2 out of 4 stars
Share This Review
John Rankin had always been the first one to arrive at the CBS news station. His job was to handle the assignment desk and switch on the lights in the studio. Everything in his life changes when he finds Steve Johnson, a popular news anchor, sitting on the news desk with a rope around his neck. A few hours later, the body of Jesse Anderson, a young intern at CBS, is found on the bed of Steve Johnson. As the investigation progresses, the police discover nothing. No murder weapon, no motive, no suspects. The victims appear to have died at the same time, in the same manner, but at two different places. The lack of evidence solidifies the fact that it was a murder, but it also poses a problem because the investigation cannot move forward without any evidence. There are a lot of questions in front of the police. What was Steve Johnson doing in the studio, late after his work hours? Why was there a rope around his neck when he clearly didn’t die by hanging? Why was the body of Jesse Anderson on his bed? And above all, how did they die? Will the police be able to solve this mystery, or will it go down as the unsolvable murder? Has someone finally committed ‘the perfect crime’?
Murder at Broadcast Park by Bill Evans is not your everyday crime thriller. Spinning a tale around the murder of a news anchor, Evans introduces us to the workings of the media industry. For someone, like me, who is clueless about it, this novel can be quite informative. It is fast paced and quick in taking sharp turns that catch you unawares. The first two chapters are the best thing about this book. They completely hold the interest of the reader and form a firm foundation on which the rest of the story stands. The writing style is commendable, in this portion. Authors, often, take it a bit slow in the beginning, biding their time to drop the bombshells at the right moment. Evans doesn’t seem like one of those authors. Right from the beginning, there are twists and turns which leave no room to catch one’s breath.
This novel is written in the third person and is descriptive for most part. We know what is going on inside each character’s head. To make matters clearer, the author has cleverly and effortlessly slipped in the background story while introducing a certain character. They all seem pretty sorted out which leads to an unsettling transparency. We lament the doomed fate of the characters who don’t know what we know. We call out to them to not fall into the trap of the villain and pull our hair when they do exactly what the killer wants them to. This sense of dread, because we know what’s going to happen, is what this story is all about.
As exciting as this book sounds, it is not without flaws. While, in the beginning, it is thrilling, the enthusiasm diminishes with each chapter. Through the first few chapters, I had absolutely no idea about who the killer might be. I believed that it was the strength of the plot, and this made me feel a bit stupid about myself. There were no red herrings, no connections, nothing whatsoever that could lead us to the murderer. I was clueless, and this is what the best ones do to you. Predictability is the weakest point of a murder mystery, and this novel seemed impervious to such a flaw. For a while.
Halfway through the book and I knew everything. I knew who the killer was, which was also what the author intended. Something that was truly unpredictable had now become unsurprising and conventional. I will agree that the approach of laying it bare in front of the reader is not flawed. We are supposed to the loathe the villain and pity the victims. If handled correctly, this could have been the perfect book. The ending would have been its masterstroke. However, nothing like this happened. I didn’t feel connected enough to feel hatred or sympathy for the characters. Their history should have evolved to create a psychological game. However, it didn’t turn out as was intended by the writer. All in all, there was no proper development of the characters.
One thing that seemed totally out of context was a certain subplot in the story. Why the author bothered to create it is beyond me. It all started to fall apart after a while, and by the end, there wasn’t much left. For all these reasons, my rating for Murder at Broadcast Park is 2 out of 4 stars. If I could, I would have granted it a 2.5. It’s not that I didn’t like this book. I liked its idea, and the approach was a rare feat. I believe that it couldn’t stand up to the expectations that its first few chapters had created. In crime novels, the reader feels indulged. It allows us to bet on the characters and ignites our inner detective. In this novel, there was no such thrill of the chase. To make up for it, the author had to bring in the psychological factor. This unconventional tactic didn’t pan out as it was supposed to and this is what disappointed me the most.
******
Murder at Broadcast Park
View: on Bookshelves | on Amazon
Like ReviewerDiksha's review? Post a comment saying so!
