Skip to main content

Review: Murder on the Christmas Express ***

This time of year I tend to read a much wider range of  books, so expect some random reviews. But one thing that will always feature over Christmas is a mystery - whether it's revisiting M. R. James ghost stories for the nth time, or a Christmas-themed murder mystery. This book certainly fits the bill with its deliberate reference to Agatha Christie's title, and Christmas thrown in.

The setting is somewhat less exotic than the Orient Express - here it's the sleeper train from London to Fort William - but there's the same opportunity for a tight band of suspects and there's the convenience of a train that gets derailed in a snowstorm, isolating the suspects and the detective - in this case a newly retired Met detective inspector, heading up to Scotland because her daughter's about to give birth.

Where this differs a lot from Christie is the impact of modern technology. So the detective, Roz Parker, is agonisingly kept up with the complications of her daughter's delivery, and the (first) victim is a social media influencer, which is an important factor in the storyline. We get a nice locked room mystery and increasing rebellion from the (mostly unpleasant) set of train passengers to fill out the action.

The book isn't bad, but apart from a couple of central characters, I found it difficult to get a picture of some of the others (there are four students, practising for an unlikely sounding cross between University Challenge and Big Brother, for example, who I had real trouble making anything other than ciphers in my mind). The side story of Roz's life didn't really add to the main thread of the mystery plotting, and the prose could sometimes try a bit too hard.

For example, there are some strained similes - there's a midwife 'whose low, reassuring tones flowed like the warm water that filled a birthing pool'. Like many real passengers, Roz notices the glimpsed lives of people as the train passes their houses, but as she 'became aware of thousands of parallel lives', she feels that 'Like every small part of the train, each life was integral. Essential.' Really? This observation is then extended to wildly misunderstand Schrödinger's cat with the thought that 'Each box of a window with its blinds or curtains could contain an atrocity. Schrödinger's casement.' 

I lived with this - it was never hugely intrusive, but the thing that finalised my mixed feelings about the book was the ending. There's an interesting twist at the end - but the reaction to that twist is to totally lose any sense of justice being done. It just felt wrong.

This was an entertaining enough story, with plenty happening and a couple of effective characters, but it could have been a lot better.

See all of Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly digest for free here
You can order Murder on the Christmas Express from Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.com and Bookshop.org

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp
117 comments
Read more

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor
25 comments
Read more

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense
6 comments
Read more