NYT rec the second book in this series.

At first this read just way too simple. Not much backstory, no fancy literary devices. And then the people just got to me. Temple and Etha. Carmine. Lottie and Minnie, Dr Hinchie. Poor Florence and Trot. Chester at the Jewel theatre. And the 1935 Oklahoma setting during the depression and the dust bowl was just so vivid. ( )

I enjoyed the first Dust Bowl book. Laurie Loewenstein developed the characters in a refreshing manner. And the terrible dust storm that settled over the town after the rainmaker set off fireworks to poke the rain that does not arrive. So who has killed the rainmaker and why? Is one of the farmers or businessmen responsible for this odious crime? Loewenstein leads the reader to many theories of the who and why, but the final resolution provides a surprise. The journey shows the everyday life of the Oklahoma individuals during a bleak period for framers and businessmen, but also focuses on food and parties and love. ( )

The rainmaker made big promises, but before he could fulfill his boasts, he is brutally murdered in the middle of a dust storm. Suspicion falls falls on Carmine, a young man who works for the Civilian Conservation Corps and who had had a fist fight earlier with the dead man. Sheriff Temple Jennings, relying on circumstantial evidence and an eye witness, arrests him, but Temple’s wife, Etha, believes him to be innocent. It’s a tough time for the residents in the midst of the Dust Bowl years, and even tougher for the sheriff, who is being challenged in the upcoming election. Etha sees something in Carmine that reminds her of her deceased son, and she determined to help free him. The setting and time period are quite interesting, the plot well written, and the characters are very well drawn and developed. I was pulled into the story from the very beginning and my interest only grew as I read on. A sequel, “Funeral Train,” will be available on October 4, 2022, and continues the story of Sheriff Temple Jennings and his wife, Etha. The author does a fantastic job of setting the scene, making readers feel the hopelessness of the people as they face devastating “dusters” time and again. Great historical fiction with the added suspense of murder. Highly recommended. ( )

this is really deftly done. she has written a mystery but with such a good sense of place and character, that it feels like so much more than a mystery. oklahoma in the depression, with the visceral experience of the dust storms (i had no idea they were so dangerous and violent) and what it must be like to try to survive when there is no rain for the crops and no work for the people and no customers for the people running the businesses. it's a really thoughtful and compelling look into what that must have been like.

i'm not sure the historical details all worked (would people really take piano lessons when they were struggling to put food on the table?) but overall it felt like we were in this place. the people felt real, and their daily life felt realistic and not overly tragic or bittersweet. it felt like the way people could live and move through a small town.

i thought the mystery held together really nicely as well. we learned about some of the townsfolk and weren't sure if knowing about them was more about the mystery or more about the character study of the main characters, and this worked really nicely to keep the reader engaged in both of those aspects of the novel.

i don't feel like the time period felt perfect, but i really liked this. ( )

I read this because my wife was reading it for book club. Plus the idea intrigued me–a mystery story set in a piece of history rooted in Americana. I had never heard of it, the author, or the publishing company before. But I thought I could use a break from the robots and aliens.

The thing is, it’s just tedious. The characters are dull as dishwater. There’s no intensity to the mystery. There’re no stakes. It’s as dry as the dust bowl it’s telling about.

The thing about a mystery book is that bad mysteries contain large swaths of text that don’t matter to the plot. In a good mystery, the entire story is the mystery, not side characters or subplots. Knives Out, The Da Vinci Code, The Maltese Falcon, The Silence of the Lambs, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Even the false leads, the red herring, still matter to the plot.

So for example, this book has a suspect. They spend time investigating them, thinking he’s the killer, but then it turns out to be wrong. And the audience knows this all the time. So you feel like you wasted time reading that part. It’s not dramatic irony, it’s page filler. This feels more like a regular book that got labeled “mystery” for marketing purpose. Maybe that’s why I don’t read them — I don’t like plot threads that end at a wall.

In a mystery, all the parts are important. Finding evidence A leads to talking to suspect B who points a finger at witness C who we find out was with D who lied about artifact E which suspect B wants and so on. It should be “buts” and “therefores”, not “and thens”. I don’t mean it has to be a complex web, but “Garfield’s Babes and Bullets” was a more intriguing mystery than this.

This book is for old ladies who just want a comfort read. They don’t want anything surprising or challenging. There’s no diversity in the book–no black people, no immigrants, no one ethnic, no Native Americans, no gays, no Jews. Just loud, white males and one white female (the wife of the investigating sheriff).

Oh, there is one blind guy who runs the theater, so I guess you can check off “disability”. Thing is, he’s an asshole, so it’s not exactly glorious representation. Not to mention he doesn’t figure into the story whatsoever. He’s not even a B-plot, he’s a C-plot. I’m not sure what role he’s meant to play? The struggling entrepreneur during the time of economic hardship?

I would rate it three stars, but my judgment criteria means I wouldn’t bring anything two stars or below to a desert island with me. And I wouldn’t bring this with me — I don’t want to read it again. ( )