Ian Rankin is universally considered to be one of Britain’s greatest living writers of crime fiction. He has been called “the Scottish Ed McBain”, and as an admirer of McBain’s work, I was keen to read Rankin’s books. The first in his John Rebus series is this one, Knots and Crosses, and I have to say: if Rankin’s reputation is based on this book, I cannot understand it. It’s simply not a very good book. Rankin himself admits this (a bit) in his introduction, written many years later. His policeman is far too literary a figure, reading (and quoting from) books that it would be very unlikely for him to read — as Rankin himself tells us. But my problem is not with the character of John Rebus. I would like to see more of him. The problem is with the story. It’s about a serial killer who leaves clues with Rebus — and Rebus, a professional police detective, doesn’t see any reason to share the messages with anyone else on the force. When finally an English professor rings up the police and says that he has figured out a pattern which no one had seen before, I was really shocked. Not shocked at the genius of the professor, but shocked that such an incredibly stupid plot device was thereby exposed, and shocked at the unbelievable (literally, unbelievable) stupidity of the hero, Rebus. Without giving anything away, let’s just say it was a very, very silly story. I can only hope the series got better after this. Maybe I’ll try one more …