Oh, half off on the LoA edition of Le Guin's Hainish stories!

That caught my eye, too! If that counts as “romantasy” I guess I am for it.

Well, I whipped through the K.J. Charles this weekend. Finished it Sunday evening ... leaving me with the rest of the evening/night to fill. It's good - set in Oxford, seven good friends, one of whom is murdered. And the big question is, of course, who and why. I had thought it would be someone else (and I'm not entirely buying the "who"), but it does bring some closure.

I read an ARC of "Death in the Spires" and also have some questions/issues about the who. We only have their word for how the murder went down and, while I get why the others accept it, I'm not sure I do. Or maybe I think it would be more fun if the murder were more planned as a sign of sociopathy. Anyway, I've thought a lot (probably too much) about it since I read it.

Wait, y’all think Jem is wrong about whodunnit? I would like to hear more.

I'm willing to accept it, since we got a confession, But I'd be willing to accept that someone else did it - even a suicide.

Oh, I think the one who confessed done it; I'm just not convinced it was unintentional. Or not as unintentional as he confessed (if that makes sense). I just didn't see a lot of guilt or self-reproach prior to the confession. The murderer certainly seemed to be going on with his life just fine.

Mind you, I thought Toby'd realized what a shit he was and how he had no future and killed himself to inflict as much pain as possible on his friends. So I may be over-analyzing.

Oh, ok. I think that bit where Nicky talks about how training is for thinking and when you fight you don’t think (talking about fencing with Hugo) makes me buy that the killing was spur of the moment followed by panicked trying not to be caught. I prefer impulsive murders to planned, though, in general.

Toby is the hardest character for me to understand, so I’ve been thinking about him a lot. They are all pretty interesting, though.

I do agree, it doesn’t have that satisfying everything falls into place sort of resolution that I do like in a murder mystery. And now that I am saying that I am reminded of The Eighth Detective and those stories getting reconfigured.

I really liked the way the question of justice vs vengeance vs law is handled.

I agree that the ending wasn't as neat as I usually like my endings to be. I think I'd've been more satisfied if I could see that the murderer was more tortured by what he'd done than we were shown. Nicky seems to be living a fine life as a college don. Maybe if we'd seen something about his life as an undergrad that was very different - more luxurious or extravagant or something - I might've been more OK with it. Or maybe I'm just over-analyzing.

I also was interested in the difference between justice, vengeance, and law, and how the people most affected made the call at the end.

I was also struck by how Jem doesn't seem to know much of anything about any of the group's parents other than Toby's, and then it's only the inheritance stuff that Nicky told him. He knows their social status because of what schools they went to and whose family has money, but nothing about whether the parents were supportive or distant, encouraging or dismissive, etc. We know Jem's parents didn't really understand him but they supported him when he had his breakdown, but there's no mention of what Prue's parents did when she left Oxford or really any of the others except Hugo's putting pressure on anyone writing about the murder. Mind you, I can't say I know much of anything about my college friends' families either but that was rather longer ago than 10 years.