First off, why over 100 chapters, plus several "interludes". Author with ADHD?
I give this book overall 4/5 stars for the multitude of intere..Show More »sting characters, multiple intertwining storylines and good pacing. I had to take 1 off for annoying anachronisms and some heavy-handedness in the writing.
The time is 1888 Victorian London, when the Scotland Yard detectives are facing bad PR after not solving the Ripper case and their small team is tasked with 10,000 disappearances a year in the city. A fellow detective is murdered, and they want to provide "closure" for his family. Closure? Did they really say that in 1888? Did they use the term "forensic technology"?? And so on. And most people familiar with Victorian London have heard of Henry Mayhew, so why confuse readers with a half-witted character of the same name (but not the same social researcher and writer)? The real Mayhew died in 1887. Strange choices.
The Hammersmith and Day detective characters are strong enough that we may see a sequel featuring them, but I hope they won't discover DNA or blood spatter analysis ahead of their time.
I liked the first book very much, and the second one was good. They had good plots and were interesting for what they showed of the day. I liked the ..Show More »Doctor who was pushing the edge of forensic science. But this one was violent for the sake of shock value. The violence was so far unrealistic, especially for the medical capabilities of the day, that they lost all connection with reality. I am so sorry.