Customer Reviews

No More Dying Then

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

NO MORE DYING THEN is really not on the same level as the rest of Inspector Wexford series. The story drags on in the most boring way one can imagine. The introduction of clues that should point us to the solution of the mystery is so heavy-handed that it's hard not to guess what happened pretty early into the book. It seems like the mystery is completely secondary here to the detailed and unappetizing exploration of Burden's repressed sexuality.

Mike Burden is portrayed as a disgusting, hateful creep in this novel. He mistreats his lonely orphaned children, acts horribly towards his sister-in-law, and wishes that the woman he wants to marry should never recover her lost son because if she does, that will mean an extra mouth for Burden to feed. What kind of a nasty individual wishes out of greed that a mother would lose her little son forever? What kind of a creepy police officer uses the grief of a crime victim to have sex with her? Before I read this novel, I used to like Burden as a character. Now, I will never be able to read another Wexford mystery without shuddering in disgust every time Burden is mentioned.

Wexford doesn't get a lot of space in this novel. He appears a couple of times, wondering why Burden is behaving in such a nasty way, and then disappears again. His family isn't mentioned at all. The dialogues between Wexford and Burden that usually liven up the series aren't there either.

It's not a good sign when a reader puts aside a mystery novel with only 15 pages to go and forgets about it for over a week. This is exactly what I did. You know how it's going to end anyways, so it makes no difference when or whether you get to those final boring pages of a boring book. As much as I love this author, I have to say that this book is a complete waste of time.

No More Dying Then is worth reading. It stands on it's own, and it is a worthy addition to the Wexford series. I've been reading Rendell for a couple of years now, primarily because Elizabeth George's work is so often compared to hers. I find the comparison complimentary to both authors. Rendell's early work, including No More Dying Then, is less complex in plot and character development than both her later work and all of George's work. Regardless, Rendell's stories are interesting, and her characters are believable. No More Dying Then is generally a satisfying work. The relationships and thought-processes are well-crafted and authentic. The red herrings are fun, and the ending is a bit of a suprise. Plus, there is enough bizarre and deviant behavior to entertain a second milennium audience without excruciating detail, for those of us who prefer not to know too much...

I have been reading Rendell's work in order of publication (a personal preference when authors are as prolific as she), and I have thoroughly enjoyed the development of both Wexford and Burden. I get the feeling that Rendell likes her main characters and cares about their lives. As a result I care about them, and want to know more about them.

Written around 1970, this mystery about the abduction and possible murder of two children in Sussex holds up today. In fact, one major plotline reminded me of the 90s bestseller, *The Deep End of the Ocean.* Rendell's writing is often compared, justifiably, to P.D. James'; her grasp of psychology, particularly the psychology of grief and loneliness, is profound and poignant. From the characters of Inspector Burdin and his sister-in-law Grace to those of the villain(s) and victim(s), Rendell has rendered real sensate beings whose pain and terror we share.

Not being familiar with Rendell's work, but needing something to pass the time with, I kept reading more out of amazement that such a loathsome, self-centered mysogynist as Burden (an aptly named character if there ever was one) is the most central character. DON'T READ FURTHER IF YOU DON'T WANT SPOILERS FOR THE PREDICTABLE PLOT.

How people can enjoy a story that features a recently widowed man whose greatest sadness and regreat is not for a) losing his wife's loving presence or b) his childrens' woes, but c) he is now perforce chaste and sexually frustrated, his priggishness and self-absorption making any other woman unappealing: That is until he meets an equally self-absorbed woman whom he finds initially distasteful because--wait for it--she's a poor housekeeper.

But it gets better! When they finally get in the sack, he is now jealous of her interest and distraction for HER MISSING SON AND HE'S THE POLICE OFFICER ASSIGNED THE TASK OF FINDING HIM!

I'm sorry, but eyewwww! This is like a slow train wreck and I keep reading thinking it cannot get worse! His sister-in-law, a professional and highly credentialed nurse, has tossed it all aside to be a stand-in Mummy/housekeeper. She's as selfless as he is thoughtless. For six months she's been a faithful slave and he cannot even call home to say he won't make it for dinner. (Oh well, this WAS written 1969).

I agree that stylistically she's on top and her characters are well drawn out, if always based on cliches. But hers is a dark world full of really unsympathetic people. Woof!

~ ~ - ~ ~
~ ~ This was my absolute favorite Ruth Rendell mystery in the Inspector Wexford series. It takes place in about the middle of the Inspector Wexford/ Detective Burden series. But it is not necessary to be familiar with the detectives, as they are briefly introduced to the reader in each book.

~ ~ Detective Mike Burden's wife has just died, and his sister-in-law is staying at his house to help take care of his two children. He is so utterly miserable, and grief stricken, that he can't see how much they all need him to focus himself on his home life. Partially because of his inability to deal with his personal life, when a 5-year-old boy disappears, he throws himself whole-heartedly into the investigation. He becomes over involved with the boy's mother. The recent disappearance of a 12-year-old girl makes the case more worrisome.

~ ~ Ruth Rendell is a master of plot twists and turns that keep us guessing. The book was very strong in the characterizations of the principal players, not just Burden and Wexford, but also the boy's mother, who clings to hope when it looks grim. Grace, Burden's sister-in-law is also very believable and understandable, as she suffers through the pain of Burden's family, who need his focus back at home.

~ ~ "No More Dying, Then!" is absorbing and captivating. It is a great way to start reading the Inspector Wexford mysteries. "

This story is an early work by Ruth Rendell, but it's a clear milestone on her road to become the queen of dark fiction. I marvel at how adept Rendell is at taking the reader into the very core of her characters' minds. No need to get into the plot of this book, but if you enjoy a meandering tale with many stops along the way to examine the thinking, emotions and motivations of the book's characters, this is a work for you. As dark as the story can be, a kind of redemption emerges at the close.

Above average for Ruth Rendell with unremitting suspens and round up characters, this book could be termed "superb" by any other author; for Ruth Rendell, it is merely excellent. Contrary to the view of the reader from Riga, Ruth Rendell, to me, is of the same category as Dorothy Sayers - stylishly erudite. P. D. James I would classify with Agatha Christie, with a pedestrian style and unmemorable characterizations.

This is a typical Ruth Rendell product. If you have read her books before and liked them then you will like this one. 'No More Dying Then' deals with the disappearance of a small boy. Six months earlier, a twelve-year-old girl disappeared in the same vicinity, and was never found. So the two events terrify the community and galvanize Chief Wexford and his deputy Burden into action. At the same time, Burden is having a very hard time dealing with the loss of his wife to cancer about nine months earlier. In fact, the secondary plot of Burden's emotional struggles almost overshadows the mystery itself. Rendell handles both sides of her story with smooth professional polish. The plotting is believable and skillful, the writing is excellent, the characterizations are insightful.

So why four stars and not five? Well, because almost no 200-page mystery novel can explore personalities or ideas to the depth that would be required for 5 stars, IMHO. Secondly, is Ruth Rendell herself as unhappy as her characters always seem to be? Whether they are cops, criminals, or innocent bystanders, even the happiest of Rendell's characters seem to look at life with a world-weary resignation. Sheer joy is close to unheard of in her work, and this book is no exception.

In a mystery magazine article I read a few years ago, someone took Rendell to task for criticizing Agatha Christie (whom Rendell could never begin to approach, IMHO). The writer said, "Whom would you prefer to have dinner with: Hercule Poirot or Inspector Wexford?" The answer is obvious. After a dinner with Wexford, you would wonder what's the point in going on with life.

I'm probably spending too much time on the negatives here, because this is a fine book. But I don't believe that Rendell is at the very top level of living literary mystery writers - a level which is reserved for P D James and Elizabeth George. Then comes Anne Perry, and then Rendell. However, that still puts Rendell above an awful lot of writers!