Sign in with Facebook
Emma Sea's Reviews > The Invention of Murder: How the Victorians Revelled in Death and Detection and Created Modern Crime
The Invention of Murder: How the Victorians Revelled in Death and Detection and Created Modern Crime
by
by
The subtitle should be "how Victorians created modern sensationalist media," rather than crime.
Enjoyable, but to some extent a lot of the book was the same theme over and over again: acusations of crimes used to reinforce class and gender divisions. I felt sad most of the time, reading about women and men long executed, who had clearly commited no crime, but had the weight of the Victorian legal system against them.
This made it a slightly ponderous read. I think about half the length could have been sacrificed to make the book twice as enjoyable.
2.5 stars, rounded up.
Enjoyable, but to some extent a lot of the book was the same theme over and over again: acusations of crimes used to reinforce class and gender divisions. I felt sad most of the time, reading about women and men long executed, who had clearly commited no crime, but had the weight of the Victorian legal system against them.
This made it a slightly ponderous read. I think about half the length could have been sacrificed to make the book twice as enjoyable.
2.5 stars, rounded up.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Invention of Murder.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
April 24, 2013
– Shelved as:
to-read
April 24, 2013
– Shelved
April 24, 2013
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-3 of 3 (3 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Kelly (Maybedog)
(new)
Apr 26, 2013 07:48PM
That sounds so sad.
reply
|
flag
Kelly Maybedog wrote: "That sounds so sad."It was awful :(
One woman was tried four times for murder. First she was tried for killing two of her own babies (not at the same time) by poisoning, even though there was no evidence. She was acquited of both. Then she was tried for killing the baby of a neighbour, whom she had handled briefly four months before his death, and hadn't seen since. She was acquitted of that too. Then she was tried a fourth time, at which the judge declared she had already admitted killing two counts of child murder, therefore she must be guilty of this one as well. The fact that she hadn't admitted it, had protested strenuously against it, and had already been acquitted three times didn't matter one bit: she was found guilty, which no evidence, and hanged.
I just don't even know what to say. That is beyond belief.
