What do you think?
Rate this book
Asesinato en la convención
La imaginación exuberante de Asimov atraviesa ahora una nueva frontera y penetra en el género de la novela policiaca. El resultado es «Asesinato en la convención». Un escritor de primera línea muere en circunstancias misteriosas, durante una Convención de Libreros Americanos. Guiado por la diestra mano de Asimov, el lector atravesará el complejo laberinto de intereses creados, envidias profesionales, trucos publicitarios… hasta llegar al sorprendente e impecable final.
287 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1976
27 people are currently reading
833 people want to read
About the author
Isaac Asimov
4,337 books27.7k followersWorks of prolific Russian-American writer Isaac Asimov include popular explanations of scientific principles,
The Foundation Trilogy
(1951-1953), and other volumes of fiction.
Isaac Asimov, a professor of biochemistry, wrote as a highly successful author, best known for his books.
Asimov, professor, generally considered of all time, edited more than five hundred books and ninety thousand letters and postcards. He published in nine of the ten major categories of the Dewey decimal classification but lacked only an entry in the category of philosophy (100).
People widely considered Asimov, a master of the genre alongside Robert Anson Heinlein and Arthur Charles Clarke as the "big three" during his lifetime. He later tied Galactic Empire and the Robot into the same universe as his most famous series to create a unified "future history" for his stories much like those that Heinlein pioneered and Cordwainer Smith and Poul Anderson previously produced. He penned "Nightfall," voted in 1964 as the best short story of all time; many persons still honor this title. He also produced well mysteries, fantasy, and a great quantity of nonfiction. Asimov used Paul French, the pen name, for the Lucky Starr, series of juvenile novels.
Most books of Asimov in a historical way go as far back to a time with possible question or concept at its simplest stage. He often provides and mentions well nationalities, birth, and death dates for persons and etymologies and pronunciation guides for technical terms. Guide to Science, the tripartite set Understanding Physics, and Chronology of Science and Discovery exemplify these books.
Asimov, a long-time member, reluctantly served as vice president of Mensa international and described some members of that organization as "brain-proud and aggressive about their IQs." He took more pleasure as president of the humanist association. The asteroid 5020 Asimov, the magazine Asimov's Science Fiction, an elementary school in Brooklyn in New York, and two different awards honor his name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_As...
Isaac Asimov, a professor of biochemistry, wrote as a highly successful author, best known for his books.
Asimov, professor, generally considered of all time, edited more than five hundred books and ninety thousand letters and postcards. He published in nine of the ten major categories of the Dewey decimal classification but lacked only an entry in the category of philosophy (100).
People widely considered Asimov, a master of the genre alongside Robert Anson Heinlein and Arthur Charles Clarke as the "big three" during his lifetime. He later tied Galactic Empire and the Robot into the same universe as his most famous series to create a unified "future history" for his stories much like those that Heinlein pioneered and Cordwainer Smith and Poul Anderson previously produced. He penned "Nightfall," voted in 1964 as the best short story of all time; many persons still honor this title. He also produced well mysteries, fantasy, and a great quantity of nonfiction. Asimov used Paul French, the pen name, for the Lucky Starr, series of juvenile novels.
Most books of Asimov in a historical way go as far back to a time with possible question or concept at its simplest stage. He often provides and mentions well nationalities, birth, and death dates for persons and etymologies and pronunciation guides for technical terms. Guide to Science, the tripartite set Understanding Physics, and Chronology of Science and Discovery exemplify these books.
Asimov, a long-time member, reluctantly served as vice president of Mensa international and described some members of that organization as "brain-proud and aggressive about their IQs." He took more pleasure as president of the humanist association. The asteroid 5020 Asimov, the magazine Asimov's Science Fiction, an elementary school in Brooklyn in New York, and two different awards honor his name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_As...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 137 reviews
October 10, 2012
Another bandwagon I couldn't resist the urge to jump on...
ASIMOV: Good morning team. Now, I know you're all eager to get started on Authorised Murder, but why don't we take a moment to introduce ourselves. You first.
ASIMOV: I'm Asimov. Overall concept. I'm proud to say that it's going to be a sexy, post-modernist mystery...
ASIMOV: You gotta be kidding. How are we ever-
ASIMOV: Shut up, Asimov. Next?
ASIMOV: Asimov. Plot and suspense.
ASIMOV: Like you're going to be able to do plot and suspense! I mean, if we'd had Asimov, it might have been different-
ASIMOV: I said shut up, Asimov! Asimov is busy with Robot 8, but I'm confident Asimov will do a fine job. Next!
ASIMOV: Asimov. Sex and romance.
ASIMOV: Oh come on Asimov, get real. What do you know about sex and romance? What was wrong with using Asimov?
ASIMOV: He's finishing The Gods Themselves. But Asimov knows his stuff. I'm sure we've all read his books on dirty limericks, they're first class.
ASIMOV: Yeah, right. So okay, Asimov, what's the sex and romance going to be like?
ASIMOV: Well Asimov, I got a few ideas. One of the characters is gonna have this weird thing, he's into-
ASIMOV: Spare us the details, Asimov. Is that it?
ASIMOV: No way, Asimov, I was just getting started when you so rudely interrupted me! The weird thing, and then I'm going to describe all the women's breasts every time I get an-
ASIMOV: Jesus Christ! It's worse than I thought. Why didn't we ask Asimov to do this part?
ASIMOV: He's just started Asimov's Guide to the Bible. Booked up. And look, it's not so bad-
ASIMOV: Not so bad?
ASIMOV: Like I said, not so bad. We don't have anyone to do characterization. Describing the women's breasts is a whole lot better than nothing at all.
ASIMOV: You mean, if we didn't know what their tits looked like we wouldn't be able to tell them apart?
ASIMOV: Asimov, stop being so negative. Tell us what you're doing instead.
ASIMOV: Post-modernism. I-
ASIMOV: I coulda guessed. So what's your idea of post-modernism, smartass?
ASIMOV: I'm making Asimov a character in the story. And he co-writes it with the narrator and they have little fights in the footnotes. It's sophisticated and droll-
ASIMOV: Ha! And you were laughing at Asimov. Asimov, why the heck didn't Asimov get this job?
ASIMOV: He's assigned to Asimov's Paradise Lost until September. Stop whining, Asimov.
ASIMOV: Yeah, Asimov, he's right. We got a job to do. Deadline, remember?
ASIMOV: Sorry, Asimov.
ASIMOV: It's alright, Asimov.
ASIMOV: Thank you team, I knew you were all professionals. Now I want a first draft by Tuesday. That okay with everyone?
ASIMOV: Can we make it Wednesday, Asimov? I promised Asimov I'd lend him a hand with Hugo Winners Volume III.
ASIMOV: Fair enough, Asimov. Wednesday it is. Nine o'clock start?
ASIMOV: Sure, Asimov.
ASIMOV: Good with me, Asimov.
ASIMOV: No problem, Asimov.
ASIMOV: Great! Now come on guys, no time to lose. Let's get writing.
ASIMOV: Good morning team. Now, I know you're all eager to get started on Authorised Murder, but why don't we take a moment to introduce ourselves. You first.
ASIMOV: I'm Asimov. Overall concept. I'm proud to say that it's going to be a sexy, post-modernist mystery...
ASIMOV: You gotta be kidding. How are we ever-
ASIMOV: Shut up, Asimov. Next?
ASIMOV: Asimov. Plot and suspense.
ASIMOV: Like you're going to be able to do plot and suspense! I mean, if we'd had Asimov, it might have been different-
ASIMOV: I said shut up, Asimov! Asimov is busy with Robot 8, but I'm confident Asimov will do a fine job. Next!
ASIMOV: Asimov. Sex and romance.
ASIMOV: Oh come on Asimov, get real. What do you know about sex and romance? What was wrong with using Asimov?
ASIMOV: He's finishing The Gods Themselves. But Asimov knows his stuff. I'm sure we've all read his books on dirty limericks, they're first class.
ASIMOV: Yeah, right. So okay, Asimov, what's the sex and romance going to be like?
ASIMOV: Well Asimov, I got a few ideas. One of the characters is gonna have this weird thing, he's into-
ASIMOV: Spare us the details, Asimov. Is that it?
ASIMOV: No way, Asimov, I was just getting started when you so rudely interrupted me! The weird thing, and then I'm going to describe all the women's breasts every time I get an-
ASIMOV: Jesus Christ! It's worse than I thought. Why didn't we ask Asimov to do this part?
ASIMOV: He's just started Asimov's Guide to the Bible. Booked up. And look, it's not so bad-
ASIMOV: Not so bad?
ASIMOV: Like I said, not so bad. We don't have anyone to do characterization. Describing the women's breasts is a whole lot better than nothing at all.
ASIMOV: You mean, if we didn't know what their tits looked like we wouldn't be able to tell them apart?
ASIMOV: Asimov, stop being so negative. Tell us what you're doing instead.
ASIMOV: Post-modernism. I-
ASIMOV: I coulda guessed. So what's your idea of post-modernism, smartass?
ASIMOV: I'm making Asimov a character in the story. And he co-writes it with the narrator and they have little fights in the footnotes. It's sophisticated and droll-
ASIMOV: Ha! And you were laughing at Asimov. Asimov, why the heck didn't Asimov get this job?
ASIMOV: He's assigned to Asimov's Paradise Lost until September. Stop whining, Asimov.
ASIMOV: Yeah, Asimov, he's right. We got a job to do. Deadline, remember?
ASIMOV: Sorry, Asimov.
ASIMOV: It's alright, Asimov.
ASIMOV: Thank you team, I knew you were all professionals. Now I want a first draft by Tuesday. That okay with everyone?
ASIMOV: Can we make it Wednesday, Asimov? I promised Asimov I'd lend him a hand with Hugo Winners Volume III.
ASIMOV: Fair enough, Asimov. Wednesday it is. Nine o'clock start?
ASIMOV: Sure, Asimov.
ASIMOV: Good with me, Asimov.
ASIMOV: No problem, Asimov.
ASIMOV: Great! Now come on guys, no time to lose. Let's get writing.
August 5, 2021
Darius Just is at a ABA (American Booksellers Association) convention. He is a writer of some critical claim, but has never written a best seller yet. His former protégé, Giles Devore, managed that with his first novel, and his second novel, that has just been published, is expected to do even better. When Devore is found dead in his hotel room most see an accident, but Darius sees a murder, and starts to investigate.
Asimov was a prolific writer, with some 500 books to his name. There is a recurring joke about this fact through out this book, which apparently was one of his favourite among those that he wrote. I think it is quite obvious that he enjoyed writing it. Unfortunately it really isn't among his best in my view. Some of his fiction was really good, and some not so good. This falls straight in the middle. Not great, not bad, just okay.
Everything ties up neatly at the end, and it is written with a slightly comic tone, with the occasional banter between the narrator (Just) and the writer (Asimov). It is never boring as such. It's just that it hasn't got anything memorable. I dislike Devore the victim, and Darius is more or less just a type, a caricature. The best character in this is probably Asimov himself. He's made himself a kind of entertaining character in this story, which he may have been in real life as well.
The plot never really got me. If you take a look at the cover of this edition, then you'll see all the essential elements that are at play here, but I didn't actually realise that until I'd finished it. Somehow the mystery of it all never really got interesting, nor exciting enough. I have to say, I prefer Asimov's science fiction to his mysteries. This is definitely not badly written, but I've read better mysteries, and I've read far better stories by Asimov.
Asimov was a prolific writer, with some 500 books to his name. There is a recurring joke about this fact through out this book, which apparently was one of his favourite among those that he wrote. I think it is quite obvious that he enjoyed writing it. Unfortunately it really isn't among his best in my view. Some of his fiction was really good, and some not so good. This falls straight in the middle. Not great, not bad, just okay.
Everything ties up neatly at the end, and it is written with a slightly comic tone, with the occasional banter between the narrator (Just) and the writer (Asimov). It is never boring as such. It's just that it hasn't got anything memorable. I dislike Devore the victim, and Darius is more or less just a type, a caricature. The best character in this is probably Asimov himself. He's made himself a kind of entertaining character in this story, which he may have been in real life as well.
The plot never really got me. If you take a look at the cover of this edition, then you'll see all the essential elements that are at play here, but I didn't actually realise that until I'd finished it. Somehow the mystery of it all never really got interesting, nor exciting enough. I have to say, I prefer Asimov's science fiction to his mysteries. This is definitely not badly written, but I've read better mysteries, and I've read far better stories by Asimov.
June 15, 2017
Isaac Asimov was a ridiculously talented author. But by the time he reached the mid-70's, I think he was convinced he could take on any challenge and do it well. He was not entirely correct.
Take this book, Murder at the ABA. Apparently, an editor suggested to Asimov that he write a mystery novel set at the American Booksellers' Convention, just to add some "local color" to it. Asimov took on the challenge, apparently doing extensive research while attending the actual ABA in 1975. The plot involves a writer, Darius Just, who has had some modest success with his first few novels, but is now being eclipsed by his young protege, Giles Devore, who is an overnight sensation. When Just discovers Devore dead in his bathtub, he suspects foul play, even though the police consider it an accident. Despite his antipathy toward the deceased, Just sets off to uncover the killer. He interviews various convention guests and hotel employees, including one famous but irascible author by the name of Isaac Asimov, as he works his way toward a solution. Yes you read that correctly: Asimov wrote himself into the novel as a minor character. And that is the kind of "cleverness" that permeates the book.
But that's not why I thought this novel was a sub-par effort from Asimov. No, I have two other quibbles here. The first is that the murder mystery itself doesn't really seem to stay above board with the reader. There are things of which our amateur detective is aware that we as readers can't possibly know until he reveals them late in the book. It does not seem to follow the "fair play" rules established by the classic British mystery writers of the early 2oth century. The other thing I found annoying was Asimov's frequent forays into sex. I don't know if he felt the need to keep up with the times, but there seems to be a lot of ogling of women, innuendo and bed-hopping in this book, and much of it to no great purpose. It was almost as if Asimov was saying, "See, I can write about sex too! I'm not a prude." OK, great. But does it add anything to the overall plot, style or theme of the book? Not to my way of thinking it doesn't.
This is a mediocre mystery and a mediocre novel overall. Unless you're a completist, I recommend skipping it. Stick with the Robot and Foundation stories; there's a reason they're famous and this book is not.
Take this book, Murder at the ABA. Apparently, an editor suggested to Asimov that he write a mystery novel set at the American Booksellers' Convention, just to add some "local color" to it. Asimov took on the challenge, apparently doing extensive research while attending the actual ABA in 1975. The plot involves a writer, Darius Just, who has had some modest success with his first few novels, but is now being eclipsed by his young protege, Giles Devore, who is an overnight sensation. When Just discovers Devore dead in his bathtub, he suspects foul play, even though the police consider it an accident. Despite his antipathy toward the deceased, Just sets off to uncover the killer. He interviews various convention guests and hotel employees, including one famous but irascible author by the name of Isaac Asimov, as he works his way toward a solution. Yes you read that correctly: Asimov wrote himself into the novel as a minor character. And that is the kind of "cleverness" that permeates the book.
But that's not why I thought this novel was a sub-par effort from Asimov. No, I have two other quibbles here. The first is that the murder mystery itself doesn't really seem to stay above board with the reader. There are things of which our amateur detective is aware that we as readers can't possibly know until he reveals them late in the book. It does not seem to follow the "fair play" rules established by the classic British mystery writers of the early 2oth century. The other thing I found annoying was Asimov's frequent forays into sex. I don't know if he felt the need to keep up with the times, but there seems to be a lot of ogling of women, innuendo and bed-hopping in this book, and much of it to no great purpose. It was almost as if Asimov was saying, "See, I can write about sex too! I'm not a prude." OK, great. But does it add anything to the overall plot, style or theme of the book? Not to my way of thinking it doesn't.
This is a mediocre mystery and a mediocre novel overall. Unless you're a completist, I recommend skipping it. Stick with the Robot and Foundation stories; there's a reason they're famous and this book is not.
September 13, 2012
Ok, but not one of his best. This one felt like he was writing just to write, not because he actually had a story tell. I wouldn't recommend it.
October 25, 2014
Up to now I had only read some of Asimov's science fiction work, so when I came across this mystery I didn't know what to expect, but thought I'd give it a try.
It was great! It was funny and clever (and, yes, dated - but enjoyable nonetheless)
I liked how he wrote himself into the story. It was done in a way that really worked, and those were the scenes that really made me laugh.
However, I had to roll my eyes at some of his descriptions of the female characters and feminism.
Overall it was fun to read, and definitely makes me want to read more of Asimov's non sci-fi books.
It was great! It was funny and clever (and, yes, dated - but enjoyable nonetheless)
I liked how he wrote himself into the story. It was done in a way that really worked, and those were the scenes that really made me laugh.
However, I had to roll my eyes at some of his descriptions of the female characters and feminism.
Overall it was fun to read, and definitely makes me want to read more of Asimov's non sci-fi books.
November 24, 2015
Darius Just, a second-string writer whose works are just "too good" for the average Joe who wants a good "Best Seller" main stream book, attends the ABA (American Booksellers Association) earlier than planned. His friend asks him to show up a day early to help with a public relations event and thus (in Just's mind at least) starts him down the path that leads to murder. One thing after another happens to put Just in just the right frame of mind to forget another favor that his protégé Giles Devore asks of him. When Devore winds up dead, Just is convinced his sin of omission may have been the catalyst and he sets himself the task of tracking down the killer.
The trouble is, Just and his conscience are the only ones who think there has even been a murder. The hotel security and the police all believe Devore simply slipped in the shower and died when his head met the porcelain. Just spends the rest oft he conference tracking down clues, interviewing (and annoying) possible suspects and witnesses, and basically composing the plot for the mystery novel that the fictional version of Asimov has been commissioned to write. Just's own life will be attempted and his delirious ravings after being coshed on the head himself will lead him to the last clue necessary to trap a murderer.
Back in the mists of time, I read Isaac Asimov's Murder at the ABA (1976; aka Authorised Murder) from either the local Carnegie library or the school library, I'm not sure which. I think I must have been coming off of an Asimov science fiction high, because I gave it a four-star rating. So, it was natural that I'd want a copy of my very own to reread some day. I picked up a copy sometime before 2010 (I didn't log just when) and when one of my fellow challengers read it for my Vintage Bingo Challenge, I decide it was time to pick it up again. I'm afraid I should have left it as a nostalgia piece.
This time around I was not nearly as charmed with Asimov's thinly-disguised Harlan Ellison protagonist, Darius Just nor with Asimov inserting himself into the narrative as comic relief. And I say that as some who is incredibly fond of both Isaac Asimov and Harlan Ellison as writers. Just is annoyingly self-centered, despite his deprecating comments, and the peek at the 1970s treatment of women isn't nearly as amusing as Asimov thinks it is. When you add the fact that the killer (and the reason) is blazingly obvious from the chapter when the body is found (less than half-way through the book), I have to say that Mr. Asimov is not up to his usual standard. His Black Widower tales are much better mystery stories.
★★ for an okay read. IF you manage to miss the clue when Just discovers the body, then it's possible the mystery will entertain--I'm assuming I did miss it back in the 80s. The banter between Asimov and Just, both in the narrative and in the footnotes, is amusing. And the book is a nice look at the 1970s convention/conference scene.
First posted on my blog My Reader's Block. Please request permission before reposting. Thanks.
The trouble is, Just and his conscience are the only ones who think there has even been a murder. The hotel security and the police all believe Devore simply slipped in the shower and died when his head met the porcelain. Just spends the rest oft he conference tracking down clues, interviewing (and annoying) possible suspects and witnesses, and basically composing the plot for the mystery novel that the fictional version of Asimov has been commissioned to write. Just's own life will be attempted and his delirious ravings after being coshed on the head himself will lead him to the last clue necessary to trap a murderer.
Back in the mists of time, I read Isaac Asimov's Murder at the ABA (1976; aka Authorised Murder) from either the local Carnegie library or the school library, I'm not sure which. I think I must have been coming off of an Asimov science fiction high, because I gave it a four-star rating. So, it was natural that I'd want a copy of my very own to reread some day. I picked up a copy sometime before 2010 (I didn't log just when) and when one of my fellow challengers read it for my Vintage Bingo Challenge, I decide it was time to pick it up again. I'm afraid I should have left it as a nostalgia piece.
This time around I was not nearly as charmed with Asimov's thinly-disguised Harlan Ellison protagonist, Darius Just nor with Asimov inserting himself into the narrative as comic relief. And I say that as some who is incredibly fond of both Isaac Asimov and Harlan Ellison as writers. Just is annoyingly self-centered, despite his deprecating comments, and the peek at the 1970s treatment of women isn't nearly as amusing as Asimov thinks it is. When you add the fact that the killer (and the reason) is blazingly obvious from the chapter when the body is found (less than half-way through the book), I have to say that Mr. Asimov is not up to his usual standard. His Black Widower tales are much better mystery stories.
★★ for an okay read. IF you manage to miss the clue when Just discovers the body, then it's possible the mystery will entertain--I'm assuming I did miss it back in the 80s. The banter between Asimov and Just, both in the narrative and in the footnotes, is amusing. And the book is a nice look at the 1970s convention/conference scene.
First posted on my blog My Reader's Block. Please request permission before reposting. Thanks.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 6, 2021
There ought to be a special word for scifi writers who believe themselves visionaries for men but who are absolute cave-dwellers about women.
I picked up a copy of this for 25 cents, intrigued by the idea of an Asimov murder mystery, and, knowing what I know about him, decided I would read until Isaac said something creepy about women. I made it one page before the lady looking at herself in the mirror decides to deliver a keynote speech in an outfit that allows her nipples to play peek-a-boo.
To make sure I was being fair, I opened the book in the middle at several places and at each point it got progressively creepier. Makes me regret I spent so much time with his scifi as a kid. He was the opposite of helpful to my personal development.
I picked up a copy of this for 25 cents, intrigued by the idea of an Asimov murder mystery, and, knowing what I know about him, decided I would read until Isaac said something creepy about women. I made it one page before the lady looking at herself in the mirror decides to deliver a keynote speech in an outfit that allows her nipples to play peek-a-boo.
To make sure I was being fair, I opened the book in the middle at several places and at each point it got progressively creepier. Makes me regret I spent so much time with his scifi as a kid. He was the opposite of helpful to my personal development.
October 23, 2024
Very fun book. This is my first Asimov book and I was led to believe that he was the type to write very dry characters, but the characters were actually the best part here. Particularly Darius (even as the asshole that he tends to be) and Asimov himself as he appears in it.
The meta aspect was also great. I tend to love books about writers writing about their industry, and this definitely scratches that itch. And the banter in the footnotes between Asimov and Darius was such a highlight that my only complaint is that there are too few of them.
As a mystery, it's decent. There are some clues that work nicely and some less so, and the culprit isn't necessarily the most interesting, but figuring out the dynamics of the timeline of the crime is satisfying.
There are a few thematic kinks I wasn't quite satisfied with, particularly with the character of Giles. There were a few interesting ideas surrounding him and the relationship between him and Darius that it feels the book wasn't all that interested in actually exploring, which is a shame.
Still, overall, very fun and satisfying read. I might check out Asimov's sci fi stuff one day, but he isn't half bad as a mystery writer either.
The meta aspect was also great. I tend to love books about writers writing about their industry, and this definitely scratches that itch. And the banter in the footnotes between Asimov and Darius was such a highlight that my only complaint is that there are too few of them.
As a mystery, it's decent. There are some clues that work nicely and some less so, and the culprit isn't necessarily the most interesting, but figuring out the dynamics of the timeline of the crime is satisfying.
There are a few thematic kinks I wasn't quite satisfied with, particularly with the character of Giles. There were a few interesting ideas surrounding him and the relationship between him and Darius that it feels the book wasn't all that interested in actually exploring, which is a shame.
Still, overall, very fun and satisfying read. I might check out Asimov's sci fi stuff one day, but he isn't half bad as a mystery writer either.
October 18, 2018
Puntuación2.5/5 😑Mej, promedio, decepcionante.
Reto del 2018, around the year in 52 books: #29, relacionado con las armas del juego clue.
Esta es una novela de misterio que se desarrolla durante una convención de editores de libros. Seguimos a nuestro protagonista Darius Just, un escritor que se encarga de investigar el asesinato de una persona durante la convención.
Es una sátira del mundo de editoras, escritores y publicistas. Tiene un tono ligero y por momentos irreverente. Me sorprendió que Asimov escribiera otra cosa que no fuese ciencia ficción. Un aspecto interesante es que el libro utiliza la metaficción, el autor mismo es un personaje de la novela.
El libro es corto pero siento que debe ser aun más corto, se alarga demasiado y resultó canson y aburrido. A mi no me interesó nada, ni quien muere, ni el/la unsub, nada de nada. Me parecía más interesante el mundo y la sátira de ese ambiente literario.
No lo recomiendo.
Reto del 2018, around the year in 52 books: #29, relacionado con las armas del juego clue.
Esta es una novela de misterio que se desarrolla durante una convención de editores de libros. Seguimos a nuestro protagonista Darius Just, un escritor que se encarga de investigar el asesinato de una persona durante la convención.
Es una sátira del mundo de editoras, escritores y publicistas. Tiene un tono ligero y por momentos irreverente. Me sorprendió que Asimov escribiera otra cosa que no fuese ciencia ficción. Un aspecto interesante es que el libro utiliza la metaficción, el autor mismo es un personaje de la novela.
El libro es corto pero siento que debe ser aun más corto, se alarga demasiado y resultó canson y aburrido. A mi no me interesó nada, ni quien muere, ni el/la unsub, nada de nada. Me parecía más interesante el mundo y la sátira de ese ambiente literario.
No lo recomiendo.
October 2, 2018
I didn't know Asimov wrote anything other than science fiction, but this was excellent. I love the way he inserted himself into the story as a third person; very amusing the way he describes himself.
August 31, 2013
Asimov obviously had a lot of fun writing this one. The mystery aspect itself isn't really captivating but the story is entertaining and Asimov's style is fresh and easy. The main character, Darius Just, is more or less modeled after Harlan Ellison, and Asimov makes himself a character. The story takes place over a weekend at the 75th ABA in 1975. It's an amusing read and a good reminder that Asimov wrote a lot more than just good science fiction.
August 15, 2023
Az úgy volt, hogy kvázi örökségként kaptunk egy adag nem mai könyvet (galaktikás szinte mind), szépen bekerültek a polcra, és azóta feléjük sem néztem. Most meg végre eldöntöttem, hogy nekikezdek a polcnak, balról jobbra. Az előszóból pedig rájöttem, hogy bár Asimov könyve, mégsem sci-fi. És jól meglepődtem.
A krimi nem annyira az én zsánerem, a cozy mystery-k aranyosak, csak azok meg sokszor bénácskák. Agatha Christie-t persze szeretem, de neki is nagyon kevés könyvét olvastam. És akkor itt van ez a kis szatírikus, metahumorral is operáló krimi, amit nagyon élveztem.
A cselekmény kibontakozása, maga a nyomozás lassú volt, de őszintén az a része még jobban is tetszett, mielőtt elindult volna a nyomozás. Van egy olyan érzésem, hogy maga a stílus polarizál: valakinek vagy nagyon bejön, vagy nagyon nem. Én az előbbi voltam. A túlírtnak nevezhető volta is a szatírát erősítette szerintem. Viszont a kommentárok az írói életről, meg a sok minden másról mindent vittek. Arról nem besszélve, hogy Asimov maga megjelenik mint szeretplő az egyébként is valós környezetben, és a könyv cselekménye szerint Asimov írja meg a regényt főszereplőnk E/1. narrálásával, miközben lábjegyzetben kommunikálnak néha.
Én nagyon jól szórakoztam. És úgy láttam, hogy még egy Asimov-krimi következik a polcon. Remélem, az is ilyen jó lesz. :)
February 3, 2023
3.00 stars, I liked it, but probably won't read again.
I bought this book at a used bookstore, and when I got it home, I discovered, written inside the front cover:
"Rather silly little book"
It really is.
An author, Darius Just, attends the American Booksellers Association convention and meets his friend Isaac Asimov, who has a contract to write a murder mystery centered around the event. Darius Just ends up involved in a real murder (though remember, this is fiction, and Darius Just is really fictional), and tells the story in sections for each person he meets during the several days of the convention, along with the time.
The real Asimov is writing the book, of course, but the narrator is Asimov's version of Darius Just, who in several scenes has dialog with the ficional Asimov. And when the fictional Just doesn't agree with the real Asimov, he leaves a footnote, but Asimov has the last say with a second footnote.
Of course, the story is about the murder of a third author, and how the fictional fictional Darius Just solves the murder as described by the real Asimov who has been interviewing the real fictional Just. In case you have forgotten.
It is a good mystery.
I bought this book at a used bookstore, and when I got it home, I discovered, written inside the front cover:
"Rather silly little book"
It really is.
An author, Darius Just, attends the American Booksellers Association convention and meets his friend Isaac Asimov, who has a contract to write a murder mystery centered around the event. Darius Just ends up involved in a real murder (though remember, this is fiction, and Darius Just is really fictional), and tells the story in sections for each person he meets during the several days of the convention, along with the time.
The real Asimov is writing the book, of course, but the narrator is Asimov's version of Darius Just, who in several scenes has dialog with the ficional Asimov. And when the fictional Just doesn't agree with the real Asimov, he leaves a footnote, but Asimov has the last say with a second footnote.
Of course, the story is about the murder of a third author, and how the fictional fictional Darius Just solves the murder as described by the real Asimov who has been interviewing the real fictional Just. In case you have forgotten.
It is a good mystery.
August 12, 2021
Writers and booksellers come out in force for the annual convention of the American Booksellers Association. And as usual, there are publishers hawking new releases, author interviews and author book signings.
But in this book by Isaac Asimov, there's also a death, allegedly by a slip and fall in the shower.
And that's how it totally looks except for one particular author, Darius Just, who insists right from the get go that it's a murder. A murder based on the state of the man's clothing — something he realizes makes no sense to anyone.
I have to say, I was a bit confused by this tale at first. After all Asimov was a character in the book but very definitely not the principal character — that's Darius Just, who I have to admit I didn't like very much. The murder victim I didn't like very much, not many of the characters.
But despite all that, I was hooked.
I love Asimov's creativity as seen in several of his books and I trusted that something would grow out of the apparent confusion — let's be honest, conventions are big, confusion and people don't always behave to the best, so it makes sense as a setting. So I was hooked and soon I was engrossed in a fun, witty, suspenseful mystery with characters that you may never wish to meet in real life but that you are quietly rooting for as the tale moves along. It all works and its really a good, if a bit quirky, story.
Three cheers for the effort. I would highly recommend it.
But in this book by Isaac Asimov, there's also a death, allegedly by a slip and fall in the shower.
And that's how it totally looks except for one particular author, Darius Just, who insists right from the get go that it's a murder. A murder based on the state of the man's clothing — something he realizes makes no sense to anyone.
I have to say, I was a bit confused by this tale at first. After all Asimov was a character in the book but very definitely not the principal character — that's Darius Just, who I have to admit I didn't like very much. The murder victim I didn't like very much, not many of the characters.
But despite all that, I was hooked.
I love Asimov's creativity as seen in several of his books and I trusted that something would grow out of the apparent confusion — let's be honest, conventions are big, confusion and people don't always behave to the best, so it makes sense as a setting. So I was hooked and soon I was engrossed in a fun, witty, suspenseful mystery with characters that you may never wish to meet in real life but that you are quietly rooting for as the tale moves along. It all works and its really a good, if a bit quirky, story.
Three cheers for the effort. I would highly recommend it.
December 15, 2025
What a fun and fast read! I enjoyed my time with Asimov in this book (from 1976!).
The murder mystery follows our protagonist in 1st person, Darius Just. He is a short and unaccomplished author with a superstar protege. I haven't read an entirely 1st person book in a long time, but Asimov did it quite well here. We were speaking with other side characters constantly and always learning something new.
Isaac Asimov wrote himself in as one of the side characters in this book. It was really funny! He plays on his own wild character traits to give us some comedic relief. Darius Just and Isaac Asimov also add footnotes to the story (written by Isaac Asimov). A very clever and funny gimmick.
I had a good time reading this book. It’s simple and fun.
The murder mystery follows our protagonist in 1st person, Darius Just. He is a short and unaccomplished author with a superstar protege. I haven't read an entirely 1st person book in a long time, but Asimov did it quite well here. We were speaking with other side characters constantly and always learning something new.
Isaac Asimov wrote himself in as one of the side characters in this book. It was really funny! He plays on his own wild character traits to give us some comedic relief. Darius Just and Isaac Asimov also add footnotes to the story (written by Isaac Asimov). A very clever and funny gimmick.
I had a good time reading this book. It’s simple and fun.
November 2, 2019
"When the protege of writer Darius Just suddenly turns up murdered at the celebrated annual publishing convention, chaos and suspense sweep the autographing sessions, the buffet tables, the bars, and the famed hospitality suites.
"Darius is certain he can discover the murderer -- if the murderer doesn't find him first ..."
~~frontispiece
I just couldn't get into this book, which saddened me -- normally I like Asimov's writing very much. The format seemed disjointed, which is why, I think, that I couldn't get into it. And with over 900 books waiting to be read, I chose not to take the time to plow through.
"Darius is certain he can discover the murderer -- if the murderer doesn't find him first ..."
~~frontispiece
I just couldn't get into this book, which saddened me -- normally I like Asimov's writing very much. The format seemed disjointed, which is why, I think, that I couldn't get into it. And with over 900 books waiting to be read, I chose not to take the time to plow through.
January 15, 2025
3.25*
It was surprisingly much better than I expected it to be.
I didn't really like the ending and it was boring towards the end of it.
But at the same time it was funny and I loved how the hight of the narrator was a main part of the story kinda.
Gotta say tho his obsession with women was kinda annoying, I did not need an in depth description of why he wouldn't have sex with this or that lady and vise-versa
It was surprisingly much better than I expected it to be.
I didn't really like the ending and it was boring towards the end of it.
But at the same time it was funny and I loved how the hight of the narrator was a main part of the story kinda.
Gotta say tho his obsession with women was kinda annoying, I did not need an in depth description of why he wouldn't have sex with this or that lady and vise-versa
April 16, 2019
Asimov's foray into the whodunit genre, with a fanciful story set at a meeting of the American Bookseller's Association. A friend of a writer and amateur detective, Darius Just, is discovered dead, but Just is unable to convince the police that this is the result of a murder. Independent investigations uncover some nefarious on goings at the hotel and lead to a solution to the mystery. Not remembered.
April 28, 2024
claramente no el mejor libro de asimov que haya leído pero por lo menos bastante entretenido, me ha gustado especialmente que se introduzca a si mismo como personaje y como co-escritor junto al ficticio narrador-escritor y las puyas que se lanzan estos dos en los pies de página
September 6, 2024
Empezó un poco lento para mi gusto, cuando pensé que el final era la confirmación del asesinato me di cuenta que estaba errada. Aunque si hubo asesinato.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 30, 2018
1.5/5 Querido Isaac,no te dejes llevar por los editores, sigue en tu genero Sci-Fi no te involucres con asesinatos e investigaciones.
Un libro escrito como 3era. persona, donde todos los personajes son apagados y aburridos, con un inicio muy lento y que cuando llegas al 32% ( si lo estas leyendo digital) es que pasa algo, pero luego nuevamente entramos en este letargo de dime y te diré en el cual te pasas el libro completo. A quien iban a matar lo sabes en la pag. 20, quien y como? lo sabes al 40%....demasiado predecible.
Repetitivo y aburrido, no tengo mas que decir.
Un libro escrito como 3era. persona, donde todos los personajes son apagados y aburridos, con un inicio muy lento y que cuando llegas al 32% ( si lo estas leyendo digital) es que pasa algo, pero luego nuevamente entramos en este letargo de dime y te diré en el cual te pasas el libro completo. A quien iban a matar lo sabes en la pag. 20, quien y como? lo sabes al 40%....demasiado predecible.
Repetitivo y aburrido, no tengo mas que decir.
August 13, 2025
I've read a lot of Asimov. He was one of my favorite writers when I was a teenager reading a lot of science fiction. But I'd never heard of this book. I actually heard about it from the NY Times crossword puzzle on 7/11/2025. It was one of the clues. So, not having heard of it I decided to check it out of the library.
The book is fantastic. Making himself a character in the book was great. The little asides that he and the narrator would have as footnotes were hilarious.
The story itself was great. The characters were a lot of fun. It was a good mystery. Asimov can really pull you into the story. There was a lot more sex in this book that you'd normally find in an Asimov book. However, some of the gender roles and descriptions were a bit sleazy when seen by our modern standards. But I can make some allowances for the mores of fifty years ago when the book was written.
I really loved this book. Glad I ran across it.
The book is fantastic. Making himself a character in the book was great. The little asides that he and the narrator would have as footnotes were hilarious.
The story itself was great. The characters were a lot of fun. It was a good mystery. Asimov can really pull you into the story. There was a lot more sex in this book that you'd normally find in an Asimov book. However, some of the gender roles and descriptions were a bit sleazy when seen by our modern standards. But I can make some allowances for the mores of fifty years ago when the book was written.
I really loved this book. Glad I ran across it.
September 12, 2020
“Come December” – a play on words from a romantic interlude in the Hollywood film “Come September” of the sixties – and the copy of MURDER AT THE ABA would have been lying in my shelf for nearly thirty years. As per my habit on the flyleaf I have written my name and date of purchase 1st December 1991. I am not really sure but more or less sanguine that I have till date not read this book and if I had started it I have not finished it.
In the 1990s I became a fan of Isaac Asimov. I read two of his science fiction novels – “Stars like Dust” and “Caves of Steel”. I am not sure which one, but it was one of these books that hooked me on Isaac Asimov’s works. My employment entailed a reasonable amount of outstation travel in the late eighties and early nineties and by and large in India we still travelled by train, flights being pricey. And so every trip would last a day or more and what better way to spend the journey than get immersed in an interesting book and so I started on the Foundation series. At one station there was a book entitled “Black Widowers” and the back jacket told of Isaac Asimov’s ability to write crime thrillers too. And “Black Widowers” was really superb. And then I purchased “Murder at the ABA”.
In the past few years I have been a subscriber to the e-book site Scribd. com and have been completing twenty to twenty-five books annually. I finished reading “The” on 05.09.2020 and picked up “Murder at the ABA” determined that this time I would finish it -a book almost thirty years old.
This is the first full length crime novel of Isaac Asimov that I read. Set in the location of the 75th Annual Convention of the American Booksellers Association, the story is fictitious. Asimov was present at the convention, autographed one his new books, etc. but the murder and the background are entirely fictitious as are the characters like Giles Devore or Darius Just. He has included this disclaimer at the end of the book.
Giles Devore was a protégé of Darius Just a known author with four books to his credit and a fifth on the way. His publishers were a small printing house called Prism Printers. When Giles was writing his first book “Crossover” he had approached Darius Just. Just had helped him revise and ready his novel “Crossover”, which turned out to be a runaway success and Devore outshone his mentor Just. At the ABA Convention he was releasing his second book “Evergone” and he was to autograph about two hundred and fifty copies.
However Giles success had gone to his head and he was bent on encashing his fame and ditching all who had helped him he had already said that he was not going to release his third book through Prism Press unless they paid him an advance of fifty thousand dollars which was way beyond the means of the small printing house. Darius Just was upset because he had expected Giles to dedicate his second book to him as a token of gratitude he had received from his mentor, but Giles had dedicated “Evergone” to his wife Eunice.
Giles had yet another idiosyncrasy. He had ball pens made with his initials monogrammed and would only autograph his books with them. However, while coming to the convention he had forgotten his monogrammed pens at home and his wife Eunice sent a package of pens which was in the hotel cloakroom. For reasons best known to him Giles did not collect the package and from the convention as he was being taken to the TV Studio for an interview he hands over the cloak room ticket and a key to Darius Just asking him to collect the package place it in his room. Darius being otherwise occupied clean forgot about the errand. Next day when he remembered and collected the packet he went to Giles Room. Giles was a very neat person. He never threw his clothes on the chair or bed haphazardly. Just saw that Giles clothes were strewn haphazardly on a chair and the bathroom door was shut. He waited for a few minutes and hearing no sounds from the bathroom he opens the door and finds a fully naked Giles in the bathtub quite dead. The body was so placed that it appeared that Giles had slipped, hit his head on the faucet and died. Any jury would bring an unanimous decision of accidental death.
Darius Just comes out of the bathroom and on the bureau where he had placed the packet from the cloakroom was an open pen and a powder like substance probably talcum powder. He just touches it and licks it to find that it was heroin. Darius Just was convinced that Giles Devore had been murdered, but he had no convincing evidence. He calls up the hotel security and almost immediately the security guard Michael Strong whom Just had met earlier in one of the seminars and who asked Just to autograph a copy of “Evergone”, which Giles had already signed Just noted an oddity. The first sentence was in a faint ink but the flourishing signature was bold and dark.
Shortly thereafter the Head of Security Anthony Marsogliani arrived after inspecting the room Just asked if there was a drug problem in the hotel. Marsogliani answered in the negative and asked where the drug was, but the bureau top was clean there was neither the pen nor the powder. Marsogliani advised Just to say nothing about drugs since he could not substantiate it to the police. Just complied.
As the Convention’s third day was drawing to a close Just takes the hotel’s public relations officer Sarah Voskovek to dinner. After dinner they sit in a park for some time and a knife wielding assassin attack Just. However Just disables him with some karate kicks dislocating the assassin’s shoulder. In the process Just bangs his head against a tree and is woozy. Sarah takes him to his apartment and nurses him during the night. Next morning at the hotel he approaches Marsogliani and requests him to come to Giles room alongwith Michael Strong. After about ten minutes or so Just asks for a pen from Strong. Strong is carrying a few pens and he offers one. Just asks for a different pen which Strong refuses. Just forcibly takes a pen from Strong’s jacket and the game was up. Marsogliani restrains Strong as Just opens the pen and empties its contents on the bureau top. And out pours talcum like powder which Just says is heroin. Marsogliani calls up other security men and Strong is taken away.
As just explains in the end, it was a case of three pens. The original monogramed pen of Giles ran out of ink as he was signing Strong’s copy. Strong offers him his pen and by mistake hands over the heroin filled pen. This pen also runs out of ink and Giles as per his habit pockets it. Nellie Griswold of Hercules Printers offers Giles a pen, but it is red and Giles continues signing with the red pen and after the autograph session finishes throws the pen away and stomps off to his room.
Giles had the habit of fiddling with pens and unscrewing them, especially when distraught or distracted. He must have fiddled with Strong’s pen after you (Sarah Voskovek) left, and the powder it contained tumbled out on the bureau. This meant nothing to Giles, but when Strong entered, the sight of spilled heroin must have driven him wild. He attacked and killed the unsuspecting Giles. Then forcing the clothes of the dead body he dragged it across the room into the bathroom and made it look like a fall in the bathtub. He was not aware of Giles of neat habits, he strewed the clothes on the chair and that made me think, especially when Eunice told that he had not changed his habit.
That is the story in brief and it is really interesting. I enjoyed reading the book.
In the 1990s I became a fan of Isaac Asimov. I read two of his science fiction novels – “Stars like Dust” and “Caves of Steel”. I am not sure which one, but it was one of these books that hooked me on Isaac Asimov’s works. My employment entailed a reasonable amount of outstation travel in the late eighties and early nineties and by and large in India we still travelled by train, flights being pricey. And so every trip would last a day or more and what better way to spend the journey than get immersed in an interesting book and so I started on the Foundation series. At one station there was a book entitled “Black Widowers” and the back jacket told of Isaac Asimov’s ability to write crime thrillers too. And “Black Widowers” was really superb. And then I purchased “Murder at the ABA”.
In the past few years I have been a subscriber to the e-book site Scribd. com and have been completing twenty to twenty-five books annually. I finished reading “The” on 05.09.2020 and picked up “Murder at the ABA” determined that this time I would finish it -a book almost thirty years old.
This is the first full length crime novel of Isaac Asimov that I read. Set in the location of the 75th Annual Convention of the American Booksellers Association, the story is fictitious. Asimov was present at the convention, autographed one his new books, etc. but the murder and the background are entirely fictitious as are the characters like Giles Devore or Darius Just. He has included this disclaimer at the end of the book.
Giles Devore was a protégé of Darius Just a known author with four books to his credit and a fifth on the way. His publishers were a small printing house called Prism Printers. When Giles was writing his first book “Crossover” he had approached Darius Just. Just had helped him revise and ready his novel “Crossover”, which turned out to be a runaway success and Devore outshone his mentor Just. At the ABA Convention he was releasing his second book “Evergone” and he was to autograph about two hundred and fifty copies.
However Giles success had gone to his head and he was bent on encashing his fame and ditching all who had helped him he had already said that he was not going to release his third book through Prism Press unless they paid him an advance of fifty thousand dollars which was way beyond the means of the small printing house. Darius Just was upset because he had expected Giles to dedicate his second book to him as a token of gratitude he had received from his mentor, but Giles had dedicated “Evergone” to his wife Eunice.
Giles had yet another idiosyncrasy. He had ball pens made with his initials monogrammed and would only autograph his books with them. However, while coming to the convention he had forgotten his monogrammed pens at home and his wife Eunice sent a package of pens which was in the hotel cloakroom. For reasons best known to him Giles did not collect the package and from the convention as he was being taken to the TV Studio for an interview he hands over the cloak room ticket and a key to Darius Just asking him to collect the package place it in his room. Darius being otherwise occupied clean forgot about the errand. Next day when he remembered and collected the packet he went to Giles Room. Giles was a very neat person. He never threw his clothes on the chair or bed haphazardly. Just saw that Giles clothes were strewn haphazardly on a chair and the bathroom door was shut. He waited for a few minutes and hearing no sounds from the bathroom he opens the door and finds a fully naked Giles in the bathtub quite dead. The body was so placed that it appeared that Giles had slipped, hit his head on the faucet and died. Any jury would bring an unanimous decision of accidental death.
Darius Just comes out of the bathroom and on the bureau where he had placed the packet from the cloakroom was an open pen and a powder like substance probably talcum powder. He just touches it and licks it to find that it was heroin. Darius Just was convinced that Giles Devore had been murdered, but he had no convincing evidence. He calls up the hotel security and almost immediately the security guard Michael Strong whom Just had met earlier in one of the seminars and who asked Just to autograph a copy of “Evergone”, which Giles had already signed Just noted an oddity. The first sentence was in a faint ink but the flourishing signature was bold and dark.
Shortly thereafter the Head of Security Anthony Marsogliani arrived after inspecting the room Just asked if there was a drug problem in the hotel. Marsogliani answered in the negative and asked where the drug was, but the bureau top was clean there was neither the pen nor the powder. Marsogliani advised Just to say nothing about drugs since he could not substantiate it to the police. Just complied.
As the Convention’s third day was drawing to a close Just takes the hotel’s public relations officer Sarah Voskovek to dinner. After dinner they sit in a park for some time and a knife wielding assassin attack Just. However Just disables him with some karate kicks dislocating the assassin’s shoulder. In the process Just bangs his head against a tree and is woozy. Sarah takes him to his apartment and nurses him during the night. Next morning at the hotel he approaches Marsogliani and requests him to come to Giles room alongwith Michael Strong. After about ten minutes or so Just asks for a pen from Strong. Strong is carrying a few pens and he offers one. Just asks for a different pen which Strong refuses. Just forcibly takes a pen from Strong’s jacket and the game was up. Marsogliani restrains Strong as Just opens the pen and empties its contents on the bureau top. And out pours talcum like powder which Just says is heroin. Marsogliani calls up other security men and Strong is taken away.
As just explains in the end, it was a case of three pens. The original monogramed pen of Giles ran out of ink as he was signing Strong’s copy. Strong offers him his pen and by mistake hands over the heroin filled pen. This pen also runs out of ink and Giles as per his habit pockets it. Nellie Griswold of Hercules Printers offers Giles a pen, but it is red and Giles continues signing with the red pen and after the autograph session finishes throws the pen away and stomps off to his room.
Giles had the habit of fiddling with pens and unscrewing them, especially when distraught or distracted. He must have fiddled with Strong’s pen after you (Sarah Voskovek) left, and the powder it contained tumbled out on the bureau. This meant nothing to Giles, but when Strong entered, the sight of spilled heroin must have driven him wild. He attacked and killed the unsuspecting Giles. Then forcing the clothes of the dead body he dragged it across the room into the bathroom and made it look like a fall in the bathtub. He was not aware of Giles of neat habits, he strewed the clothes on the chair and that made me think, especially when Eunice told that he had not changed his habit.
That is the story in brief and it is really interesting. I enjoyed reading the book.
October 18, 2018
Asimov e il caso delle tre penne.
Per andare direttamente al sodo: mi aspettavo molto, ma molto di più. Chiariamoci, il romanzo è decisamente buono, ma con Asimov non sono affatto stata abituata al decisamente buono. Sono stata abituata al massimo, all'aldilà di ogni previsione, al talmente bello che mi mancano persino le parole per raccontartelo. Per questo, mio caro Isaac, non puoi uscirtene con un giallo mediocre. L'opzione non esiste, chiaro?
Ripeto, gli elementi ci sono tutti e sono anche mescolati con accuratezza. Personaggi adattissimi -il che, parlando di un giallo, equivale a dire tutti con un punteggio di diecimila o più sulla Scala dell'Ambiguità-, ambientazione così anonima da risultare perfetta, trama accattivante, situazioni credibili e non forzate. E poi c'è Asimov come personaggio. Si è messo nel libro, capite? Quando questo è narrato in prima persona da uno pseudo-detective. Meraviglioso. Darei il massimo solamente per questo colpo di genio e per come è stato messo in gioco, conferendo al tutto quel tocco di classe senza il quale questo libro avrebbe davvero rasentato livelli davvero inconcepibili per Asimov.
Tornando a noi, dopo uno svolgimento pieno di suspance e tutto quello che volete, ma sostanzialmente piatto, mi aspettavo un fuoco d'artificio, un finale col botto. Peccato che l'ultimo sparo sia partito a mille per fermarsi dopo dieci secondi con qualche scintilla imbarazzante e basta.
Credo che se non fosse stato il mio Isaac mi sarei arrabbiata ancora di più.
Non mi resta che tornare alla fantascienza.
Per andare direttamente al sodo: mi aspettavo molto, ma molto di più. Chiariamoci, il romanzo è decisamente buono, ma con Asimov non sono affatto stata abituata al decisamente buono. Sono stata abituata al massimo, all'aldilà di ogni previsione, al talmente bello che mi mancano persino le parole per raccontartelo. Per questo, mio caro Isaac, non puoi uscirtene con un giallo mediocre. L'opzione non esiste, chiaro?
Ripeto, gli elementi ci sono tutti e sono anche mescolati con accuratezza. Personaggi adattissimi -il che, parlando di un giallo, equivale a dire tutti con un punteggio di diecimila o più sulla Scala dell'Ambiguità-, ambientazione così anonima da risultare perfetta, trama accattivante, situazioni credibili e non forzate. E poi c'è Asimov come personaggio. Si è messo nel libro, capite? Quando questo è narrato in prima persona da uno pseudo-detective. Meraviglioso. Darei il massimo solamente per questo colpo di genio e per come è stato messo in gioco, conferendo al tutto quel tocco di classe senza il quale questo libro avrebbe davvero rasentato livelli davvero inconcepibili per Asimov.
Tornando a noi, dopo uno svolgimento pieno di suspance e tutto quello che volete, ma sostanzialmente piatto, mi aspettavo un fuoco d'artificio, un finale col botto. Peccato che l'ultimo sparo sia partito a mille per fermarsi dopo dieci secondi con qualche scintilla imbarazzante e basta.
Credo che se non fosse stato il mio Isaac mi sarei arrabbiata ancora di più.
Non mi resta che tornare alla fantascienza.
May 2, 2018
Darius Just, un escritor de ciencia ficción con una similitud más que casual con Harlan Ellison (es decir, un enano gruñón, amargado, quejumbroso, con una opinión demasiado alta de sí mismo) va a una convención hecho una furia con un autor que alguna vez consideró su protegido pero que ahora ha publicado un libro muy vendido. Cuando dicho autor aparece muerto en el hotel de la convención, Ellis-- digo, Just, debe hacer de detective y descubrir quién es el culpable.
Es una historia de detectives bastante sencilla de seguir. Asimov ha escrito mejores historias al respecto (los cuentos de los Viudos Negros, las historias de Elijah Bailey), por lo que es claro que el objetivo de este libro es sólo divertirse con el set y a costillas de un amigo suyo. El mismo Asimov aparece en la historia, investigando para escribir un libro sobre un crimen en una convención, ninguneando a Uri Geller (el que doblaba cucharas con la mente), ofreciendo consejos no muy útiles y en general riéndose a costillas de Ellison/Just.
En diversas páginas hay notas al pie que comentan un poco sobre la naturaleza de la trama. Éstas toman la apariencia de conversaciones que tienen Asimov y Just (o más bien críticas, con Just quejándose por cómo lo presenta a lo largo del libro y Asimov riéndose de todas esas quejas). En cualquier otro libro más serio se verían fuera de lugar e incluso un tanto baratas, pero es claro que Asimov sabía qué clase de libro estaba escribiendo, por lo que no estaba muy preocupado de ello.
Es una historia de detectives bastante sencilla de seguir. Asimov ha escrito mejores historias al respecto (los cuentos de los Viudos Negros, las historias de Elijah Bailey), por lo que es claro que el objetivo de este libro es sólo divertirse con el set y a costillas de un amigo suyo. El mismo Asimov aparece en la historia, investigando para escribir un libro sobre un crimen en una convención, ninguneando a Uri Geller (el que doblaba cucharas con la mente), ofreciendo consejos no muy útiles y en general riéndose a costillas de Ellison/Just.
En diversas páginas hay notas al pie que comentan un poco sobre la naturaleza de la trama. Éstas toman la apariencia de conversaciones que tienen Asimov y Just (o más bien críticas, con Just quejándose por cómo lo presenta a lo largo del libro y Asimov riéndose de todas esas quejas). En cualquier otro libro más serio se verían fuera de lugar e incluso un tanto baratas, pero es claro que Asimov sabía qué clase de libro estaba escribiendo, por lo que no estaba muy preocupado de ello.
June 10, 2011
Isaac Asimov... mystery writer??? Apparantly so. Murder at the ABA describes just that; a murder which takes place at the 1975 American Booksellers Association convention. Asimov appears as a minor character in this story, and apparently included enough real information regarding the actual 1975 ABA convention that he had to include a disclaimer that the events portrayed are a work of fiction. The mystery was only so-so. For me the star of this story was narrator Darius Just; especially as he was read by Daniel Grace. Darius Just is a curmudgeonly, chauvinistic and narcissistic man. Through Asimov’s eyes, he managed to be …well, not likable, but entertaining. I have never heard of narrator Daniel Grace, but he has that 1950’s quality to his voice that made it somehow seem okay that Darius Just is such a wanker. Many aspects of this book are quite dated, but listening to it made me feel as if I was watching an old black and white on Turner Classic Movies rather than reading listening to a novel that is no longer in it’s prime. Again, the mystery wasn’t great but the characters, the writing and Darius Just made me laugh out loud many times.
If you happen to come across this in a library collection or used book sale, it’s worth giving it a go. However I can’t really recommend anyone rush to put this on their TBR list.
If you happen to come across this in a library collection or used book sale, it’s worth giving it a go. However I can’t really recommend anyone rush to put this on their TBR list.
January 26, 2017
I did enjoy this book! Someone described this as "meta-fiction" and I see their point. Asimov introduces himself as one of the characters and he and the main character/detective scatter footnotes throughout the book insulting each other and having a lot of fun. He also threw in a scene where he is autographing books. It turns out to be an important scene but it is also a lot of fun to read. Asimov simply enjoyed interacting with his readers, especially of the female variety. It actually is not one of his best mysteries. I say this because it didn't hold my attention so much I raced through the book to whodunit. However, in some ways I might have enjoyed it better that way. For the most part, Asimov was better at the armchair detective type mystery, with the Caves of Steel series being a notable exception. I will say I did not guess whodunit, which is always a point in the author's favor!
March 9, 2016
A short, misogynist author who is short is at an American Bookseller Association convention where someone he knows dies. The short POV character is the only one who thinks it's murder, so he goes around pestering everyone until he gets it figured out. And he is short - that must be very clear.
The mystery is okay. The main character is hard to take. I think Asimov wrote this mostly for his own amusement, which carries the book for 30 pages or so.
At least it doesn't take up much space. *rimshot*
The mystery is okay. The main character is hard to take. I think Asimov wrote this mostly for his own amusement, which carries the book for 30 pages or so.
At least it doesn't take up much space. *rimshot*
August 19, 2020
Anche se il vero e proprio ‘enigma’ del giallo è tutto sommato abbastanza banale e deludente, si tratta di un romanzo abbastanza originale e piacevole da leggere, poco impegnativo. Consigliato a chi apprezza lo stile tipico di Asimov, nel presentare i personaggi e nel farli interagire, nei dialoghi e nelle descrizioni. La presentazione che Asimov fa di sé stesso nel corso del racconto è impagabile.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 137 reviews