I decided to read this because it's one of the first "locked room" mysteries. Published in the early 1900s, it was written in France and challenges the reader to solve a seemingly impossible crime.
We're following the detective skills of Joseph Rouletabille. He's a reporter by trade, but he believes that he can solve the attack of a young woman. He keeps his methods secret for most of the book, giving out little nuggets here and there. I didn't have it figured out, and I had to pay close attention to the reveal so I wouldn't miss any answers.
A couple things bothered me about this book. First was the usage of the word "murderer." For the entire book, they referred to the attacker as a murderer. The victim was NOT DEAD. If I put the book down for any length of time, when I came back to it, I would read "murderer" and wonder if the victim had died and I didn't remember. I got used to it after a while, but the real issue, the one I still don't understand, is the resolution of the book.
SPOILER:
The villain gets away. Why? BECAUSE ROLETABILLE LETS HIM GO! And he doesn't just allow the villain to escape, he alerts the person he's going to expose them. Does Rouletabille have to answer for this? NOPE. Instead he tells the judge, "...my business is not to arrest people." and "I gave _____ time to catch the 4:17 train to Paris, where he would know how to hide himself, and leave no traces." Seriously?! That honestly ruined the entire story for me. There was no reason to let the villain escape, and he really is a murderer.
Yes it's fiction, and I shouldn't be annoyed. But I am. I hated almost all the characters by the end of the book. The crime itself was interesting, but the rest of it was a bummer. HUGE PASS.
