A Spectacle of Corruption (Benjamin Weaver Series #2)

A Spectacle of Corruption (Benjamin Weaver Series #2)

by David Liss
A Spectacle of Corruption (Benjamin Weaver Series #2)

A Spectacle of Corruption (Benjamin Weaver Series #2)

by David Liss

eBook

$9.99 

Available on Compatible NOOK Devices and the free NOOK Apps.
WANT A NOOK?  Explore Now

Related collections and offers


Overview

Benjamin Weaver, the quick-witted pugilist turned private investigator, returns in David Liss’s sequel to the Edgar Award–winning novel, A Conspiracy of Paper.

“[A] wonderful book . . . every bit as good as [Liss’s] remarkable debut . . . easily one of the year’s best.”—The Boston Globe

Moments after his conviction for a murder he did not commit, at a trial presided over by a judge determined to find him guilty, Benjamin Weaver is accosted by a stranger who cunningly slips a lockpick and a file into his hands. In an instant he understands two things: Someone wants him to hang—and another equally mysterious agent is determined to see him free. After a daring escape from eighteenth-century London’s most notorious prison, Weaver must face another challenge: to prove himself innocent when the corrupt courts have shown they care nothing for justice. Unable to show his face in public, Weaver pursues his inquiry disguised as a wealthy merchant seeking to involve himself in the contentious world of politics. Desperately navigating a labyrinth of schemers, crime lords, assassins, and spies, Weaver learns that in an election year, little is what it seems and the truth comes at a staggeringly high cost.

Praise for A Spectacle of Corruption

“[A] rousing sequel of historical, intellectual suspense. ”San Antonio Express-News 

“Liss is a superb writer who evokes the squalor of London with Hogarthian gusto.”People

“In Benjamin Weaver, Mr. Liss has created a multifaceted character and a wonderful narrator.”The New York Sun

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9781588362421
Publisher: Random House Publishing Group
Publication date: 03/16/2004
Series: Benjamin Weaver Series , #2
Sold by: Random House
Format: eBook
Pages: 416
Sales rank: 385,219
File size: 724 KB

About the Author

About The Author
DAVID LISS is the author of The Coffee Trader and A Conspiracy of Paper, winner of the 2000 Edgar Award for Best First Novel. He lives in San Antonio with his wife and daughter, and can be reached via his website,www.davidliss.com.

Hometown:

San Antonio, Texas

Date of Birth:

March 16, 1966

Place of Birth:

Englewood, New Jersey

Education:

B.S., M.A., M.Phil.

Read an Excerpt

Chapter 1

Since the publication of the first volume of my memoirs, I have found myself the subject of more notoriety than I had ever known or might have anticipated. I cannot register a complaint or a lament, for any man who chooses to place himself in public sight has no reason to regret such attentions. Rather, he must be grateful if the public chooses to cast its fickle gaze in his direction, a truth to which the countless volumes languishing in the scribbler’s perdition of obscurity can testify.

I will be frank and say that I have been gratified by the warmth with which readers responded to the accounts of my early years, yet I have been surprised too—surprised by people who read a few lines of my thoughts and consider themselves near friends, free to speak their minds to me. And while I shall not find fault with someone who has read my words so closely that he wishes to makes observations on them, I confess I have been confounded by the number of people who believe they may comment with impunity on any aspect of my life without a moment’s regard to custom or propriety.

Some months after publishing my little volume I sat at a supper gathering, speaking of a particularly noxious criminal I intended to bring to justice. A young spark, on whom I had never before set eyes, turned to me and said that this fellow had better be careful, lest he meet the same end as Walter Yate. Here he simpered, as though he and I shared a secret.

My amazement was such that I did not say a word. I had not thought about Walter Yate in some time, and I had no idea that his name had retained any currency after so many years. But I was to discover that, while I had not contemplated this poor fellow, others had. Not a fortnight later another man, also a stranger, commented on a difficulty I faced by saying I should manage that affair in the same fashion that I had managed my business with Walter Yate. He said the name with a sly nod and a wink, as though, because he had uttered this shibboleth, he and I were now jolly co-conspirators.

It does not offend me that these men chose to reference incidents from my past. It does, however, perplex me that they should feel at liberty to speak of something they do not understand. I cannot fully express my bewilderment that such people, believing what they do about this incident, should mention it to me at all, let alone with more than a dash of good cheer. Does one go to a raree show and make light with the tigers regarding their fangs?

I have therefore decided that I must pen another volume of memoirs, if for no other reason than to disabuse the world of its ideas concerning this chapter of my history. I wish no more to hear the name Walter Yate spoken in naughty and secretive tones. This man, to the best of my knowledge, did nothing to deserve becoming the subject of a private titter. Therefore, I shall say now, truthfully and definitively, that I did not act violently upon Mr. Yate—let alone with the most definitive violence—something which, I have discovered, the world generally believes. Further, if I may disabuse the public of another misconception, I did not escape the most terrible of punishments for his murder by calling upon the influence of friends in the government. Neither of those tales is true. I had never known of these rumors because no one had ever spoken them to me before. But now, having published a few words of my life, I am every man’s friend. Let me then do the friendly service of revealing the facts about the incident, if for no other reason than that it might be spoken of no more.





Walter Yate died, beaten in the head with an iron bar, only six days before the meeting of the King’s Bench, so I had mercifully little time after my arrest to reflect on my condition while awaiting trial. I will be honest: I might have put that time to better use, but not once did I believe, truly believe, that I would be convicted for a crime I had not committed—the murder of a man of whom I had scarcely heard before his death. I ought to have believed it, but I did not.

So great was my confidence that I often found myself hardly even listening to the words spoken at my own trial. Instead, I looked out at the mob packed into the open-air courtroom. It rained a fine mist that day, and there was a considerable chill in the February air, but the crowds came anyway, crammed onto the rough and splintering benches, hunched against the wet, to watch the proceedings, which had attracted some attention in the newspapers. The spectators sat eating their oranges and apples and lit- tle mutton pastries, smoking their pipes and taking snuff. They pissed in pots in the corners and threw their oyster shells at the feet of the jury. They murmured and cheered and shook their heads as though it were all an enormous puppet show staged for their amusement.

I suppose I might have been pleased to be the subject of such a broad public curiosity, but I found no gratification in notoriety. Not when she was not there, the woman I most wanted to look upon in my time of sorrows. If I were to be convicted, I thought (only in the most romantical way, since I no more anticipated a conviction than that I should be elected Lord Mayor), I should only want her to come and cry at my feet, tell me of her regrets. I wanted her teary kisses on my face. I wanted her hands, raw and coarse with wringing, to take mine as she begged my forgiveness and pleaded to hear my vows of love repeated a hundred times. These were, I knew, mere fantasies of an overwrought imagination. She would not come to my trial, and she would not come to visit me before my fanciful execution. She could not.

My cousin’s widow, Miriam, whom I had sought to marry, had wedded herself six months before to a man named Griffin Melbury, who at the moment of my trial busied himself with preparations for standing as the Tory candidate in the election soon to commence in Westminster. Now a convert to the Church of England and the wife of a man who hoped to rise as a prominent opposition politician, Miriam Melbury could ill afford to attend the trial of a Jewish ruffian-for-hire, one to whom she was no longer attached by the bonds of kinship. Kneeling at my feet or covering my face with tear-wet kisses was hardly the sort of behavior to which she was inclined under any circumstances. It would surely not happen now that she had given herself to another man.

Thus, in my hour of crisis, I dwelled less on the possibility of impending doom than I did on Miriam. I blamed her, as though she could be held accountable for this absurd trial—after all, had she married me, I might have abandoned thieftaking and would not have brought myself into the circumstances that had led to this disaster. I blamed myself for not pursuing her more vigorously—though three marriage proposals ought to meet any man’s definition of vigor.

So, while the lawyer for the Crown attempted to convince the jury to convict me, I thought of Miriam. And, because even as I dwell with longing and melancholy I remain a man, I also thought about the woman with yellow hair.

It must be seen as no surprise that my mind wandered to other women. In the half year since Miriam had married, I had distracted myself—not with the intent of forgetting, you must understand, but with the aim of making my sense of loss more exquisite—largely by indulging in vices, and those vices consisted principally of women and drink. I regretted that I was not of a gambling disposition, for most men I knew found that vice to be as distracting as the two I favored, if not more so. But in the past, having paid the high price of money lost at game, I could not quite grasp the entertainment in viewing a pair of greedy hands collecting a pile of silver that had once been my own.

Drink and women: Those were vices on which I could depend. Neither needed to be of particularly fine quality; I was of no temper to be overly choosy. Yet, here was a woman, sitting at the edge of one of the benches, who absorbed my attention as nearly as anything could in those dark times. She had pale yellow hair and eyes the color of the sun itself. She was not beautiful, but she was pretty and had a kind of pert demeanor, with her pointy nose and sharp chin. Though no great lady, she dressed like a woman of the middling ranks, neatly, but without flair or much of a nod to fashion. Rather, she let nature do what her tailor could not, and exposed to the world in a deeply cut bodice the expanse of a dazzling bosom. There was, in short, nothing that would have kept me from finding her a delight in an alehouse or tavern, but no particular reason why she should command my attention while I sat on trial for my life.

Except that she did not once take her eyes from me. Not for a moment.

Others looked at me, of course—my uncle and aunt with pity and perhaps with admonition, my friends with fear, my enemies with glee, strangers with unpitying curiosity—but this woman fixed on me a desperate, hungry gaze. When our eyes locked, she neither smiled nor frowned but only met my look as though we had shared a lifetime together and no word need be spoken between us. Anyone observing would have thought us married or sweethearts, but I had never to my recollection—none the best during those six months of hearty drinking—seen her before. The enigma of her gaze monopolized my thoughts far more than the enigma of how I came to stand trial for the death of a dockworker I’d never heard of two days before my arrest.

Reading Group Guide

Discussion Questions from the Publisher
1.The justice system in the 18th century seems outrageously unjust. No defense attorneys, judges who make a living through bribes, and shopkeepers who sell evidence. What do you think will shock readers three hundred years from now about our justice system?

2. Benjamin Weaver seems to be a mix of brutality and compassionate, the practical and idealistic. What do you think of his sense of justice? What do his inconsistencies tell you about his character?

3. Eighteenth century parliamentary elections had expensive campaigns, bribes, and thugs. They attracted the power-hungry and the greedy, liars and thieves. Is there something inherent about politics that draws these types of people to it? Is there anything that can be changed about how campaigns are run that would minimize corruption?

4. In one fell swoop, Miriam completely reinvented herself. She converted, married a man from an utterly different background, and is even called by a different first name. Do you think it is possible to be happy with so many drastic life changes? Does turning your back on your heritage have more do with hating your past than loving your future? Or is this simply the fulfillment of a life-long wish to live the life you believe you were meant to live and not the one you were born to? Is this ability to reinvent yourself something with which people in earlier times might have been more comfortable?

5. When Weaver dresses as Mathew Evens or as a footman he discovers a whole new world. Is it as easy in today's world to change your clothes and dabble in a different world? Can you still walk a mile in someone else's shoes? Are social classes today as obvious or permanent?

6. There are several incidents of extreme cruelty to animals in the novel. Dogmill, the most brutal villain in the novel clearly relishes goose pulls, cock fights, and was apparently responsible for killing Mendes beloved dog. Is there a connection between cruelty to animals and cruelty to humans? Is Mendes humanized by his love for his pets? Or is his conduct towards his fellow man worse when juxtaposed against his ability to display compassion and kindness to animals?

7. Grace Dogmill and Miriam Melbury are very different women, yet they both refuse to settle into the roles that society would like to place them in. Are they equally justified in not wanting to remain where they have been pigeonholed? Who do you think is more sympathetic? Who is stronger?

8.Weaver keeps expecting to be betrayed by Jonathan Wild, and is constantly surprised when that doesn't happen. Is Wild as untrustworthy as Weaver thinks he is? Does the novel suggest that there is honor among thieves?

9. Is Griffin Melbury a good man with a gambling habit and a quick temper or is he a bad man with a deceivingly pleasant personality? Do you think that Weaver is objective enough to tell the difference? Is Miriam?

10. What do you think of the ending? What does Weaver suggest about his role in what happens to Melbury, and why does he depend so much on hint and innuendo?

Foreword

1. The justice system in the eighteenth century seems outrageously
unjust. No defense attorneys, judges who make a living
through bribes, and shopkeepers who sell evidence. What do you
think will shock readers three hundred years from now about our
justice system?

2. Benjamin Weaver seems to be a mix of brutality and compassion,
the practical and the idealistic. What do you think of his
sense of justice? Do you agree with the decisions he makes of
whom to punish and whom to let go? What do his inconsistencies
tell you about his character?

3. Eighteenth-century parliamentary elections had expensive campaigns,
bribes, and thugs. They attracted the power-hungry and
the greedy, liars and thieves. Is there something inherent about
politics that draws these types of people to it? Is there anything
that can be changed about how campaigns are run that would
minimize corruption?

4. In one fell swoop, Miriam completely reinvented herself. She
converted, married a man from an utterly different background,
and is even called by a different first name. Do you think it is possible
to be happy with so many drastic life changes? Does turning
your back on your heritage have more to do with hating your past
than loving your future? Or is this simply the fulfillment of a lifelong
wish to live the life you believe you were meant to live and
not the one you were born into? Is this ability to reinvent yourself
something with which people in earlier times might have been
more comfortable?

5. When Weaver dresses as Matthew Evans or as a footman he discovers
a whole new world. Is it as easy in today’s worldto change
your clothes and dabble in a different world? Can you still walk a
mile in someone else’s shoes? Are social classes today as obvious or
permanent?

6. Weaver keeps expecting to be betrayed by Jonathan Wild, and
is constantly surprised when that doesn’t happen. Is Wild as untrustworthy
as Weaver thinks he is? Does the novel suggest that
there is honor among thieves?

7. There are several incidents of extreme cruelty to animals in the
novel. Dogmill, the most brutal villain, clearly relishes goose pulls
and cockfights, and was apparently responsible for killing Mendes’s
beloved dog. Is there a connection between cruelty to animals and
cruelty to humans? Is Mendes humanized by his love for his pets?
Or is his conduct toward his fellow man worse when juxtaposed
with his ability to display compassion and kindness to animals?

8. Grace Dogmill and Miriam Melbury are very different women,
yet they both refuse to settle into the roles that society would like
to place them in. Are they equally justified in not wanting to remain
where they have been pigeonholed? Who do you think is
more sympathetic? Who is stronger?

9. Is Griffin Melbury a good man with a gambling habit and a
quick temper or is he a bad man with a deceivingly pleasant personality?
Do you think that Weaver is objective enough to tell the
difference? Is Miriam?

10. What do you think of the ending? What does Weaver suggest
about his role in what happens to Melbury, and why does he depend
so much on hint and innuendo?

From the B&N Reads Blog

Customer Reviews