Long live Maigret

I've been disappointed with so many new, highly acclaimed books lately that I find myself turning back to the classics once again. (As usual, curmudgeon that I am). Now I'm working my way back through the Simenon canon and enjoying every minute. I'd almost forgotten how much I loved Maigret! A big, strong, man of few words who can take a bullet and keep on working, never complaining or blaming. For me, that's old school sexy and I'd like to see it come back into style!

The stories are edgy, sometimes raw, and always realistic. Paris is not idealised as it is so often, but shown with all its flaws and very much anchored in that particular postwar time. Simenon knows how to choose just the right detail in his description, saying volumes in a simple but compelling observation. Such simplicity is a great gift, and much appreciated.

In short, you can't go far wrong. The translation is good, the story fast-paced and interesting, and Gareth Armstrong has fantastic pacing, a beautiful voice, and gives us an excellent narration. May you enjoy taking a trip into the old days with the unforgettable, highly original character that is Maigret.

69 people found this helpful

First of the Maigret books--well narrated

Georges Simenon, a Belgian writer in early 20th century, wrote many novels--perhaps most notably the Commissaire Jules Maigret series. Maigret is a detective in the French police, and he seems to find his criminal without using the customary procedural methods, but just following his own instincts.

In this book, the first in the series, Maigret is seeking a criminal who eludes him most cleverly. He seems to appear everywhere, only to be elsewhere instead. It begins with Maigret examining a body in the lavatory of a train, who looks like the man he is chasing, but he finds that Pietr has escaped, which begins his pursuit of him in many cities.

The writing is plain, lacking some of the exciting twists and turns of later detective stories, but fun because Simenon has created a character with a distinct personality (his pipe, his hat, his individualized way of pursuing his adversary). He tends to seek "the crack in the wall," meaning he uses a bit of psychology--waiting until he can observe his criminal in a way that shows the parts the man would not have liked to reveal about himself.

This is a very good translation of this book. And the narration is excellent. Recommend to those who enjoy books from the early era of detective fiction.

47 people found this helpful

Real crime here is the English accent narration

Has Pietr the Latvian turned you off from other books in this genre?

No this genre, but certainly this Audible series as they are all narrated in an English accent

What didn’t you like about Gareth Armstrong’s performance?

Mr Armstrong is a wonderful narrator. But Audible should have chosen someone with a French accent to narrate this French story. This was like listening to Sherlock Holmes with a Spanish accent.

Any additional comments?

Why in the world would Audible take a classic French detective series and have it narrated with an English accent? So much of the atmosphere and locality is completely missed when the characters of a French detective novel speak with English accents (except, oddly enough, the Latvian).

40 people found this helpful

How Georges wrote his stories

Georges had a very structured approach in writing his stories, adhering to a formula in writing much of his work. Living on a houseboat, he might research his story over a long, if fragmented duration. When ready to start the story, he might type the tale sitting outside (presumably weather allowing) on his boat. The writing of the novel would occur over a roughly two week period, typing each morning three hours from 7 to 10 o'clock. Each day, the work would thus advance maybe a chapter a day, with the conclusion and plot structure not determined until actual composition.

20 people found this helpful

I know this is a classic, but I just don't get it

Millions love Inspector Maigret, so when I was browsing for something to listen to, I thought: this must be a sure bet. Instead, I ended up with possibly the most boring book I have encountered in years. The plot was completely uninteresting, involving characters I could not care about. Most of the book involved descriptions of Maigret getting wet: by being out in the rain, or walking in shallow water on a beach - uncomfortable for him no doubt, but not really that interesting for me. I did listen to the end but only because: I was on a trip and downloading a new book was difficult, and the narrator was terrific. Perfect voice for the genre and he really worked hard, though ultimately in vain, to make the story interesting.

8 people found this helpful

Wow. Wow wow wow wow wow wow wow. Wow.

I am grateful that I never watched any of the myriad film or TV versions of Maigret, thereby avoiding preconceived notions, actors’ interpretations, or secondhand imagery. This is a stunning book, compact and forceful, from the tightly condensed plot to the prose that drives that plot forward. And Gareth Armstrong’s performance does both full justice. The best news? Audible has 63 more, all with Mr. Armstrong at the mic.

6 people found this helpful

Lost in the translation

What did you like best about Pietr the Latvian? What did you like least?

I listened to the whole book. Nice performance. But the plot was hard to follow and I never understood or really cared about any of the characters. There was a nice twist at the end that tied up a lot of loose ends but it wasn’t enough for me to want to read another of his books.

4 people found this helpful

Very Offensive

If you like a macho detective, hysterical women, and Jews portrayed as stinky and smelly, this author is for you. And no, I don't consider the bygone era a valid excuse.

2 people found this helpful

Middle Brow Procedural Shows Its Age

Any additional comments?

Reading this novella is like watching a Hitchcock film. You can see a lot of the skill it took to make it, but you can also see – a little sadly in my case – how dated its narrative technology is.

In many respects, this is the dawn of the police procedural. We get to see Inspector Maigret as he sets out, not to solve a crime, but to prove the title character is guilty. We know the formula today, and it’s often done well in television and film, but it’s new here. There’s some historical interest in seeing Simenon unfold (presumably for the first time anywhere) the possibilities of the procedural. For instance, we get the occasional scene from the antagonist’s perspective. And there are striking moments when discarded aspects of life come into significant play: such as when Maigret relies of a call to a hotel switchboard of the sort that no longer exists.

But, truth be told, this feels a lot longer than it is. Just as Hitchcock “builds suspense” by showing us certain shots longer than we expect, the method feels unsuited for a 21st century reader. My take on Hitchcock has long been that his mastery in the 1950s consisted of waiting just a beat too long, of making his viewers hold their breaths for an instant before giving them what they expected or shocking them with what they feared. Hitchcock doesn’t work for most of today’s viewers because, with our shortened attention spans, we’re waiting what feels like a half dozen beats too long. The rhythm is off, so out of sync with our expectations that there’s less suspense than what-are-you-waiting-for irritation.

Simenon is not about suspense, but a good part of this one is about watch-me-show-you-how-it’s-done. We get, for instance, a quick refresher about the fact of “hit men,” professional killers hired by organized crime. That may have felt like esoteric information when this came out; now it feels condescending.

I suspect (on the basis of his reputation) that Simenon got better the farther he went with these. As this one unfolds, however, the plot gets more and more contrived. Our title character is two people, then he’s one person playing his identical twin brother. For a time he’s a heartless killer and international thief, and then he’s a weary ex-patriate who no longer wants to hurt anyone. I confess I got lost in the final unraveling, but I confess as well that I had stopped caring.

There are elements here worth paying real attention to (probably more attention than I paid), and I may give a later Maigret another shot. Still, this feels as “middle-brow” as Hitchcock has come to feel for me: a kind of art that, however impressive it was in its day, looks more and more like a sullied compromise between what the cutting edge was doing and what the uncritical market wanted.

This is probably a three-star book given its historical significance and the fact that it is, all these years later, a model of efficient story-telling. Still, I have to ding it another star for its casual, unembarrassed anti-Semitism. That may add to the historical quality, but it’s a downer to read all the same.

2 people found this helpful

Great Mystery!

Great mystery! Truly inspired narration plus a great story makes this a fantastic listen! Can't wait to download the next in series!

2 people found this helpful