Mary Jane Clark’s DYING FOR MERCY has an intriguing opening set piece: A man commits suicide by stigmata, giving himself the wounds suffered by Jesus Christ at the Crucifixion. The man dies for his own sins, having been involved in a crime cover-up. But, instead of just going peacefully, if a tad bit dramatically, the now-dead man has deliberately created an involved and implausible trail of clues and evidence that will eventually lead amateur investigators to discover the other perpetrators of the crime.
Enter Clark’s series character Eliza Blake and the rest of the KEY News staff, now appearing in their 12th novel. If you can get over the extremely eccentric puzzle the suicidal man has left for others to follow — including carvings on a stone fountain, hidden anagrams and even a talking parrot (!) — then you might enjoy the book.
It’s got a gale-force pace, short chapters and decent dialogue, reminiscent somewhat of Tim Green at his best. But it’s the sheer bloody unlikelihood of this gigantic, NATIONAL TREASURE-style death puzzle that distracted me. I kept thinking of the logistics behind teaching a parrot to say something out loud when you could just as well do it yourself. Odd.
It’s a shame, because the news show is a great device that Clark uses fairly well throughout the novel. Reporters are investigators by nature, and the team at KEY News is dogged in its pursuit of the facts. The characters aren’t exactly deep, but you can sacrifice a little depth for a story that sails quickly along and presents to the reader an absolute host of potential villains. But I’m afraid it’s a good set piece gone to waste.
So … okay … hold on.
Did I mention there was a talking parrot? I didn’t want to do this, but I have to. So note, folks, this is a MAJOR SPOILER ALERT. Do not continue reading if you don’t want to know too many details.
Are they gone? Good. Remember the guy who committed suicide and decided to construct an elaborate puzzle so that people who came after him could unearth his past crimes and that of others? Yeah, him. Well, here’s the thing: His son is a rapist. This he knows. But he doesn’t bother telling anyone. Instead, he teaches a parrot (a parrot!) to say the words, “Son! Heir! Rapes!” But because everyone else in the book isn’t totally barking insane, they think the bird is saying, “Sun! Air! Grapes!” and they keep giving it grapes.
Yeah, go ahead, read that paragraph again. Truly ridiculous. It would be amateurish if played for laughs, but it’s just sheer madness when played for real. I love that he takes the totally unnecessary step of teaching the parrot to say “Heir!” or “Air!” if you will. Here’s a tip: Don’t trust parrots with your dying clues; they’ll backbeak you every time. —Mark Rose
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Lol, that parrot. I haven’t read the book, so I can only base this off of what you’ve written, but I’m thinking a part of himself he chose to not recognize existed didn’t really want his son to be caught, which is why he came up with such a totally insane and problem-filled way of “revealing” his son’s crimes.
Even though I enjoyed the book a little bit more than you did, I do love your review, very funny! I agree that the parrot was a weird part to add just to reveal that his son is a rapist. But it seemed odd that Innis was trying so hard for Eliza/and others to learn about his son’s crimes, when it seemed like pretty much everyone knew about them. Valentina even said, “Are you having women issues again?”
~ Popin