I confess I am at something of a loss...

[byslantedlight]

...as they might have said in the programme... Did anyone else watch The Suspicions of Mr Whicher tonight? The Radio Times says: "Of course the source material is impeccable; Summerscale's book is a finely tuned and superbly researched mystery, but writer Neil McKay keeps a tight hold on all of the original's essential elements." and that might

Comments

[llywela13]

I watched it. I had much the same reaction. I actually fell asleep toward the end! I wanted very much to find out whodunnit, but that had as much to do with having read/seen all the hype beforehand (I was very good and didn't let myself Google the answer, but in retrospect maybe I should have, I could have saved myself two hours). The show itself was pretty dull

[byslantedlight]

That sounds pretty much as I saw it... oddly enough, thinking about the story itself makes me feel it should have been completely engaging. What a tale of humanity - the scorned children, the selfish (?) step/parents, the resulting murder of a young child by two other children, who as adults finally emigrated to Australia together, years and years later... There is really such a story there - but all about the two children themselves, not about the detecting of the crime... Obviously you've got to work it out to write about it, but... I wonder if Summerscale had written it from the pov of Constance, or even of William, if it would have been much more compelling... How easy for any of us to end up feeling as they did, the horror being what tiny thing might have tipped their balance to committing murder... Or from the governess/stepmother's pov - the events set off so many years later when she fell for her employer... The more I think about it, the more it seems as if the right focus is what was missing... I wasn't at all interested in

[llywela13]

The lack of clear focus is what I keep coming back to, as well. It was such a flat, straightforward narrative of events (events which lacked a clear narrative to follow, moreover, being a true story and therefore as untidy as real life tends to be, rather than a properly crafted tale designed for public consumption) and made little or no attempt to actually explore the dramatic angles it touched upon. There was very little mystery, despite it being billed as a gripping whodunnit, and very little exploration of any of the characters' feelings or motivations. It felt superficial, in fact, as if it was just scratching the surface of what could have been such an interesting story. It was as if the story didn't know what it was supposed to be - a gripping murder-mystery, an exposé of the limitations of Victorian policing, or the tale of a once lauded detective watching his career fall apart as he fails to resolve this hugely important case. Instead of picking one of those angles and really going for it, the show attempted to strike a

[byslantedlight]

I completely missed all the hype for the programme, which is probably just as well - I would never have called it a "gripping whodunnit", partly because we weren't really asked to guess whodunnit - we were told who'd almost certainly done it fairly quickly, and then it was all about proving her guilty... Now there's a frightening thought! There wasn't any effort made (on the show) to investigate anyone else at all, or to suggest that anyone else might have dunnit...

I think you're right about it being so much tell and barely any show as well - half the fun of being a viewer (or reader!) is figuring things out as you go along, so that when the conclusion comes you have something to relate to. "I didn't see that coming", or "I'm so clever, I worked it out!" or even just "I never did like him..." We weren't allowed to do any of that fun stuff in the show...

I'm enjoying The Crimson Petal and the White much more - last ep tonight, too!

[phantomas]

I read the book last year, recommended as a fine example of creative non-fiction...and I found it somewhat boring, not documentary enough but neither mystery enough.

It's a true story, and apparently The Story (and Whicher) where investigative police (relatively new) was commented upon in newspapers and inspired writers to write crime in a certain way (website here: http://www.mrwhicher.com/)

And yes, the girl confessed at some point (in a totally pointless way, but I guess Criminal Minds would profile her as needing her moment of glory), and all the other things you noticed...dull.

I'm not sure why the book was so well received, to be honest. Yes, the story was at the time incredibly scandalous, but as I said, I don't think the book achieved that perfect mix of factual and fiction it's been acclaimed for.

I didn't watch it(I forgot, my housemate will not forgive me, she's a great Paddy Considine fan)..I was hoping they've done better than the book, but obviously not.

[byslantedlight]

recommended as a fine example of creative non-fiction
Interesting - on what basis was it supposed to be such a fine example? Because the facts were well-researched then, or...?

It really sounds as if it should make a brilliantly human story, but it just didn't on screen, and it sounds as if the book was the same... and yet people seem to be praising the billy-oh out of it! I wonder if they're praising what they see as the skill of writer, as far as her research went, rather than in the re-telling of the story...? The drama seemed to me to go through the mechanics of the case without actually touching on any human aspect at all, and it's that which gets me interested in stories... the feeling of them, not just what-happened... I wonder if they'd shown it from Constance's pov, and perhaps started way back when her father began sleeping with the governess, to give us a feel for her potential motives, whether it would have been more compelling as drama/a book...

[lisaloveslewis]

I have read the book as well and was hoping the programme was going to be more engaging, sadly it wasn't. I took the confession to be because Constance found God and needed to be absolved. Wouldn't recommend any one bother with the book as it's pretty much the same, the story had the potential to be exciting but just lacked any sort of spark, I can only suppose it's because it's a true story and not that exciting to start with.

[byslantedlight]

It's funny, if I think of the story more as what-happened rather than a story, it seems as if there should be so much more scope to make it an interesting story! I mean - a man betrays his wife for their governess, his children are encouraged to mock their mother who dies. He then marries the governess and has two children with her - his first children realise that they are lesser in importance just as their mother once was. They try to run away from home, but are brought back; the daughter suffers either pretend or hysterical paralysis before their stepmother's new child is born. Still children themselves, they finally murder their young half-brother and dispose of his body in a privy, following a complex plan to throw the blame onto servants in the house. Although a blood-stained nightdress is found, the local policeman hides the evidence himself; a friend who at first spoke out about Constance changes her mind, and the family hires a lawyer for her defence, so that when the daughter is brought to trial there is nothing to convict