The Rottweiler, Ruth Rendell

Book: 11
Title: The Rottweiler
Author: Ruth Rendell
Genre: Mystery
One-sentence summary: Someone is garroting young girls on the streets of London. Whodunit and why?
Why did you get this book? It was for sale on the bargain table at Brookline Booksmith, and I've read and liked Ruth Rendell before.
Do you like the cover? It's blue. Kinda snazzy.
Did you enjoy the book? I did, although it wasn't flawless* - there were a few false steps, like the murderer's whole "Oh, I do not know why I am compelled to commit such brutal murders. I wonder if there might be a repressed memory that is driving my actions? Oh! Look! I have discovered a repressed memory that is driving my actions!" thing. But I was interested in the characters, and that's a very big thing with me. It was definitely enjoyable.
Was the author new to you and would you read something by this author again? No, I'd read Piranha to Scurfy, which was great, particularly the title story, and House of Stairs, which bored me even though it was a lesbian novel. I'll read her again - I have a copy of one of her other books lying around somewhere.
Are you keeping it or passing it on? Keeping. I rarely pass on books unless I *really* don't enjoy them or can't get into them.
Scale of 1 to 10: 8
Anything else? Don't think so. Good book, though.
Number of pages: 352
Total pages for the year: 3921

*I do think it is possible for a book to be flawless or near-flawless, though I do not think it is possible for a book to be perfect. That is to say, I think it's possible for a writer not to make any technical missteps in plotting, characterization, writing, etc. throughout a book, but it isn't possible to write a book that is so good that it couldn't possibly be better. A book can do everything it does perfectly, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be more than it is. If you see what I mean. Maybe I'm not making any sense. It's all academic anyway, and I am boring.