Once Upon a Crime - Montclair Library discussion

"At a Bath auction house, a large slab of carved stone is up for sale. At the height of very competitive bidding, there is a holdup attempt by three masked robbers. They shoot and kill the highest bidder, a professor who has recognized the female figure carved in the stone as Chaucer’s Wife of Bath. The masked would-be thieves flee, leaving the stone behind."

Hello! Angela here. Jody sent email, she won't be able to join us today. This book was slightly more complicated than I had expected, given that we had only 3 weeks to read it.

Sorry that Jody can't make it.

Hi Tim. Did you enjoy the book? But for Ingeborg's adventures it might have been too slow for me.

I liked it. I gave it 3 stars here, probably more like 3.5. I felt like I was part of the team, in that I wasn't given everything needed to solve the mystery either!

3 stars is probably what I'd give it, meaning I might read another one by this author. The Washington Independent Reviewer said

"The most enjoyable element of a Diamond investigation is not necessarily discovering whodunit — because, frankly, the investigative components are not all that satisfying — but learning which arcane subject we will plunge into during the course of solving the mystery."

I tend to enjoy the arcane info incorporated into mysteries although it does not usually make for a page-turner. I would love to see Ingeborg's roof escape on film.

So I assume you didn't figure out the killer? Does that make for a better read?

On page 110 Diamond has a vision from the past where Tim looks like a flashback from the 14th century. Similar to foreshadowing? I wonder if the author does that in his other books. I haven't read anything else by him.

No, I didn't figure it out. I felt like it came a little bit out of left field - someone we had barely dealt with at all.

I like to figure it out, but it isn't essential for my enjoyment - sometimes it doesn't seem like it is set up for me to. But this one felt like it was going to be the type where you could, and it took away a little for me when I couldn't say, "Wow, I should have figured that out." Technically there was info there, but a lot more hidden away than I like.

Hi, Mary here. Sorry I'm late. I also gave it 3 stars. I planned to rate it higher as I was reading, but by the time I got to the end, with that "out of left field" ending, I had lowered it.

I also kept waiting for them to find out how Nathan really died, because suicide was ridiculous. I was even talking to myself, saying Suicide, really????

Yes it was hidden in that they did not show Peter Diamond's thought process when he figured it out. It did seem to come out of left field. I also felt like Nathan's suicide came out of left field. And I didn't like the way the keys were conveniently hidden on the mattress for Ingeborg to find. Too easy.

I haven't read anything by this author either. I have to say though, he did a pretty good job of making it readable for those who hadn't read the 13 other Peter Diamond books. We had one book in the group that we read that was similarly pretty far along in a series, and I had trouble keeping track of all the supporting cast that had (I assume) been developed along the course of the series.

From reading the comments on Goodreads, I gather that this was not considered one of Lovesey's better novels.

Hi Mary. Yes Nathan deserved a more complicated ending. I did enjoy the way the young detective ended up losing his memory and hanging out with vagrants.

Mary wrote: "I also kept waiting for them to find out how Nathan really died, because suicide was ridiculous. I was even talking to myself, saying Suicide, really????"

Oh, yeah, I totally forgot about that! Yeah, it would have been better to find out about that. But all the false leads and red herrings (thought it was good that one of the detectives actually mentioned "red herring") kinda just got left aside.

Angela wrote: "Hi Mary. Yes Nathan deserved a more complicated ending. I did enjoy the way the young detective ended up losing his memory and hanging out with vagrants."

I was waiting for him to explain that he and Nathan got into a struggle on the bridge, and he threw Nathan off.

The Nathan/Lee Li subplot just got dropped. (And how do you pronounce Lee Li? Like Lee Lee? Or Lee Lie.

One thing another reviewer pointed out was the concept of "gun rental" due to the strict gun control in Britain. That is so unusual and perhaps made it more likely that once you had the gun you would have an easy route to the killer. So that's why Ingeborg had her wild adventure. I wonder how a U.S. version of the book would have proceeded.

Mary wrote: "The Nathan/Lee Li subplot just got dropped. (And how do you pronounce Lee Li? Like Lee Lee? Or Lee Lie."

Since Nathan called her "Lily", and run through my British pronunciation filter in my head I figure "Lee Lee" is pretty close.

I thought it was Lee Lee. But now that you mention it, Nathan called her Lily so it was probably Lee Lie.

Angela wrote: "One thing another reviewer pointed out was the concept of "gun rental" due to the strict gun control in Britain. That is so unusual and perhaps made it more likely that once you had the gun you wou..."

Yeah, that was one thing that I found interesting, from an American standpoint. Also the apparent differences when it comes to undercover work.

Yeah, Lee Lee makes more sense.

There were so many interesting words and phrases I hadn't read before.

raise a hare but not follow it
trousered millions
anorak--not the jacket anorak
winkle
and my favorite --- peppercorn rent

Funny - I was going to mention a lot of British slang that I just didn't get!

Favorite quotes/lines?

page 283 Monica says she would "have had his guts for garters"
Yikes!

page 312: "I'm holding fast to my principles, even in a world I hardly recognize anymore."

page 347: "Erica, a headmistrees by temperament if not by appointment..."

"Raffles had already returned to the warm armchair and was staring at Ingeborg in the way only a cat can, daring her to eject him. She chose another chair."

That is why I'm a dog person.

About the only other highlight I made - beyond some possible "clues" that didn't end up as such - was with this exchange:

“Long time ago. It says here the Mark IV remained in service until 1963.”

“When sexual intercourse began.”

I looked it up, and the poem is thus:

Annus Mirabilis (by Philip Larken)

Sexual intercourse began
In nineteen sixty-three
(which was rather late for me) -
Between the end of the Chatterley ban
And the Beatles' first LP.

Tim wrote: ""Raffles had already returned to the warm armchair and was staring at Ingeborg in the way only a cat can, daring her to eject him. She chose another chair.""

: )
(I'm a cat person)

I looked up the poem too. And an article came up in the Guardian about the Profumo affair and what was going on in Britain in 1963 including a film that Julie Christie was in called "Billy Liar". Some kind of film about a modern young women.

Angela wrote: "That is why I'm a dog person."

Yeah, but try leaving a dog alone at home for the weekend.

A cat? It will look at you when you get back with a face that says, "You were gone?"

Well thank you both for coming! The book for next month is "The Holdout" by Graham Moore. We will "meet" here on Goodreads on the 3rd Monday of February. In March, if all goes well, we will give this a try live, on WebEx.

I was born in 1962, so I know sexual intercourse started slightly before the poem states.

Looking forward to it!

"The Holdout" by Graham Moore.

OK. Hope to see you all next month.

See you next month!

Angela, the 3rd Monday in February is President's Day. Are we still on?

Mary, I am not sure. I will let you know as soon as I know. The library was scheduled to be open but now we have closed the branches so that staff can help the county set up vaccination appointments. So right now I don't know!

Unless there are strong objections, I will be posting my thoughts on The Holdout next week as scheduled. Given the virtual environment, I don't see why the open or closed state of the physical library should matter.

Now if Angela would get in trouble - but I don't see why - that would count as a "strong objection" to me, but otherwise, anyone else who cares to discuss it, "see" you Monday.

Yes! Go for it! I will most likely be busy with other duties. I look forward to reading your comments and will comment myself if I get a chance.