The most critical review I have ever written was of Patricia Cornwell's attempt at historial research, Portrait of a Killer. Gilda O'Neill has gone the other way. She has left behind her usual excellent historical research East End textbooks to attempt to write a novel set in the East End of Jack the Ripper. Like Miss Cornwell, she should have stuck to what she knows. I can see why they've used a Lesley Pearse quote on the front of the novel to help sell it. It's like a poor man's version of a Lesley Pearse book. If you inject a very silly, completely unbelievable Jack the Ripper plot into Miss Pearse's book Hope, and reduce the writing quality a couple of notches, you've got The Lights of London. It's odd that Gilda O'Neill, who has made her name doing research books, has written a novel set against the backcloth of the Jack the Ripper murders without apparently doing any research into the killings. And her creative writing is poor. The book is weak on dialogue, plot and characters. There are the usual snippets of interesting information that we get in her other books, but the similarity to her other books is almost the problem. It's like she's written one of usual books and then cobbled together a plot to turn it into a novel.
At least it's an honest attempt. It's clearly not been ghost written, which would have been a cynical way to have made the most out of Gilda O'Neill's name. Perhaps a compromise would have been for the publishers to have one of their people at least edit it. It reads like they haven't.