"A Death in Diamonds" is the fourth book in the delightful mystery series "Her Majesty the Queen Investigates" by S.J. Bennett. Unfortunately, this book is not yet available in North America :( -- the author has said she doesn't have a publisher for it yet (what??!). Fortunately, I was able to source a copy from the U.K. And I'm so glad I didn't have to wait!
The first three books all took place in 2016 (post-Brexit, pre-Megxit, lol), when the Queen was 90. This volume takes us back in time to 1957, the early years of her, and opens with the 31-year-old monarch in Paris for an official visit. It's a triumph for the young Queen -- but several incidents before, during and after her Paris visit lead her to believe that someone is trying to sabotage her. And there's an important visit to Canada and the U.S. coming up soon, too...
Back in London, the city is buzzing about a double murder that was discovered while the Queen was in Paris -- of an Argentine businessman and a prostitute, who was wearing a valuable stolen tiara -- at the rented mews home of the Dean of Bath, no less (!)(a high-ranking Anglican clergyman). The Queen has her own reasons for taking a keen personal interest in the case...
Rozie Oshodi, Assistant Private Secretary to the Queen in the first three books, is missed here (she wasn't even born in 1957...!) -- but her predecessor, Joan McGraw, who did intelligence work at Bletchley Park and elsewhere during the war, is a more-than-adequate substitute who works to help Her Majesty identify the saboteur and solve the mystery of who killed "the tart in the tiara" and her client -- while also dealing with the deeply entrenched classist and sexist attitudes of the "Men With Moustaches" who surround her at Buckingham Palace.
As usual with this series, I enjoyed this book tremendously. At least, I WAS enjoying it...
...right up until I read a certain sentence in Chapter 55, contrasting the young working mother/Queen with a villainous CHILDLESS couple. I was preparing to give this book a 5-star rating up until that point -- but that particular stereotype, tossed casually into the conversation, was jarring, and made me wince. It took me several pages to re-absorb myself in the story, as it reached its climax.
So -- not 5 stars, but 4.5, regretfully rounded down to 4.
There's a fun section of "Afternotes" at the end, explaining what was fact and what was fiction. (It's not mentioned, but I know the Ottawa part of the North American visit was based in historical fact and, as a Canadian, it was fun to read about that.)
Coming next year from the same author: #5 in the series, "The Queen Who Came in From the Cold." :) (Let's hope for a North American publisher and speedy publication date here, for both #4 and #5, by then...!)
Links to my reviews of previous books in this series:
- #1: "The Windsor Knot"
- #2: "All the Queen's Men" (alternate title: "A Three-Dog Problem")
- #3: "Murder Most Royal"
This was Book #6 read to date in 2024 (and Book #2 finished in February), bringing me to 13% of my 2024 Goodreads Reading Challenge goal of 45 books. I am (for the moment, anyway...!) on track to meet my goal. :) You can find reviews of all my books read to date in 2024 tagged as "2024 books."
Hi Loribeth. Thank you so much for this lovely review, for which I'm very grateful. Thank you too, for pointing out the effect of that phrase in Chapter 55. After I read the review I had to look it up and I see what you mean. I intended it to refer to practical, not moral, considerations (I have to say those didn't cross my mind, as I struggled to have children myself), but I'm going to try and get it changed in future editions. The word isn't necessary in context, and I would hate it to cause upset. Like most writers, I rarely change anything except proofing errors as the result of a reader review, but this is one of those cases where I'm grateful that my lovely publishers at Zaffre give me the opportunity to do it occasionally. (As it happens, my PhD was on textual ambiguity and the relative values of writer intentions and reader interpretations, so this is kind of my field!) Meanwhile, I'm glad you loved the rest. Warmest wishes Sophia
ReplyDeleteDear Sophia, thank you so much for delurking and leaving that very gracious comment (despite my criticism)! I didn't include that paragraph in my Goodreads & StoryGraph reviews, as I tend (for the most part) to keep the childless/infertility/loss related bits of my reviews here, where I feel they'll be better understood. I don't dispute that the couple in question was acting in a villainous manner, particularly in the context of the story -- but childless people (and childless women in particular) in books & on screen are so often cast as the villains (particularly in contrast to virtuous mothers), that one sentence did raise my hackles somewhat. I did love the book overall, as I have loved the previous three, and I often recommend them to others! Thank you again for your kind words and consideration. I am already looking forward to the next one!
DeleteAs a childless woman, I would find that difficult to read too. Villainous is often levelled at us in storytelling from fairy tales to modern literature, it's such a trope and thank you for raising this.
DeleteThanks. I just need to get on with the writing now!
ReplyDeleteOkay, I hadn't read these books. Felt interested enough to consider them but they weren't high on my list. Until now. I want to support an author who bothers to comment AND considers changing things they've written once they've learnt how hurtful a stereotype can be!
ReplyDelete