This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader.
---
What’s Triptych About?
I’m going to start off by saying it took me far, far, far too long to figure out how the title was appropriate. I cannot express how clueless I felt once the light bulb went on. I should stress that I wasn’t sitting around pondering it—and had essentially forgotten the title. I’m pretty sure I’d have sussed it out earlier. The more I think about it, however, the less I think it’s appropriate—Polyptych would be better—Tetraptych or Quadriptych would be even more accurate. But who even knows those terms anymore?
Anyway, there’s a serial killer/rapist afoot in the Atlanta area—the ages, races, and socio-economic status are varied enough that the typical pattern doesn’t fit. The novel shows the hunt for the killer from three overlapping perspectives (with a fourth for a significant portion of the book, too).
The first is from APD Homicide Detective Michael Ormewood, who might be a perfectly adequate detective (it’s hard to tell at the beginning, but you have to assume he is). He is a terrible person however. I know the two aren’t related, but…ick. You want the killer to be stopped, but you really don’t want him to be the one who stops him. So, it’s nice that an agent from the Georgia Bureau of Investigations, Will Trent, comes along to consult on the murder investigation Ormewood’s involved with—and shows him that it’s connected to others.
The second perspective is that of an ex-con, who has been out for only a few months. You can’t help but like him—in sharp contrast to Ormewood—but he’s a convicted murderer and is a registered sex offender, so it’s hard to generate a lot of sympathy for him. The part of the novel focused on him includes so much backstory you’d be well within your rights to forget that you’re supposed to be worried about a killer in the present. He’s clearly reformed (but honestly, doesn’t remember committing the crime he’s convicted of), he’s a rare success story for the Criminal Justice system—sadly, the world isn’t going to recognize that anytime soon. Connecting him to the present case takes a long time, but proves to be pretty important.
The third perspective is that of Will Trent. I don’t know if this was supposed to be a stand-alone, or if the whole point of the novel was to introduce Trent as central character of the series. In the end, that was the result, though. Trent’s an oddball of a detective—but he’s incredibly good at what he does. Eventually he, and his on-again-off-again lover/lifelong best friend (a detective in Vice with an ugly history with Ormewood) start to put the pieces together.
Alllllmost DNFed
I didn’t like this novel much at all—and was pushing myself through it for at least the first half. Why? I don’t know—I just wasn’t in the mood for any other audiobook I had my hands on, I guess. Kramer’s narration, Slaughter’s style, the characters, and the experience as a whole, just left a sour taste in my mouth.
Eventually, while I still didn’t enjoy the book, I got to the point that I was going to listen just to see how the ex-con’s storyline ended up. Still, I almost returned this to the library at least eight times before that point (and once or twice after).
When Trent’s perspective took over, I enjoyed it enough to start thinking about getting book 2. Also, I wanted to see how Slaughter took this particular book and turned it into a series that’s gone on into eleven books (as of later this year) and spawned a TV series.
The Narration
Kramer does a capable job, I guess, but it just didn’t work for me. I’ve listened to other books by him before (have only written about one of them, though) and I’ve felt the same way. His name didn’t trigger anything for me, but that voice and delivery sure did.
Kramer has a list of credits that can only be described as “enviable,” and keeps getting work—so clearly I’m in the minority when it comes to him. His name isn’t enough to keep me from listening to a book—but it sure won’t convince me to give something a try if I’m on the fence about it.
So, what did I think about Triptych?
Huh. What do you know? I said pretty much everything I have to say already.
I actually think I’d have been better off walking away from it. The ending was satisfying and my curiosity about the ex-con was satiated. But I’m not happy with myself about it.
Trent and his friend (or whatever), Angie, are interesting enough that I do think I’ll come back for another ride, but I don’t think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship. They’re the reason the book gets that 1/2 star.
