V.I. Warshawski is the crusading detective character created by Sara Paretsky, who has starred in 21 crime novels so far.
In 1991, the second novel in the series, Deadlock (1984), was turned into the flop film V. I. Warshawski starring Kathleen Turner. Seems like a good fit, but as often happens, they took a comedic approach to the crime story, and made the female detective subordinate to her male counterparts. Why do they screw around with a hit premise?
Warshawski is very much like Kathleen Turner's image - a tough, feminist detective who drinks whisky and is not afraid of physical confrontations. Parestsky has been credited with transforming the image of women in crime novels and along with a lifetime achievement award from the British Crime Writers' Assoc. and the CWA Gold Dagger, she was named the 2011 Grand Master by the Mystery Writers of America.
Hardball is a hefty crime novel, in which the first few pages are accolades from many top critics stating the author and the detective are both at the top of their game.
Victoria Iphigenia Warshawski is asked by a nun to help two elderly aunts find a long lost son. Lamont Gadsden disappeared in 1966 during a period of race riots in Chicago. Someone back in the day was arrested and tried for his murder, so it seems like a closed case and she is warned from several directions to leave it alone. Soon she discovers planted evidence caused the wrongful arrest and questions about her own father and family friends being involved arise. Finding the ties from the present choking the past, she must deal with obstructive politicians and an uncooperative incarcerated gang member to untangle the truth.
It is certainly a well written and crafted crime novel, but I must have been expecting something else as I found it plodding and quite dull. After reading Robert Parker's Split Image just before this, with its overly spare style, I found Paretsky to be longwinded and over detailed. I could see where the plot was going, and predicted the outcome very early. It never had a spark or momentum for me. I found myself wading through heavy descriptions and detail waiting for the (hard)ball to start rolling. At the center of this mystery are crooked policeman back in the day who are now the crooked politicians running the city. The only surprise there is the lack of it.
I can see this is my mistake, assuming it was a quick entertainment. Looking at it now, I can see it is a serious crime novel more in the style of Scott Turow than Janet Evanovich. Warshawski must grow on you for the series to be so highly lauded, but in Hardball I didn't find the character spark to encourage me to read another.
In the 'Thanks' section of Hardball, Paretsky talks about doing community work in Chicago in 1966 not far from where Martin Luther King lived. She heard him speak and then marched with him and his demands to the door of city hall, and it is this period of her life that inspired Hardball. Knowing this was the best thing about the book.
I finished it, but was waiting for the end. Not a good sign.
2009 / Paperback / 529 pages
Comments