Heaven 2024: September Book Club: The Appeal by Janice Hallett
Doublethink has graciously offered to facilitate this month's reading of The Appeal by Janice Hallett. This provides a brief synopsis https://www.amazon.ca/Appeal-Novel-Janice-Hallett-ebook/dp/B098433CGQ
Comments
I think that’s enough to be going on with !
I enjoyed it. Thought it was cleverly done, and there was enough variety of types of communications for it not to seem too samey.
Do you find the description of the community, and it’s pecking order, convincing ?
I thought the community, specially the way the Haywards dominated the amateur dramatics was very well done.
What do you think of portrayal of different ethnic and cultural communities ? Is it convincing, do you feel it is respectful ?
It was OK, though maybe a bit stereotypical, but this was a light weight crime novel so I didn't think about it too much.
Do you miss never being inside the head of a character, or having a third person narrator ?
I felt that you got to know the characters quite well from they way they wrote, SJ and Joyce for instance. Some of them such as Sam and Kel never really came alive to me.
Do you find the characters psychologically convincing, in particular what do you think of Isobel and Sam ?
Isobel was rather creepy but very well done. She was desperate to be wanted and liked, but also far too clinging. Sam I never really got a grip on, and I found her marriage totally unconvincing.
There is one murder and fifteen suspects, did you manage to keep track - did you find exploring the possibilities enjoyable or overwhelming ?
I went with the flow. I read it in more or less one sitting, and though I spotted the character that didn't exist quite early on I wasn't too bothered as to who had done the murder or why.
Did you guess who the lawyers ultimately believed did it ? Did you agree ?
I'm never very good at spotting who did the murder, and this was no exception. I was a bit disappointed as they were one of the few characters that seemed a decent human being.
Do you feel the major issues the book covered (I won’t list here to avoid spoilers) were done well ? Was there anything you would like to have seen more or less of ?
I very much enjoyed it and will read more by this author, but I thought there were some major holes in the plot that made the whole thing rather on the silly side.
What did you think of the format ?
I liked the novelty of a book written entirely in messages and emails. It made the book quick and easy to read, but perhaps meant I didn't focus as closely on all the facts. I felt the premise was a bit unrealistic - expecting the two law students to solve the case without any of Kel and Sam's communications or external evidence seemed unreasonable. I wasn't sure if the QC, Roderick Tanner, needed Femi and Charlotte's help solving the case or was using the case as a training exercise.
In the end it seemed they were helping to decide if Issy was actually innocent, despite confessing, which makes it seem even more confusing as to why they weren't given all the evidence. However I just suspended my disbelief and enjoyed the book anyway!
Without more information about Kel I couldn't help picturing him as a younger Kel from the Australian comedy 'Kath and Kim', or as Glen Robbins, the actor who plays Kel, which was a bit distracting from who he might really be!
Do you find the description of the community, and it’s pecking order, convincing ?
I disliked Femi and Charlotte's assumptions about the pecking order and how it influenced the characters' motives and interactions. While social position played its part it felt like they were using an unproven or outdated psychological theory to categorise people and predict their behaviours. People and social groups are much more complex than that. Plus Femi and Charlotte are not psychologists, so it seemed an odd approach for them to take.
Do you miss never being inside the head of a character, or having a third person narrator ?
I didn't miss a third person narrator or being in the head of a character, but maybe having a narrator would have made it easier to keep track of the large cast of characters and how they were all connected. I did get confused about how Tish was linked with both Sam through Sam's time in Africa and the Hallidays and how complicit Tish was in the cancer scam. I probably need to reread the book!
There is one murder and fifteen suspects, did you manage to keep track - did you find exploring the possibilities enjoyable or overwhelming ?
I have to admit I read the ending early on so couldn't solve the crime myself. I always get stressed when a child is in danger in books so don't enjoy the read until I check if they will be safe or prepare myself for tragedy. This one really struck a bit close to home as my cousin's baby K. died from Leukaemia a few years ago. Not long after that my uncle (baby K's grandfather) and his youngest son (my youngest cousin) acted in a local production of 'All My Sons', playing the doctor and Bert, a boy in the neighbourhood, which I went to see. It was a bit of an uncanny coincidence and distracted me from the plot until I knew the ending and through bringing back sad memories.
Was there anything you would like to have seen more or less of ?
I would have liked to see communications from Sam and Kel and a better explanation of why they lied about their medical condition when working in the UK. It seemed very out of character unless they were in dire need of work and would have had to wait for treatment before working.
Would you read another mystery by this author ?
I already read the sequel and would like to read Hallett's other books too. I actually liked the sequel more, even though it is only a novella as the theme of the crime is a bit lighter and goes better with the cosy crime genre. Plus I like Christmas mysteries.
I loved the format. I thought it leant itself well to the story. The format helped me guess who would be murdered in the first 100 pages. ( It was the lack of emails by Sam.)
• Do you find the description of the community, and it’s pecking order, convincing ?
The community and its pecking order seemed to make sense. The format made it hard to do any sort of deep dive into developing the relationships fully.
• What do you think of portrayal of different ethnic and cultural communities ? Is it convincing, do you feel it is respectful ?
I think it was as respectful enough. I am not sure if the format allowed for anything other than a surface level representation.
• Do you miss never being inside the head of a character, or having a third person narrator ?
No.
• Do you find the characters psychologically convincing, in particular what do you think of Isobel and Sam ?
Isobel got on my nerves. Clingy, cloying and needy. I was a bit surprised when I learned she had been emailing back and forth with an alter ego. WE only see Sam though other’s eyes. An astute woman who smelled out a rat.
• There is one murder and fifteen suspects, did you manage to keep track - did you find exploring the possibilities enjoyable or overwhelming ?
I didn’t try to explore the possibilities: I just rolled with the narrative. I wasn’t surprised that Isabel decided to take the fall.
• Did you guess who the lawyers ultimately believed did it ? Did you agree ?
I did not know who they would find. I am not sure if they were correct.
• Do you feel the major issues the book covered (I won’t list here to avoid spoilers) were done well ? Was there anything you would like to have seen more or less of ?
I am not sure if I bought the Munchausen by proxy aspect. I guessed early that the child was not sick, the doctor was on the take and Martin was a fraud.
• Would you read another mystery by this author ?
Yes, definitely.
2. Do you find the description of the community, and it’s pecking order, convincing ? Perhaps it’s too long since I lived in an English village! But I found it rather overdrawn. Or perhaps that’s a reflection of the ‘tall poppy’ syndrome of Australia. Old families aren’t given quite such respect (perhaps because they’re not that old or necessarily respectable). It’s interesting that Mili, another Australian, is not entirely convinced either!
3. What do you think of portrayal of different ethnic and cultural communities ? Is it convincing, do you feel it is respectful ? Reasonable. The portrayal of the aid community and the people they were helping seemed pretty varied and realistic.
4. Do you miss never being inside the head of a character, or having a third person narrator ? I guess what we get through this format is the external view of the characters, the face they want to portray to the world. Emails and text messages are a more concise form than traditional letters, so I think we get less insight into the characters than in older epistolatory novels, less revelation of inner thoughts. I’m not sure I missed it, but it did remind me of the first stages of historical research – you have a pile of documents and don’t know how you are going to get them to reveal a story (Does anyone remember Jackdaw kits?)
5. Do you find the characters psychologically convincing, in particular what do you think of Isobel and Sam ? I found Isobel very needy and, frankly, annoying – but convincing except when she confessed - which seemed unlikely. I felt she was not competent or together enough to commit the murder (Tanner makes the point that his clerks/students were fooled by the non-existence of Lauren, but being able to create an ‘imaginary friend’ is not quite the same as organising a murder). I agree with others that Sam is elusive; it’s hard to get a handle on her because we don’t hear her voice.
6. Did you guess who the lawyers ultimately believed did it ? Did you agree ? No I didn’t guess the murderer, though I did think it wasn’t Isobel, and I did guess fairly early that Poppy wasn’t really ill.
7. Would you read another mystery by this author ? Yes I would.
What did people think of the title? I assume it had a deliberate double meaning – the appeal for funds for Poppy and the appeal against Isobel’s conviction