goodbookin's review
3.0
Overall, the story was compelling enough to be enjoyable the whole way through, but I did have some problems with this book.
More minorly, there were a number of continuity errors that really ground my gears. For instance, if a murder took place on the 9th, the next day on the 10th we’d be told the murder had been reported on everyday in the newspaper for the last three days. And I’d be like… hmm?
I forgave it the first time, but for that type of mistake to occur more than once is just poor editing.
But more significantly, I had some ethical concerns. If you’re going to use the real names and identities of women who were brutally murdered, you have to be extremely mindful of how you portray them, and I didn’t think Alex Scarrow’s portrayal was particularly respectful at times. I think perhaps he relied too heavily on the assumption that these events happened over 100 years ago and therefore sensitivity around the victims is less of an issue now, and I don’t agree. Towards the beginning of the book, two of the women are described as being involved in “baby farming”, a thriving business whereby they murder unwanted newborns for money. There’s a part in the book where Annie Chapman remorselessly murders a 6 month old child. But there’s absolutely nothing to suggest any of these women were involved in crime, and it seems a gross and unethical manipulation of the facts to take the identities of real women whose reputations as prostitutes have already afforded them limited sympathy from the public, and then imply they were also criminals who murdered babies. Annie Chapman sold flowers and crochet to make money, but it worked for the narrative that she murdered children to make money, so that's what Alex Scarrow chose to run with.
If you're going to embellish or stretch the truth, there needs to be an author’s note that clearly separates the fact from the fiction.
I’ve done my best to take this with a grain of salt and still consider the story itself, how well it reads and how entertaining it is, but that’s not everything in literature, especially when you’re writing on real events and real people. Unfortunately this tarnished the book a little for me, which is frustrating because were it not based on true events I would’ve been more able to get swept up in this dark, gory Victorian thriller. I just wish Alex Scarrow had taken a little more care.
More minorly, there were a number of continuity errors that really ground my gears. For instance, if a murder took place on the 9th, the next day on the 10th we’d be told the murder had been reported on everyday in the newspaper for the last three days. And I’d be like… hmm?
I forgave it the first time, but for that type of mistake to occur more than once is just poor editing.
But more significantly, I had some ethical concerns. If you’re going to use the real names and identities of women who were brutally murdered, you have to be extremely mindful of how you portray them, and I didn’t think Alex Scarrow’s portrayal was particularly respectful at times. I think perhaps he relied too heavily on the assumption that these events happened over 100 years ago and therefore sensitivity around the victims is less of an issue now, and I don’t agree. Towards the beginning of the book, two of the women are described as being involved in “baby farming”, a thriving business whereby they murder unwanted newborns for money. There’s a part in the book where Annie Chapman remorselessly murders a 6 month old child. But there’s absolutely nothing to suggest any of these women were involved in crime, and it seems a gross and unethical manipulation of the facts to take the identities of real women whose reputations as prostitutes have already afforded them limited sympathy from the public, and then imply they were also criminals who murdered babies. Annie Chapman sold flowers and crochet to make money, but it worked for the narrative that she murdered children to make money, so that's what Alex Scarrow chose to run with.
If you're going to embellish or stretch the truth, there needs to be an author’s note that clearly separates the fact from the fiction.
I’ve done my best to take this with a grain of salt and still consider the story itself, how well it reads and how entertaining it is, but that’s not everything in literature, especially when you’re writing on real events and real people. Unfortunately this tarnished the book a little for me, which is frustrating because were it not based on true events I would’ve been more able to get swept up in this dark, gory Victorian thriller. I just wish Alex Scarrow had taken a little more care.
dkwaye's review
5.0
As soon as I read the first few lines I fell in love with Scarrow's writing. Soon, I was completely charmed by everything else. It feels like it's been forever since I read a really good 21st century (as in 'written in...') novel!
More...