Anyone read Sophie Hannah's No One Would Do What the Lamberts Have Done?

[DesiccatedCoconut]

I just finished Sophie Hannah's No One Would Do What the Lamberts Have Done and I feel like I need someone to explain it to me like I'm four years old. Anyone read it and want to engage in a spoiler-laden discussion?

I read all of Sophie Hannah's crime fiction books, except the Poirot ones so far. I look forward to them and save them up, accepting that there's always a bit of quirkiness and suspension of disbelief but enjoying them nonetheless. This one did not live up to expectations and I really don't think I understood it.

Anyone else?

The reason Sophie Hannah wrote this unusual book was as an epitaph to her beloved dog who died last year. As a dog lover I can understand all the dog thought in this novel. I can quite believe that "in ten years time all dogs will speak to their owners" I am teaching my beloved dog French because as part poodle she needs to know her native tongue! My take on the two mysteries is that Ree the daughter was the author (Chantree) and that Corinne and Saul murdered the Gaveys to protect the Lamberts. The peach was obviously central to the story but I haven't worked that out yet!

Where was Saul Hollingwood mentioned, I can't remember and it's driving me mad!!

Chapter 22: “The stark fact is that, if those two sentences had never been uttered, a young man named Saul Hollingwood would have gone to work as usual on
29 June 2024 instead of doing what he did after calling in sick. (He sounds as if he matters to our story, doesn't he?
Yet this is the first and last time his name will appear in these pages.)”

Then he’s also mentioned in the very final chapter

Thank you, I misread it and thought it meant he was mentioned somewhere else in the actual book, I've spent ages flicking through the ruddy thing!!! Xx

Not sure if anyone is still on this thread, but I just wanted to add one more piece to the puzzle! I'm an author too and at one point was represented by the same agency as Sophie. I had a conversation years ago with Peter Straus, who is her agent, in which he mentioned that you had to be really careful about including coincidences in thriller novels, and that the only author who was "allowed" to include them was Kate Atkinson, as she had made them "her thing". I'm thinking it's possible that he and Sophie had also had similar conversations, and that Sophie feels resentful about the fact that coincidence is so common in life but is rarely permitted in fiction. I'm not sure what this means for the plot, but I feel it must have something to do with it! Other than that I admit to being completely confused, though 😂

Excellent point. I think there were numerous actions that happen in real life that are not allowed in detective novels (eg the inclusion of twins pertinent to the plot).

I'm still watching this thread - still waiting for someone to crack the code 😂
I think this is super helpful knowledge - I now need to think about what coincidences happened in the book...

No really! I forced myself to read on to page 99 and then put it down. It's the first time ever I paid R400 for a book and couldn't continue.

I read to page 99 and couldn't continue. I don't know what this book is about.

I’ve just finished this and have so many questions! First, what was the story about Bonnie? She was hinted at once and then never mentioned again!

Bonnie is the terminally ill dog who was going to take Champ’s place. In the very final chapter it’s revealed that she doesn’t exist, nor does her owner Sarah Sergeant

Ahh of course! Thank you! It was such a confusing book!

Hi, I am brand new to Mumsnet but found this thread because I have been frantically googling this book to try to figure out what happened! So glad that so many others have the same problem. I was reading on a time crunch so maybe I missed things but reading this it doesn't seem so. One thing I wanted to throw in that nobody has mentioned yet is how it is said in the book that if Lesley hadn't said what she did about giving the dog a joke name being disrespectful that none of this would have happened (I think this was in the section where Saul Hollingwood is mentioned) and wondering if the person who was outraged by that wasn't Sally Lambert but Corinne, who had named her house "Ismys House", which she says is a joke for "this is my smallest house". So maybe she was annoyed about that and felt her "joke" house name was under attack (which it should be, how offensive is that "joke" to all your neighbours). Also I wondered about the name Saul Hollingwood - it reminded me of Saul Goodman from Breaking Bad/Better Call Saul, and how that name is a joke, meant to sound like "it's all good, man". In the same way, Saul Hollingwood sounds like "it's all Hollywood", I.e. it's all fake; Saul Hollingwood doesn't exist. Just a thought. I agree with everyone here about the peach being significant- can anyone recall or find the part about who actually dropped the peach stone in the story - a visiting girlfriend of someone, I think. Wondering if there is a clue there. Anyway, thanks everyone for your thoughts and theories; hope we can get to some answers eventually!

I too used to love her books
But this one I unusually gave up on as it was so repetitive and dull, skipped to the end, was none the wiser and didnt care

I haven't even read the book - just this thread. But it is making me wonder if what Saul Hollingwood did instead of going to work was sit down and write this book? Is he the author, since he is said to be important but never mentioned again? Would that work? (Question to people who have actually read it )

I've just finished this and found it the most baffling thing I've ever read. I don't think I'd have bought it in the first place if I'd realised it was all about a dog!

My best guess is that Connor is the man who broke up with his girlfriend, who then ran away and dropped the half-eaten peach, which eventually killed furburt. So his action of breaking up with his girlfriend put everything into motion. I'm basing this on why he was late to work that day bc he decided to end his relationship.