This was like wading through a bog.

I’m not a particular fan of this writing style. There is an all-knowing narrator that tells a lot and shows very little. I prefer show, don’t tell. Or at least narrative where the story moves forward and not every step of the way reflects on everything.

This wouldn’t be so bad if the actual mystery was engaging, but most of the time it wasn’t. I mean, I wasn’t even sure there was a mystery. Apparently, Topsy, who suffered from dementia, overheard someone say “It would be better allround if she were dead.” People some times say this sort of thing when an elderly person is suffering a debilitating disease. Doesn’t mean those people decide to give chance a hand.

But there are clues! Are there? Liz, Pat and Thelma are convinced Topsy would not muddle her tablets. Based on spending about 30 minutes in her presence and because the Topsy they used to know was a stickler for such details. Dementia changes a person. And Topsy may still have know what each pill is for, does she also remember she took those pills half an hour ago?

Where are means, motive and opportunity? Liz, Pat and Thelma never discus these. Probably because if you start thinking about this, there can only be one likely suspect. And what sort of mystery is that if it’s already solved on page 50?