A Breach of Promise

Rating:
Summary: The best one yet!
Review: Before, The Sins of the Wolf was the best, but now . . . I change my mind. This one takes its place. Not only was the underlining drama that goes throughout the series great, but the actual mystery was so unpredicatable! Usually, the mystery itself is predictable that you knew who dunnit before the book tells you (well the murderer I knew), but this book surprised me. I can't wait for the next one. Anne Perry has done it again!

Rating:
Summary: Fascinating
Review: From a historical point of view, from a woman's point of view this was an excellent book. I was disapointed at the way it ended but it was very good reading none the less.

Rating:
Summary: My first Anne Perry but not my last
Review: I am not a reader of mysteries. But I picked up this book in the library because of the title. It was excellent! In a subtle way, Perry makes a good point about Victorian treatment of women. Its a book well worth reading.

Rating:
Summary: OK, Anne. . .where are the last six pages???
Review: I don't think I could ever totally trash any book that Anne writes. As usual, Oliver, Hester, and William make a great team, and the big surprise that comes right after the murder midway through the book made me gasp out loud. . .as did the resolution of the subplot involving the investigative work William does for Miss Jackson. But when I turned the last page, I said to myself, "Hold on here! Is this case concluded or not?" Frankly, half the fun of seeing the mystery solved is the big final scene where the big society person gets exactly what's coming to him or her. Well, I checked to see if any pages had been torn out of my library copy of the book. Nope. All I can say is, "Anne, don't be in such a big hurry to get your book to the publisher next time." This one suffers from the same thing that made me stop reading John Grisham--a hurried ending that leaves significant pieces of the plot unresolved. Resolve the mystery next time and keep us guessing about the relationships, not vice versa. Anne, you've done better. . .and you can do it again:)

Rating:
Summary: Great reading
Review: I enjoyed this book. The english touch is what I look for in a good mystery with the real fact of the period. Reminds me of an author Victora Holt.

Rating:
Summary: So what's a girl to do?
Review: I find it hard to credit that someone could fall in love with someone without knowing even the most basic thing about them. And I find it even less creditable that a person could become engaged to someone without noticing it. And, finally, how could one so reportedly gifted be so persistently unobservant and obstinant in defending a suit of this kind. But, having said all that, I have to say that I enjoyed this book. I kept wondering when, and if there would be a murder, and who the victim would be, even though I figured out the subplot before it was announced. I wish that Perry had not ended the whole thing quite so abruptly. I have a considerable fondness for Rathbone, and wonder why Hester is not more attracted to him. Perhaps his thoughtfulness and male sensitivity are a bit too modern for our thoroughly liberated Victorian heroine. Hester appears to prefer the rough masculine good(if somewhat insensitive)intentions of Inspector Monk. I like this trio of investigators. Hope Perry doesn't break them up.

Rating:
Summary: Tedious, overdrawn courtroom drama
Review: I have admired and enjoyed Ms. Perry's style, plot development, and particularly her characters. "Breach" is not her best as it is unecessariliy prolonged and repetative; it almost says 'maybe you don't understand this. so we'll go over it again'. But she'll rebound, probably better than ever

Rating:
Summary: Couldn't Put It Down
Review: I have been reading Anne Perry's books for many years and this is one of her best! I've always been a bigger fan of the Pitt's but with this book I've "switched sides".

Rating:
Summary: Usual Anne Perry Fare: Victoriana viewed from the 1990's
Review: I have read and enjoyed all of Anne Perry's books, but certainly not for the mystery plot - the solution is always contrived (here, the murderer left too much to chance, in "Cain His Brother" the main character would have had to be an acrobat and have the gift of teletransportation to have done what he was supposed to in the time he was supposed to have done it), and there are holes you can drive an hansom through. I think that's because Ms. Perry's main goal is putting across her views on the social and gender inequalities in English society in the Victorian age. I totally agree with her feminist and liberal views, so I go on reading her books, but she could really make a greater effort in consistency. Here, as in "Weighed in the Balance", the coincidence of having Hester Latterly working in a place where someone is connected to the main mystery is just too much. The main plot was quite sufficient to make her point - though I guessed what was Melville's real problem before I was a third of the way into the book - having the link between the plot and subplot was contrived and unnecessary. And I agree with the other readers who think the ending was much too abrupt. Also, it's very 1990's and American (yes, I know she comes from New Zealand, same difference) to have the characters call each other by their first names, specially a nurse in someone's employ does not call her employers by name or, talking to a child, refer to his parents by first name. Did Jane Austen ever let us know what Mr. and Mrs. Bennet's, or Mrs. Dashwood's, first names were? It bothers me in that it does not give the right formal atmosphere of social conversation of the time. I was glad to see that Ms. Perry seems to have outgrown her love of the verb "to obey" and all its form (obedience, obediently, etc.). She only uses it about ten times in this book - albeit sometimes inappropriately, as when Monk "obediently" follows a servant taking him in to see the master of the house - whereas I've counted up to 25 times in earlier books. A little thing, I agree, but very annoying to a reader (Americans don't use that word so much, do they?). Anyway - to sum it up, this was not the best of Anne Perry's efforts, but it was enjoyable nonetheless. I do wish next time she develops the ending more - it's always so satisfying to confront the culprit - and pays more attention to consistency and verbal mores.

Rating:
Summary: Usual Anne Perry Fare: Victoriana viewed from the 1990's
Review: I have read and enjoyed all of Anne Perry's books, but certainly not for the mystery plot - the solution is always contrived (here, the murderer left too much to chance, in "Cain His Brother" the main character would have had to be an acrobat and have the gift of teletransportation to have done what he was supposed to in the time he was supposed to have done it), and there are holes you can drive an hansom through. I think that's because Ms. Perry's main goal is putting across her views on the social and gender inequalities in English society in the Victorian age. I totally agree with her feminist and liberal views, so I go on reading her books, but she could really make a greater effort in consistency. Here, as in "Weighed in the Balance", the coincidence of having Hester Latterly working in a place where someone is connected to the main mystery is just too much. The main plot was quite sufficient to make her point - though I guessed what was Melville's real problem before I was a third of the way into the book - having the link between the plot and subplot was contrived and unnecessary. And I agree with the other readers who think the ending was much too abrupt. Also, it's very 1990's and American (yes, I know she comes from New Zealand, same difference) to have the characters call each other by their first names, specially a nurse in someone's employ does not call her employers by name or, talking to a child, refer to his parents by first name. Did Jane Austen ever let us know what Mr. and Mrs. Bennet's, or Mrs. Dashwood's, first names were? It bothers me in that it does not give the right formal atmosphere of social conversation of the time. I was glad to see that Ms. Perry seems to have outgrown her love of the verb "to obey" and all its form (obedience, obediently, etc.). She only uses it about ten times in this book - albeit sometimes inappropriately, as when Monk "obediently" follows a servant taking him in to see the master of the house - whereas I've counted up to 25 times in earlier books. A little thing, I agree, but very annoying to a reader (Americans don't use that word so much, do they?). Anyway - to sum it up, this was not the best of Anne Perry's efforts, but it was enjoyable nonetheless. I do wish next time she develops the ending more - it's always so satisfying to confront the culprit - and pays more attention to consistency and verbal mores.