27 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
"Love doesn't excuse everything.", July 30, 2006
Ruth Rendell's "End in Tears" is her latest Chief Inspector Wexford novel. This time, Wexford is seeking the murderer of eighteen-year-old Amber Marshalson, who was bludgeoned to death on her way home from a late night out with friends. Along with Detective Sergeant Hannah Goldsmith and the rest of his team, Wexford interviews Amber's friends and family, and tries to find witnesses who may have spotted the attacker. When yet another young woman is found dead, the investigation quickly heats up.
This is a complex case, with many twists and turns that keep the detectives off balance. They find evidence that Amber and her friend Meg were engaged in a cruel money-making scam, but although the police suspect that the girls were dealing drugs, there are no facts to support this theory. Before the case is solved, Rendell explores the themes of family dysfunction, greed, racism, parenting, and aging with her usual expertise. The characters are well delineated and, as always, Rendell captures the English countryside perfectly with her superb descriptive writing.
There is also an entertaining subplot involving Detective Goldsmith's infatuation with Detective Constable Baljinder Bhattacharya. Although Hannah has no qualms about having casual physical encounters with men, Bal insists that he wants to be in a meaningful relationship before he becomes intimate with a woman. Hannah, who is an ardent feminist, cannot believe her ears and she is far from pleased by her colleague's apparent prudishness.
As the book passes the midway point, Rendell loses her way. She overcomplicates matters, introducing many extraneous characters and additional subplots that make the story a chore to follow. The solution to the crimes is completely out of left field, and if I didn't see Rendell's name on the cover, I would have difficulty believing that one of the great writers of crime fiction concocted such an absurd and unrealistic conclusion. This is too bad, since I adore Wexford, who is a kind, gentle, compassionate, and very intelligent man. Unfortunately, this time around, Rendell's fans will have to be to be satisfied with the well-written first half of "End in Tears."
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
How convoluted can you get?, October 4, 2006
As a devotee of the Rendell/Wexford series, it grieves me to say this one strikes out. I kept doggedly reading the thing, thinking, this surely can't be Rendell writing this. I can't remember any detective story with such a cast of extraneous characters, so many red herrings thrown out. The occasional insertion of Wexford's daughter Sylvia's predicament was refreshing, but the story itself bogged down quickly. Two girls dead, some unknown connection between the two of them, lots of suspects. Then comes the unlikelyl (absurd?) revelation of who the original ringleader was. Sadly, then, this reader admits disappointment over End in Tears.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
The book with the split personality., September 15, 2006
The first half of the book is classic Ruth Rendell-- Wexford and Dora are their are at their best and most human. The teenaged victim has an unwanted child and a huge amount of cash. The set up is fascinating, and I was extremely happy that I bought the book.
But then, somewhere around the middle, Rendell seems to lose the plot. We follow increasingly complex series of red herrings down a garden path to an ending that is both irrational and unsatisfying. It honestly has the feel of an ending that the publisher demanded rather than the characters and plot required. It did not ruin the book for me, but it was a very close thing.
Fans of Rendell will still find a lot to like about End in Tears, but people new to her work should look back to her older material. This is not her strongest book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
