Chris McDonald

This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader.
---

I’d enjoyed snooping around people’s lives. Poking at their secrets and unearthing dirty little details that earned me my payday. It wasn’t honest work, but it was fun.

Mostly.

The beatings weren’t, and I’d taken a few in my time.

Asked the wrong question to the wrong person. Asked the right question to the wrong person. Wisecracked at an inappropriate time. My crooked nose and the waxy scar on my cheek would be the lasting reminders.

WHAT'S LITTLE GHOST ABOUT?
Irving Ash is a Denver PI on rough times. His divorce is about final, this most recent romantic relationship (note the distinction) is over, and thanks to some recent headlines, he's having a hard time getting work. He's about to be evicted from his office, and it probably won't be long before he's out of a home, too. On the plus side, his cat, Cleo, seems to like him.

A friend connects him with a job. Well, not really a friend, an acquaintance. Okay, technically the bartender of his regular stop—Ash calls him an "enabler." This may be out of the goodness of his heart, but it's more likely that he'd like Ash to be able to pay his growing tab. The job is doing security work for Roxie Pictures—a porn studio (the owner, Gordon Rock, describes their work as "art...Beautifully shot videos, made by passionate people for passionate people,"*). Cleo apparently has some qualms about the job, but the pay is good enough he can't pass on it.

* That sentence alone gives you everything you need to know about the character. You can feel the sleeze dripping off of him. The next sentence of his description will make you want to wash your hands before picking the book up again.

It's not too long before Ash finds the studio's biggest star, Brandi Dyvine, in a confrontation with someone. Then she goes missing, potentially kidnapped. Rock's in love with her and is willing to fork over ransom money—Ash talks him into trying to buy some time instead. Ash figures finding and rescuing her is far more likely to result in Dyvine and Rock not being killed at the end of the transaction.

Ash starts combing through the details of Brandi's life—and well, things get messy from there. In the world that Ash finds himself in, women and money are the deadliest combination—and he learns that the hard way.

BROTHER JOHN
Like any good PI who finds themselves near the morally gray areas, Ash has a friend who is far more comfortable in the gray—maybe even the black. The Hawk/Joe Pike/Bubba Rogowski/Mel Frost role.

For Irving Ash, that friend is a man named Brother John. Brother John is the kind of friend you want when things get hard—he's resourceful, dedicated, and willing to go the extra mile. I'm unwilling to say more about him because Ash should be the one to introduce him to you (I'd just ruin it). But I couldn't not say something about him.

So let me say this—I'll be the first backer for a Kickstarter for a novella or two about Brother John before Ash moved to town (or be the first to pre-order). I don't see McDonald doing that, but if he did...

PESKY BRITISHISMS
I really hate to pick at these nits. Truly. But my biggest fear when I heard that McDonald was going to write this was that it was going to sound like someone from the British Isles pretending to be an American. Sadly, that fear was realized.

And I get it—we still owe a debt for Dick Van Dyke's Bert. I'm not sure how much longer we need to atone for this (but it's a while)—and there are several other lesser offenses we need to make up for, too.

But, no one in the US uses a biro to make notes on pages of A4, gets aspirin from a chemist, or plugs an address into a car's sat nav. (there are smaller examples, but let's stick with some of the more egregious ones). Do I—like many/most readers--know what's being said there? Sure. But when I come across something like that it jars me, takes me out of the moment. And I really don't like that when I'm enjoying the moment so much. I was in Ash's head, I was fully invested, and then McDonald slips and throws ice water on my face. Yes, I'm able to get back into the moment, back into Ash's voice, etc.—but this whole experience would've been so much richer if I didn't have to get back into it, but could've just stayed there.

Now, this all goes away if Irving was someone who grew up in England and moved to the States, eventually to Denver, instead of going to University or something along those lines. Then these slips are character moments, not the jarring errors they become as he's a guy from the East Coast who moved to Denver.

Is any of this that big of a deal? Not really. Is it unforgivable? Of course not. Did I lose some appreciation for the novel because of it? Yes. It's something that could've been explained away, or reduced with another editing pass or two. When the rest of the novel is so good, the tiny flaws really stand out.

SO, WHAT DID I THINK ABOUT LITTLE GHOST?

‘Whoever it is has Brandi, I’m sure of that. So, we hit them, and we hit them hard.’

‘Revenge?’

‘Absolutely.’

‘I love revenge,’ Brother John smirked.
I know I was supposed to think of classic PI types when I read this novel—and I did to an extent. But really what this made me think of more than Chandler or Hammett was Stephen Mack Jones and Walter Mosley's Down the River Unto the Sea.* Both of those were very much in the classic PI mold, but incredibly contemporary, too. That's what Irving Ash felt like to me, a 21st-Century PI, and regular readers know what kind of catnip that is to me.

* I also want to mention Michael Koryta. I'm not sure why, every example I can think of from Koryta fails to match up. But I can't shake the feeling that Little Ghost shares some DNA with something he did or would write.

I saw the bigger elements of the final reveal coming—but not all of them, and the ones I missed were the more important and disturbing ones (if you ask me). So I was able to feel good about myself and be taken unawares at the same time. I really can't ask for more than that. Along the way, McDonald hit me with at least four moments where I couldn't believe I read what was on the page, and had to go back to verify. After the second moment, it became clear to me that McDonald wasn't playing around, no punches were going to be pulled here.

McDonald has crafted a compelling story with a central character that will get you invested and hoping he'll come out on top—even while he's doing things that most of the time you'd find abhorrent. The writing is crisp and terse—McDonald gets his money's worth out of each syllable. Ash is a damaged man, and you can sense it—and you can see when it gets worse, just because the text isn't verbose, doesn't mean you're not going to find a lot of emotion and depth in the scenes. McDonald has given us both.

This says something about his talent. If you gave this to me without an author's name on it and told me it was someone I'd read before, I don't know that McDonald would be in my first five guesses. I think that's true of his DI Erika Piper series, too—I wouldn't have picked the Stonebridge Mystery author for those. So far, that's three distinct voices and styles he's displayed in three subgenres. You've got to wonder a little what he's not capable of at this point.

I strongly encourage PI fans to pick this up—and soon. Maybe if enough of us do it, we can convince him to keep this from being a stand-alone.… (más)

This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader.
---
WHAT'S ROSES FOR THE DEAD ABOUT?
Seven years ago, Erika Piper is one of the detectives that arrested the rock star, Johnny Mayhem, for beating his wife to death with a baseball bat. It's not one of those cases that haunts her, they had solid evidence, made a good arrest, and moved on.

But now, new evidence has been made public that casts doubt on that arrest. Enough doubt that Mayhem is released. He's angry about the last seven years and the way "the real killer" got away with things, so he's making not very subtle threats against those who were involved in his arrest and conviction—and the man who held onto that evidence until now.

Under the shadow of Mayhem's release, Piper returns to work after maternity leave—to a nice, safe, and stultifyingly boring desk job. Which she's going to make work, she's committed to the idea—she regrets its necessity, but she wants to be a good mother, and she has plenty of evidence that the DI role is dangerous. But on her first day back—the new DCI offers her old DI position. She needs someone with the experience that only Piper has. Just mentioning the offer causes problems at home, her partner, Tom is dead set against it and makes that very clear. Eventually, she agrees—for one case, and then they'll re-evaluate.

That one case? The death of Mayhem's drug dealer—the man who held on to the evidence for all those years. There's evidence at the scene that ties it to the death of Mayhem's wife, too. Could this be her chance to redeem herself for the work on the original case?

THIS IS THE END?
At this point, the series feels lived in—we're comfortable with all of the characters and this world. If McDonald hadn't been making so much noise about returning to it lately, this is where I'd be complaining that he jumped off at the wrong time. We needed more time with Piper's new boss and partner, and that it'd be good to see Piper functioning in a stable environment for a bit (like she was in the beginning of Whispers). But since it looks like he's at least thinking of #4, I guess I can spare us all that.

SO, WHAT DID I THINK ABOUT ROSES FOR THE DEAD?
If I was ranking them, I'd put the second in the series, Whispers in the Dark, a little higher—and not just because of the shocking mid-book scene. But just a little—I'd have preferred a little more time spent with a couple of the threads in this book (and one more proofreading pass). Those are just quibbles, though. This is a gripping story and McDonald got me chasing a couple of red herrings—I was fully committed to one of them until the moment it became impossible.

I thought the conflict over Piper leaving the desk job for the DI role so soon was resolved a little too easily—but I do appreciate the way that McDonald handled it overall. I just wanted it fleshed out a little more, I think.

That's twice I've said something along the same lines in this section—essentially, I guess what I'm saying is that I liked the book, but it was a bit too lean. Several scenes were a bit too brief, conversations could've gone on a little longer—especially the arguments over Piper's work (and too often she and Tom are just repeating themselves). I'm not asking for another 100 pages, but maybe 20? This is the shortest of the three and it felt like it.

I cannot say enough for both the premise of Roses for the Dead and the resolution of that story. McDonald's take on this idea was fresh enough to make it stand out among other procedurals. Even if it feels impossible to talk about without spoiling just about everything. The pacing is strong, I can't get enough of these characters, and the investigation was well-executed—everything you want in a police procedural.

I'm glad I finally got to reading these books, and encourage crime readers out there to pick them up, too.… (más)

This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader.
---
WHAT'S WHISPERS IN THE DARK ABOUT?
DI Piper is pulled away from her partner Liam's wedding reception to take over at the scene of a murder. A good friend of her DCI is one of the victims. DCI Clive Burston and a drug dealer have been shot and killed. The way it looks, if a gun had been recovered at the scene, she'd have concluded that Burston shot the dealer and then himself. But clearly, that can't be the case.

Then another pair of bodies shows up—it also consists of a member of the same gang as the dealer and someone who has no connection to him—or crime at all.

Just what is going on? And how is she supposed to stop it?

DI ERIKA PIPER
Piper's still dealing with the trauma—physically and psychologically—from the events prior to A Wash of Black—and she's picked up a little more on the psychological side. But she's clearly in a better place than she was when we met her. There's a confidence to her that wasn't there in the last book—you can see it in both her interactions with her colleagues and the way she goes about the investigation. She's not trying to prove that she's ready to work anymore.

She still has work to do—no doubt about that—but she's on the right path, and it's nice to see McDonald showing that. It's some subtle work and well done.

Now, how the events of this novel will set her up for whatever book 3 throws at her, I don't know. I'm looking forward to seeing how she deals with it.

SO, WHAT DID I THINK ABOUT WHISPERS IN THE DARK?
McDonald gives Erika and Liam some strong moments—individually and together—outside the case, and I was taken aback by how invested I was in these characters before the halfway point of their second book! There were some sweet moments, and a couple that got me a little misty (for both "positive" and "negative" reasons)—I was impressed at how efficiently he was at some of those, just two or three sentences that hit the emotions just right. And then there's the scene that made me say things about McDonald that I should probably apologize to him for.

If he's that good with the subplots, of course he's going to nail the main story. This is a classic mystery—the killer, the motive, how the detective figures it out, how the killer comes into contact with the victims—it's all tried and true, and McDonald delivers it well. But how the killer does it? I don't think I've seen that before (eh, maybe something like it—but not as effectively portrayed). It's a very clever take on this story. The personal stories and the way Piper and the others go through the investigation—the ups, downs, and the unexpected—that's what separates these books from the rest.

It occurs to me, that if you removed the names and the personal subplots, and just told me the plot of this novel, I'd think you were describing one of Noelle Holten's DC Maggie Jamieson . The twisty sort of mix of technology, motive, and execution behind the crimes fits in Maggie's world as well as in Erika's. Fans of one should definitely check out the other—although A Wash of Black wouldn't have worked as well as a Maggie Jamieson book, so I'm not saying the two series are in lockstep—just that two of my recent favorites have some overlap.

Top-notch writing—there's a couple of scenes that are so well described I feel like I was in the room with them—a great mystery, and some characters that'll become favorites. Get your hands on this series, reader.… (más)

This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader.
---
WHAT'S A WASH OF BLACK ABOUT?
A year ago, DI Erika Piper was assaulted in the course of her duties, she survived, but it was close. It's her first day back to work, and it's a doozy.

A famous actress has been murdered and her body was essentially left on display. It's a recreation of a very famous scene from a movie she starred in—the same way her character was killed. Well, almost. The film version departed from the novel it was adapted from on a couple of points—this crime scene is loyal to the book. The publicity around this case is going to be huge—as will be the pressure to solve this quickly.

Is this a personal grudge against the actress disguised to throw off the police? Is this a crazed fan paying a gruesome tribute to the actress/movie/novel? Is this someone working off some other twisted purpose hiding it beneath the spectacle?

This killer isn't satisfied with one murder—and soon it appears the killer has Piper herself in their sights.

DI ERIKA PIPER
Piper arrives in this book nearly fully-formed, sure, there's room for development and growth in the books to come—but as a character, she's fully fleshed out. She has a past (that we get a glimpse of), well-established relationships with fellow detectives, her superiors, crime scene investigators, coroner, and so on—as well as a full personal life.

Frequently we get these layers a little at a time with a series like this, and only after a few books, do we get to see the character's entire world (or at least a good deal of it). McDonald doesn't go that route, we could be reading the 4th or 8th book in the series, not the first. I don't mind taking the former route with a character—and I understand why authors might make that choice—but I love it when an author successfully pulls off what McDonald did here.

She might be physically ready to come back to work, but she's not fully ready on the psychological front (it'd be easy to argue she never will be). I don't think she came back too soon, but she has some work to do on that front, and it was great to see a character actually do that work rather than the typical "detective does just enough to get the shrink to sign off on their return to duty."

I particularly enjoyed the relationship Piper has with DS Liam Sutton. They work so well together, and their interactions and rituals bring this part of her world to life. I'm hoping to see more of that in the books to come.

A MISTAKE OR A RED-HERRING?
I don't know about you, but I frequently find myself talking back to books when characters are making mistakes. Boy howdy, did I mutter at Piper a lot about one thing. There's a witness that I (based on my extensive training and experience as a reader of procedurals) figure should've been talked to right away. And Piper and the other detectives ignore them.

Now, was this an oversight on McDonald's part? Should Piper have tracked this person down? Is this a red herring designed to trip up readers like me?

I'm going to assume it's the latter—although it could also be a sign that Piper's a little rusty. Either way, it drove me nuts.

SO, WHAT DID I THINK ABOUT A WASH OF BLACK?
I had such a great time with A Wash of Black. It hit the spot just right—well-executed and satisfying. It's not reinventing the wheel, there's nothing revolutionary about it. It's a solid, confident police procedural that delivers all the twists and complexity that the genre demands—with a good cast of characters, an engaging protagonist, and a compelling killer. You don't need to be flashy or to subvert conventions or anything when you get everything as right as this one does.

I said it above, but it bears repeating—there's no indication that this is the first in the series—or a debut for the novelist. McDonald approaches this with the assurance of an established writer. It shouldn't need to be said, but just to be safe, I will—this is not the same kind of book as his Stonebridge Mysteries, and it takes no time at all to see that. Don't go looking for anything cozy here.

I'm eager to come back for the second, Whispers in the Dark, in a couple of weeks. In the meantime, I heartily recommend this to you.… (más)