And our November Book of the Month is...CASE HISTORIES by Kate Atkinson (discussion Tuesday 25 November)

[TillyBookClub]

We'll be chatting about our Book of the Month, Kate Atkinson's CASE HISTORIES, a brilliantly inventive take on the crime novel, on Tuesday 25 November from 8-10pm.

I'll let you know asap if the author can join us - and don't forget you can order your copy here.

Keen to know how the votes turned out? Have a snoop at the results here

And, for anyone who missed them first time round, here were November's book choices

Looking forward to seeing y'all tomorrow at 8pm - as its just us this time, we'll probably keep it to 1 1/2 hour max and finish about 9.30.
Looks like it's going to be a strongly opinionated one...

Have finished reading too although not sure I can join in tomorrow (might have to dip in and out). Found it very readable but yes, very harrowing.

i loved it - well written, a page turner, spooky, but with humour (love the detective) - love the dead ends eg the air stewardess. will now read others!

So....my opening gambit is going to be: did you find find this book funny? or too harrowing/gruesome to be funny?

It is Atkinson's humour that I like best, and that makes this book a more complex crime novel. But is the humour somehow inappropriate given the material?

(e.g when Sylvia starts hearing voices and goes all Joan of Arc, her mum briefly worries about it but then considers its 'cheaper than an obsession with ponies' and lets it carry on. And hey presto, she kills her sister)

What did everyone else think about the comic/crime mix?

I don't view this as a 'funny' book but the comedy in it mainly works I think. I found the beginning funnier (esp describing the Land mother and daughters) but found it less so when the more gruesome parts of the story were revealed. I struggled with Michelle / Caroline describing her baby as 'the bug' - sort of funny and I can understand the character's thinking like that. But that bit made me feel uncomfortable.

i didn't find it funny particularly, though had forgotten about the ponies, which was funny at the time but awful in retrospect. I didn't find it harrowing as posters above did, but grim and relentless.
I did enjoy it as book though, and don't know why I haven't read more of hers since Behind the Scenes.

Her "humour" irritated me immensely and the fact that she put so much in brackets - virtually everything was a joke. It was just too slick and even the "harrowing" bits were not that harrowing because she belittled them. I read lots of reviews and they all raved about the book, so I am completely out of kilter with most people - a good story ruined by the author!

I think I found the ending in which all the good characters end up "tidied up" a bit too familiar, or pedestrian. Though not quite so tidy that Tanya was found by her sister, possibly for the best given she had found a happy home.

Yes, uncomfortable is the right word exactly. I think she is a super-sharp writer, with an incredible eye for charaterisation, and sometimes her humour in describing a character can be right. But there were definitely times where I couldn't stomach a 'funny' line because it grated with the terrible grief that almost everyone is suffering from.

I did think it was a very gripping read, even though the plot twists could be a little contrived. It can be odd to be totally absorbed by a book even when you're not sure you actually LIKE it very much.

Agree with lemurtamer that the ending is way too tidy.

Did anyone second guess any of the plot twists? What was the biggest surprise?

I found that wass the problem - I wasn't totally absorbed because her slic writing got in the way. When I had finished I found I had not been moved in any way except for feelings of frustration at all the levity.

I think the characterisation was the strongest part of this novel and agree that the ending of each story was explained away a bit weakly. Maybe if you got really analytical you could argue the characters need humour to view their situations because their stories are so horrible - not sure though. I didn't enjoy reading this book either but it did get under my skin a bit and gave me a few horrible dreams at night!

As for twists I don't think this novel had many. I guessed Sylvia was a murderer because she was a nutter anyway and also guessed that some other weirdo had killed Laura. Maybe the biggest twist was that Shirley axed Keith and not Michelle / Caroline. But that wasn't a huge twist really. In fact I don't understand why Shirley killed Keith - I've realised there wasn't really a motive for each murder apart from the fact the killers were probably all insane. Not much detective work for Brodie really!

I started to think that the mother had done it, so save the daughter from the father, but didn't guess that Sylvia had done it.
Also didn't guess that the sister had the axe.

Yes, I agree that the characters needed some humour, and indeed many people would bring that to these kinds of situations, but it was ruined by the constant throw away remarks which prevented the real tragedies from showing through (for me). I think using brackets is a very lazy way of writing and that is why I would not place her among the top writers of today.

I was most (solely) moved by Jackson's family tale - his siblings demise. I thought the Land sisters were a bit panto English eccentric, as were Caroline's dh and m-i-l and guess that the sister had killed Caroline's husband.

I especially enjoyed the characterisation of Rosemary as depressed mum and Theo as devoted father. They had some great moments - but agree was all v sad. Not a feel good book by any means.

oops used brackets - sorry Grandmabet!

You do end up comparing the storylines, don't you? I could have skipped the Shirley/Michelle one too. The Olivia one could have been an entire book, perhaps with more background into why Victor was so awful. The Theo/Laura one was for me the least well characterised (could any daughter be that perfect?) but moving.

Amelia and Julia were perhaps a wee bit too ying/yang, but I did find them appealing and interesting. And Jackson's involvement with them is far deeper than with anyone else.

I enjoyed the fact that the stories overlapped, an extra dimension of guesswork - I remember Behind the Scenes at the Museum having the same pleasure in connecting everyone together. The only problem was that here I felt some of it was forced to make the 'mystery' happen. Where as in Behind the Scenes... it is a device that naturally intrigues and gives structure to a family saga.

Oh the odd bracket is acceptable and would have much more impact if used sparingly. On one page there were six instances of brackets, eg "There seemed to be ancient Cambridge customs for most things (sorry, Oxford)." What's the point??

Shall we talk about Jackson? Agree that his sister/brother's death is one of the saddest parts of all. And like him as a character - in that I think I would like him if I met him in real life. But wonder if a detective can ever be anything but the loner/drinker/misunderstood-by-wife/soft-inside-really stereotype. Can there be a detective that announces their unstinting happiness and contentment with the world before going out to solve gritty homicides?

Yes, TillyBookClub, I think it is a very good device when writing a series of short stories, but it makes one complete novel somewhat disjointed.