Product Description

THE NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER-NOW IN PAPERBACK

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #79049 in Books
• Published on: 2007-03-06
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 416 pages

From Publishers Weekly
Man walked into a pub." This line, delivered with a droll inflection by reader John Lee, is the perfect opening for Martha Grimes's latest entry in her Inspector Jury series. Harry Johnson enters the Old Wine Shades pub and recounts to Jury the strange tale of a mother and son who disappeared nine months ago, along with their dog, Mungo. At first Jury finds the story more amusing than ominous, but as more details are revealed his curiosity is piqued, and he feels compelled to investigate the disappearances. What he discovers is that nothing, including the agreeable Johnson, is what it seems. Grimes builds a captivating mystery with plenty of twists and quirky characters to keep the listener engaged, and Lee's controlled performance fits nicely with her eclectic, character-driven storytelling. Lee's characterizations are presented with a dignified, no frills aplomb, which isn't easy given that they include the inner thoughts of an autistic child and the dog, Mungo. In fact, the scenes featuring Mungo supply some genuinely laugh-out-loud moments, as well as some of the novel's most intense suspense. Jury fans will not be disappointed.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist
The Richard Jury series (this is the twentieth installment) is known for having an English pub in some sort of starring or supporting role, reflected in the title. In the latest, the pub of the title is the setting for a very long pub tale that sounds for all the world like a shaggy dog story. A man in the pub, with a shaggy dog at his feet, tells Jury (for unknown reasons, except sociability) about a friend of his whose wife, son, and dog all disappeared nine months previously. The clincher to the story is that the dog came back. New Scotland Yard Detective Superintendent Jury lets the man (a physicist whose disappeared friend is also a physicist) talk for three nights about the disappearance. Jury gets drawn into investigating the case, which he mostly doubts, until a body turns up. Very improbable and creaky but still certain to be of interest to loyal Jury fans. Connie Fletcher
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

Review
A top-notch Grimes, replete with an especially suave villain and a most peculiar twist. -- Entertainment Weekly

Customer Reviews

Grave Disappointment
Martha Grimes has been at the top of my list of favorite mystery writers for years. I love her Richard Jury novels and I even have many of them on tape, narrated by Tim Curry. But THE OLD WINE SHADES has me stymied. I have read her other novels and was so bored that I thought someone else must have written them, but to read a Richard Jury novel that has run amuck is unacceptable.

Is Grimes on medication, or is she just sick of writing about Richard Jury? This novel reads like the mental wanderings of someone going crazy. Her attempt at cleverness by writing from the POV of Mungo the dog was an abysmal failure. Why allow the reader to know the thoughts of Jury and a dog, but nobody else? What's the point? And that's the conclusion I reached about this novel--what was the point? The plot ran all over the place and accomplished exactly nothing.

I think I'll go read some other mystery writers for awhile and hope Grimes gets well soon.

In What Dimension Was This Book Written?
This Grimes mystery was a big disappointment. I have read all of her books and did not expect this. Please don't read this as a first Grimes book. The discussions about superstring/quantum/mechanical/M theories were okay with me--I read that stuff anyway. The dog was okay--I have several and I know they think and that they have stories to tell. But please...they have not "called time" in the afternoon in English pubs for a number of years. Also, what was the point of the bloody slipper prints? Why has our friend Jury suddenly become so gullible that he doesn't check details? The use of outdated forensic technology, or rather the lack of up-to-date technology, is disappointing. Everyone is snippy and grouchy--they have all turned into boors. In addition, there are way too many spelling and grammatical errors. Please, Martha, you can do better than this!

BritMysteryLover
Dear Martha,

Frankly I am very dissapointed. You are one of the very few folks I buy hardcover, but this one is a bust. Maybe it's me though so bear with my questions.

1. The dog. Did he really have to 'think' (muse, wonder, philosophize)? What was the point of dragging the kitten all over the room? How come if he was smart enough to get into the basement and chew the kids free, he was too dumb to go get Jury and alert him to the kids in the basement?

2. Intellectual pretentiousness. How much did we really need to know about Schroedinger? Heisenberg? String Theory? Parallel universes? Quantum theory? How did the continuous references enhance the plot or further the story? How much did we need to know about wine and Trevor's snobbishness? Was he even necessary? Were they paying you by the word??????

3. Jury. By the end I began to think HE had entered a parallel universe. How come he rushes off to find Timmy and, arriving 20 minutes late, suddenly decides the kids are in no great danger after all and spends the last 10 pages of the book bantering with Wiggins and his reporter pal? What caused the loss of urgency? Did Harry (who was a pathological liar, a murderer, a diabolical calculator), kidnap the kids for kicks? Perhaps he too had entered a parallel universe (one devoid of rationality)? What was he going to do with them? Keep them in his cellar for awhile unti they got 'good and scared'?

I love you Martha, I'll keep reading your books. But I hope you'll let Jury back into this universe where dogs don't muse, Melrose gets to really play a part, and the writing is relevant and to the point.