WE BEGIN AT THE END is the best kind of mystery. It involves many twists throughout, not just one. Plus, although there is one main question (who killed Star?), which isn't truly answered until practically the end, even though you may think you have it figured out several times before then, more questions emanate from that one.

Simply put, Star and Vincent and Martha and Walk were a teenage foursome in their small California town until, when they were 15, Vincent accidentally killed Star's little sister Sissy. He was convicted of manslaughter as an adult and served time in an adult prison, where he murdered another prisoner. Now it's 30 years later, and he's out. When someone kills Star shortly thereafter, Vincent apparently did it, so he goes right back to jail, even to the same cell.

But Walk, now chief of police in that town, is sure his old friend is innocent. So he sets out to prove it. He investigates while Martha, now practicing family law in another city, prepares a defense.

Initially you'll agree with Walk, then you may not be so sure. Then maybe you will agree again when it looks like it's someone else. Then Walk, himself, isn't so sure. Then you may think you have it figured out. But maybe not.

At the same time all this is going on, we follow 13-year-old Duchess and her little brother Robin. These are Star's children, now orphans sent to Montana to live with their grandfather. Duchess is tough and in trouble. Will she be found by the person who thinks she has what they are willing to kill for? Can she protect Robin? Will she make it back to California to take care of the person who she thinks killed her mother?

From the first chapter of WE BEGIN AT THE END, this book reminded me of books written by one of my favorite authors, John Hart. So I was delighted when I watched a Zoom interview with Chris Whitaker, and he said that Hart influenced him. Whitaker also thanks Hart in the Acknowledgments.

That said, I found some irritations and some mistakes that irritated me.

*Constant irritation: Duchess talks like a 10-year-old. She calls herself "outlaw" to nearly everyone, often. But she contrasts that childishness with her use of the F word every other sentence.
*WE BEGIN AT THE END contains many, many runon sentences, each using a comma where one sentence should have ended and another begun. Misuse of punctuation is more than irritating. It can ruin a reading experience.
*I think I'm a smart reader, yet I didn't feel so smart while I was reading this book. I had to reread too many sentences; they seemed deliberately evasive.
*Although Whitaker said during the Zoom interview that copyeditors fixed all what he called his "Englishisms," I found many. For instance, he called a doctor "Mr." In America, we call doctors "Dr."
*I didn't like the end, what ultimately happened with Duchess and Robin.

Finally, I wish I had been able to read WE BEGIN AT THE END before I saw the Zoom interview rather than after. I would have asked Whitaker why he chose the book's setting to be in California and Montana rather than the UK and why all the characters are Americans. Most writers write what they know.

What an appropriate title! "Small world" really is what SMALL WORLD is about.

But know this right up front: SMALL WORLD has lots of characters, so many that you may have a hard time remembering who's who. This book should include a list of characters with who each is. Because it doesn't, I suggest, if you own your copy, keep a highlight marker handy and highlight each name when it first appears so it's easy to flip back and find that name if you forget it by the time it next shows up. My friend keeps notes on borrowed books.

You will probably need one of these tricks to help your memory because this book has several stories going on:

One story is about twins who came to New York from Ireland in the 1850s and were each adopted out to different families in different parts of the country, with another story about their present-day descendant, a train engineer about to retire.

There's a story about a Chinese man in 1850s California and another about his present-day descendant (whose husband may have descended from Irish people who helped the Irish twins in New York).

Another story is about a black slave in the 1850s who came with his rich Kentucky owner to Illinois and escaped, and another story is about the former slave's present-day descendants, a mother and her giant teenaged son who excels in basketball.

And, yes, there's another story about an (American) Indian girl/woman in the 1850s who ran away from her adoptive parents, and, yes, another story is about her present-day descendant who is escaping her abusive boyfriend.

All the main characters from the present-day stories are on the same train. How did they all come to be there at the same time? What are their stories?

Throughout SMALL WORLD are occasional coincidences, such as the blue locket that young Finnegan, one of the Irish twins in the 1850s, kept his whole life to give to his twin Nora when he found her. Yet the present-day story about the Indian girl running from her boyfriend mentions that she now has that locket. Somehow, a character from one story came in contact with a character from an unrelated story. It's a small world.

I won SMALL WORLD from the publisher.

Don't you just love it when you read a really good book by a new-to-you author, and now you get to read his previously unknown-to-you books? That's how I feel now. I just read the really good CAROLINA MOONSET by Matt Goldman, a new-to-me author who previously wrote four books I now get to read. And, if author blurbs mean something to you, I'm joined in my praise by William Kent Krueger.

Joey, a 45-year-old divorced father from Chicago, is visiting his parents in South Carolina. His father is suffering from dementia, and his mother needs a break. While there, Joey meets Leela, the daughter of his parents' next-door neighbors. She is also in her 40s and divorced, and she also has children. Together they discover secrets about long-ago unsolved murders in this area. Then another murder occurs, and the police want to accuse Joey's father, who is not only physically and memory impaired but will die in a few years. So Joey and Leela investigate further and find even more secrets in this town, most from long ago, all involving his father and friends and rich brothers and their women.

Oh, so what if parts of the story sound a bit soap opera-ish.

From CAROLINA MOONSET's first page, I knew I was going to like the book. Goldman's writing is superb, and it grabbed me right away. Pay attention, even in Chapter 1, to every little thing. These are clues to what comes later.

Lisa Unger is one of those authors whose books I know I’ll enjoy even before I start reading them. And once again she has proven me right with FRAGILE. This book is a quick read not only because it’s relatively short; also, you won’t want to put it down.

FRAGILE is set in The Hollows, a fictional town in upstate New York. The Hollows is a mysterious place where people grow up and never seem to be able to leave, at least not for good. So most everyone knows everyone, went to high school together, and judges each other on the basis of who they were back then.

Maggie is one of those long-time residents who left for a while but then felt compelled to return. So she married another long-time resident, Jones. He had been the handsome football star when they went to high school together. Now he’s a police detective and Maggie is a psychologist in private practice.

Their son’s girlfriend is missing. Because everyone in town knows everyone, everyone is concerned, even if only because they knew her mother in high school (because, of course, everyone attended the same high school).

For many residents of The Hollows, the investigation into this missing-person's case brings up the memory of another missing-person's case back when Maggie and Jones were in high school. Questions about this old case are finally answered during the investigation into the present case.

It’s probably a little too convenient that most people in town grew up together. I suppose that makes it unrealistic. Also unrealistic is Maggie’s practice as a psychologist. Both the good guys and the bad guys are her patients, and that, too, seems a little too convenient.

But FRAGILE's Prologue is one of the best prologues I’ve read. It seems to me that most authors add a prologue to the beginning of their book in an effort to make it interesting right away. That usually doesn’t work well for me. This time, however, it did. I kept thinking of that prologue while I read the rest of the book. It was the hint of something that is not fully clear until nearly the end.

Accept the conveniences and, maybe, disregard the psychic, and you’ll enjoy this story of a small-town psychologist and her cop and their involvement in two missing-person’s cases.

If you can suspend disbelief here and there, you'll really enjoy FALLING. I did, and so did everyone else in my book group. FALLING is a fast read because you won't want to put it down.

Terrorists have given an airline pilot a choice: crash his plane with 140 "souls" onboard and save the lives of his kidnapped family, or land the plane, saving passengers and crew but resulting in his family's deaths. His answer is that neither the people on the plane nor his family are going to die. At that I admit that the book is ultimately predictable, but it was so much fun to read about how everyone--the passengers and crew on the plane, the pilot's wife and two children, the two (yes, just two) terrorists, the FBI, the air traffic controllers, the President of the United States, and even the baseball players and fans at Yankee Stadium--learned about and dealt with this terrorist threat.

My criticism is T.J. Newman's waste of time describing the pilot's dreams. They add nothing of consequence to the story.

Others poke holes in this story and criticize its authenticity. I don't at all. I'd be willing to bet that, once you start FALLING, you'll be willing to suspend disbelief and you won't want to stop.

Every time I finish reading a Joseph Kanon book, I'm afraid he might retire and not write another. I feel that way now after reading his THE BERLIN EXCHANGE. Please, do it again, Joe!

From 1962 to 1989, West Germany traded (exchanged) goods or money for political prisoners in East Germany. That is the background of THE BERLIN EXCHANGE.

Martin, an American who was a KGB spy and has been in an English prison for the last 10 years, is swapped for three political prisoners in East Germany. He was not forced but has chosen to go there because his ex-wife, Sabine, and son live there, even though he has heard nothing from her during the entire 10 years and even though she has divorced him and married an East German. This is the trouble I had with Martin: he cares too much for that long-gone wife. I expected nothing good from her and was always suspicious of what she said and did.

Martin wants out of the spy business now, but that seems to be why the East Germans want him there. Then again, it’s hard to tell who wants him there and why. Martin doesn’t know if anyone in East Germany can be trusted.

After Sabine's East German husband commits a crime and it looks like Martin may be implicated, he knows he needs to get out of that country. All his spy training comes in handy as he plans his escape into West Germany with his son and ex-wife.

This is a great historical thriller with that Kanon style. He tells much of the story through dialogue, and he spares no words.

The story is promising. Actually, THE SUN DOWN MOTEL appears to be two stories at first, one Vivian's in 1982, the other Carly's in 2017.

In 1982, Vivian runs away from home and ends up in Fell, New York, with a job as night clerk at the Sun Down Motel. She disappears later that year and is presumed dead. In 2017, Carly, Vivian's niece, is curious about what happened to Vivian and why no one noticed she was missing for four days. So she goes to Fell to find out. Chapters of THE SUN DOWN MOTEL alternate between these two stories.

Turns out, this is really one story with a then and a now. Both are of the same locations, most of the same people, and even the same ghosts.

And about those ghosts: They spoil the story. Not many authors can successfully write a ghost story for adults. Stephen King can do it, and I wonder how he does it every time I read one of his books. But Simone St. James should stick with real life and forget about the supernatural or paranormal.

The story: In 1982 Vivian is bothered when she learns about the deaths of three (later four) women in Fell. She investigates and becomes convinced of one man's guilt, a frequent guest of the Sun Down Motel. She sees ghosts during her night shift there. She is frightened but not enough to quit. In 2017, after Carly gets to Fell, she takes the same job that Vivian had, night clerk at the Sun Down Motel. She conducts her own investigation of the murders of those same four women because Vivian, Carly thinks, was a fifth. She also sees some of the same ghosts.

I would have rated THE SUN DOWN MOTEL higher if not for those silly ghosts. But another thing also irritated me: St. James speaks of 1982 as if it were ancient times. Perhaps that was before she was born.

I never thought I’d say this, but KLARA AND THE SUN is too mysterious. By the end of the book, I’m still not sure I solved all the mysteries. Kazuo Ishiguro alludes; he doesn’t give answers.

Klara, the narrator, is a robot. Ishiguro is pretty clear about that from the beginning, but he still leaves a lot of unknowns about her. What does she look like? Someone about halfway through the book calls her cute, whatever that means. Is she intelligent? Again, he doesn’t say so outright, but throughout the book Ishiguro speaks of her keen observational abilities. I suppose that means she is. But if she looks and acts like a human being, which it sounds like she does, how could her owner store her in a utility room or leave her in a junkyard?

Klara’s owner, 14-year-old Josie, is tired and weak almost all of the time. She is sick to the point of death. Ishiguro never says why. But he does allude to the answer, of course, once the reader gets well into the book. It seems that children who are “lifted” often get sick like this. But he never says what "lifted" is. For my own satisfaction, I assume it means that they were made smarter.

Klara’s job, as Josie‘s companion, is to watch over her. So Klara innocently observes and accepts everything almost always without question while the reader questions everything and tries to figure it out. I found it frustrating.

The title, KLARA AND THE SUN, lets you know that the sun is important to Klara. Its rays rejuvenate her. I imagine that Klara’s sitting in the sun‘s rays is like my plugging my iPhone to its charger.

Because Klara realizes her life depends on the sun, she worships it. She also talks to it, probably the way people talk to God. She is sure the sun can work miracles, and in the end maybe it does. Ishiguro never makes this clear.

KLARA AND THE SUN bored me. It’s not as bad as Ishiguro’s last book, but I still know he can do better. Let’s hope he writes a more adult book next time.

Although I differ with some blurbs I've read calling NOTES ON AN EXECUTION a thriller, I do agree that this book is excellent. And, although I think the couple lines of Danya Kukafka's antiracist comments (inserted as a character's thoughts) contained in this book are unnecessary, NOTES ON AN EXECUTION is undeniably great in its thoughtfulness. It's a five-star read.

The lives of not only a condemned man but, also, of the women crucial to his life are explored right from his beginning. While I disagree with Kukafka that people romanticize a serial killer and forget his victims, NOTES ON AN EXECUTION is the most thoughtful and maybe even the most interesting exploration of their lives and feelings that I've read.

But there is more to this book: Kukafka grabs a reader's attention with her presentation of the stories. Her organization is, I think, why some people call NOTES ON AN EXECUTION a thriller. It really isn't, but the order in which the stories are presented does add tension.

BLACK RABBIT HALL is two stories that, for the first half of the book, only seem to be related by photographs showing one story's main character, Lorna, as a child standing in front of Black Rabbit Hall, where everything takes place in the other story. So that's the mystery for the first half of the book: why was Lorna at Black Rabbit Hall when she was a child? Both stories bored me. They were wordy; that is, descriptions went on and on. "OK," I thought, "I get it. Get on with it, please!"

In one story, Amber lives at Black Rabbit Hall in the 1960s with her brothers and sister and their beautiful, perfect mother, soon out of the picture to be replaced by an evil stepmother. Oh, and with her comes a handsome stepbrother.

In the other story, present-day Lorna and her fiance explore wedding venues, Black Rabbit Hall being Lorna's choice because of the aforementioned photographs. Black Rabbit Hall is now owned/managed by the old evil stepmother, and Lorna spends the night there, alone with the evil stepmother and a maid.

When the two stories finally do come together, BLACK RABBIT HALL is less boring. It is not an original story, though; it is ages old: an evil stepmother, the suffering children, a baby given up for adoption, reunification, even a kind of comeuppance for the evil stepmother. Haven't we all seen this story over and over? Heck, I even remember watching Shirley Temple in this story on Sunday mornings. And, of course, the end is wonderful for all left alive.

I'll say this for BLACK RABBIT HALL: the second half of the book has more mysteries. Even so, this book made me feel like I read and saw it before. It reminded me too much of stories that appealed to me when I was a child.

At a neighborhood picnic last summer, one of my neighbors introduced himself in his accented voice and said that he's from Romania. "Have you heard of it?" he asked.

I was surprised he asked me that and said, "Of course!"

He told me that most people he talked to in the United States didn't know that Romania exists, let alone its history.

And that is why Ruta Sepetys wrote I MUST BETRAY YOU. People need to know about Romania and its little-known history, in particular 1989, when, after many years of Communist rule and Stalin-like repression, its citizens finally revolted and overthrew Ceau?escu.

But I MUST BETRAY YOU is historical fiction. It is about a 17-year-old boy, Cristian, who lives in Communist Romania and takes part in the revolution. While Christian is fiction, the history is fact.

Christian lives with his family in a concrete apartment block, where the Communist rulers have decided they and their neighbors should live. Communist rulers make all decisions; there is no freedom. There is also very little heat and electricity. And no one can trust anyone, not even their own family members.

Just before Christmas 1989 Christian hears that others are revolting, and he joins them. Many years later, when archives are accessible, he learns hard facts about his family, facts they felt were necessary for their safety under Communism.

Although I MUST BETRAY YOU is classified as a young adult novel, Sepetys is known as a crossover author. That is, adults as well as young adults read and enjoy her books.

As an adult, I can honestly say, I found this book both interesting and unputdownable. And that, from me, says a lot. I have not enjoyed young adult books since I was 13. I resisted reading Sepetys's other books for that reason, but now I will.

I won this book from bookishfirst.com.

LITTLE FIRES EVERYWHERE, by my estimation, rates three or four stars out of five. I’ll give it four.

It starts out dull, a book about suburban teenagers. I’m an adult; teenagers bore me nowadays. But this book eventually turns out to be about adults, too. So it gets better.

As a matter of fact, it’s hard to say who the main characters are; there are several possibilities. LITTLE FIRES EVERYWHERE is a mystery told from the points of view of different characters, both teenagers and adults.

Blurbs I read call this book a thriller, but it’s not. I think some people use the words “thriller” and “mystery" interchangeably. LITTLE FIRES EVERYWHERE is a mystery: Who lit the little fires everywhere? And the phrase ”little fires everywhere" is treated both literally and nonliterally in this book.

The story starts out with the fire, then it’s flashback. Different mysteries go on then, all leading up to the fire.

The flashback begins with Mia and her teenage daughter who come to Shaker Heights, Ohio with all their belongings fit into their VW Rabbit. (There’s another mystery for you: that VW Rabbit is 20 years old, and they’re still driving it cross country. Really?) The landlady of their apartment they settle in also lives in Shaker Heights in a beautiful home and has four teenagers of her own. If I had to pick the main characters, they would be these six people.

Everyone has secrets from one another, and sometimes the secrets are mysteries to the reader, too. Some of the secrets come out and the mysteries are resolved. My criticism of this book, though, is that I had too many questions in the end. At least we learn who lit the little fires everywhere.

After reading MIGRATIONS, I understand why it has received so many good reviews. But, although it has a promising beginning, the bulk of the book is slow and depressing. It also seemed choppy to me until I got used to it’s going to and from various periods of time.

All is bleak, with nearly every animal species extinct and those not extinct close to being so. This is the world when Franny takes it upon herself to follow Arctic terns as they migrate from the Arctic Circle all the way to the Antarctic.

During her journey, we learn more and more about Franny through many flashbacks. They give the impression that she is a selfish person. But keep reading. As her secrets are divulged, your impression may change. And the secrets also make for a great ending.

As a matter of fact, I think those last few chapters are the reason for all the good reviews and high ratings, although it is true that Charlotte McConaghy’s writing is beautiful throughout the book. Plus, her descriptions of the Arctic and the Antarctic made me cold.

But the story never addressed to my satisfaction how nearly all animal species could be extinct while human beings are just fine. All species depend on other species for their lives, including the human species.

I admit, I did not expect to like SUCH A FUN AGE. On the basis of its description on the book's flap, I thought it was a book that concentrated on racism, which every-other book seems to be about lately. So I would have passed it by if my book club hadn't chosen it.

Joke's on me. I shouldn't have read the book flap.

Emira is a 25-year-old black college graduate, part-time typist, part-time babysitter, who longs to be more adult with a job more like her friends' jobs. But she loves the little girl, Briar, she takes care of three days a week. The mother, though, is pretty hard to figure. (By the way, they're white.)

First of all, the mother calls herself Alix, which she pronounces "aa LEEKS," even though her name is actually Alex. After she hired Emira, their relationship was impersonal, limited to comments, questions, and instructions about Briar's care. That changes after a late-night incident in a grocery store. Emira is there with Briar when she is stopped by a security guard. He and another customer are suspicious that she has kidnapped Briar, a little white girl. This problem is soon straightened out, but Alix is now determined to become Emira's friend. I think that is probably because of a racist comment that her husband made on TV during a newscast. (Speaking of which, this is the reason Emira and Briar were in the grocery store. Some junior high school-age boys threw an egg at their window because of the comment, so Alix and her husband called the police. They didn't want Briar there when the police came. Why would someone call the police because boys threw an egg at their house? And why would they get their toddler from her bed at 11 p.m. so she could get out of the house? And why would they call their babysitter at 11 p.m. for such a ridiculous reason?)

While Alix is determined to be Emira's friend, Emira begins dating Kelley, another white customer in the grocery store that night. Kelley filmed the incident with his smartphone and wants to publicize it but doesn't. Emira doesn't want to and insists he delete the video from his phone.

As the story continues, we see more and more the kind of person Alix really is, especially after she meets Kelley.

I won't give away more of the story. I will say that SUCH A FUN AGE is excellent. It didn't offend me and shouldn't offend anyone, if that is your concern. The end, though, might be too rushed.

The confusion begins with the title. First, it implies that Evelyn Hardcastle is who this story is about. But it isn’t, really. Second, the title also implies that Evelyn Hardcastle will die 7 1/2 times. But no.

That’s OK. Titles are often mysteries. But even now that I’ve finished the book, I’m still not sure about those 7 1/2 deaths. I’m confused because I think there were more.

A man who we eventually learn is Aiden Bishop finds himself at a large estate that is in severe disrepair. He doesn’t know why he is there; he has no memories. He doesn’t even know who he is.

I don’t want to describe the story in much detail because different parts confused me throughout. I may describe something in one way, but you may read it and understand it in another way. It’s that confusing.

I know this, though. Bishop is tasked with solving the murder of Evelyn Hardcastle. But who has given him this task? By the end of the book there will be a sort of answer. But even that person has superiors, and we are never told who they are.

Bishop inhabits the bodies of several guests at the estate. In this way, he sees Evelyn Hardcastle and the goings on of many other guests at the estate from many perspectives so he can solve the mystery of her murder. He even tries to prevent it.

This story contains so many characters it is difficult to keep track of them all. And it is especially difficult to remember who did what. If you are one of those fortunate people who can sit and read a book all day, I think you may have a chance at avoiding confusion. But if you have to put the book down to go to work or to go to sleep, you are bound to be confused. Thank goodness someone was thoughtful enough to include a list of characters near the front of the book.

I don’t know if this author reads reader reviews, but he should learn about a repeated editorial error that a good editor should have caught and corrected. Turton and his editor should learn the difference between "intended on" and “intended to.” "Intended on” is a mistake that is repeated throughout this book. No one intends on doing anything; they either intend to do it, or they plan on doing it.

ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL really is what its title says it is: an anatomy, or analysis, of a scandal. The story is told from the viewpoints of the various people who are involved in the scandal, directly or indirectly, although the actual scandal is not dealt with until about page 200. You might say, then, up until that point is setup that goes too long. You would be only partially correct. If this is to be an anatomy of a scandal, analyses of these people are necessary.

James is a handsome, charismatic politician in England. His is the scandal to be analyzed. So we go back to his college days and those of his future wife, Sophie, and some of the people they went to school with. These are people in the 1990s who will be directly or indirectly involved in the scandal about 20 years later.

In 2016 James is accused of rape by a woman he had been having an affair with. The case goes to trial, and the viewpoints of various characters, including the prosecutor, Kate, are given postscandal as well.

I was surprised by Kate. I feel like I shouldn’t have been, though. You may catch it before I did.

I enjoyed this book, although perhaps the word really shouldn’t be “enjoyed.” The subject matter wasn’t exactly happy.

My only criticism of ANATOMY OF A SCANDAL is its punctuation. Semicolons are misused all over the place. I am a retired editor, and these errors glared at me.

Not many authors could have written MORNINGSIDE HEIGHTS as Joshua Henkin did. The story of Pru and Spence might have been a bore. But Henkin ensured, simply, that once you start this book, you'll want to finish. Although this story is not thrilling or suspenseful, it's a page turner just the same.

Part 1 of MORNINGSIDE HEIGHTS is what I think of as introduction. Granted, for an introduction, it's long. But, again, Henkin ensured that it doesn't seem overly so, that it isn't a bore. He introduces us to Pru and Spence, who is Pru's college professor and, not much later, her husband. Spence is probably a genius, and the courses he teaches are so popular that students will camp out all night to be first in line to sign up for them.

In subsequent parts of MORNINGSIDE HEIGHTS, the reader sees Spence's downfall. When he is in his 50s, he is diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer's disease. It began to creep up on him, Pru thinks, maybe as early as when he was still in his 40s. She deals with it alone at first, eventually hiring help when she can’t do it anymore. This gives her a little time for a life outside their apartment, especially for a job, but also including a short-lived affair.

Different parts of the book also concentrate on Sarah, Pru's and Spence's daughter, and Arlo, Spence's son from his first marriage. Arlo is also a genius and had a difficult relationship with his father. Although he later comes to his father’s rescue, there can be no relationship now, no mending it.

Somehow, Henkin makes MORNINGSIDE HEIGHTS a story you will want to read. This is the first of his books I have read, and now I’m anxious to read his earlier books.

What a clever book this is! Really, Magpie Murders is two books, a book within a book. And both books are Magpie Murders.

The narrator of Anthony Horowitz's Magpie Murders, Susan Ryeland, describes her experience with the book within the book, Magpie Murders, written by the fictitious author Alan Conway. Ryeland is an editor for the publisher of Conway's books. Magpie Murders is the ninth in his series of who-done-its, and, although Ryeland dislikes Conway, she likes his who-done-its.

Now we read what Ryeland reads, the Magpie Murders written by Conway. It feels like reading an Agatha Christie novel. If you own the Magpie Murders written by Horowitz, I suggest you do so with a highlighter nearby so you can mark the first occurrence of characters' names. There are so many! I needed to do that so I could leaf back to remind myself who characters were. And, speaking of names, I will never be able to read a book again without wondering whether the names of its characters have some significance. You will understand what I mean later.

Before the murders are solved in the copy of Magpie Murders that Ryeland is editing, the story ends. It is missing chapters, and Ryeland is determined to find them. But she can't just ask Conway for them. Her firm's biggest money maker, Alan Conway, is dead. It looks like he jumped from a tower, committed suicide. But, during Ryeland's search for the missing chapters, which takes her to various areas in England, she decides that he didn't jump but was pushed.

So Ryeland not only needs to find the missing chapters so that the murders in Conway's Magpie Murders are solved; she also feels she needs to solve Conway's murder.

Every bit of this book, of both books, really, is clever. I'm so anxious to see what PBS does with it in 2022.

Reviews of Tana French books never deserve fewer than four stars, and I’m usually inclined to give them five. In this case I’ll stick with four, though.

THE SEARCHER is a bit of a departure for French. That is, the main character of this book isn’t Irish. Cal is American, a retired cop who has come to live in a small town in Ireland. He thought it would be a quiet place to live.

A 13-year-old, who Cal mistakes for a boy, has asked, practically demanded, that he look into the disappearance of her brother. This is what Cal thought he was leaving behind when he moved to Ireland. Even so, he does get involved in this case, just like old times.

Cal learns that small towns in Ireland can have the same trouble as big cities in the United States. There is no escaping it.

I don’t give this book five stars because I didn’t like the way Cal talked. Although French writes wonderful dialogue between Irish people, she doesn’t quite get it right with Cal. I understand that she wanted to make clear that he isn’t a big-city guy. But sometimes he talks stupid. There is a difference between sounding country and sounding stupid. He clearly is not stupid. So he does not sound authentic as the Irish people do.

I also was unhappy with the end.

A HEARTBREAKING WORK OF STAGGERING GENIUS is delightful. Dave Eggers has a writing style like I’ve never read before. What would otherwise be, for example, sad or serious, he lightens. My gosh, he even makes the copyright page enjoyable reading! And I'm glad I read a hardcover copy and could see the cover minus the dust jacket. Check it out if you can.

This is a memoir. Eggers explains that he wouldn’t really call A HEARTBREAKING WORK OF STAGGERING GENIUS a true story because he made up the dialog. And sometimes that dialog is obviously his invention, such as when a 9-year-old boy talks with the maturity of a 30-year-old man or when he begins with his MTV interview that turns into something else. I sometimes had to re-read to understand what he was doing.

Before the beginning of A HEARTBREAKING WORK OF STAGGERING GENIUS Eggers notes all the parts you can safely skip. But that made me want to read them all the more, and I didn’t skip anything. I admit, though, after 100 or so pages his style sometimes aggravated me, his constant repetition, so I did skim some paragraphs. Even though I could tell that those paragraphs represented his private thought processes, I sometimes found them disjointed and monotonous.

Most reviews of this book concentrate on only part of the story, he and his little brother. Yes, Eggers raises his much younger brother, Toph, after their parents died. And, of course, Toph is a big part of the story, occupying Eggers' thoughts most of the time.

But he also emphasizes all the energy he simultaneously expends on a startup magazine. Poor Eggers is always exhausted.

Also running throughout his story are his remembrances of his mother, beginning near her end. Yet he doesn't have much to say about his father, apparently an alcoholic.

Eggers' memoir has three main subjects, not just one. Probably most readers find his relationship with Toph to be the most touching.