Lots of food for thought! Dickens’s London was not a musical.

https://ginghampanda.blogspot.com/2019/04/murder-by-book-crime-that-shocked.html

DNF @ 50%

I couldn't make myself finish this one. It has two things I enjoy: historical murder and literature, but links them in such a slow and ponderous fashion that I just can't seem to care about the outcome.

Interesting tale of the power of a book to influence public moods as well as public behavior. Did the glamorization of the criminal life portrayed in "Jack Sheppard" lead to murder and crime, or was it just coincidence. In some ways the furor surrounding the novel, discussed here, reminded me of the witch hunt over certain comics in the 1950's, on the basis that boys in juvenile detention were interviewed to find out what they read, and they read comics the focused on gore and horror (though no-0ne interviewed boys NOT in juvenile detention to find out what they read).

Overall an interesting insight into a particular genre (Newgate Romance) during a particular era in the history of literature.

This book was an interesting peek into how a murder in Victorian England shocked and sensationalized the gentry. As the crime was being investigated, people looked to authors of the day such as Dickens to see if their popular stories were the reason behind this murder.

I really wanted to love this book - having finished Devil in the White City, I was looking for something similar, something that straddled the line between non-fiction and fiction. But I was disappointed in this book. It's an interesting story, and has plenty to share about classism, immigration, and independence, but I just wanted more depth of detail. It was hard to tell if it was truth or fiction - I can imagine it being difficult to fact check considering the time period, but I did expect it to be more informed.

A good, easy read.

At times, this was a bit overwrought, but it wasn't the writing, it was the period and the "I'm better than you" attitude of the Aristocracy. (Which frankly the rich and current Aristocracy is bad enough, thank you. A murder of your peers is still a murder, you don't get to run around saying how dare they? "They" being those ungrateful servants that were worked to the bone and paid peanuts.)

I was fascinated while trying to puzzle out the culprit and still not sold on the motive or the reasonableness of the plan. Yet, the differing opinions of famous people for and against Courvoisier was so insightful into their character. I don't want to give a spoiler, so I will just say that I have since read Thackery's 'Going to See a Man Hanged' and gained a new respect for his skills of observation, sense of the absurd, and the horrible circus-like atmosphere that public executions turn into.

Have to admit, I'm still wondering if he did it alone, and if so, what was the straw that broke the camel's back? Not that I think that they hung the wrong man, I don't understand the timing combined with the lack of planning and motivation.

Fascinating look into the early development of popular media and it's interaction with the society. In the years before the murder new printing methods had made books cheap and abundant, the novel form was on the rise, and suddenly everyone was reading. The authorities became concerned that sensationalist stories inspiring copycat murders. Along comes the murder of a prominent member of the elites they seem to have the proof. Very relevant in our current context where these interactions are evolving quickly. The underlying story of the murder is a good example of the way organizational pressures and low professionalism result in diminished or missing justice. Good topic but reads a little on the slow side.