Review: The Delicate Storm

The Delicate Storm (John Cardinal and Lise DeLorme #2), Giles Blunt. London: HarperCollins, 2004.

Summary: A gruesome murder in the woods is soon followed by another, leading to an international investigation, a terrorist plot from the ’70’s, and a shrewd murderer on the loose, climaxed by an epic ice storm.

The call comes for John Cardinal when a local living near the woods reports a gruesome discovery. His dog has retrieved a severed human arm. The investigators retrieve more parts traced back to a cabin where the body was hacked apart to be eaten by bears. It’s an American scouting out ice fishing possibilities. The Mounties, are called in, including a former nemesis of Cardinal’s.

Meanwhile, Cardinal’s father’s heart condition is worsening. The one bright spot is a young woman doctor, Winter Cates, recently arrived and quickly embraced for her ability to connect with patients, including Cardinal’s father. Then she goes missing. Soon her naked body is found in the woods. That case goes to DeLorme, but they soon begin to wonder if the murders are connected. They wonder more when they discover a fifteen year old case of a woman murdered under similar circumstances, strangled with signs that made it look like she had been raped.

The only evidence they have is that Cates’ murderer apparently sought her out to treat a gunshot wound, leaving signs of type AB blood in her office, but nothing else. Then Cardinal goes to New York where the first murder victim lived to learn that the supposed victim is very much alive and that the real victim is a former CIA agent using his identity. But what was he doing in Canada? And why are Canadian Security Intelligence Services making it hard to track down the story behind this man?

While this is all going on, Cardinal is getting veiled death threats from a criminal he put away, due to be released from prison soon. They are coming to his home. A buried secret connected to the case is putting his family in jeopardy.

Further clues from the case of the murdered CIA agent lead to Montreal and a terrorist plot that resulted in the death of a hostage in the 1970’s and a mysterious figure, Yves Grenelle, who disappeared after the death. Could Grenelle be the killer who has left three bodies in the forests of Algonquin Bay, perhaps under another identity? Who is he and why Algonquin Bay?

An artist skilled in taking images and “aging” them gives DeLorme and Cardinal a clue to the identity of the killer, but there is not enough evidence to make an arrest, let alone convict, leading Cardinal to make a risky move to confront the suspected murderer amid a hundred year ice storm.

DeLorme and Cardinal work well while respecting boundaries. But they clearly notice each other–she appreciating Cardinal’s maturity and integrity, he noticing her attractiveness. Then they are thrown together, sharing a hotel room but in separate beds, when DeLorme’s room is flooded and none are available. Nothing happens, except in Cardinal’s mind, as he struggled to sleep. It’s awkward, and we’re left wondering how the two will work it out. At least Cardinal doesn’t keep it secret from his wife.

The book is one you don’t want to put down. There are threads left dangling for future books in the series. And having lived through ice storms with power outages, and frigid weather, Blunt captures the creeping dread one has in these kind of storms and the deeper frustration and ominous foreboding when one knows who a killer is but cannot find the way to prove it.

Review: Forty Words for Sorrow

Forty Words for Sorrow (John Cardinal and Lise DeLorme Mystery #1), Giles Blunt. New York: Berkley Books, 2000.

Summary: When a missing teenager’s body is found in a mineshaft, John Cardinal is re-assigned to a case he’d been pulled off of and is joined by Lise DeLorme, who is also investigating him for corruption. Meanwhile, facts point to a serial killer when another body turns up and another missing youth is traced to their community.

John Cardinal had been investigating the disappearance of a girl, Katie Pine, that he’d linked to another missing youth. When the search threatened to absorb most of the Algonquin Bay police department resources, he was taken off the case. No other leads developed until now. Then a body was found, frozen in ice in an abandoned mine shaft. and identified as Katie Pine. He is put back on the case. We learn the depths of how much Cardinal cares about his work, and about the victims of crime in this interior monologue after he tells Katie’s widowed mother that her body has been found:

“Eskimos, it is said, have forty different words for snow. Never mind about snow, Cardinal mused, what people really need is forty words for sorrow. Grief. Heartbreak. Desolation. There were not enough for this childless mother in her empty house.”

Blunt, p. 37

Cardinal has been assigned a partner from Special Investigations, Lise DeLorme. Sharp, observant, and strikingly attractive, it turns out she is investigating Cardinal on the quiet. After several frustrated attempts to bust a major credit card fraud operation, it becomes apparent someone is tipping off the suspect, a man by the name of Corbett. Cardinal suspects the investigation though DeLorme denies it. And there is something suspicious about this apparently diligent, caring cop. His wife is in an expensive psychiatric facility and he has a daughter in an art program at Yale. And all this on a cop’s salary. Yet as DeLorme comes to work with him, it seems out of character.

Their investigation leads them to see a link with one and possibly two other missing youth. They find another body. Then the girlfriend of another young man shows up. He had been headed to Algonquin Bay and had failed to stay in touch. It looks like they are hunting for a serial killer. Will they find the killer before there is another victim? They may have some time, but not a lot–it appears that the killer likes to play with the victims before administering slow, torturous deaths.

Unbeknownst to Cardinal and DeLorme, they are looking for two people, a twisted young man who already has a record as a child for killing animals and a needy, unattractive young woman who has been taken in thrall with both the man and his cult-like fascination with torture and murder. As DeLorme and Cardinal investigate, tension rachets up as we follow the killers in their plans to “party” with Keith London, the missing young man. The plot moves back and forth between the killers and the detectives, with the investigation DeLorme is pursuing on Cardinal in the background and Cardinal’s own troubled conscience raising further apprehensions.

Blunt plots this masterfully, developing the relationship between Cardinal and DeLorme from initial distrust to growing admiration that stays professional. Cardinal is faithful to his wife–even when she thinks herself worthless in her illness. We find ourselves rooting for them, not only to catch the killer(s), but for Cardinal to be cleared and for them to be able to trust each other. Blunt combines a fascinating police procedural with characters we care about and a psycho-thriller with truly evil killers and a young man with a girlfriend who loves him who we desperately want to survive.

[BTW, thanks BT for the gift of a great read!]

I’ve No Plans to Move to Canada

Flag_of_Canada.svgThis is not a statement about Canada, which I’ve always loved visiting. I have good friends who make their home there, and they love their country as much or more than I love mine. No anti-Canada rant here. No rant at all really.

Rather, it is a response to the number of posts I’ve seen recently saying, “if ‘______’ is elected president, I’m moving to Canada!” Depending on your politics, you might be inclined to say this for a various of the candidates currently on offer.

Now I suspect that some of this is overstated hyperbole, or just a form of venting frustration with what seems a bizarre political season to many. But I also wonder if it reveals some unsettling, at least to me, suppositions about the political order.

It seems that the assumption behind statements like the one above is that if such and such is elected the nation is going to go to hell in a hand-basket. Now I will totally agree that it is not an inconsequential thing to elect a president, or any other political office holder. I grew up in a city that was more or less a one party town and often elected those beholden to organized crime. And I live in a city, that while far from perfect, has enjoyed several generations of forward looking leadership.

What troubles me in the sentiment is that I feel it puts too much stock in a single area of our public life–the political. It seems that our discourse tends to turn the politicians we like into saviors, and those we don’t into demons. It’s kind of striking to me that believers and atheists both have something in common in this discourse–they talk about politicians as supernatural, or at least as super-human figures. At very least, it seems that something is out of proportion here. A few observations:

  • Under our system, political leaders derive their power from the governed. Even with the problems of campaign finance, we are still the people who put these people in office, or not.
  • At every level, we operate in a system that balances power between executive, legislative, and judicial functions. It’s inefficient, but it does provide mechanisms to check the excesses of a person or group.
  • I also wonder if we put too much stock in these people, perhaps in part because of the way the 24/7 news cycle distorts our view of reality. So many others are pursuing the common good, whether in starting companies, serving communities, creating works of beauty, and, of vital importance, raising the next generation.
  • One of the things this points to is that what makes a country good are not simply our leaders, but an engaged citizenry that is thinking not only of our own good but the common good. This raises the all-important issue of our character as a people, as David Brooks has so helpfully done on his “Road to Character” website.

This is why I’m not planning to move to Canada, or elsewhere. There is so much I love about the city, state, and nation I live in. I will not give away my own responsibility for fostering what is best about these to the political system. Nor will I lodge my hope in any political leader, nor allow their failings to dissuade me from seeking the common good of “the land that I love.”

This post actually began in church this past Sunday. We were singing these lyrics by Chris Tomlin:

You’re the God of this city
You’re the King of these people
You’re the Lord of this nation

What is disturbing to me is that many of those I’ve heard voicing sentiments about going to Canada are people of faith, and I suspect many have sung this song at some point. What I wonder is, do they believe God will still be sovereign over our nation if the person they disdain is elected? Some may chide me for making too much of a “careless” statement. But I wonder about our “care” for our city, state, and nation if we would talk about leaving it if someone we disapprove of is elected. What are we saying about our faith in God and our love for our place?

Something to think about. . .