Murder Before Evensong - Richard Coles ***(*)

A novel by a celebrity is almost always one I would avoid at all costs, as we all know why the publisher wants their name on the cover. It's all about marketing opportunity and nothing to do with writing skills. However, because Richard Coles' other profession as an Anglican clergyman made him ideally suited to writing a church-set murder mystery, I overcame my natural avoidance, and on the whole I'm glad that I did.

After reading eight chapters without a hint of murder, I thought Coles was doing an inspiring job of portraying life in a village parish from the 1980s, when an archaic location, that still had local church politics dominated by the lord of the manor, was struggling to come to terms with the (then) present. (There's even a knowing reference to the hit TV show of the period, To the Manor Born.) And, of course, Coles has the church life (and the vicar's outlook on life) perfectly illustrated. It's far more realistic than the portrayal of a vicar in a standard crime novel (though not, of course, my own Stephen Capel mysteries). If you extracted the crimes, to be honest, this novel would stand up well as an enjoyable exploration of that very particular setting.

If anything, the murder mystery part is the weakest aspect of the book. The plotting is more than a little contrived and it's quite difficult to keep track of the secondary characters who eventually come to the fore. I couldn't help think that if Agatha Christie had written this, we would get a real shock from whodunnit - here, the feeling is more 'Oh, okay. Fine.' It's the antithesis of Janice Hallett's amazing books, starting with The Appeal, where the plotting is phenomenal and hits you between the eyes.

Because I enjoyed the setting, both in terms of the life and thoughts of the central character of the Reverend Canon Daniel Clement, and this transitional world of the 1980s when the UK was undergoing a significant culture shift, I will be going back for the second instalment - I just hope that with practice Coles can make the detective aspect more engaging.

See all of Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly digest for free here

You can buy Murder Before Evensong from Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.com and Bookshop.org.

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Comments

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 recent 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 ex

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

Which idiot came up with percentage-based gradient signs

Rant warning: the contents of this post could sound like something produced by UKIP. I wish to make it clear that I do not in any way support or endorse that political party. In fact it gives me the creeps. Once upon a time, the signs for a steep hill on British roads displayed the gradient in a simple, easy-to-understand form. If the hill went up, say, one yard for every three yards forward it said '1 in 3'. Then some bureaucrat came along and decided that it would be a good idea to state the slope as a percentage. So now the sign for (say) a 1 in 10 slope says 10% (I think). That 'I think' is because the percentage-based slope is so unnatural. There are two ways we conventionally measure slopes. Either on X/Y coordiates (as in 1 in 4) or using degrees - say at a 15° angle. We don't measure them in percentages. It's easy to visualize a 1 in 3 slope, or a 30 degree angle. Much less obvious what a 33.333 recurring percent slope is. And what's a 100% slope

Search This Blog