Silent in the Grave

Silent in the Grave (2007) Deanna Raybourn

To say that Silent in the Grave annoyed me would be a vast understatement. This book had tons of high recommendations, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why.

First, the heroine, who is supposed to be intelligent, tends towards sheer idiocy. Sure, she’s well read and knows about art and music, but she hasn’t a lick of sense, and is constantly placing herself into incredibly stupid situations. For example, she thinks gypsies may want to kill her brother. So what does she do? She drags him out to the gypsy encampment. Sheer genius.

Secondly, the “mystery” was pretty transparent. Unusual for me, I knew who the killer was halfway through the book. I didn’t know the reason, but considering all the ridiculous information that was thrown in towards the end, I can’t see how I was supposed to have known. So the biggest “mystery” in the book was how long it was going to take the heroine (and I use that term very loosely) to fall in love with the hero.

Too damned long is the answer.

And to make things worse, her “sudden” attraction to the hero drove me nuts as well. She emphatically repeats in one chapter how she is attracted to thin, blond, dainty men like her husband, and doesn’t like the tall dark hero at all. The in the next chapter “suddenly” remembers that as a child/teen her favorite romantic heroes were tall, dark, muscular, and handsome, and she recalls all the daydreams she had about her literary heroes.

Come on. If she spent that much time day dreaming, how could she have forgotten so quickly and easily?

Thirdly (am I only on three?), it feels like the author wanted to write a “Victorian” mystery without having to go to all the trouble to create an actual Victorian heroine. I don’t care how liberal and “crazy” her family was, the way she continually makes scenes, members of society would have crossed the street to get away from her–and not because she was a widow. I cannot imagine a Victorian heroine–no matter how liberally raised–acting in public as Julia acted.

Fourthly, don’t get me wrong, I strongly believe in equality across the board, but a Victorian heroine who was fully accepting of Jews, Gypsies, prostitutes, lesbians, and homosexuals–but completely freaked out about pornography? Not only are her beliefs simply too modern to be accepted, but she wasn’t internally inconsistent. I’m sorry, but if you want to write an historical mystery, you have to follow at least most of the conventions of the time. If you want to write an historical mystery where the heroine has modern views, by all means do so, but label it properly as fantasy.

Fifthly, other than looking mighty fine with his shirt off, and secretly (but obviously) swooning over the heroine, the hero doesn’t do a whole lot in this story, other than allow this repressed (?!) woman to free herself from her “mousy” persona. That and provide something for Julia to drool over and her family to tease her about. Ugh. Never mind the fact that although Julia constantly dwells on Rayburn, when he finally kisses her, the reader is left wondering precisely what happened. Seriously, they step behind a tree, he raises his hand as if to hit her, and then suddenly she back in the carriage? WTF? (And the number of times he physically threatens her? Liberal woman my rear end.)

Sixthly, the concluding chapters suddenly started throwing in all kinds of new information from all OVER the place. We learn about forty thousand new things about her dead husband, none of them good, while one of the characters in the book suddenly does an about face and changes from sweet and angelic to EVIL (and I mean maniacal laugh evil). Sorry, not buying that either. No one has that good of a game face–especially considering the circumstances. And especially since his “rationale” for his EVILNESS is utterly and completely far fetched and comes is completely from out of left field.

Lastly (although I could go on) the book “concludes” (and I use that term loosely as well) leaving the “romantic” element of the story completely unresolved, and blatantly mentioning the next mystery (Coming soon!). I hate this more than you can possibly imagine. It’s one thing to put a chapter or two of the next book after the end of the current book. It’s something else entirely to have the heroine talk about the next book at the end of the final chapter. Listen, if your book is good, your writing strong, and your characters interesting, I will read the next book. Ending one book with a cliff hanger or a teaser for the next just makes me mad.

Did this book have strengths? Certainly. Which is the only reason I kept reading. But these strengths were in no way good enough to overcome the many flaws that I found incredibly irritating. If you want a mystery with strong romantic overtones, check out Tasha Alexander’s And Only to Deceive. That wasn’t my cup of tea either, but at least it was well done.
Rating: 3/10

• Browse the archives:
  
• Legacies » »
• « « Death at La Fenice