3.5-4* The positives first: such wonderful atmospheric tonality!
-The geographical setting of northern hemisphere climatic extremes, along with the richness and diversity of Iceland and Greenland (especially in contrast to dry Australia) is visually titillating.
-Thus it stimulates ones senses immediately, with a strong desire to be immersed further. You hear the wind, feel the cold air, see the ocean, birds and cliffs, touch the land and its people. Ridpath takes you on a journey!
-He cleverly interweaves this beautifully described environment so succulently throughout his plot, which is thoroughly delectable for a reader. Such is the author’s expertise in writing. My rating is very high. 5*
-Ostensibly, Ridpath also brings another level of interest & appreciation to the reader. A unique one; the history and culture of both Iceland & Greenland. He incorporates historical facts along with contemporary knowledge, research, academia, advisors for documentary film-makers etc. But in this plot the fiction causes friction with what is truly factual. It adds another dimension to it.
-Ridpath gives his tale depth and sincerity with a salute to the ancient character of Gudrid, The Wanderer (great title), at its core. She was the daughter in law of Erik the Red, travelling far to forge discoveries.
-The premise of this plot is based around the supposed theory that these early Norse explorers actually travelled to the American shores before Christopher Columbus, reaching the island of Nantucket. Supportive finds promoted this theory. Good idea! Higher rating still. 5*
-Two pieces of intriguing, yet questionable, historical artefacts surface. One is a rare Nth American shell necklace found in Greenland & another is a letter written by Columbus (to his brother), found in a Vatican archival document. Of course, they become both clues and evidence for both the Norse (American discovery) theory as well as a crime or two.
-In fact, three murders. I question the necessity of that many though? I don’t think it added much suspense. Rating slips a tad. 4.8*
-That these two artefacts query the ‘fact or fiction’ aspect of Icelandic history and discoveries, is enough in itself. Especially crucial is its impact upon the expert presenter, Eyglo, and the crew of the film documentary being made at the same time. Not to mention the myriad of advisors, researchers and archaeologists, past & present, who are involved. There are many possible murderers within this framework.
-Indeed, the found artefacts are dissected until secrets are finally told, identifying the culprit/s. The academic rivalry along with this new found evidence, certainly adds some surmountable tension and fascination to the plot. Hence there are highly relevant back stories, from the 1980’s, of particular characters and what their involvement was, and is. The consequences of decisions made. Rating is still high. 4.5-5*
-That filming occurs simultaneously as the first murder of an Italian tourist, Carlotta, who was bludgeoned to death in an historic Nth Iceland church, also increases suspicion. Particularly that she was linked with archaeological and historical academics herself whilst studying. Herein is a clue.
-But it is the film crew who discover the body. Was it by chance? Was it set up? By who? And what did Carlotta do, or know, that meant an end to her life?
-There are many thoughts but you want to find out who is telling the truth and who isn’t. That’s a guessing game alone! And how is this crime to be solved? Then the next?
-The three murders are briefly described and are not particularly graphic (a friend said "more Agatha Christie"?), with the main focus being upon the detective protagonist, Magnus, and his unique methods of deduction. The author puts the reader next to him in attempting to solve the mysteries. Rating still high. 4.5-5*
-Our detective has a tough job though. But who is he? If you haven't read prior Magnus books you aren't particularly up to date with his personal history; however, there is enough slips of information to give clues. Magnus seems a likeable enough character and has a vastly different take, or methodology, on how to solve murder crimes which also makes for interesting reading.
-Magnus moves into his investigation more from his experience of living and working as a detective in America. There is apparently a difference to the Icelandic method, which is discussed.
-Thus the technical aspects of crime-solving are embraced, Magnus style, with dubious concerns by others.
-Indeed there are red herrings throughout, which put you on one trail with Magnus, then another. But it is the secrets, the questionable inter-relationships and jealousies which cause more electricity in the plot's development. Though at times the current didn’t flow as there was just too much of it for me. Lowered rating slightly. 4.5*
-I decided long ago that many academics are an odd bunch and often narcissistic; their egos come first. In this plot it is the catalyst. Who is telling the truth? Is there more than one liar?
-Magnus must comb through every clue, interviewing people several times, much to their annoyance. Ever so slowly he goes, from one clue to another. Like a thousand piece jigsaw he’s trying hard to solve.
-He goes about his fossicking in his own style and time but it took a little too long though. This is when I lost interest. Something else needed to happen to reignite me. Rating moved down. 4*
-But the scenery and atmosphere along the journey made up for it plus the whodunnit aspect. Thus my rating hovered around 4-4.5*
-Even though I had guessed a few suspects, including the actual culprit, it didn’t deter. I read on but still thought it could change again. But it was a bit too long. Did it need editing? Rating slipped a tad. 4*
-Ridpath's writing style evokes a well researched story. Back up my rating goes. 4.5* But gosh, those character & place names did my head in! OK, down the rating goes again. 4* A map and character list (with pronunciations) would have helped. A friend had the audio which I listened in on; it helped a little but I was still confused with who was who, as my friend was. And it was boring; we agreed that the narrator needed to be more expressive.
-By now there was a sense of some mediocrity hanging over this plot at times; probably created by it being drawn out, particularly the ending. I occasionally lost interest despite there being good characters, a good murder, or three, and an outstanding environment in which it was all set.
-Yet something was just ho-hum at times. Thus it lowered my grade again, 3.5-4*… such was this feeling I was left with. I tried to come to grips with this; what was it?
-Parts were slow, not much happened; though Ridpath’s attempt at spicing up relationships was perhaps designed to activate the reader. I’m not sure it worked or was even necessary at times.
-The subplot of a disgraced policeman added a little interest but I expect another sequel will erupt from this though. Nonetheless, I ponder whether Ridpath himself has trouble with the Magnus series continuing?
-This may well be the case. It’s taken several years for another book. Magnus definitely has an identity crisis being an American with roots in Iceland. Does the author too have a crisis of sorts? Just a thought.
-I did like the detail at the end of the book about Iceland. My rating hovering...3.5*… closer to 4*
-Overall, my final decision lies with the mediocre feeling I had. It was certainly not a biting, edge of your seat ‘thriller’ (3.5*) but a well described historical ‘simmering’ styled crime plot in a great setting...worth the journey alone. It’s 3.5-4*