"Too much exposition"
One would think, that with the combination of Jane Austen and P.D. James, the publisher, editor and author could presume that the reader knows the basic plot of Pride and Prejudice, and could do away with the quite enormous amount of re-hashing and expositions.
One would also think, that Dame James' editor could have gently nudged her to do less of 'Elizabeth said' and 'Darcy said' and help her get the story and dialogue flowing as effortlessly as we, who love her, knows she can.
If one can get past the tons of exposition and rehashing of P&P, the apparently completely absent editor, and the frequently tiresome dialogue, it is a good enough novel. Not nearly as excellent as Austen and James usually are, each on their own, but ... fair enough.
"jane austen would be proud"
there have been past attempts at sequels to the treasured Pride & Prejudice but, until now, they haven't done Jane Austen justice. this really filled the brief - the story was brilliant and kept you guessing to the end ( as you would expect of a P.D.James) the narration was perfect and the whole thing was a book Jane herself would've been proud of.
Doesn't PD James have any friends or an editor to tell her when she writes something bad. I am a great fan of PD James and Jane Austin, but this book doesn't do either of them any favours. It has been a long time since I have been this disappointed in a book.
I did not want the book to end, it is as good as it can be. It takes a great, sensitive writer to do this and Miss James is both. Reader is very good, just right.
"Slow, repetitive & dull"
I was tempted by the title’s references to Pride & Prejudice and the reputation of PD James, and I can only guess that the publishers were too, but this turns out to be a story with very little plot, no sub plot and entire sections would appear to have been cut and pasted throughout. The result is a book with a frustratingly slow pace and irritating repetitions. It is a lesson in how not to construct a tale.
"OK storyline, poor production values & editing"
I know other reviews have concentrated on this as a murder mystery-style sequel to Pride & Prejudice, but my main gripe is the poor production values and editing. On numerous occasions they've left in the narrator's errors and at times certain phrases are repeated for no reason. Compared to some of the other excellent audiobooks you can get on Audible, it sounds like the producers of this just haven't really bothered to make sure errors and repetitions are edited out. The title of my review says it all!
I was so looking forward to this and didn't enjoy it at all. It was sprinkled with references to characters from other Austen novels and used recognizable dialogue from Pride & Prejudice which I found quite annoying, especially as large parts of the book were taken up with re-hashing plot elements from P&P. Surely the characters wouldn't still be banging on about things which had happened years before, especially since so much had happened in the intervening time (weddings, children etc.).
Worst of all it was very very VERY dull; the wittiness of Elizabeth was entirely missing and Darcy was just a hide-bound cardboard cut out. Jane and Bingley were faint ghosts of themselves. The reading style was equally monotonous, I wish I'd listened to the preview before I excitedly clicked 'buy'!
Overall a most disappointing book.
This was so shallow and slight that I had to double-check my library incase I had accidentally downloaded the abridged version! I usually avoid tributes, prequels and sequels of famous works but thought that with P D James, Jane Austen's work might be in safe hands - I was wrong!
I had great expectations for this book. Though set in Pemberley, the characters are only the echo of the characters in Pride and Prejudice.
The story is boring, there are many errors in the judicial and historical reconstruction. I would have imagined that an author like PD James would have been more accurate in hes research. It 'a shame because I like them both Austen and James, but I think this book is a flop. I saw in her biography that PD James was born in 1920. Her date of birth and the story narrated in such neutral manner made me suspect a ghost writing.
"Death Comes to Pemberley - but not quickly enough!"
Oh dear if this had gone any slower it would have ben overtaken by continental drift. James has the characters down to a T but therein is its only good feature. The plot is dull and plodding and the resolution on a par with 'I woke up and it was all a dream'. Dreadful.