"A Fatal Likeness" Book Review

A Fatal Likeness by Lynn Shepherd
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

"A mystery that explores the dark lives and unexplained secrets of the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, and his wife Mary, author of Frankenstein.

"In the dying days of 1850 the young detective Charles Maddox takes on a new case. His client? The only surviving son of the long-dead poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, and his wife Mary, author of Frankenstein.

"Charles soon finds himself being drawn into the bitter battle being waged over the poet’s literary legacy, but then he makes a chance discovery that raises new doubts about the death of Shelley’s first wife, Harriet, and he starts to question whether she did indeed kill herself, or whether what really happened was far more sinister than suicide.

"As he’s drawn deeper into the tangled web of the past, Charles discovers darker and more disturbing secrets, until he comes face to face with the terrible possibility that his own great-uncle is implicated in a conspiracy to conceal the truth that stretches back more than thirty years.

"The story of the Shelleys is one of love and death, of loss and betrayal. In this follow-up to the acclaimed Tom-All-Alone’s, Lynn Shepherd offers her own fictional version of that story, which suggests new and shocking answers to mysteries that still persist to this day, and have never yet been fully explained."

Before I get started, I will say that I found this book enjoyable and the writing well done. Otherwise, I wouldn't have finished it and this review would just be a list of exasperated complaints.

However, I do have some nit-picking to do.

I must say that I do not like when a narrative goes back and forth between time periods. Specifically, some time in the past and then the current state of affairs. Now, if that actually means a damn to the story, like it is a major part of the plot, then fine, do that, so long as it is sensible. What the author did here, and I don't know if she does it in all of her work, was irritating because it reminded me that she existed and it didn't move the story along. It seemed to always give information that wasn't necessary to be read and almost seemed like she was showing off her research skills in odd moments. I know there is a narrator and that guy knows everything because we're reading this story 200 years in the future, but having that show up slows the pacing of the story and must of it doesn't help me if the character doesn't know about it.

Also, the mentioning that we, the reader, probably know what happened to the main character because we may possibly have read the first book (I didn't), is annoying. Particularly when the narrator goes, "He did this (but YOU know that)". I know the author didn't want to repeat themselves, but there must have been a more elegant way of doing that.

I found the accents perfect, because I knew where they were from and could read them. I have read some characters with accents and had to have it translated like it was a different language (Dracula, anyone?).

I said it before in one of my updates, but I'll say it again: "I find it funny that the author of a British detective novel would mock the character of Sherlock Holmes - even though her detective wouldn't be able to hold a candle to him: he's both stupid (or at least among these particular clients - the only reason he is getting ahead is because some other detective has done the work for him by writing it down) and overemotionally involved in his cases." The movie about Holmes came out recently, you're British, you're writing about a detective that is logical and has scientific methods, and has a disdain for his appearance (unless it will help a case). Am I really supposed to think of someone other than Holmes? You brought this upon yourself, Ms. Shepherd!

It is interesting that she should choose such a famed and literary family to slander in this book. I'm sure there are Romantic fans out there getting their pitchforks and torches ready. I did love "Frankenstein" (the book); it is one of my all-time favorites. But even still, I only found it somewhat irksome that Mary Shelley's character is besmirched so much in this book. (view spoiler)[I always thought her to be a young woman in love with odd ideals not suited to her time, but not so much child-killing, murderous bitch. (hide spoiler)] She does mention after the epilogue that she made up most of it to make a more interesting story, but it is still plausible. After reading about Lord Byron, it wouldn't surprise me if any of them were just as bad. He was a monster, if not an outright sociopath.

It was a typical detective novel, you figured things out as you went. I was very satisfied with the ending - (view spoiler)[though what was up with that girl dying? You had to have a sad ending, didn't you? (hide spoiler)] Overall, a decent book. I enjoyed myself, but I'm not sure I would read more of Ms. Shepherd's work.

View all my reviews

I bequeath this book 3 out of 5 stars.