It’s another of those “hmm” moments … and I’m getting so many of them lately -- have only really enjoyed, unreservedly, one book in the last few months. I’d expected to love Guardian Angel, because it’s the sixth V.I. Warshawski novel I’ve read, and I loved the others, placing them in the four and five star category. So, what went askew with this one? I find myself wondering what mindspace Sara Paretsky was in when she wrote this one.
I got to like V.I. in the BBC Radio dramatization of Killing Orders (with Kathleen Turner and Martin Shaw, whom I adored at the time, so I listened in, on spec). Then I watched the Kathleen Turner movie, and was more or less hooked … read the first bunch of books and was sold on V.I., even if I don’t really care for Chicago as depicted here any more than I like the look of it in Due South. I think you have to be native to the place to love it … it’s way too much city for me. But ―
This is the first V.I.W. book in which Vic spends an inordinate amount of time, uh, well, bungling. She makes so many errors -- procedural, tactical, legal, personal -- that it’s a wonder she survives. She shouldn’t have. She’s always had a smart mouth, but in this book she’s shooting it off so often, so waspishly, I can’t imagine anyone wanting to be her friend, or assisting her.
Also, I have a problem with the book’s logistics. Plot development here relies heavily on flimsy connections. If the case she builds ever goes into court, I should think a thousand-buck-an-hour lawyer would utterly destroy it. Looking back over the novel, V.I. is too often overconfident, reckless, thoughtless, irresponsible, inconsiderate … inept, clumsy, even incompetent, and I *shudder* to write that, because Mizz W used to be the epitome of stealth, economic efficiency and smart-aleckiness (yes, I know there’s no such word).
Vic is 39 in this book, and -- sorry, guys -- the way Paretsky writes her, she’s showing every sign of early stage menopause! Speaking as a veteran of same, I recognize the scatterbrain, the inability to concentrate on details and predict consequences, as surely as I know the fatigue, pain levels, and general “flusteredness” that beset V.I. throughout.
I hardly think menopause is the point of what’s going on in the book (!) but I’m clueless as to why Paretsky would write the character this way, much less hang a long story on such flimsy wires. It’s not a “bad book” as such, but it’s far from the rewarding experience I’d hoped for.
Still, I finished it out, and remembering the novel’s good points I have to say three stars. It makes statements about racial equality, and the rights of the elderly to be respected and treated fairly; it paints a very vivid portrait of a city and a time -- c. 1990 -- that are worlds apart from where I am, and therefore intriguing, which is always a plus. It has some characters you genuinely like (Mr. Contreras is irresistible), and it has … dogs. [grins, chuckles] It also encapsulates a time … before mobile phones, omnipresent video surveillance, CCTV, drones and all the rest, that would make 90% of Vic’s shenanigans utterly impossible today. This in itself makes it a “historical,” adding to its interest.
What do I take away from this? Well -- Chicago is another planet! 1990 is another dimension. And American corporate law is just plain … bizarre.
Can’t give Guardian Angel four stars, but I will give it three. It’s probably more readable for people who haven’t read the earlier books and therefore come to it with certain expectations.