Hardcover first edition, one of three printings (see individual listings for specific printing). Pangborn (1909 - 1976), well known for his science fiction work (including the classic, "Davy") here presents an intriguing contemporary courtroom drama.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Book Description
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
"... by a jury of his peers",
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Trial of Callista Blake (Mass Market Paperback)
Those who know Pangborn only by his science fiction works such as Davy and A Mirror for Observers may be surprised but not disappointed by this book. The cover announces proudly that this is as powerful as Robert Traver's Anatomy of a Murder. As usual, such a blurb is inaccurate - but in this case it's because this book is not only more powerful than Anatomy, it is also an impassioned and deeper, more reasoned look at the ethics, flaws, and realities of the American legal system.Like Anatomy, the facts of the case are never really in doubt: Anne Dougherty is found dead by drowning in a small pond near her house, but an autopsy shows she would have died shortly anyway from a lethal dose of aconite. Callista Blake is charged with murder, and she readily admits to having an affair with Anne's husband Jim and to having aconite in her house, dissolved in a bottle of brandy. Clearly an open and shut case, except for having to prove `malice aforethought' - and it is just on this point that everything revolves, for Callista herself cannot remember a critical period of the night in question, and claims the aconite was intended for herself. Each of the major players in this courtroom drama is brilliantly brought to life by Edgar's pen: Cecil Turner, attorney for the defense, a little too old to really be practicing, and who has fallen a little in love with his charge; Terrance Mann, a judge with serious doubts about the validity of capital punishment but feels he can do more good than harm in judging most matters; Edith, friend and fellow artist to Callista; T. J. Hunter, prosecuting attorney, doing his job as he sees fit, without any true antagonism to Callista but doing his best (and a very good, practiced best it is) to prove the state's case. The book starts slowly, as each of the characters is introduced and the basic facts of the case brought to light. As minor witnesses are brought to the stand, more and more of each person's character and feelings come to the fore, a slow buildup to the climactic point when Callista herself takes the stand. And it's Callista's own emotional makeup and self-judgment that really determines the outcome of the trial - an outcome that may come as a sharp emotional shock to the reader, for by this point I don't think anyone reading this cannot be deeply involved with all participants. There are some very pointed discourses in philosophy edging in and around the courtroom events: the relevance of a person's religious beliefs to such a trial involving both adultery and a certain prejudice against someone who is agnostic (Callista), whether inaction is just as culpable as direct action, even whether the `artistic' are somehow `above the law', not subject to the normal dictates of society, and most importantly, who has the right to sit in judgment of another human, where by necessity that person cannot be fully known for just who that person is, or if even a person's own self-judgment is adequate. The final coda, a letter by the judge after the trial, is a strong indictment against capital punishment, emotionally powerful, simply reasoned. Regardless of your own opinions about this, I think this deserves a read, as the legal system has changed little in the days since this was written, and some serious thought about how the adversarial system of the court can truly bring out `truth' and just why the state has the moral `right' to take actions that are not moral for the individual is definitely in order. --- Reviewed by Patrick Shepherd (hyperpat)
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
