I've been, along with Mom, culling out very old mystery series and rereading before donating. I'm beginning to think I should skip the rereading point. Either the first three attempts at this were just bad luck or you really can't go home again, I'm not sure which. I do like Richard Jury. This one however is barely a 2.5 stars. It was dull and the ending awful.Two murders little more than a year apart, two women strangled with their scarves, are the cases connected or mere murders of convenience, Jury, Macalvie and Wiggans have to look at the Devon and London murders and decide that very thing. Honestly outside of just doing a series of interviews, there isn't much investigating in this. When I read this back in college in the 80's, I probably liked it but now not so much since literally nothing much happens for three hundred pages (and naturally being published in 1986, it predates DNA and that sort of forensics). Worse, I haven't read or see a Richard Jury mystery in ages. I totally forgot Melrose Plant was his friend but figured he had to be. This book is broken into parts and part two is nothing but Melrose for ninety pages and I was totally lost/bored by that.While the motive for the killings was interesting, there could have been a lot of trimming of this to make it move better. I don't want to spoil the ending but it was just plain awful, exactly the sort of ending I hate in a mystery so that was disappointing as well.
There was lots of English food in this book and I almost suspect that Martha Grimes wrote this mystery to showcase that food. Such as Toad in the Hole, Bangkok Duck, and the Fool dessert. Yes, this book made me curious about English cuisine and now I feel the need to try my hand at making some of these dishes.What of the mystery? Well, I guessed who the culprit was in Chapter 12, a little before the midpoint of the book. But the story was entertaining, with all the fun characters and the locations, so I quite enjoyed the book even though the mystery part wasn’t that mysterious. Don’t get me wrong; there was plenty of anticipation, even drama, watching Jury and Macalvie and the ever cough-drop redolent Wiggins try to figure it out and then catch the culprit. This book was plenty entertaining and I listened to it in 2 days.The Warboys family that runs the inn& pub The Mortal Man were quite entertaining with their crazy meals, the pants-leg pursuing dog, the accident prone family wait staff, and the little fire that occurred but was easily put out. One of the younger sons was trying his hand at story writing and ran some of his ideas past our detectives, much to their consternation and my amusement. Yes, plenty of interesting characters in this book!The Narration: Steve West did a great job and I can’t imagine any other voice for Richard Jury or the gruff Macalvie. His voices for the ladies were distinct and feminine.
Do You like book I Am The Only Running Footman (2001)?
I love the Richard Jury series but this one confused the heck out of me. I seriously don't think I would have kept reading except I love the main characters: Jury, Wiggins, Plant. However, where was Plant? Sort of underused, imo. Wiggins was great, as always and the semi-regular character, Macalvie was his usual arrogant self. Jury also had a new love interest? Somewhat. But the story sort of meandered all over and I honestly can't tell who did it or why. It just sort of ended and a character who was a bit minor was the culprit.I don't think I've included spoilers, just my general disappointment. I still like Martha Grimes' writing style: witty, succinctly descriptive, great dialogue. But I am lost as to what happened why, when and where.And I am a reader of mysteries.
—Jaksen
I love the RJ series for its wonderfully quirky and humorous characters and for its intelligent side factors. How many of you looked up the Robert Browning poem several times referred to in this story? To fully appreciate Martha Grimes, you must pursue her extra details yourself. Otherwise, you're not giving Martha full credit for her ingenious work!!! Google that poem right now!!!! It is unbelievable; and Robert Browning, who'da thought!!! And the link to the story!!! Anyway, I had trouble with Running Footman; I was confused in the beginning; it was disjointed, and I plodded along annoyed, until, as it developed and toward the end, I started to again enjoy and be amazed at the convoluted links to the story, (I even drew a story/family tree with arrows and notes to try to grasp all that was going on--- and DECIDED that this might be the best Richard Jury I have ever read! I want to discuss it with other people who have read it, namely Dianne and Jack, but don't want to give assignments to my friends, because who wants a friend who gives you work to do!!!!! But yes, do not judge Martha Grimes lightly. At least with her Richard Jury Series, she is not just a mystery writer; she is a brilliant mystery writer.
—Jane Snyder
I Am the Only Running Footman is a mystery revolving around two strangled girls. Other than that both girls were strangled at night with their scarves, there seems to be little to link the murders. However, Richard Jury, with a little help from Melrose Plant, tracks down all the leads. In the final chapters, he quickly pulls together the clues to solve the mystery.This was my second mystery by Martha Grimes. I did not enjoy it as much as the first. This one comes further along in the series which may explain why there was not much character development. However, the mystery wasn't suspenseful; I never really cared about who did it. A disappointment.
—Iris
