Death Comes at Christmas - Marie O'Reagan and Paul Kane (Eds.) ****

A full-blown murder mystery would overload a short story, but for some reason Christmas crime works well in short form, as witness the series of classic books that recently tailed off with Murder by Candlelight. It's refreshing to have a chunky new collection, some from high powered modern thriller writers - and the vast majority of the stories are well worth reading.

I think it's fair to say that few come up to the really great classic Christmas mystery shorts, but I very much enjoyed, for example, C. L. Taylor's How to Commit Murder in a Bookshop - I think many published authors would quietly identify with the targeting of agents, publicists, marketing people and the like (leaving readers and booksellers safe). Russ Thomas gives us a dark old Christmas house scare with The Red Angel, and there's amusing murderous fluffiness in The Wrong Party. Some good twists too - for example in Samantha Hayes' dark Frostbite, while Sarah Hilary's Marley's Ghost gives us a very satisfying ending in true Christmas Carol style.

There's only one story that was an out and out turkey. Alexandra Benedict revived her unlikeable characters from last year's Christmas Jigsaw Murders. The story's one redeeming grace is its very clever title - The Midnight Mass Murderer. However, the mass murder in question - the killing of a whole midnight church congregation - wouldn't work. The murderer's threat (to kill 'just under two hundred people') is far too accurate a prediction as no one can accurately predict a congregation size, but more importantly the method (carbon monoxide poisoning) is far too slow and variable in impact to take out a whole group of people in one go with no survivors. Most hilariously inept, though, is Benedict's attempt to take out our amateur detectives. Again carbon monoxide is the mechanism - but quite how this was emitted by 'storage heaters' - which are electric - is not made clear.

It's perhaps too much to expect every story in a collection to be a good one (though I'm not sure what the editors were playing at including that one) - but you still get 17 satisfying reads, which is an impressive success rate.

You can buy Death Comes at Christmas from Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.com and Bookshop.org

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:

Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

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 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...

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...

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...

Search This Blog