Magpie Murders: A Novel Kindle Edition

Definitely a top contender for my favourite read of this year – a book that’s truly something special, original and memorable. I predicted early on that it was going to be a 5-star read for me, even if there’s always that small niggling doubt you have that it’s going to veer off the rails and end on a disappointing note. Thankfully, this wasn’t that book, and both the mystery set in the present, as well as the actual plot of the Atticus Pũnd whodunit, were clever, interesting, and more than exceeded my expectations. And I didn’t guess either mystery – a major bonus!As outlined in the book summary, this book contains a novel within a novel. You’d think this would be confusing, but don’t worry it’s not, and anyone (particularly those who’ve read a lot of mysteries), will be able to follow the plot/s no problem.The first chapter introduces us to the protagonist, editor, Susan Ryeland, looking back on the day she eagerly sat down to read the first draft of the latest Alan Conway mystery novel, ‘Magpie Murders’. She goes on to explain that ‘Magpie Murders’ marks the ninth book in his Atticus Pũnd detective series, and that she is a long time fan of his work. She then rounds off the chapter by stating that ‘Magpie Murders’ ruined her life, and how she wishes she had never read it. She wraps up with an ominous message that we have been warned...We then launch straight into the ‘Magpie Murders’ manuscript, and I found it really cool how it’s set out like an actual book. There’s a cover page (not illustrated of course since this is the first draft), an ‘About the Author’ section, a title list of Conway’s eight previous books, and even a ‘Praise for the Author’ blurb. It really tickled my fancy that author’s Robert Harris and Ian Rankin endorsed both Atticus Pũnd and Alan Conway – too cute! It even states that Atticus Pũnd is soon to be a major BBC1 Television series.The plot begins on the day of a funeral. Mary Blakiston, housekeeper of Pye Hall (the most prominent house in town) has recently died, the apparent victim of an unfortunate household accident, a fall down the stairs. We quickly learn that Mary is not well liked in the village – that she is a busybody who relishes sticking her nose in everyone’s business and ferreting out their secrets. Naturally, as a result of this, she has a lot of enemies. Atticus Pũnd, when he is introduced, is pretty much a carbon copy of Poirot, he’s even foreign. But don’t be put off, there are reasons for this that will be explained. Funnily enough, this is the second novel I have read this month (The Death of Mrs. Westaway) that not only features Magpies, but uses the rhyme ‘One For Sorrow’ etc. I felt it was used more effectively here, but Ruth Ware still does a good job of it.To further distinguish it from the present day storyline, Conway’s novel is set in 1955, and is written in the more formal style of an Agatha Christie novel, with multiple third person POV’s. Whereas the present text, is narrated by Susan Ryeland in the first person, and has a lighter, more modern feel. There are some hilarious moments when Susan, attempting to play detective, and decipher clues, comes up with some really half baked ideas. She’s no Atticus Pũnd that’s for sure!I recommend this over all other books I’ve read this year. I would’ve been more than happy if it was just an Atticus Pũnd novel written by Horowitz, but to have a second mystery as well, and relating it to the first in all the ways that it did just blew me away. I’m so tempted to move straight on to ‘The Word is Murder’ but think I should save it, knowing I have it still to read...

This is a well-written novel, engaging in many ways, but also strange. Horowitz plays with conventions in a way that’s sometimes clever, but sometimes comes off as artifice. It’s unfair to generalize about the book as a whole, though, because it is two distinct, very different novels packed into one edifice-size book. I liked Novel One better than Novel Two.Novel One is a more or less traditional British mystery, well executed with marvelous depth of detail and interesting characters, supposedly by a writer named Alan Conway. It is being read in manuscript form by a nameless person. As a standalone, and with a conclusion, it would be a fine novel in the tradition of Sherlock Holmes … even including the pleasant but diffident Watson-like figure of James. Atticus Pünd is an estimable protagonist, a perfect analog of Holmes, deductive reasoning spinning but never exposed. However, the story is told by an omniscient narrator (who isn’t entirely omniscient, since he’s not privy to Pünd’s deductive logic.) Most of the time this isn’t a show-stopper, but it is jarring when the narrator goes into a character’s head right after refusing to go into Pünd’s thoughts. The story toddles along, the omniscient narrator giving it a very 19th Century feel. But wait, you say, Conan Doyle was one of the first noteworthy authors to use third person distant so he could let Watson tell the story without having to expose Holmes’ ratiocination until the very end. An omniscient narrator would know Pünd’s thinking, so the choice of that form comes off as artifice. The bigger problem is there is a crowd of named characters from the little town of Saxby-on-Avon. We love them all, and Horowitz is at his best when he’s describing them. Most are potential suspects by the end of the 90% of Novel One we get before a break …… to Novel Two, which starts with an attempt to solve the too-many-characters-to-remember problem in Novel One. The solution is to have the nameless editor, who we might or might not remember from chapter one, summarize many of the people in Novel One, reminding the relieved reader who all these folks are. But the summary comes off as artifice. (“Ohmigod, editor says there are too many characters. Well, I’ll fix that.”) After the summary, the editor finally lets us know she’s Susan Ryeland, and Book Two is off to the races … well, the trots … and Ryeland narrates the second story in first person. The transition from omniscient narrator to first person helps make a clear break from Novel One, but Ryeland is a less interesting narrator than Conway’s omniscient narrator, and first person somewhat circumscribes her ability to give the reader the opulent descriptions that made me turn the pages in Novel One. It turns out that there are many parallels between Conway, the author, and his protagonist, Atticus Pünd. That is well handled and interesting, but Ryeland’s search for missing material layers red herring upon red herring. Faced with many characters and many clues, I began to zone out. Still, the book is well-written. For readers who want complex plots and good writing, this book will be satisfying.

This book within a book, is both captivating and maddening. One wants each of the stories to run their course and be resolved, yet we must leave each story. And, it is necessary to alternate stories, one of which is fiction and the other the story of writing the fiction. Very clever. Worth the read.

The book is very good, the only problem some parts of that (almost in the middle) has soo many details that makes it boring. But I the general is that one of the best whodunnits I've already read

Unfortunately, I must agree with the negative reviews here.As much as I've liked the 'book within the book' idea, the whole novel ends up being just far too long. It's a horrible thing to say to an author, but cutting off 25% of each part would have done a lot of good (maybe Susan should have edited it, haha!).Also, are we talking 'references' (to MSM, Poirot, Christie, etc) or plain clichées, because honestly...So many pages are wasted on so many things that are totally irrelevant to the story and weigh an already heavy plot even more down (one thing is a red herring, another thing is random ideas thrown in here and there).The way Pund 'solves the murder, is just neither realistic nor believable.Andreas is annoying.Characters are all so inconsistent, tons of words to describe each one of them, and still, no depth.Several inconsistencies here and there, hard to follow up anyway due to the length of this thing.I still give it an extra star because it is, after all, well-written.

La construcción es sorprendente

L'auteur sait raconter des histoires et c'est important pour un roman policier ; le suspens est bien là jusqu'à la fin. Le roman dans le roman est une idée originale mais je ne sais pas si j'aimerais en relire un autre du même genre. On a l'impression de lire deux romans policiers différents à la suite l'un de l'autre.

El libro llegó en perfecto estado. Es un libro de bolsillo, tiene el tamaño de letra acorde a esto.