Petty Treason by Madeleine Robins
Still dealing with the ramifications of Point of Honour, alternate-Regency era inquiry agent Sarah Tolerance is approached by an associate of a former client (who had, in fact, hired her to investigate the first man) to clear his sister of her husband’s murder. The deceased husband, we soon learn, had many unsavory habits, and may have been involved in treasonous plots.
I enjoyed it a lot, but not as much as Point of Honour. For one thing, a number of the twists and reveals were telegraphed long before they should have been, and for another, the main plot didn’t have as much of a personal impact on Miss Tolerance. Like others, I also have a problem with the ending.
Specifically, that Miss Tolerance let Anne go, knowing that she had killed her husband. One of the major points of Point of Honour was that she believed the law should be upheld, even if you may sympathize with the killer. Robins seems to approach it as a choice between justice and the law (which was constructed to punish the actual victim) and I largely agree that, to some degree, it was justice (and possibly also a degree of insanity caused by her situation, as Anne often seemed to barely be clinging to reality) and that Anne should be free to start a new life, but it feels out of character for Miss Tolerance to let her go. I suppose the ideal solution would have been for the decision to be taken out of her hands while she tried to reconcile herself between the two.
Despite that, I really liked the books, and am deeply saddened that the third book will never be finished.
I enjoyed it a lot, but not as much as Point of Honour. For one thing, a number of the twists and reveals were telegraphed long before they should have been, and for another, the main plot didn’t have as much of a personal impact on Miss Tolerance. Like others, I also have a problem with the ending.
Specifically, that Miss Tolerance let Anne go, knowing that she had killed her husband. One of the major points of Point of Honour was that she believed the law should be upheld, even if you may sympathize with the killer. Robins seems to approach it as a choice between justice and the law (which was constructed to punish the actual victim) and I largely agree that, to some degree, it was justice (and possibly also a degree of insanity caused by her situation, as Anne often seemed to barely be clinging to reality) and that Anne should be free to start a new life, but it feels out of character for Miss Tolerance to let her go. I suppose the ideal solution would have been for the decision to be taken out of her hands while she tried to reconcile herself between the two.
Despite that, I really liked the books, and am deeply saddened that the third book will never be finished.