English Mysteries Club discussion

I'm looking forward to this - should be able to get a copy from a friend later this week. :)

And I'm next in line for my library's ebook

I have read this before but will be rereading with the group. My paperback copy is tattered and missing some pages so this time I will be reading the Kindle edition, which I have already borrowed from the library :)

Welcome Ramla. Enjoy the reread :)

I also read this book sometime ago. Always enjoy going back to good books.

Carola wrote: "I also read this book sometime ago. Always enjoy going back to good books."

Ditto. And ditto.

I'm in, thanks for telling me about this group Carol.

Me, too!

So much fun! I will wait until the 15th to discuss but am glad I decided to reread this!

I just got the book out so that I can start it later, and after my granddaughter read the title, I asked her, "Why would anyone shoot a butler?" Her reply: "If he wasn't doing his work right?"

do we read the whole thing before the 15th?

Jackie wrote: "do we read the whole thing before the 15th?"

You can but it isn't required. But after the 15th there may be plot points discussed that you might want to avoid reading about if you haven't finished the book.

Ramla Zareen wrote: "Karlyne wrote: "I just got the book out so that I can start it later, and after my granddaughter read the title, I asked her, "Why would anyone shoot a butler?" Her reply: "If he wasn't doing his..."

She's 8, which is why I laughed so hard. And, no, we've never even met a butler in real life, but she's seen a few movie ones!

I have a grandson who is 3 (the 8 year old's brother), and the things he says absolutely keep us in stitches! They're both intentionally funny at times (I thank God regularly for their senses of humor), but often they make us laugh unintentionally!

& my friend thought she had all the GH mysteries but she doesn't have this one - or Penhallow. I may have to sit this one out. :(

I may have to sit it out, too. I enjoy reading the comments of the group members.

***Carol*** wrote: "& my friend thought she had all the GH mysteries but she doesn't have this one - or Penhallow. I may have to sit this one out. :("

I just finished it, Carol. Would you like to come by and borrow it? (heeheheehee)

Karlyne wrote:
I just finished it, Carol. Would you like to..."

Ha! Smartypants! I may have found another source!

library! if they don't have it, complain!

I just got it from Amazon for $1.99.

is someone going to start it? another thread or what?

I think the discussion starts on the 15th. I'm half way finished. Liking it a lot so far

I whizzed through this earlier in the month. I have read most if not all Heyer's mysteries before (most more than once), but I had forgotten how much I enjoyed the dialogue! Truly one of Heyer's strengths in my opinion.

For example, the section where Sir Humphrey keeps trying to read aloud to Frank:

   "Sir Humphrey, pleased to find his nephew more widely read than he had imagined, unbent and said that he had borrowed the book from Fountain that morning. He presently made another attempt to read a passage aloud and was still more firmly checked. 'Do you remember this bit, Frank?' he began.
    'Yes,' said Mr. Amberley.
    Sir Humphrey informed him that his manners were intolerable."

So funny!!

I finished the book a couple days ago. I enjoyed it! Heyer is witty. My favorite character was Lady Matthews. The denouement at the end was a little long, but besides that a good read.

One of the funniest sections, Leslie! And I love Lady Matthews, too, Christina. Her very intelligent vagueness is a treat, and I'd love to meet her in real life.

The section in the pavilion and the woods was deliciously scary. In fact, I had to tell myself to calm down already; you'd think I hadn't read this before!

Lady Matthews reminded me a little of the early Miss Marple -- inarticulate but internally sharp.

Leslie wrote: "Lady Matthews reminded me a little of the early Miss Marple -- inarticulate but internally sharp."

They do resemble each other! I always feel that Miss Marple is a bit shy about voicing her opinions, because she's a maiden lady- even though she knows she's right. I can't seem to find the adjective for Lady Matthews.

I saw Lady Matthews as a thinker, not a talker. Very astute and when she said anything she was quietly confident - and right. Yes, very Miss Marple.

And they're both rather surprised to find that not everyone is following their thought processes. Nice, humble women!

Ella's Gran wrote: "I saw Lady Matthews as a thinker, not a talker. Very astute and when she said anything she was quietly confident - and right. Yes, very Miss Marple."

Oh, and, Ella's Gran, I'm an Ella's Gran, too. My youngest grandgirl, Ella, just turned 2!

She is my first of 5 grandchildren - 3 girls and 2 boys. My Ella is 13 years young now!

I enjoyed Why Shoot a Butler. It was the first Heyer mystery I read though I've read most of her Regency romances - and loved them. The romance part of this book was its weakest component, in my opinion; I didn't feel any chemistry. The mystery's interesting and has twists and turns, but the best part, as mentioned by others, is the dialogue. The relationship between the hero's aunt and uncle is priceless; Lady Matthews has the household under control. The various policemen are interesting characters and are manipulated skillfully by our hero. All in all a very enjoyable read!

Ella's Gran wrote: "She is my first of 5 grandchildren - 3 girls and 2 boys. My Ella is 13 years young now!"

And my Ella is the youngest of 9! But, she's an only so far, and the other 8 belong to different parents!

Sandy wrote: "I enjoyed Why Shoot a Butler. It was the first Heyer mystery I read though I've read most of her Regency romances - and loved them. The romance part of this book was its weakest component, in my op..."

The chemistry was so unspoken and undemonstrated that I think it stretched its believability. But, I read Heyer mostly for the dialog, and she never disappoints there.

Sandy wrote: "I enjoyed Why Shoot a Butler. It was the first Heyer mystery I read though I've read most of her Regency romances - and loved them. The romance part of this book was its weakest component, in my op..."

I agree totally with your sum up of this read Sandy. I thought the mystery was really good with all its twists and turns, but was made great by the dialogue. Loved Lady Matthews. Not only had the household under control, but all those who inhabited, and visited! I loved the way she 'managed' the husband - much the same way as her nephew managed the policemen.

I was somewhat dumbfounded at the marriage proposal as I hadn't got even an inkling that there was a romance blossoming between anyone in the book. A very weak component particularly considering Heyer's other genre of Regency romance that is well done. Maybe she felt she ought not include 'real romance' in a mystery book since people might think she was piggy-backing her mysteries on her romance success.

I know I read all of Heyer's books many, many years ago so must have read this, yet had no recollection of the story at all. Great stuff.

I think the only serious clue about the romance is that he doesn't turn her in, although she thinks that's because he wants to catch her himself. And then when she's relieved to run into him in the woods, too, but it's not obvious, is it?

Really surprised by the comments re: romance. I thought it was clear - almost just like the romance in Regency Buck! Shirley, like Judith, wanting to be independent and unwilling to trust. Frank, like Worth, amused by the show of independence but wanting her to confide in him of her own free will; taking actions for protection of her brother which are misconstrued.

Well, Lady Matthews wasn't in the least surprised! I don't remember being surprised the first time that I read it, either, but I think, as a Heyer fan, I was expecting it. Probably thinking of Regency Buck, sub-consciously!

I'm in the middle of my re-read and enjoying it - but was shocked to run into "the N word", is it in anyone else's version?

meanwhile, I am enjoying the teasing between Amberley and his old school pal. without it, he wouldn't have been as likable.

Jackie wrote: "I'm in the middle of my re-read and enjoying it - but was shocked to run into "the N word", is it in anyone else's version?

meanwhile, I am enjoying the teasing between Amberley and his old schoo..."

It was a reference to working, wasn't it, Jackie? It's hard to read it even in a non-nasty context, kind of makes shivers run up and down my spine. I remember my father-in-law using it in a really nasty way once, in front of my kids, and I told him I'd rather hear the f-word than the n-word. But I'd rather not hear either.

I too was shocked by the use of the "N" word. I have a kindle edition and thought they could have put dashes instead. I did enjoy the book. The witty dialogue and interaction among the characters was great. Amberley is about the most sarcastic main character ever. The romance part was an unnecessary addition but also funny because she is the perfect person for him.

As much as I admire Heyer's Regency romances, I found this book quite disappointing. Nice dialogue, potentially compelling plot, & subtle wit, yes. However! First & worst, the main character--amateur detective Frank Amberley--is a pompous, spoiled, patronizing twit. (The same type who use the N-word nowadays & get sniffy if anybody "with no sense of humor" objects.) That undermined the already not very plausible romance, which insofar as one could believe it at all, felt like an impulse sparked by crisis & lack of other options rather than a true attraction. And finally, I get very annoyed when a mystery's plot doesn't unfurl through action, but is explained in a long lecture at the end. Particularly irksome was learning that Amberley had key information from the start which he hid from us, the readers, as well as the police--both unconscionable!

I think this is my 2nd least favorite Heyer mystery - (Footsteps is the least) because Amberley is so unlikable, at least in his dealings with our heroine. and she is sulky, I hate that. I do like him better talking to his friend or dealing with his family. I am still enjoying it, however.

Jackie wrote: "I think this is my 2nd least favorite Heyer mystery - (Footsteps is the least) because Amberley is so unlikable, at least in his dealings with our heroine. and she is sulky, I hate that. I do like ..."

The pair will make a "good" couple - they each get the partner they deserve!

I didn't want to be negative but I thought it was just silly Didn't even get a third of the way through.

Sandy wrote: "The romance part of this book was its weakest component, in my opinion; I didn't feel any chemistry. "

I agree. It seemed implausible and forced. I think Heyer feels the need, because of her background primarily as a romance writer, to include a romantic element in her mysteries (I've read one or two others of them and they all seem to have a love story mixed in), but in this one the romance didn't seem very romantic or very realistic.

Other than that, I did enjoy it, though Heyer didn't follow the traditional English pattern of giving the reader sufficient clues hidden here and there to make it possible for an astute reader to figure it out.

the very end is sort of romantic - will he save her life?!

@ Jackie - that's quite OK!

Hi I've managed to get a copy through my local library system. I thought I had read this before, but it's not ringing any bells.

Just about to start chapter 8 so will keep out of here till I finish.

I was noticing the resemblances to Worth & Judith too. WSAB was written 2 years earlier. Good start - for about 2 pages! Also, bizarre (in one case career threatening) character motivation, plot holes you could drive a truck through & so far, other than Lady Matthews I'm not enjoying the secondary characters as much as usual.

I'm hoping it will pick up for me.

***Carol*** wrote: I'm hoping it will pick up for me.

Well it didn't. Other than Helen (mercifully suppressed contemporary) & My Lord John (leaden historical) this is the worst Heyer I've ever read.

You can add coincidence, implausible obligatory romance & tedious finale to the faults.

I'm trying to decide on the rating & if the Sergeant & lady Matthews are enough to bump the rating to 2*.

Jackie or anyone else - could you tell me what chapter had the racist word. I've read a different edition than I have pictured (a GR librarian is going to load the cover picture up for me) Possibly it's been cleaned up.

Although I wouldn't judge GH too harshly for being a product of her time. I've been told Christie has been cleaned up, racism wise where as Heyer & Tey haven't.

What I struggle with in the Golden Age women authors,(& I'll include Marsh in this) is the contempt they always seem to feel for women servants - especially the young ones.

it's chapter 8, when Mark Brown has drowned and they were doing CPR (or whatever it was called then) they worked like N.... to bring him back to life. makes you go "WTF!"