women's Rights Party made it (in part) possible for women to run for political office. As an added extra, the book includes one more character from history- the man (who used the pseudonym S.S. Van Dine) who wrote the enjoyable Philo Vance mystery series. A most interesting and enjoyable read.
January 9, 2020
Triggering with the poor treatment of women and the glib way rape and abusing females, a horrific way of killing the victim, no real punishment for ANY of the SEVERAL people involved in the death, and a general consensus of, "well, shes dead so let's just move on."
I guess one could compare it to China Town, but the tone of the book was so uneven - one second an armchair mystery, the next grim and gritty and disturbing.
Oh, and boring. Also boring. I skimmed huge chunks without missing out on any key information.
I guess one could compare it to China Town, but the tone of the book was so uneven - one second an armchair mystery, the next grim and gritty and disturbing.
Oh, and boring. Also boring. I skimmed huge chunks without missing out on any key information.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 14, 2020
Jazz Age Detection
Review of the Lake Union Publishing paperback (2019)
The fiction of the post-World War I era of the 1920-30's has been a long time favourite of mine. It has some of my most loved works by Fitzgerald and Hemingway. It includes the "Golden Age of Crime" by writers such as Christie and Sayers. So a lost generation/jazz-age detection series combined with a love of books and publishing is like catnip to me.
Julia Kydd is an orphaned heiress who was in the process of establishing a small fine print publishing business in England. She is forced to come to New York City to settle an inheritance dispute with her half-brother Philip Kydd. In New York, she becomes entangled in the family affairs of a friend whose suffragette sister has died under suspicious circumstances. In order to aid her friend and to settle the inheritance (on a bet with Philip) Julia sets out to solve the mystery.
Relative Fortunes takes a leisurely amount of time to set everything into place, which is understandable in an origin story. Once the investigation gets rolling and the solution is revealed it becomes a rollercoaster of wild revelations. For the crime reading buff there is a series of easter egg cameo appearances by an upcoming writer named Willard Wright, the real name behind the pseudonym S.S. Van Dine, author of the Philo Vance series of mysteries (1925-1935). Philip Kydd apparently helps the New York City authorities with the solutions to mysterious crimes in his spare time, although he doesn't do much detection in this first book. Wright is planning to use Philip as the basis for his future detective, but it is Julia that seems to be the detecting force in the family.
I thoroughly enjoyed this first work of what is expected to be a continuing series. I am already on to the 2nd book which is called Passing Fancies (2020). It involves a mystery centred around a jazz singer in the Harlem Renaissance.
I discovered the Julia Kydd series through the excellent selection at Toronto's mystery book store Sleuth of Baker Street.
Trivia
Marlowe Benn is actually a pseudonym of writer Margaret L. Benton.
Review of the Lake Union Publishing paperback (2019)
The fiction of the post-World War I era of the 1920-30's has been a long time favourite of mine. It has some of my most loved works by Fitzgerald and Hemingway. It includes the "Golden Age of Crime" by writers such as Christie and Sayers. So a lost generation/jazz-age detection series combined with a love of books and publishing is like catnip to me.
Julia Kydd is an orphaned heiress who was in the process of establishing a small fine print publishing business in England. She is forced to come to New York City to settle an inheritance dispute with her half-brother Philip Kydd. In New York, she becomes entangled in the family affairs of a friend whose suffragette sister has died under suspicious circumstances. In order to aid her friend and to settle the inheritance (on a bet with Philip) Julia sets out to solve the mystery.
Relative Fortunes takes a leisurely amount of time to set everything into place, which is understandable in an origin story. Once the investigation gets rolling and the solution is revealed it becomes a rollercoaster of wild revelations. For the crime reading buff there is a series of easter egg cameo appearances by an upcoming writer named Willard Wright, the real name behind the pseudonym S.S. Van Dine, author of the Philo Vance series of mysteries (1925-1935). Philip Kydd apparently helps the New York City authorities with the solutions to mysterious crimes in his spare time, although he doesn't do much detection in this first book. Wright is planning to use Philip as the basis for his future detective, but it is Julia that seems to be the detecting force in the family.
I thoroughly enjoyed this first work of what is expected to be a continuing series. I am already on to the 2nd book which is called Passing Fancies (2020). It involves a mystery centred around a jazz singer in the Harlem Renaissance.
I discovered the Julia Kydd series through the excellent selection at Toronto's mystery book store Sleuth of Baker Street.
Trivia
Marlowe Benn is actually a pseudonym of writer Margaret L. Benton.
July 15, 2022
There are several things to like about this historical novel. The time period, for one--Jazz Age America is an appealing setting for me. In this first novel, Benn doesn't make quite as much out of it as she might have done, but overall a good showing. Julia is, in the main, a great main character. I really like her--except when she's bickering with Philip and when Benn makes her shrill. In fact, most of the female characters turn shrill when they're upset. The shrillness was rather tedious, surely to goodness these women have different personalities and just might react in ways other than shrill when they're angry. The plot is pretty interesting. We know the family is covering up--but we have to figure out just what it is they are covering. Is it merely an unpleasant suicide? Perhaps Naomi's last effort to bring shame to her unpleasant relations? Or had one of her relatives had enough of her and so decided to end the outrageous behavior permanently. There's a nice little twist to the motive.
But...I'm still trying to figure out why Benn dragged in Willard Huntington Wright, other than to keep pointing out what an obnoxious man he supposedly was. Supposedly, we're setting up the idea that Wright (as S. S. Van Dine) based Philo Vance and his friend Markham on Philip and the lawyer Jack Van Dyne. That's fine. That's just dandy. Okay...then make Philip the detective. And funnel the tidbits about the murder to Wright so he can slap together his first detective novel. But--no. Julia is the amateur detective and the whole solution is hush-hush, top secret and Wright never learns a word of it. He just wanders on scene periodically so Philip can talk about what a nuisance he is and Julia can despise him. Wright serves no real purpose.
And back to Philip--he really is a piece of work. Putting Julia through the mill over her inheritance because he was bored and wanted to spice things up? And then prolonging it because she wouldn't just let him run roughshod over her and he thought she was a worthy adversary? Really? It just didn't go down well.
I can see the makings of a good series. IF we ditch the whole Wright thing. There's a nice bit at the end which promises that Philip may just turn over a new leaf and maybe he'll become tolerable if he shows up in future installments. ★★ and 1/2 [rounded up here]--with hopes that future stories will build on good bits.
First posted on my blog My Reader's Block. Please request permission before reposting portions of review. Thanks.
But...I'm still trying to figure out why Benn dragged in Willard Huntington Wright, other than to keep pointing out what an obnoxious man he supposedly was. Supposedly, we're setting up the idea that Wright (as S. S. Van Dine) based Philo Vance and his friend Markham on Philip and the lawyer Jack Van Dyne. That's fine. That's just dandy. Okay...then make Philip the detective. And funnel the tidbits about the murder to Wright so he can slap together his first detective novel. But--no. Julia is the amateur detective and the whole solution is hush-hush, top secret and Wright never learns a word of it. He just wanders on scene periodically so Philip can talk about what a nuisance he is and Julia can despise him. Wright serves no real purpose.
And back to Philip--he really is a piece of work. Putting Julia through the mill over her inheritance because he was bored and wanted to spice things up? And then prolonging it because she wouldn't just let him run roughshod over her and he thought she was a worthy adversary? Really? It just didn't go down well.
I can see the makings of a good series. IF we ditch the whole Wright thing. There's a nice bit at the end which promises that Philip may just turn over a new leaf and maybe he'll become tolerable if he shows up in future installments. ★★ and 1/2 [rounded up here]--with hopes that future stories will build on good bits.
First posted on my blog My Reader's Block. Please request permission before reposting portions of review. Thanks.
June 28, 2020
This has a lot more substance than most of the frothy mysteries set in the 1920s that have come out in the last few years. Women's rights and their less than equal status in society is a major theme that runs through out this story. It effects Julia, the protagonist, who finds herself at her brother's whims when he challenges her inheritance. It forces her to take on a wager with her brother to prove her friend's sister's death is murder to safeguard what is rightly hers. The investigation into Naomi's death, a strident woman suffragist who is considering running for Congress, reveals the complicated issues associated with women's rights because there were many women who truly believed and agitated for little to no rights for women. They believed a woman could achieve her influence in the sphere of the home and influencing her husband. The issue is not presented as simple as how backward the people were in the early 20th century, particularly for how hard it was for the working class and poor women.
Saying all that, women's rights does not drown out the rest of the novel. Julia is deeply involved in printing books and runs her own press. There is a lot of information about bookmaking and print type. While it is interesting, I think it is too much.
The beginning of the book is slow. The investigation doesn't get going for a while and the pace suffers. I don't like a lot of the characters. Julia's brother is a real prat. Sometimes he's friendly and others he's a little boy pulling the wings off of flies and doesn't realize that is painful. Many of Naomi's family are just downright nasty.
The writing is good. There are twists and turns and the book has substance. It is not one you are likely to forget as soon as you finish it like some popcorn cozies. I became more engrossed as the book went on. There were definitely surprises at the end. A solid story and mystery. I'd like to know what happens to Julia in the future.
Saying all that, women's rights does not drown out the rest of the novel. Julia is deeply involved in printing books and runs her own press. There is a lot of information about bookmaking and print type. While it is interesting, I think it is too much.
The beginning of the book is slow. The investigation doesn't get going for a while and the pace suffers. I don't like a lot of the characters. Julia's brother is a real prat. Sometimes he's friendly and others he's a little boy pulling the wings off of flies and doesn't realize that is painful. Many of Naomi's family are just downright nasty.
The writing is good. There are twists and turns and the book has substance. It is not one you are likely to forget as soon as you finish it like some popcorn cozies. I became more engrossed as the book went on. There were definitely surprises at the end. A solid story and mystery. I'd like to know what happens to Julia in the future.
August 2, 2019
Thank you Little Bird Publicity and Amazon Publishing for the free book.
Julia is about to lose her inheritance due to a stipulation in her father's will. Her brother offers her a deal she can't refuse. He tells her that if she can prove that a local suffragette's death was a murder, and not a suicide, he will give her back her share of the inheritance. Thus begins Julia Kydd's investigation into what happened to Naomi Rankin.
I will preface this review with the fact that I am not much of a historical fiction reader. That being said, I adored this book. I loved the swankiness of it. I enjoyed the verbiage and I thought that the writing flowed effortlessly.
Julia Kydd and her naive yet endearing friend, Glennis (Naomi's sister) were two sleuths who captured my heart.
I even found myself drawn to Julia's brother, Philip. He was one of the most dynamic in the story and I enjoyed how he developed into someone I wasn't expecting.
This book helped me to appreciate my life as a woman in 2019. We have come a long way as women since 1924. It was eye opening to see the little nuances of life that we were not privy to.
I did feel a bit bogged down by the private press and book publishing aspect of the story. It felt a little over my head. I think that if I were given more background on it, I may have enjoyed that part more.
Overall, this is a great book! And I definitely look forward to reading more in the series as it is released!
Julia is about to lose her inheritance due to a stipulation in her father's will. Her brother offers her a deal she can't refuse. He tells her that if she can prove that a local suffragette's death was a murder, and not a suicide, he will give her back her share of the inheritance. Thus begins Julia Kydd's investigation into what happened to Naomi Rankin.
I will preface this review with the fact that I am not much of a historical fiction reader. That being said, I adored this book. I loved the swankiness of it. I enjoyed the verbiage and I thought that the writing flowed effortlessly.
Julia Kydd and her naive yet endearing friend, Glennis (Naomi's sister) were two sleuths who captured my heart.
I even found myself drawn to Julia's brother, Philip. He was one of the most dynamic in the story and I enjoyed how he developed into someone I wasn't expecting.
This book helped me to appreciate my life as a woman in 2019. We have come a long way as women since 1924. It was eye opening to see the little nuances of life that we were not privy to.
I did feel a bit bogged down by the private press and book publishing aspect of the story. It felt a little over my head. I think that if I were given more background on it, I may have enjoyed that part more.
Overall, this is a great book! And I definitely look forward to reading more in the series as it is released!
July 6, 2020
I finally found a book worth finishing -- believe me, I’ve started more than a few stories over the past few years but wouldn’t waste my time continuing to read them. This book, however, is well worth reading from beginning to end. One thing that especially makes me like the story is that there are profound statements throughout the book on subjects having to do with the treatment of women, both personally and in society. There are also insightful observations on having money and the lack of it, and it is clear that the author is a deep thinker. The situation of the main character, Julia Kydd, as she approaches her 25th birthday permits the author to delve into these matters and, in so doing, create a compelling story set in the early 1920s. There is a suspicious death that Julia investigates, but this is not really a murder mystery book, at least not in my opinion. The real story, which has nothing to do with the death, is about how Julia faces a tremendously challenging situation in her life with decisiveness and self-control, without feeling sorry for herself. The novel highlights how difficult things could be for women in the 1920s, and although things have improved a bit since then, women for the most part still have things harder compared to men. I would have given it 5 stars if the author had not done what most female authors do (I must add, Jane Austen was not guilty of that) ... however, I won’t go into it. Let me just say, all that aside, this is a very good book.
September 12, 2019
What began as a long, slow, not-sure-I-can-finish-it read for about 100 pages, turned out to be quite an interesting and enjoyable story. Taking place in 1920s as women recently earned the right to vote, this was a timely read with the upcoming 100th anniversary of women's suffrage movement. We meet Julia Kydd just before her 25th birthday after arriving in Manhattan from London to collect her share of an inheritance which she soon learns isn't to be. She makes a wager with her brother, Phillip, that if she can prove the recent mysterious death of her friend's sister was murder, she will be entitled to her share of the money. Julia becomes quite the sleuth, using her wits and smarts to piece together what really happened. As well, Julia's journey changes her and helps her discover what she truly wants for herself and if her desire to open her own private printing press can become reality. The story picks up considerably after its slow start and with a few twists and turns leads to a surprising conclusion. Glad I finished it!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 630 reviews