When I first heard about this book, its premise reminded me of Pamela Branch’s Murder Every Monday (1954), with its “school for murderers” concept, although I will say Holmes’ novel takes the plot in a very different direction. Murder Your Employer is arguably an inverted mystery, as we know who the would-be killers are, we know who their victims will be and the main focus in the narrative is on these prospective murderers honing their method of killing. With such a premise, some tricky manoeuvring is required to ensure the reader is not repulsed nor bored by the plot and characters alike. However, the history of the genre shows that this is possible to achieve, such as in the mysteries of Richard Hull for example. The choice of murder victims is important in this regard, as well as the final outcomes for the killers themselves. Dark humour, reversals of fortunes and last page twists are all crucial strategies for making such a story work. Holmes certainly leans into the unlikeable victim trope, identifying a group of people readers are more likely to feel less fond of e.g. employers, and in the story the narrator opines that: ‘no modern pestilence is more pernicious in our overview than the Sadistic Boss.’
Synopsis
‘Who hasn’t wondered what the world would be like if a person who is the object of your affliction ceased to exist? At the McMasters Conservatory, future “deletists” (never murderers) learn the consummate execution of the homicidal arts. To this sumptuous campus come three memorable classmates: self-effacing Cliff Iverson, troubled Gemma Lindley, and Hollywood diva Doria Maye – all of whom have suffered menacing employers who richly deserve a deadly denouement. Under the tutelage of Dean Harbiner Harrow and the fascinating faculty of McMasters’ hall of poison ivy, they hone their craft, each hoping to finesse a perfectly mastered murder.’
Overall Thoughts
Before the story commences, the author builds up the reality of a world in which a college devoted to solely teaching would-be murderers exists, by including a glossary called ‘Terms of the Applied Arts’. This section provides definitions to some of the words used by the college. For example, deletion is:
‘Our preferred term for “murder [vulg.], although some younger staff have lately adopted “omission” as less austere. Note that while “to delete” is our verb of choice, we do not use “to omit” as an alternative.’
Another one is executive, which is their:
‘Preferred term for the individual whose deletion […] is due to your initiative. We believe the term “victim” is far too subjective and may not fairly take into account your history and motivation. Although scholars may occasionally use the word for the sake of clarity in a lecture or textbook (such as this), we discourage it in conversation, for if one’s conversation has been recorded, the word “executive” sounds infinitely preferable to “victim” when played back in a court of law.’
The story also comes with a foreword by Dean Harbiner Harrow, who directly addresses the reader:
‘So you’ve decided to commit a murder. Congratulations. Simply by purchasing this volume, you’ve already taken the all-important first step toward a successful homicide of which you can be proud, one that would gain you the admiration of your peers, were they ever to learn of it. This book will see to it that they don’t.’
This foreword recontextualises the story as three case studies of students who attended that college and the results that happened as a consequence. It is not quite a textbook vibe, but the premise is reinforced by the idea that the narrative that follows, is one you’re supposed to be taking notes from. It should be said that this shift in style does not make it less readable, as the structure of the novel is a combination of sections narrated by Dean Harrow and others written by Cliff Iverson in his diary (which he is required to write as part of his course). This prevents the narrative from becoming disjointed or bitty. Furthermore, the foreword also mentions that: ‘Not all those figuring in these narratives met with success, and under no circumstances should you embrace any approach without first learning the outcomes of their missteps.’ I liked this aspect as it creates a bit of a puzzle and some tension for the reader as they have to see if they can predict who will succeed and who won’t.
From what I can tell this book is set in the post-WW2 period, around the 1950s. This is not immediately obvious, and I think it something which could have been more clearly and promptly flagged up. I can appreciate why the novel is set in the past, as it means there is less information available on the art of murdering someone (as there’s no internet) and the college syllabus would also not have to contend with modern technology which makes murder harder to get away with.
To avoid being utterly morally repellent the college’s philosophy on murder taps into the idea of justifiable homicide. For instance, potential students are encouraged to ask themselves the following four questions when thinking about the person they want to kill:
1. Is this murder necessary?
2. Have you given your target every last chance to redeem themselves?
3. What innocent person might suffer from your actions?
4. Will this deletion improve the life of others?
This places restrictions upon the types of murders that are approved of. The harming of innocent bystanders and animals is also off limits in any murder plan proposed by a college student. This is not a new strategy in mystery fiction as even back in the 1930s, justifiable murder was explored in mysteries such as Trial and Error (1937) by Anthony Berkeley. These questions are not a mere gimmick, and the writers utilises them effectively in the subsequent plot. Overall, I would say the setup has plenty of little details to give this fictional world a convincing rationale.
Cliff Iverson’s enrolment in the college is shown to be unusual, as he does not voluntarily choose to join. At the start of the book his plan to commit the perfect murder of his boss, goes badly awry and he is only spared prison because his mistakes are covered up by two ex-policemen who give him an offer he can’t refuse, namely going to the college for an interview with the dean. It is soon revealed that he can have a sponsored place (so another mystery in the book for the reader to solve is who is the sponsor?). Refusal to join, has life limiting consequences, so initially Cliff is rather shanghaied into agreeing to go on the course. Yet this adds to the believability of the story as to begin with Cliff is a bit resistant to college life and it takes him some time to find a degree of acceptance towards it.
The college includes an interesting variety of students, and I think the author has done a good job in not alienating his readers through his character types. The case could be made for this being a campus novel as the book spends most of its time at the college. The narrative explores college life and describes the friendships and rivals Cliff makes. The course assignments are naturally murder themed, with students being involved in pretend practice kills, as well as homing specific skills and knowledge that their own murder plans require in the real world. Their intended murder is in effect their course thesis. Failing your thesis results in the student’s own demise, to prevent them speaking about the college when under arrest. Adding to the college/campus theme, the story also includes faculty appraisals of the three central students, which raise the concern that one of the students might not be cut out to be a killer, which places them in a vulnerable position.
I think the narrative switches between the three students well. This is a slower book, which allows for the backstories and the college system to be unpacked gradually. Nevertheless, I still think the novel is too long, as it does lose some steam, particularly when it draws out the process of each student executing their thesis murder. I definitely feel this story could have been shortened. Moreover, it does not know quite when to end. One more chapter keeps being added and the final chapter is rather weak and tangential. The endings for the three students and their proposed victims are interesting, although I am unsure if they needed more grit and dark humour. The denouement perhaps has a fairy tale quality which I don’t think is fully effective. However, overall, I did enjoy this book quite a bit and I will be interested to see what the author writes next.
Rating: 4.25/5