Emma Flint (1)Recensioni

I went into this novel thinking that it was a thriller, but it is much more than that. Rather than focussing on the crime or the whodunnit, it concentrates on Ruth Malone, the main suspect.
Ruth's young children are killed during a hot summer night in 1965, and the police quickly believe her to be the killer. The main reason is that she does not behave like a grieving mother should according to public opinion - or like a woman should at all. She drinks, visits bars, has lovers. She is strikingly beautiful and cares for her appearance, turning heads wherever she goes.
Pete Wonicke, a reporter working on his breakthrough, covers the case and soon becomes entangled in the story.

To me, the core of this novel is Ruth's femininity and how men see her. The male gaze, the judgement of the public and her own belief system of how she has to behave, created by her mother when she raised her, weave a net that Ruth can hardly escape and that makes it impossible for her to truly be or even feel herself. When she tries to break free, she uses unhealthy mechanisms that lead to disaster. On the other hand, all the men try to do is to control her power, to break her because they cannot stand her innert strength and her lure.
Like this, the novel paints a picture of society in 1965 that feels like a punch in the gut. Yet, I could not stop reading and would probably have read the book in one sitting if I had had the time. The story and the characters totally engrossed me and I am sure that they will haunt me for some time to come.

The novel was based on a true murder case. Alice Crimmons was convicted for the murder of her children, but the (re)convictions were overturned several times. She was paroled twelve years after the murder and to this day it is not certain what really happened.½

Little Deaths by Emma Flint is a novel based on a real life murder case. It was a difficult read as the murder victims were two young children but at the same time, it was so well written that I couldn’t put it down. Set in the summer of 1965, Ruth Malone, wakes up to find that her two children are missing. After searching the neighbourhood and calling her separated husband to ensure the children are not with him, the police are called. Unfortunately, by mid-day they find the first body and a few days later the second child’s body is discovered. Ruth is a very private person and holds her emotions deep inside herself but unfortunately this made the police feel that she didn’t show enough grief. They take a closer look at her, discovering some empty liquor bottles in her garbage, and love letters from more than one man in her bedroom, with this scanty information about her the main detective decides that she murdered her children. From then on the police only looked at her and didn’t follow any other leads.

A great deal of the story is told through the eyes of Pete Wonicke, a reporter. This is his first big assignment and at first he goes along with the convenient solution that everyone seems to be pointing at. But as he continues with the case, he begins to have serious doubts as to Ruth’s guilt. He discovers that some witnesses are being manipulated, and others seem to be actually lying. The police do arrest her however, and she is put on trial.

This story mirrors the true life case of Alice Crimmons but whereas both Ruth and Alice always maintained their innocence, this fictional account does give us a plausible answer. The author has delivered an excellent story about a woman who was judged guilty due to her lifestyle and her detached manner. Little Deaths is an atmospheric and wrenching read that totally engrossed me.

A fictionalised version on the real life conviction (and release and reconviction and eventual parole) of Alice Crimmins for the murder of her two young children in 1965. There was never any real evidence that Alice was guilty and she was judged and condemned more for her lifestyle and for not behaving like a 'good mother'. Emma Flint follows the facts of the case closely while introducing a creepy reporter who falls for the desirable but detached woman and engineers a sadly all too believable answer to who killed children, when in reality the deaths of the Crimmins' children went unsolved.

For most of the story, and before researching the original murder trial, I was gripped and even tempted to skip to the end and find out if Ruth was actually guilty! She is clearly devastated by the brutal deaths of her children, plummeting into a black hole of grief while trying to numb the pain with sex and alcohol, but Flint keeps the depth of Ruth's feelings and motivations from the reader and makes her appear callous on occasion. The pseudo investigation into the murders is less convincing. Pete the rookie reporter, who switches from dishing the dirt on Ruth to pretending he is on a quest for justice - or, as a fellow reporter wryly observes, 'you're following your dick' - manages to coax lengthy interviews from unlikely witnesses, which fill in a few necessary blanks but don't really move the plot forward. Also, while talking to one of Ruth's lovers, a married cop silenced by the detective leading the investigation, Pete is told that Ruth danced 'like white ribbons in the dark'. I mean, what? I had to laugh at that break in characterisation. The pacing, leaning heavily on Pete's wet dreams about a woman he doesn't really know, slows to a crawl and then suddenly Ruth is in court at the mercy of a last minute witness and Pete's ingenuity. The revelation of who killed the children - which was my first thought but cleverly sidelined by Flint's portrayal of the characters - was a solid if not satisfying ending.

Also, bonus points for a British author writing so convincingly about 1960s New York!

It told a story. It was well written, but it didn't move me. I almost forgot I read "Little Deaths" until I got the reminder in my mailbox. In the end, I didn't care about anyone. 4-stars.

3.5*
I didn't see the twist on this murder/mystery which kept me interested in the story overall. However, by the end of this, I didn't like any of the characters which usually isn't a problem for me. There was little to no character growth for anyone - in fact, I'd make the case that most of the characters deteriorated over time. The middle was slow moving as well. However, I still enjoyed the overall plot of the story and will be looking for other books by Emma Flint.

Mitte der 1960er Jahre lebt die alleinerziehende Ruth Malone mit ihren beiden Kindern Cindy und Frankie in New York. Sie arbeitet abends als Kellnerin in einer Bar, hat wechselnde Männerbekanntschaften und schaut oft zu tief ins Glas. Als eines Nachts beide Kinder spurlos verschwinden und kurz darauf tot aufgefunden werden, ermittelt der zuständige Sergeant Devlin ausschließlich in eine Richtung. Er hält Ruth für die Täterin. Er fühlt sich durch diese unglaublich attraktive, anziehende Frau provoziert und manipuliert Zeugen sowie Beweismaterial. Auch Peter Wonicke, ein junger Journalist verbeißt sich in die Sache. Es ist sein erster großer Fall beim "Herald" und anfangs schreibt Peter alles um es seinem Vorgesetzten recht zu machen. Allmählich forscht er weiter und kommt dahinter, dass Ruth ihre Kinder nicht getötet haben kann. Sie wird tatsächlich verurteilt und landet im Knast. Peters Hartnäckigkeit ist es zu verdanken, dass Ruth schlussendlich frei kommt, aber da ist sie eine gebrochene Frau.Ein spannendes Psychogramm, das auf wahren Begebenheiten beruht. Breit einsetzbar.

In 1965, Ruth Malone is a woman down on her luck. She has two children, Frank Junior and Cindy. One night they go missing. The next day Cindy is found dead and a few weeks later, Frank Junior is also found dead. After many long months, the police finally arrest Ruth. Pete Wonicke, a reporter, follows the case, and takes a great interest in Ruth. The police have focused all of their attention is on Ruth, and make it their mission to arrest her, and did not look at any other possible suspects. The novel is inspired by the Alice Crimmins case. I thought the writing was slow at times but it is a very sad story. I was a bit surprised by the ending.

Hold on to every page as you read this sad story based on a true life case of a Alice Crimmins, a New York Queens neighborhood woman whose two children disappear mysteriously on an incredibly hot, hot summer evening. She had locked them in the bedroom, as she usually did. How then, did they disappear. She knows she did not murder her four year old daughter and her five year old son.

Emma Flint's first novel is a wonderfully written book of fiction based on the Alice Crimmins case in the 1960's. In this book, the woman's name is Ruth Malone, a woman who lives fast and furiously. She found sex and enjoyed it. Unfortunately, she had two little children to raise by herself. And, neighborhood women, police men and society believe that just maybe those kids got in the way of her life style. So maybe, she killed them.

Her former husband, the father of the children sometimes sees the children, sometimes pays support on time, and always, always is incredibly jealous of Ruth. And, of course, society and her neighborhood is quick to judge as well. If a man hangs our in bars and takes a pretty woman home, all is perceived as normal. But, if Ruth, a woman who has a spark about her, who is pretty, wears tight clothing and knows how to entice, is judged severely!

And, when her children are found dead, the little girl Cindy strangled, and her over protective brother Frankie, named after his father Frank, are brutally murdered. And, someone did it. Someone has to pay. And, since the mother is responsible for the children, she is to blame.

Told from the perspective of a unseasoned journalist who is given the case to report by default, originally he too blames her. His initial stories blur the line of reporting facts and rapidly fall into the category of learning toward the sensational because that is what sells papers.

As time goes on though, Pete Wonicke follows her and sees a woman who stubbornly will not allow society to defeat her. As time passes, he believes she is innocent. He attends the trail and knows against all hope that she will be found guilty.

This story is so well written that I did not see the ending coming. As she sits in a jail cell, her punishment is severe. She can no longer dance seductively. She can no longer apply layers of make up. She can no longer tease and strut in the bar rooms. She can no longer have married men follow her home. And worse of all, she can no longer shampoo her beautiful Cln's hair. She can no longer watch Frankie put his tongue out when he is trying to color a page in a book. She is guilty by societal standards of being a "bitch in heat."

But, she knows she didn't do it. Who did? And why?½

Ruth Malone is not the picture of a grieving mother. Her clothes are a little too tight and her makeup is a little too perfect--always. Mere days after her children have vanished, one already found dead, she is in bars, drinking too many drinks and dancing with too many men.

Peter Wonicke, a Midwestern boy struggling to make his name as a reporter in New York City, doesn't believe she is the murderer, despite the lead detective, Sergeant Devlin, insisting that "the bitch" did it. To Pete, the facts just don't point to Ruth, though he's at a loss to come up with an alternate theory that makes sense. Yet an unexplainable attraction to the possible-murderess keeps Pete searching for answers long after he should have stopped.

Ruth doesn't help much in her own defense, either. Between her lies, her alcohol consumption, and the parade of men she has back to her small apartment in Queens, she is nothing like the picture of a mother most of the people of 1965 have in their mind.

Based on the Alice Crimmins case, Little Deaths explores what it means to be a mother, how grieving differs from person to person, and how bias can possibly lead to the wrong person being convicted. Although her conviction was later overturned, Alice Crimmins spent years in jail for the murder of her children--mostly based on how she presented herself rather than verifiable evidence. In this novel, Emma Flint writes Ruth's inner monologue so that the reader can judge whether or not Ruth's reactions are justified. The reader is left to wonder whether her remorse is real until the very end in a conclusion that, though quick, answers questions that still remain a mystery in the real-life case.

Oh, how we rush to judge! In this dark novel, Ruth is accused of murdering her children. But a reporter sticks to the story and continues to defend her. Ruth is not a likeable character which makes it even easier to judge her actions. I loved the ending as it was totally unexpected.

Wow, this book took me by surprise - in a good way. Set in 1960s New York City, the mystery centers around the murder of two children, a murder their mother quickly finds herself accused of. Both the police and the press make a lot of the mother's style of dress, makeup, extramarital affairs, and ambitions - an approach one savvy reporter starts to think might be misleading the police away from the real murder. I'll admit this book kept me guessing to the end and I was surprised by the final reveal. I look forward to more to come from this author!

This is the saddest novel I've read for some time. And the fact I found it so sad makes me appreciate the author's storytelling ability. I found it true to life in that so many of the bystanders had their own agenda and prejudged the main character. Bits about the main detective did seem somewhat inconsistent. He had an axe to grind, the reason for his behavior or many others was left unexplained.. Hoping to see additional works by this first time author. One minor quibble was with the cover selected by the publisher - so much was made of the author being a "strawberry blonde", but the cover features a dark haired woman.

What's It About?
It's 1965 in a tight-knit working-class neighborhood in Queens, New York, and Ruth Malone--a single mother who works long hours as a cocktail waitress--wakes to discover her two small children, Frankie Jr. and Cindy, have gone missing. Later that day, Cindy's body is found in a derelict lot a half mile from her home, strangled. Ten days later, Frankie Jr.'s decomposing body is found. Immediately, all fingers point to Ruth.

As police investigate the murders, the detritus of Ruth's life is exposed. Seen through the eyes of the cops, the empty bourbon bottles and provocative clothing which litter her apartment, the piles of letters from countless men and Ruth's little black book of phone numbers, make her a drunk, a loose woman--and therefore a bad mother. The lead detective, a strict Catholic who believes women belong in the home, leaps to the obvious conclusion: facing divorce and a custody battle, Malone took her children's lives.

What Did I Think?
I always hate it when a book that I'm expecting more from just doesn't produce. I know it's not easy to write a book and get it published so I always feel that I should look for at least one redeeming factor. I just couldn't find it in this one. This very weak entry was plagued from the start by ridiculous characters and unfathomable dialog. If there was a plot it never did raise it's head. I kept waiting for the defendant to be charged but 3/4 of the book was finished before that happened. What were they waiting for? The trial was another disaster going somewhere to happen. This is this authors first novel so maybe they will improve with time. I'm just not sure I will take another chance.

Ruth's two small children go missing from their apartment and are later found murdered. Ruth is the police's only suspect because she cares too much about her appearance, all men are sexually attracted to her, she sleeps around, drinks a lot, she asked her husband for a separation, she worked as a cocktail waitress, and she never cries in public.

I think we were meant to find all this desperately unfair, and of course none of the above makes Ruth a murderer. It does, however, make her hard to root for. She spends most of the sections from her point of view doing her make up and obsessing about body odour or petting her dog. Then there is Pete, the reporter who is (inevitably) sexually attracted to Ruth, but otherwise has no discernible personality and few reporting skills.

The twist at the end was underwhelming. I skimmed from about the 50% mark because the subject matter was alternately upsetting and boring.

I really dislike it when an author spends a huge amount of time developing the story and then deals with the ending in a perfunctory manner, which is the case with this book. The ending left me with a blah feeling and was really quite a let-down.½

All buzz, no bee.

This is the first book I have read off the longlist of the Baileys women’s prize for fiction 2017. The Prize is the UK’s most prestigious award for fiction written by women. If you want to learn more about this prize I highly recommend their website.

Little Deaths takes place in New York (Queen’s) in the sixties. In the beginning of the story we are introduced to Ruth Malone who is in prison. The story then take us into the past and we learn exactly why Ruth is in prison.

We learn that Ruth is separated from her husband Frank, who is threatening to sue for custody of their two children Frankie and Cindy. Ruth is not your definition of mother of the year, she drinks to much, and brings home different men.

Tragedy strikes Ruth when both of her kids goes missing from their apartment. Eventually the police end up finding the kids but both of them are dead. Due to her life style the police automatically assume that its Ruth that had murdered them.

The story is told in two perspectives. One from Ruth, and the other from Peter Wonicke who is a reporter for the local newspaper. At first Peter thinks that Ruth has done it, but then he changes his mind. He then starts to develop a romantic obsession for her as the story progresses.

Before reading this, I heard a lot of negative things about this book. I am glad that I decided to go ahead and give this book a chance. I loved it. It took me about a week to get through this.

I can easily see why this was nominated for the Baileys women prize.

I am not sure why this book has been labeled a thriller? Yes there are some dark aspects in the story, but it doesn’t read as a thriller.

I like how the story is told from two perspectives. At first I was not really thrilled by Pete’s character. I’m still not, but after thinking about I think he was there to shine light on other people’s perspective of Ruth and the situation.

This story was more then just two kids disappearing and the police suspecting that the mother did it. Though this was based on a real life case.

I think this story is all about perceptions and how we see people. And how people see us. Either fairly or unfairly. I think that people have a preconceived notion of how people should act based on their in role in life. Like if your mother, woman, grandmother, father etc. And when people don’t fit in that particular mold then we tend to look negatively at them and judge them. Just like the police and some of Ruth’s neighbors in this story did.

The head detective (Devilin ) even pointed that even if Ruth was innocent it wouldn’t matter because she was not acting like a mother should, which got her kids killed.

There was also an undercurrent of sexism and misogyny throughout the story.

Ruth is vilified because she likes to drink and go out with men. But Frank (Ruth husband) is seen in a sympathetic light. Though he hardly paid his child support, and barely there in helping Ruth rear the children. So much of the responsibility of raising the children was left up to Ruth.

I think that the biggest take away I got from this book is looks can be deceiving.

Not everything is how it appears to be. In the book, Ruth was condemned for not grieving for her children. As you read you can clearly see that this is not true. But we are looking at it from Ruth perspective and not from an outsider who doesn’t know her.

One of things I liked about this book is that at the end Ruth comes to realize that though she didn’t kill her children, she should have done more protect them. Plus, I think she realizes that she doesn’t have to be dependent on a man to protect her. She can do that herself.

I really liked this book, I highly recommend it.

Ruth Malone is a cocktail waitress with two small children. She is recently separated from her husband Frank. Ruth is an attractive woman who loves to have a good time. She dresses the part and enjoys the company of a number of men. However, her life takes a very bad turn when her two children go missing one night and she is accused of murdering them. A reporter covering the story becomes infatuated with her and does all he can to help her. I did not see the end coming, but it was an interesting one!

Little Deaths is Emma Flint's latest novel.

Flint professes that "Since childhood, she has been drawn to true crime stories, developing an encyclopaedic knowledge of real-life murder cases. She is equally fascinated by notorious historical figures and by unorthodox women – past, present and fictional."

Those interests are put to good use in Little Deaths. The novel is a fascinating blend of literary mystery, character study and social commentary.

Set in 1960's blue collar New York. Ruth Malone is a single working mother of two. She works nights as a cocktail waitress - and yes, she exploits her looks and her body for extra tips. And even when not working, she likes to look good. And so what if she unwinds with a drink now and then. Sex is not a taboo word for her either.

Except that one morning she wakes up and her children are missing. Gone. And Ruth's lifestyle, demeanor and attitude all factor into the police's opinion of what happened. The reader knows from the first pages that Ruth is in prison. Flint takes the reader back through the investigation, vilification and conviction of Ruth. Her clothes, her drinking, her carousing, her not behaving 'as she should.'

The glimpses into Ruth's past, mind and thinking are fascinating and go far to explain who Ruth is - and why she wears 'armor.' I was sickened by the police investigation, the bullying of the lead officer, the newspaper's bias, the certainty by most of the neighborhood that she is guilty. One reporter doesn't believe she is guilty though and makes it his mission to clear Ruth's name. While Ruth is not perhaps a likeable character, my sympathies were in her corner.

And as I read, I realized that really, nothing has changed. Social and public judgement is still there, but has changed venue - appearing online everywhere. Thought provoking for sure - what would be your thinking?

Was the ending what I expected? No, not quite. But it absolutely fits. Little Deaths is based on the actual case of Alice Crimmins.

Little Deaths is another of Entertainment Weekly's Most Anticipated Books of 2017.

3.5 Ruth Malone wakes up one morning and finds her two young children gone, their bedroom door hooked from the outside. Did this woman, separated from her husband, get rid of her children? The detective on the case is positive she is guilty. After all there were all those liquor bottles found in her department, most of her neighbors believe she is guilty, her lack of tears is enough proof.

A young woman judged guilty because of her lifestyle, her demeanor, her attention to her own grooming, her visits to bars and the men she brought home. Judged guilty by all, except for a few. We read about this happening all the time, people judged guilty only based on appearances, police determined to get a guilty verdict at all costs. I think that is why this book worked so, well for me, I found it believable, real. Emotionally raw, intense. Well written, for the most part well plotted. A few things bothered me, but for the most part well done.

ARC from publisher.½

This is another of those novels which is an uncomfortable read. What kept me reading? The characters. I wanted to know what really happened. But of course this is fiction and characters don’t always tell the truth, only their version of the truth. ‘Little Deaths’ by Emma Flint is an accomplished debut, as I read I could tell she had got under the skin of her characters.
There is an intriguing set-up, we first hear Ruth’s voice. She is in prison. We don’t know why, but she compares her life now with her life before. When she was a single mum with two small children. As I read, I felt a shiver down my back: where are her children now? Starting the story with Ruth in prison surely gives away the ending, doesn’t it? Not really. This is a nuanced tale of trial by jury in 1960s America [though until the Sixties were mentioned, it seemed to be set in a curiously non-time specific period] where prejudices about women could wrongly influence outcomes, where social pre-conceptions coloured witness statements, and hearsay evidence seemed admissible if the accused was disliked. It is a tale of presumed guilt, and it should make all readers stop and think.
Ruth, separated from her husband Frank, works as a cocktail waitress to support her children. It is a hard life when Frank’s support cheques bounce and the children don’t want to eat the only food she has to feed them. Ruth puts on a persona when she leaves the house, it is her way of coping. She is a proud woman, who doesn’t want to admit her struggles or to ask for help. She is attractive and uses make-up and tight clothes to attract boyfriends who give her cash, cash which helps her to survive. And then one morning when she goes to the children’s bedroom, Cindy and Frank Junior are not there. The police questioning starts, and the make-up, short skirts and lack of friendly neighbours come back to haunt her.
We are told Ruth’s story, first by Ruth herself, and also by Pete Wonicke, a young journalist who reports on the case. As the months go on and no-one is arrested we see Ruth’s anger and helplessness in the face of police who wait to convict her rather than investigate other clues. Meanwhile, Pete becomes obsessed with Ruth and with proving her innocence.
This novel stayed with me for days afterwards. It made me question how quick we are to judge others by what we see on the outside, how easy it is to allow our prejudices to dominate our views on life. Sometimes the guilty-looking person will be guilty. But sometimes they won’t.
You will have to read right to the end to find out if Ruth is guilty or not guilty.
Read more of my book reviews at http://www.sandradanby.com/book-reviews-a-z/

As a murder mystery, Little Deaths is acceptable. The murderer, when finally revealed, is not necessarily a surprise, but Ms. Flint is able to maintain readers’ interest throughout the story by dropping clues that muddy the waters regarding Ruth’s guilt or innocence. Pete’s obsession with Ruth provides an interesting counterstory and adds some depth to what could be a very superficial story.

As a statement about strong women and the issues they face in society, Little Deaths is not just powerful but timely. Perhaps Ms. Flint did not mean for her story to be so timely. Perhaps she did not mean for Ruth’s portrayal and difficulties in life to be the main focus; however given the highly charged gender dynamics occurring in the United States right now, Ruth’s treatment at the hands of her friends and neighbors as well as the police is difficult to ignore and overshadow the murder mystery around which the entire story revolves.

The problem is that Ruth is a strong female who likes sex, who likes her independence, and neither looks or acts like the rest of the women in her neighborhood. The fact that she is a mother of two children only compounds the disconnect. What makes Ruth’s troubles so compelling is the fact that the story occurs in the 1960s and yet female readers today will understand exactly what Ruth faces and the reasons why. Strong women who like sex and their independence are still a threat to certain kinds of men, and there are plenty of females who find them threatening as well. Ruth and Little Deaths is a great reminder that we still have plenty of things that need to change.

In 1965, the two toddlers of Alice and Edmund Crimmins were found dead, and she was later found guilty of their murders. Her experience was Emma Flint’s inspiration for LITTLE DEATHS. Although the book is fiction, many of its details are the same as the real-life story, especially the opinion that Ruth Malone (the fictionalized Alice Crimmins) was convicted on the basis of her looks and her sex life. LITTLE DEATHS could have been a good story.

Ruth is a red-headed cocktail waitress, separated from her husband, Frank. She wears tight skirts and lots of makeup (to cover acne scars), and she sleeps around. So, when her two children disappear, Ruth is immediately suspected of hiding them because she and Frank are battling over their custody. When the children are found dead, she is immediately suspected of murdering them because of her appearance and her morals.

Part of the problem with LITTLE DEATHS is the reporter, Pete. He begins covering the story just like every other reporter, misjudging Ruth. Eventually, though, he decides she is telling the truth, then he becomes attracted to her. His actions are never explained adequately, so he is not understandable.

I guess I could say the same about all the characters in this book. That’s because the whole thing seems rushed, like there isn’t time to explore any of them. This is especially true of the last few pages. The end leaves the reader hanging. Not good.

I won this ARC from Hachette Books through goodreads.com.

Ruth Malone is caught up in the murder of her two children late one night in Queens, New York. The year is 1965 and Ruth is trying hard to provide for her children using her own body. When the children disappear, she is quickly a suspect, but little evidence is found. A newspaper report Pete Wonicke takes an interest in the case and quickly becomes involved in finding answers. The reader is taken on a year's journal into the lives of the characters and finally the court hearing. Readers who remember the 1960's will find the history accurate.
This reviewer found the acknowledgments as interesting as the story. Emma's final thank you probably one of the most honest I have read in a long time and I quote:
And finally, to all the dreadful managers and employers I've had: thank you for making my day job so awful that I rushed to escape into Ruth's world every night and every weekend. You made me determined.

4*