“The First Casualty” (TFC) is the tenth novel by British comedian, playwright, and author Ben Elton.

Like all of Elton’s books there is a clear message and point that he makes. TFC is quite clearly a discussion of and on the Great War, specifically about the barbarity and pointless slaughter on the Western Front and the Battle of Passchendaele (the third battle of Ypres), all under the guise of a murder mystery whodunnit.

With all the usual dry wit you come to expect Elton puts forward a logical basis for his lead character’s anti war stance at home while still showing the moral and logical dilemmas and ambiguity of the battlefield.

TFC is a work of historical fiction (while the battle is based on actual events) of which the narrative will not only engage the reader from the outset but also (like many of Elton’s novels) make the reader think.

TFC gets 4 chaotic artillery barrages out of 5.

This book was suggested by a shopkeeper when I was returning from Newcastle to Sydney. I was not expecting such a pleasant read until I finished the book in few days. Well written with a good suspense.

It's hot and I can't be bothered, so I chose an easy read. I like Ben Elton books because they don't annoy me and they're easy to get through. OK, the characters are drawn with an eight inch paint roller but the settings and descriptions are fine. This once was a detective story set in the horrors of WWII, with a likeable protagonist (well, I liked him) and a cartoonish feminist sidekick.

While I believe I know a lot about 20th century history I always find that the way the author portrays the stories, events and people on his historical novels always educates me further, but not only am I educated I am also entertained and find the character portrayals very realistic. I save his novels for holidays as a little treat for myself.

Ben Elton's First World War-set murder mystery reads like he had an A-Level history textbook open next to him as he was writing. The prose is filled with thudding exposition and characters who are inexplicably aware of the entire personal history of major contemporary historical figures. Yet somehow at the same time he makes basic errors that stood out even to me. Historians would likely be baffled at the way the lead character Kingsley seems to have an omniscient understanding of the causes of the war that would only be apparent with hindsight. Elton even makes reference to carrots improving eyesight, myth not introduced until the Second World War.
Not only does the novel fail to capture a sense of the period, it also fails to develop any convincing characters. Kingsley, a conscientious objector, is just so damn perfect that when forced into battle he proves to be a stunningly effective and competent soldier, far more so than those idiotic officers who have been on the frontline for three years. Even better, Kingsley is so charming and handsome that a suffragette nurse can't resist sleeping him, and inevitably instantly falls in love with him, abandoning all her prior beliefs. This is accompanied by excruciating sex scenes that are at least mercifully short.
However, the biggest issue with the novel is that it is a murder mystery without a mystery. The plodding pace means Kingsley only arrives at the scene of the crime halfway through and then we are only presented with two plausible murders, one so obvious that Kingsley early on senses he will have some form of final confrontation with. As a reader, we are given scraps of clues, but never enough to be truly involved, and it is all wrapped up in an instant by Kingsley's masterful deductions using information we were never given.
Stick to Blackadder Goes Forth.

I would have given it one star because the terrible writing reached a point where it just all became hilarious, so at least I was kept entertained. One-dimensional characters, absolutely horrible dialogues and uninteresting plot.

A whodunit see in WW1 in the trenches of the Western Front in France gives author Ben Elton the opportunity to raise important issues from the early 20th Century that still have relevance today like the pointlessness and futility of the 'Great' War; women's suffrage and homophobia. It makes its points well and not too ham-fistedly, and the carefully researched and described scenes of trench warfare hit their target perfectly. It’s pacy and interesting enough to keep the reader engaged, but it's quite a weak, highly implausible plot and some of the characters are far from convincing - notably Nurse Murray and Captain Shannon.

A refreshing change from the usual wartime fiction. Kingsley is a policr inspector who takes a moral stand as a conscientious objector to WWI. He is imprisoned, lampooned in the media and deserted by his wife and family. This book really examines the ethical dilemma of war vs murder through the lens of someone who has dedicated his life to convicting murderers.

Kingsley is recruited from prison to be a special investigator who can be relied upon for neutrality in a politically charged murder and subsequent cover up. He investigates in France and ends up on the front line. Along the way Kingsley meets people and experiences things he would never ordinarily do in his old life. Kingsley is forced to reconsider his previous life choices in terms of his commitment to being anti-war yet failing to take an ethical stand on things he's been implicated with in his policework - the Irish rebellion, the suffragettes etc.

When I started this book, I thought it was brilliant; a witty protagonist and social commentary for the war era, how fantastic. But as I delved further, I picked up on a few flaws. And after finishing and thinking about it, I'd found quite a few issues with the novel.

For me, I think the problem is the set up is brilliant, but the pay-off really doesn't do it for me. The protagonist, Douglas Kingsley, is introduced as a disgraced detective due to his very open anti-war opinions. He doesn't object to the war because it's morally wrong, but only because he finds it 'illogical'. He's clever and highly motivated. Okay, you got me with the set up; a semi-relatable every-man who's either going to change or have his opinions confirmed. The issue is, I don't feel like Kingsley's character really develops. Elton sort of teases development, but never quite goes through with it. There's a part where Kingsley is subjected to the horrors of war in some really grim and disturbing scenes. I expected for this to have a hard impact for our protagonist, leading to some interesting inner turmoil. And it does...for one chapter. Then he's fine.
The other cast members also suffer. Abercrombie was my favourite character because he was close to being complex. He's a captain in the army, from an upper class background, hiding the fact he's gay but also struggling to cope with the horrors of war. He's probably the most interesting character, but we don't get further development because he dies.
His sort-of-not-really partner, Stamford, also begins kind of sympathetic but dissolves into a crying mess that crumbles at any kind of stress. he also sometimes comes across more of a stereotype than a real character, but that's just my opinion.
Kitty Murray, again, begins as an interesting character, given she's pretty fiery with strong views. But, she just sort of dissolves into a basic love interest. And while her an Kingsley have a little chemistry, she falls in-love with him suddenly and wants to be with him, despite her own principles. And it made me really dislike Kitty. And that's sort of what happened with me when it came to these characters; I really liked them, then I just found them annoying and wished the book would end.

The mystery itself doesn't work. While somewhat compelling, the reveal is kind of flat. The killer is the guy you totally expected it to be... because there was only one real suspect. The other two suspects are Hopkins and Stamford. Going in, you know it's not Hopkins because that's the point of the mystery, to prove it wasn't him. And you know it isn't Stamford because it's Stamford. Stamford doesn't do much. I get mysteries can be written in different ways, but I feel like it should at least engage with you; give the reader the clues and suspects, give them the chance to solve it first and see if they were right.

A positive I will give the book is it's war scenes. Any time there's conflict, it's harsh. There's an especially grim scene where Kingsley has to hack up a man (for detective reasons, trust me) and, in some areas, it is pretty well written. There's a small chapter that gives you the first insight into the mental ward for the soldiers, with some really melancholic imagery.

Would I recommend it? No. Probably not. I mean, it's not terrible, it's just not great. A lot of my review is, obviously, just to my tastes in a novel. Like I said, the war stuff is pretty grim and interesting, and the set-up is also pretty good... but pay-off, especially with character development, not so much.

I felt as though Elton was drunk during some of his writing for this book. Particularly the scenes of Douglas' wanderings at night and peeking through windows - the language and text disintegrated and was really offputting. A good story and concept, but not as well-written as his other works

Interesting to read for entertainment. The themes raised are relevant but rushed at times, the comedic factor was satisfying. However, on a student perspective the plot lacked finesse and the proper polish expected.

Grand historical mystery

This nicely done mystery evokes life in England and the trenches during the First World War. On one level it is a mystery, on another, a thought provoking commentary on the social order of the times and the brutality of war.

The plot flows nicely, the characters are interesting, the mystery is engaging, and the trench warfare is brutal. The one area that I didn’t enjoy was the ending which while satisfying, wasn’t fully explained to my satisfaction.