I've always been a big reader of true crime, in particular Jack the Ripper, so when I heard about this book, I knew I had to read it. I, Ripper didn't quite live up to my hopes and expectations, but it was still a good read.
So what did I like about I, Ripper? It was very clear that Hunter had done extensive research, and really thought about what he was writing. The creative technique of alternating chapters of a (fictional) reporter's memoir with passage from Jack the Ripper's (fictional) diary was a really unique one, and one that served the narrative well, building a lot of tension.
However, even with a creative format and that built up tension, this book still seemed to move pretty slowly. It took me a lot longer to read than I had anticipated it would. It's hard to put my finger on exactly why, but maybe Hunter stretched the book out longer than he should have. Had the book been a bit more condensed, it might not have dragged at all.
I did suspect the big final twist from rather early on in the book. It was a bit disappointing that it was telegraphed so much, at least in my opinion.
Hunter definitely has something here, a unique and well-researched fictional take on a topic that has been covered many different times, in many different ways. This may not have been the best version of the story I've ever read, but it was still a good read.
I'm glad you liked this one despite the slowness. This one was too slow and dull for me and I ended up disliking it by the end because of that. :(
ReplyDeleteI don't blame you, I almost gave up on it a couple times. I think if the subject hadn't been Jack the Ripper, it might have become a DNF, but the subject had me hooked.
DeleteSounds like an interesting read.
ReplyDeleteIt was not the best written book, but it was definitely interesting.
Delete