Scan barcode
mrs_gippy's review against another edition
1.0
In what seems to be an ever-increasing trend, what has the elements of a wonderful cozy (love the quotes, references, and allusions to the books by the Bronte sisters...love the references to other books, such as Anne of Green Gables, as well...love the house, the town, and the cats...etc, etc) was completely ruined by the book's obnoxious “heroine”! She bumped a 4-star rating down to a 1!!!
The abbreviated version is that Emily is self-righteous and childish hypocrite. Though she judges everyone else for the smallest things, she herself treats the man she supposedly loves like a piece of crap for simply doing his job, lies and points fingers at others as suspects to divert attention from those she has decided are innocent, and in general acts like a spoiled brat who will only be nice when everyone does it the way SHE wants it done.
The long version:
There are so many snarky observations from Emily about nearly everyone she encounters--doctors, waiters, contractors, drama teachers, a man from a crime scene cleaning service, etc--anything they say, do, or think that doesn't match with how Emily thinks they should be acting is worthy of a snide remark or judgmental thought from her. (I genuinely wonder if the author was trying to make the other characters appear "unlikeable" to distract the reader from how odious Emily is; if so, the plan back-fired big time!)
However, despite her high expectations of others, Emily herself, despite being in her 50s, acts childish, petulant, and downright manipulative. Because she loves Katie, she absolutely refuses to admit that Katie could be the murderer. Consequently, she treats her detective boyfriend, Luke, a man she supposedly "loves" like a complete piece of crap for DOING HIS JOB AS A DETECTIVE (and thus suspecting Katie). Katie has means, motive, and opportunity, so OF COURSE Luke has to consider her; he’d be remiss in his job if he didn’t! But Emily is enraged over it, and thus delights in punishing Luke for not clearing Katie immediately (she "wishes they were sleeping together" so she could "deny him her bed", refuses to kiss or hug him, and rejoices that he got no sleep as it "serves him right for not exonerating Katie on the spot.") What a great way to treat the man she supposedly "loves"! (But then again, I don't think she DOES actually love him, as at one point she says a statement to Luke that she freely admits has the underlying meaning of "I won't let you rest secure in my love" until till you do what I want (ie, cross Katie off the list). So clearly her "love" depends on him doing what she wants...and that isn't love at all!
Then in one of her many tirades against Luke, Emily tells him "Isn't it innocent until proven guilty? You seem to have it backwards!" What's great about that particular little tantrum is that Emily herself is very quick to assume others are guilty and point the finger at them (as long as they aren't Katie, of course). Initially Emily is certain that Roman is guilty simply on the basis of not liking him (and at that point in the story all he has done is "look" at Katie a way she doesn't like ::eyeroll::). Then later, after Katie's sister reveals some information to Emily that could possibly implicate herself and Katie, Emily completely twists the story when she re-tells it to Luke; she does this to not only make the two beloved sisters look innocent, but to make _someone else_ look guilty! It's a manipulative and extremely un-Christ like thing to do (which I mention since Emily is supposedly a Christian). But, nevertheless, she has no reservations about accusing others as long as it gets who she, Emily, cares about off the hook. In fact, when her priest tells her that the wrong person could be arrested because of her twisting the truth to Luke she says, verbatim "I don't care as long as it isn't Katie!"...So she doesn't care if someone is wrongly accused as long as Katie (who could ACTUALLY be guilty) isn't? How on earth am I supposed to like and root for this "heroine" if she is okay with innocent people potentially getting arrested (and because of her own falsehood)? Also, why is she okay lying to the man she "loves" so much? Oh yeah, because her love for Luke is actually a "conditional love."
I was looking forward to this book, and really wanted to like it, but Emily is downright awful. I don't know how others could get past this spiteful, petty, manipulative shrew of a "heroine" to actually enjoy the book.
The abbreviated version is that Emily is self-righteous and childish hypocrite. Though she judges everyone else for the smallest things, she herself treats the man she supposedly loves like a piece of crap for simply doing his job, lies and points fingers at others as suspects to divert attention from those she has decided are innocent, and in general acts like a spoiled brat who will only be nice when everyone does it the way SHE wants it done.
The long version:
There are so many snarky observations from Emily about nearly everyone she encounters--doctors, waiters, contractors, drama teachers, a man from a crime scene cleaning service, etc--anything they say, do, or think that doesn't match with how Emily thinks they should be acting is worthy of a snide remark or judgmental thought from her. (I genuinely wonder if the author was trying to make the other characters appear "unlikeable" to distract the reader from how odious Emily is; if so, the plan back-fired big time!)
However, despite her high expectations of others, Emily herself, despite being in her 50s, acts childish, petulant, and downright manipulative. Because she loves Katie, she absolutely refuses to admit that Katie could be the murderer. Consequently, she treats her detective boyfriend, Luke, a man she supposedly "loves" like a complete piece of crap for DOING HIS JOB AS A DETECTIVE (and thus suspecting Katie). Katie has means, motive, and opportunity, so OF COURSE Luke has to consider her; he’d be remiss in his job if he didn’t! But Emily is enraged over it, and thus delights in punishing Luke for not clearing Katie immediately (she "wishes they were sleeping together" so she could "deny him her bed", refuses to kiss or hug him, and rejoices that he got no sleep as it "serves him right for not exonerating Katie on the spot.") What a great way to treat the man she supposedly "loves"! (But then again, I don't think she DOES actually love him, as at one point she says a statement to Luke that she freely admits has the underlying meaning of "I won't let you rest secure in my love" until till you do what I want (ie, cross Katie off the list). So clearly her "love" depends on him doing what she wants...and that isn't love at all!
Then in one of her many tirades against Luke, Emily tells him "Isn't it innocent until proven guilty? You seem to have it backwards!" What's great about that particular little tantrum is that Emily herself is very quick to assume others are guilty and point the finger at them (as long as they aren't Katie, of course). Initially Emily is certain that Roman is guilty simply on the basis of not liking him (and at that point in the story all he has done is "look" at Katie a way she doesn't like ::eyeroll::). Then later, after Katie's sister reveals some information to Emily that could possibly implicate herself and Katie, Emily completely twists the story when she re-tells it to Luke; she does this to not only make the two beloved sisters look innocent, but to make _someone else_ look guilty! It's a manipulative and extremely un-Christ like thing to do (which I mention since Emily is supposedly a Christian). But, nevertheless, she has no reservations about accusing others as long as it gets who she, Emily, cares about off the hook. In fact, when her priest tells her that the wrong person could be arrested because of her twisting the truth to Luke she says, verbatim "I don't care as long as it isn't Katie!"...So she doesn't care if someone is wrongly accused as long as Katie (who could ACTUALLY be guilty) isn't? How on earth am I supposed to like and root for this "heroine" if she is okay with innocent people potentially getting arrested (and because of her own falsehood)? Also, why is she okay lying to the man she "loves" so much? Oh yeah, because her love for Luke is actually a "conditional love."
I was looking forward to this book, and really wanted to like it, but Emily is downright awful. I don't know how others could get past this spiteful, petty, manipulative shrew of a "heroine" to actually enjoy the book.
timgrubbs's review against another edition
4.0
A return to Stone Beach, Oregon as a murder mystery dinner turns into a real murder…
Bloodstains with Bronte by Katherine Bolger Hyde is the second novel in the now named “A Crime with the Classics” that follows Oregon transplant Emily Cavanaugh who inherited her great aunt’s estate and has started getting more involved with the local community (and her ex possibly not so ex boyfriend).
A fundraiser for a new medical clinic gets bloody when a contractor turns up dead. Unfortunately, the deceased is a scumbag which leaves a ton of potential suspects including his coworkers, employers, ex-employers, and various women he’s wrong.
Even worse, Emily’s single mother assistant is the prime suspect (which happens when you are found with the murder weapon and pass out shortly after). However, her maternal instinct (introduced in the first book) pushes her to try and prove Katie’s innocence (despite clashing with her sheriff lieutenant maybe boyfriend).
I’m not a Charlotte Brontë aficionado so I can’t comment on if there are any literary references to her work.
Also, Bustopher, the cat on the cover, only has a brief appearance despite his regular presence in the marketing…
Bloodstains with Bronte by Katherine Bolger Hyde is the second novel in the now named “A Crime with the Classics” that follows Oregon transplant Emily Cavanaugh who inherited her great aunt’s estate and has started getting more involved with the local community (and her ex possibly not so ex boyfriend).
A fundraiser for a new medical clinic gets bloody when a contractor turns up dead. Unfortunately, the deceased is a scumbag which leaves a ton of potential suspects including his coworkers, employers, ex-employers, and various women he’s wrong.
Even worse, Emily’s single mother assistant is the prime suspect (which happens when you are found with the murder weapon and pass out shortly after). However, her maternal instinct (introduced in the first book) pushes her to try and prove Katie’s innocence (despite clashing with her sheriff lieutenant maybe boyfriend).
I’m not a Charlotte Brontë aficionado so I can’t comment on if there are any literary references to her work.
Also, Bustopher, the cat on the cover, only has a brief appearance despite his regular presence in the marketing…
ego8's review against another edition
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
2.75
eyreguide's review against another edition
3.0
The idea of a murder mystery inspired by the Gothic elements in the Bronte sisters book is a great one. Every chapter of Bloodstains with Bronte begins with a quote from of the sister’s books, and the quote colors what happens next. The mystery stands on it’s own, with the literary connection a nice aspect to the story.
This is the second book in the Crime with the Classics series featuring Emily Cavanaugh. I haven’t read the first one so I’m not sure if I’m missing out on character development, but I think the plot is pretty solid without needing to know what happened in the first book. My reservations about the character development though come from the romance between Emily and Luke which didn’t quite draw me in because I felt like their connection was more explained than shown. But perhaps it is built up better in the previous book.
The book had interesting parts to it - I enjoyed the very human issues and conflicts it presented, with the character of Katie dealing with sexual harassment and worse from multiple male characters, and with the side plot of a religious intolerance. I also enjoyed the warmth and quirkiness of Emily and a some of her friends in the story. The murder mystery itself didn’t have as smooth as a flow to me - there were a few times when Emily’s feelings got in the way of the investigation, and I felt like it complicated the plot in a way that didn’t feel as believable and made me frustrated with her. I also didn’t feel the urgency of the story as much, even when it got to the end.
The literary connection and the thoughtful way in which the story was presented, made this a good light read and if you are interested in the concept, it might be a good idea to start with the first Austen related book in the series.
(I received a copy of this novel from the author or publisher in exchange for a fair and honest review. I was not compensated for this review.)
This is the second book in the Crime with the Classics series featuring Emily Cavanaugh. I haven’t read the first one so I’m not sure if I’m missing out on character development, but I think the plot is pretty solid without needing to know what happened in the first book. My reservations about the character development though come from the romance between Emily and Luke which didn’t quite draw me in because I felt like their connection was more explained than shown. But perhaps it is built up better in the previous book.
The book had interesting parts to it - I enjoyed the very human issues and conflicts it presented, with the character of Katie dealing with sexual harassment and worse from multiple male characters, and with the side plot of a religious intolerance. I also enjoyed the warmth and quirkiness of Emily and a some of her friends in the story. The murder mystery itself didn’t have as smooth as a flow to me - there were a few times when Emily’s feelings got in the way of the investigation, and I felt like it complicated the plot in a way that didn’t feel as believable and made me frustrated with her. I also didn’t feel the urgency of the story as much, even when it got to the end.
The literary connection and the thoughtful way in which the story was presented, made this a good light read and if you are interested in the concept, it might be a good idea to start with the first Austen related book in the series.
(I received a copy of this novel from the author or publisher in exchange for a fair and honest review. I was not compensated for this review.)
amyfeatonby's review against another edition
dark
lighthearted
mysterious
slow-paced
3.0
Content Warnings
Minor: Rape
tracey_stewart's review against another edition
2.0
When I decided to read this, I seemed to have been doing better with Netgalley books. I hadn't read a real failure in some time. No one- or two-star books in months.
Oh well – it couldn't last.
Now, this book was not the worst thing I've ever read. It was coherent, as far as it went, adequately well-written in terms of sentence structure and use of apostrophes and so on. There was an overdependence on somewhat labored simile, but it wasn't the worst I've seen. There were a few echoes – like more than one example of a phone ringing just as someone went to pick it up. But it was the plot that failed for me, and there was something under it all that just grated on me.
The setting for this book, and its series, is a mansion inherited by the heroine, which she is turning into a high-toned writers' retreat with a literary theme. (Which didn't make a lot of sense, financially… A literary-themed B&B would be fun – I'd go. I mean, the main character's money won't last forever, especially at the rate she's blowing through it.) The author and heroine got brownie points for deciding to make one of the rooms the Montgomery room, apparently after Lucy Maud Montgomery. The only negative I can possibly lay on that is that LMM is a somewhat odd bedfellow (so to speak) for the other authors chosen: Forster, Austen, Montgomery, Dostoevsky, Dickens, and of course Brontë. (Also, I can't quite stomach the idea of a murder centered around Lucy Maud. Which seems to be the author's eventual plan, based on the title conceit.)
The idea of a book-lover with almost unlimited funds creating rooms to evoke her favorite authors was kind of wonderful – something I'd love to be able to do. But that's not remotely a central part of the plot, and most of the planning and purchasing and decorating happens "off-screen". In fact, quite a lot of it seems to be delegated to the local vendors. This deprived me of a lot of vicarious pleasure.
Part of my disconnect with the book was probably the shadow of the first book lingering in this one. By which I mean that I didn't read that book, and references to things covered in it were meaningless. Who is this Philip in Portland? Is he dead and really a ghost, or was "ghost" another one of those labored metaphors? The events of that first book were pretty momentous for Emily, and didn't quite get enough attention in this one – or at least not early enough to make this a true standalone.
Something I grumbled about was the way that the identity of the murder victim was telegraphed from almost the very beginning of the book, to the point that I thought it was surely a misdirect and that someone else would come a cropper. But no, the person I expected to die was knocked off just as expected – so then I figured the solution was going to be either equally telegraphed or wildly out of the blue. (Mild spoiler: it was the latter, but not in a good way.)
Of course, the victim would never have become the victim if one other character didn't behave a little bizarrely.
- "'Don't let him out of your sight,' she whispered to Luke"
…
"Luke was in the back bedroom looking for Jake when he heard the scream."
- - Great job, Luke.
Something else that didn't sit well: a few cliché characters, like the drama teacher. Especially the drama teacher. That characterization managed to be offensive. And unless I've gotten my secondary characters mixed up, she was named Cordelia Fitzgerald – which cancels out the brownie points for the Montgomery Room. Oh! And the M.E.! "Medical examiner was a part-time job around here and a murder victim a welcome diversion." Really, And how did you greet the victim's family? "Yay, a murder! I was so bored! Your son did me a solid by getting himself killed!"
I was just annoyed by the heroine's semi-not-quite-is-it-or-isn't-it relationship. "For a minute she wished she and Luke were sleeping together so she could deny him her bed as punishment" – That actually made me mad. And the weird fight that they get into – or rather, that Emily gets them into – baffled me. I was going to mark it as a spoiler, but it's in the book description:
"Listen, this is up to you, but I'd strongly recommend you get a professional crime-scene cleanup team in here. We can't have Katie cleaning that stairwell."
"Because she's a suspect?" Emily was shocked at the waspish way that came out.
Luke started and widened his eyes at her. "Because she's been traumatized." Then his eyes dropped. "Well, yeah, and because she's a suspect, too. At least until she remembers what happened."
Why was this a fight? Would Emily really make this girl – who, yes, has been traumatized – mop up the large pool of blood that came from the man who died at her feet, and if that's not enough, And why is she so utterly outraged that a girl found standing over the body of a man, holding the murder weapon (because of course she picked it up and stood there clutching it) is kept in the suspect pool immediately after the murder? …"But she would not kiss a man who thought her Katie capable of murder." What that should be is "Luke would not kiss a woman who was such an idiot, and at any rate it would be conflict of interest to hang out with her until Katie was cleared…"
Luke, the local sheriff and Emily's maybe-sorta-boyfriend, is frankly crap at his job. Not only does he blow it at the very moment of the murder (you had one job, man), he lets Emily run roughshod over him in a way that even most other cozy mystery cops wouldn't allow. Emily talks to a witness and gets her to admit something, then calls him – and then lets said witness go off to work before Luke gets there. Overall I was singularly unimpressed with his sheriffing.
I was taken aback toward the end when Katie, who is boarding with Emily, makes a major decision without saying anything to the woman who, though a friend, is also her employer and owner of the house. Spoiler: Theirs is a kind of odd relationship, Katie and Emily's, half servant/master and half daughter/mother. Emily thinks nothing of having Katie go and fetch her tea – although then she might have Katie sit and share it with her. And then Katie can wash the dishes. Katie is allowed to decorate her rooms any way she likes – but the impression I was left with was of Emily in splendor in the best of all the bedrooms with no expense spared in décor and furniture, while Katie and her child occupy basically cramped servants' quarters furnished from the Salvation Army.
Finally, though there is a gay couple featured in the story, who are written pretty well and (almost surprisingly) pretty free of cliché, and though Emily and the rest of the main characters fight against (or at least frown at) the bigotry they experience … still, there came this bit:
"She herself was not a hundred percent comfortable with having a gay couple as tenants, but whatever her private feelings about their lifestyle might be, they had a right to live unmolested like anyone else. But where her own faith taught love for all sinners—including herself—she knew there were others who twisted the same scriptures to teach only judgment."
Huh.
The usual disclaimer: I received this book via Netgalley for review.
Oh well – it couldn't last.
Now, this book was not the worst thing I've ever read. It was coherent, as far as it went, adequately well-written in terms of sentence structure and use of apostrophes and so on. There was an overdependence on somewhat labored simile, but it wasn't the worst I've seen. There were a few echoes – like more than one example of a phone ringing just as someone went to pick it up. But it was the plot that failed for me, and there was something under it all that just grated on me.
The setting for this book, and its series, is a mansion inherited by the heroine, which she is turning into a high-toned writers' retreat with a literary theme. (Which didn't make a lot of sense, financially… A literary-themed B&B would be fun – I'd go. I mean, the main character's money won't last forever, especially at the rate she's blowing through it.) The author and heroine got brownie points for deciding to make one of the rooms the Montgomery room, apparently after Lucy Maud Montgomery. The only negative I can possibly lay on that is that LMM is a somewhat odd bedfellow (so to speak) for the other authors chosen: Forster, Austen, Montgomery, Dostoevsky, Dickens, and of course Brontë. (Also, I can't quite stomach the idea of a murder centered around Lucy Maud. Which seems to be the author's eventual plan, based on the title conceit.)
The idea of a book-lover with almost unlimited funds creating rooms to evoke her favorite authors was kind of wonderful – something I'd love to be able to do. But that's not remotely a central part of the plot, and most of the planning and purchasing and decorating happens "off-screen". In fact, quite a lot of it seems to be delegated to the local vendors. This deprived me of a lot of vicarious pleasure.
Part of my disconnect with the book was probably the shadow of the first book lingering in this one. By which I mean that I didn't read that book, and references to things covered in it were meaningless. Who is this Philip in Portland? Is he dead and really a ghost, or was "ghost" another one of those labored metaphors? The events of that first book were pretty momentous for Emily, and didn't quite get enough attention in this one – or at least not early enough to make this a true standalone.
Something I grumbled about was the way that the identity of the murder victim was telegraphed from almost the very beginning of the book, to the point that I thought it was surely a misdirect and that someone else would come a cropper. But no, the person I expected to die was knocked off just as expected – so then I figured the solution was going to be either equally telegraphed or wildly out of the blue. (Mild spoiler: it was the latter, but not in a good way.)
Of course, the victim would never have become the victim if one other character didn't behave a little bizarrely.
- "'Don't let him out of your sight,' she whispered to Luke"
…
"Luke was in the back bedroom looking for Jake when he heard the scream."
- - Great job, Luke.
Something else that didn't sit well: a few cliché characters, like the drama teacher. Especially the drama teacher. That characterization managed to be offensive. And unless I've gotten my secondary characters mixed up, she was named Cordelia Fitzgerald – which cancels out the brownie points for the Montgomery Room. Oh! And the M.E.! "Medical examiner was a part-time job around here and a murder victim a welcome diversion." Really, And how did you greet the victim's family? "Yay, a murder! I was so bored! Your son did me a solid by getting himself killed!"
I was just annoyed by the heroine's semi-not-quite-is-it-or-isn't-it relationship. "For a minute she wished she and Luke were sleeping together so she could deny him her bed as punishment" – That actually made me mad. And the weird fight that they get into – or rather, that Emily gets them into – baffled me. I was going to mark it as a spoiler, but it's in the book description:
"Listen, this is up to you, but I'd strongly recommend you get a professional crime-scene cleanup team in here. We can't have Katie cleaning that stairwell."
"Because she's a suspect?" Emily was shocked at the waspish way that came out.
Luke started and widened his eyes at her. "Because she's been traumatized." Then his eyes dropped. "Well, yeah, and because she's a suspect, too. At least until she remembers what happened."
Why was this a fight? Would Emily really make this girl – who, yes, has been traumatized – mop up the large pool of blood that came from the man who died at her feet, and if that's not enough,
Spoiler
the man who previously raped her?Luke, the local sheriff and Emily's maybe-sorta-boyfriend, is frankly crap at his job. Not only does he blow it at the very moment of the murder (you had one job, man), he lets Emily run roughshod over him in a way that even most other cozy mystery cops wouldn't allow. Emily talks to a witness and gets her to admit something, then calls him – and then lets said witness go off to work before Luke gets there. Overall I was singularly unimpressed with his sheriffing.
I was taken aback toward the end when Katie, who is boarding with Emily, makes a major decision without saying anything to the woman who, though a friend, is also her employer and owner of the house. Spoiler:
Spoiler
Her new love: "No problem. I can move in here." Really.Finally, though there is a gay couple featured in the story, who are written pretty well and (almost surprisingly) pretty free of cliché, and though Emily and the rest of the main characters fight against (or at least frown at) the bigotry they experience … still, there came this bit:
"She herself was not a hundred percent comfortable with having a gay couple as tenants, but whatever her private feelings about their lifestyle might be, they had a right to live unmolested like anyone else. But where her own faith taught love for all sinners—including herself—she knew there were others who twisted the same scriptures to teach only judgment."
Huh.
The usual disclaimer: I received this book via Netgalley for review.
tsenko2's review against another edition
3.0
3.5 stars
An okay book, but it didn’t hook me in and make me want to read more of the series.
The positives: the literary references to Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights were artfully tied into the story and made me wish it hadn’t been so long since I read those classics. The second positive is personal, but I live in Oregon and loved the setting on the Oregon coast. The protagonist’s visit to Powell’s Books in Portland evoked fond memories. But while the coast was mentioned, the opportunity to portray the atmosphere of rainy morning walks on the sand was never fully realized.
The negatives: awkward dialogue. There were mildly jarring incidents. A teenager saying “made my hair stand on end”, the sheriff saying “you’re white as a bleached shell”, use of “blast” as an expletive. The dialogue didn’t always feel natural or modern. The relationships were sometimes equally awkward, but more because the author fell into the trap of “telling rather showing” us how the characters felt about each other.
In sum, this was a moderately good read but it doesn’t come near the excellence of masters of the mystery genre like Louise Penny or Laurie R. King.
An okay book, but it didn’t hook me in and make me want to read more of the series.
The positives: the literary references to Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights were artfully tied into the story and made me wish it hadn’t been so long since I read those classics. The second positive is personal, but I live in Oregon and loved the setting on the Oregon coast. The protagonist’s visit to Powell’s Books in Portland evoked fond memories. But while the coast was mentioned, the opportunity to portray the atmosphere of rainy morning walks on the sand was never fully realized.
The negatives: awkward dialogue. There were mildly jarring incidents. A teenager saying “made my hair stand on end”, the sheriff saying “you’re white as a bleached shell”, use of “blast” as an expletive. The dialogue didn’t always feel natural or modern. The relationships were sometimes equally awkward, but more because the author fell into the trap of “telling rather showing” us how the characters felt about each other.
In sum, this was a moderately good read but it doesn’t come near the excellence of masters of the mystery genre like Louise Penny or Laurie R. King.
annieb123's review against another edition
4.0
Originally published on my blog: Nonstop Reader.
Bloodstains with Brontë is the second book in the Crime with the Classics series by author Katherine Bolger Hyde. Released 12th Dec, 2017 from St. Martin's Press (Macmillan) it's currently available in ebook, hardcover, and audio versions.
At almost 300 pages, it's a substantial size for a cozy mystery, but the author has a deft hand at plotting and it goes quickly. This was my commute read to and from work, and I devoured it in a couple days. The chapter headings are quotes from Bronte novels and I was impressed with the way they coordinated and preshadowed each chapter.
The characters are well written and mostly fleshed out. I had some trouble with some of the dialogue, but in general there wasn't much clumsiness or being yanked out of the story by anything egregious. It's basically a bed and breakfast cozy with a literature professor as the amateur sleuth. It's comfortable and clean (totally SafeForWork), very little mild cursing (a handful of hells, damns, and shits). You know the deal going in, and it doesn't disappoint. The clues are presented in the story and while most experienced readers will have worked out 'whodunnit' before the end of the book, there are a few unexpected twists along the way.
The book is written in third person omniscient PoV, but there are journal entries written by Katie (a young woman who works with, and is like a daughter to, the main character Emily). The journal entries (in 1st person PoV) are italicized, but are placed without any segue, so they seem occasionally disjointed from the rest of the narrative.
There is a strong element of Christian faith and sensibility running through the novel, but nothing most readers would find very objectionable. Emily is written as a person of faith and that affects the choices she makes and her reasoning processes in the book. She has a different worldview than do I and as long as I remembered that, it wasn't a problem. She is a good person and tries very hard to live her life in accordance with her faith.
Much of the plot hinges on date rape and non-consent, so if that's a trigger, it's probably best to skip this one. The author does a pretty good job of writing the necessary awful bits without being too graphic or glossing over the trauma entirely.
I read this second book as a standalone and it worked perfectly well.
Three and a half stars.
Disclosure: I received an ARC at no cost from the author/publisher.
Bloodstains with Brontë is the second book in the Crime with the Classics series by author Katherine Bolger Hyde. Released 12th Dec, 2017 from St. Martin's Press (Macmillan) it's currently available in ebook, hardcover, and audio versions.
At almost 300 pages, it's a substantial size for a cozy mystery, but the author has a deft hand at plotting and it goes quickly. This was my commute read to and from work, and I devoured it in a couple days. The chapter headings are quotes from Bronte novels and I was impressed with the way they coordinated and preshadowed each chapter.
The characters are well written and mostly fleshed out. I had some trouble with some of the dialogue, but in general there wasn't much clumsiness or being yanked out of the story by anything egregious. It's basically a bed and breakfast cozy with a literature professor as the amateur sleuth. It's comfortable and clean (totally SafeForWork), very little mild cursing (a handful of hells, damns, and shits). You know the deal going in, and it doesn't disappoint. The clues are presented in the story and while most experienced readers will have worked out 'whodunnit' before the end of the book, there are a few unexpected twists along the way.
The book is written in third person omniscient PoV, but there are journal entries written by Katie (a young woman who works with, and is like a daughter to, the main character Emily). The journal entries (in 1st person PoV) are italicized, but are placed without any segue, so they seem occasionally disjointed from the rest of the narrative.
There is a strong element of Christian faith and sensibility running through the novel, but nothing most readers would find very objectionable. Emily is written as a person of faith and that affects the choices she makes and her reasoning processes in the book. She has a different worldview than do I and as long as I remembered that, it wasn't a problem. She is a good person and tries very hard to live her life in accordance with her faith.
Much of the plot hinges on date rape and non-consent, so if that's a trigger, it's probably best to skip this one. The author does a pretty good job of writing the necessary awful bits without being too graphic or glossing over the trauma entirely.
I read this second book as a standalone and it worked perfectly well.
Three and a half stars.
Disclosure: I received an ARC at no cost from the author/publisher.
nnowels's review against another edition
2.0
I gave this series another chance, this time reading it for myself rather than listening to the audiobook. While I liked Luke a lot better this time, I felt that Emily was acting like a 50+ teenager. She was still very annoying. I’ll stop with this book, now that I know.
mal717's review against another edition
challenging
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
Okay, I am going with 3 stars for this one. Why? Here are my issues:
-I really struggle with Emily and how... Possessive she is of Katie? I don't know that that's a super accurate word choice, but I'm sticking with it.
-How she said she's "a little uncomfortable having a gay couple as tenants" because of her faith, after she's sort of befriended one and even used his and his partner's expertise in antique furniture collecting to redecorate her newly acquired mansion? But, like, they shouldn't let themselves be treated poorly by other people, and she's sad others of faith don't let people just be because Jesus loves all. Like, this isn't the acceptance you think it is.
-How she went out of her way to possibly lie about someone's possible and potentially important motive for murder -to the love of her life?
-Poor Katie. No, really.
Anyway, overall, still an easy and fairly light read, though I will say this one definitely has some more heavy topics. I may continue the series. I wanted this to be so much better. It is upsetting, really. Idk. If I need a filler, maybe I'll try the third one. Just not soon.
-I really struggle with Emily and how... Possessive she is of Katie? I don't know that that's a super accurate word choice, but I'm sticking with it.
-How she said she's "a little uncomfortable having a gay couple as tenants" because of her faith, after she's sort of befriended one and even used his and his partner's expertise in antique furniture collecting to redecorate her newly acquired mansion? But, like, they shouldn't let themselves be treated poorly by other people, and she's sad others of faith don't let people just be because Jesus loves all. Like, this isn't the acceptance you think it is.
-How she went out of her way to possibly lie about someone's possible and potentially important motive for murder -to the love of her life?
-Poor Katie. No, really.
Anyway, overall, still an easy and fairly light read, though I will say this one definitely has some more heavy topics. I may continue the series. I wanted this to be so much better. It is upsetting, really. Idk. If I need a filler, maybe I'll try the third one. Just not soon.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death and Murder
Moderate: Domestic abuse, Homophobia, Misogyny, Physical abuse, Rape, Religious bigotry, and Stalking
Minor: Child death, Domestic abuse, Suicide, and Stalking