|
[ Home ]
[ About | Reviews | Search | Submit ]
I admit to a completely quirky reason for reading this book; in the acknowledgements, the authors mention one of heaven's best ice cream places, Toscanini's of Cambridge, Massachusetts. Oh, swoon -- AND they're in Harvard Square now too. Along with the original Herrell's, also of Cambridge. Oh, man! If you know the area, I hope you know these joints. Now if Ephron's characters had eaten at Mary Chung, all would be forgiven. In GUILT, there are several elements that make up a mystery; I just didn't find that they blended successfully. This is the first book I've read by G H Ephron the writing team of Hallie Ephron and Donald A Davidoff, PhD. The story has several interesting components, the setting is a good one -- Cambridge is used as a setting by far fewer mystery writers than Boston -- and it has a lot of unique characteristics. The main characters appear smart and realistic; but the book just didn't gel for me. There were a couple of obvious clues that I thought these smart people should have caught. The romance just seemed a little hackneyed. And it was totally impossible to watch some of the storyline unfold; watching an abused wife allow her husband back into her life, knowing as she does what will happen is agonizing and painful to watch. I also had a knee-jerk reaction to a statement made by one of the lead characters, which seemed to imply that people who read science fiction have problems with reality. I've know dozens of fans of that genre -- yes, I am one -- and I don't know a more grounded, reality-based bunch of readers. Hmph. Did the abusive husband set a bomb at Harvard Law School to retaliate against his wife, who's seeking a restraining order against him? It's sure possible. But when a second bomb goes off at the courthouse, the lines blur. There are some weird flyers which hint at a hatred of the government which might provide more leads. So investigator Annie Squires and Dr Peter Zak, a forensic neuropsychologist try to determine motive for these horrific acts. Zak and Squires are a couple, though Zak shows some unnerving jealousy about her friendship with another man. I'd like to think someone with as much training as Zak has could get that women and men can be friends, one of the several things that bugged me about this couple, as did the not-very-original "should we commit?" and "thinking about marriage and the future" story line. I sensed little excitement, little that made this book unique. I can't say why, it just felt to me as if the authors sat down and brainstormed on all the 'successful' elements of a mystery novel and tried to write them. Once again, it makes me wonder if I might read too much in the field. But since other books succeed every day for me, then I don't believe that's the case. This one just didn't ring true for this reader.
Reviewed by Andi Shechter, February 2005
[ Top ]
QUICK SEARCH:
Contact: Yvonne Klein (ymk@reviewingtheevidence.com)
[ About | Reviews | Search | Submit ]
[ Home ]
| 
