#John Dickson Carr

[cinematic-literature]

The Bookshop (2017) by Isabel Coixet

Book title: The Plague Court Murders (1934) by Carter Dickson

[o-uncle-newt]

I guess the only person who can really be trusted to describe the greatness of Agatha Christie is Dorothy L Sayers...?

A while back, the always-sharp @thesarahshay sent me an ask that caught me up on something that I'd carelessly written in some tags- I said that Agatha Christie was good at writing romance into her detective fiction, without really elaborating. I then spent multiple paragraphs attempting to elaborate, I'm not sure with how much success. Essentially, and you can click above to see for yourself, my thesis was that while Sayers was a much better literary stylist (and certainly better at writing romance) than Christie, when writing a detective novel, her seams show; Christie had a natural talent for knowing exactly what belongs in a detective story and creating and fitting all the right pieces together that create a seamless detective story, including motivations drawn by romance (though I think the actual romances are among the weaker elements- still MUCH better than those written by most of her peers, for the record).

I'd had trouble putting into words what I wanted to say (there was a convoluted metaphor about Barbies and Lego in there), and I'm not sure I was too convincing; but turns out that the person who said what I wanted to say the best was, in fact the great DLS herself.

There's a fabulous book that I 100% recommend called Taking Detective Stories Seriously, which is a compilation of about two years' worth of detective story reviews that Sayers wrote. I hadn't heard of most of the authors, and even when I had heard of the authors I'd rarely read the books, but it didn't matter, frankly. She's just such a great writer, so thoughtful and incisive and passionate about both the genre and good craftsmanship (not to mention good English), that everything she has to say including on novels that haven't been in print since the 30s is worth reading. She has generally great taste, though she has a much higher opinion of Margery Allingham than I do and doesn't like Ellery Queen's The Siamese Twin Mystery as much as I'd thought she might (though the fact that a character in it insulted Unnatural Death may not have helped lol); but she also likes, to pick two very different writers who I too enjoy, HC Bailey and Mignon G Eberhart, and so she clearly has a good eye. (It's also entertaining to see her slowly force herself to admit that she likes Perry Mason...)

BUT ANYWAY.

She has three reviews of Agatha Christie books in the volume: Murder on the Orient Express, Why Didn't They Ask Evans, and Three Act Tragedy. She reviews all of them very positively, but it's her review of Three Act Tragedy (in my opinion, funnily enough, the weakest of the three) that she really gets to the core of Christie's genius. And it's actually fitting that it's for a book of hers that's on the more meh end of the scale- because it just shows how even meh Christie has an element of genius that other authors have to work hard for even in their best works.

She says:

Some time ago this column contained the statement that Hercule Poirot was "one of the few real detectives." It was a well-sounding phrase, and I have no quarrel with it, except that I am not quite clear what it meant. What I meant to write and what I thought I had written and what I now propose to write clearly with no mistake about it was and is this: Hercule Poirot is one of the few detectives with real charm. Plenty of authors assure us that their detectives are charming, but that is quite another thing. I don't know that Mrs Christie has ever said a word about the matter. She merely puts Poirot there, with all his little oddities and weaknesses, and there he is- a really charming person. And it is true, too, that he is "real," in the sense that we never stop to enquire whether his words and actions are suited to his character; they are his character, and we accept them as we accept the words and actions of any living person because they are a part of himself. Le style c'est l'homme. Indeed, when Mrs Christie is writing at the top of her form, as she is in Three Act Tragedy, all her characters have this reality. She does not postulate a character- retired actor, West End mannequin, family retainer- and put into its mouth sentiments appropriate to its station in life. She shows us character and behavior all of a piece. However surprising or enigmatic the behavior, we believe that everything took place just as she says it did, because we believe in the reality of the people. Poirot is charming, not because anybody says so, but because is is, and all her other people exist for us in the same objective manner. This is the great gift that distinguishes the novelist from the manufacturer of plots. Mrs Christie has given us an excellent plot, a clever mystery, and an exciting story, but her chief strength lies in this power to compel belief in these characters. [emphasis mine]

Sayers then proceeds to compare another author (or rather authors, the husband and wife pair GDH and M Cole) to Christie in this regard, moving on to another review. But in these three paragraphs she has, I think, said it better than anyone- that Christie's skill is in her naturalness, and how that naturalness compels us to believe in and immerse ourselves in her world. She is effortless and seamless.

To be clear, Sayers praises a lot of people in this book, and a lot of people's writing; but mostly she is praising their skill and ability to create what they have created. Here, she isn't quite praising that- she's praising the fact that the final product is so good that you can't even see the craftsmanship behind it, and that's, I think, what separates Christie from her peers. It's a power, and not one that can be broken down by a critic. She just has it.

I've said before that I don't think Sayers had this as a mystery writer, and I think she'd probably be the first to agree with that assessment; she certainly had a seemingly effortless skill as a prose writer (as these reviews show), but as a novelist she took construction seriously and wanted us to know this. That said, another person who I don't think has this, who I mention because he's someone who a lot of people compare Christie to (often negatively), is John Dickson Carr.

I've seen plenty of people say that Carr is a more sophisticated version of Christie, not just in mystery construction but in writing style, and equally prolific, creative, and versatile. I don't agree with this on most counts, but I think, honestly, that Carr is fine- but you can see the seams easily. He might have been prolific but his formulae are visible and his writing required intentionality on his part. By which I mean- Carr when he's trying to be funny is generally hilarious. Carr when he's trying to be scary is generally spine-tingling. But Carr when he's just trying to get to the next good bit is dull and mechanical. He needs to be paying attention and making an effort in order to be good, and we notice him doing this. Christie never has this problem; even when the actual stuff she's writing isn't high quality, she's never dull. Everything feels purposeful and organic, somehow.

Obviously, all of this is fundamentally subjective, and if there's one redeeming element it's that an incredibly smart lady agrees with me (by my interpretation, at least) and says it extremely well. But I'll be holding on to this one, if nothing else.

[pilibdc]

Currently Reading

The Burning Court by John Dickson Carr

[frimleyblogger]

Hag’s Nook

A review of Hag’s Nook by John Dickson Carr – 240625 Although not the first John Dickson Carr novel, Hag’s Nook, originally published in 1932, is the first of the twenty-three novels that made up his Dr Gideon Fell series. He cannot quite shake off his obsession with all matters Gothic which permeates his four earlier Bencolin novels but he cleverly interweaves scenes of cosy domesticity chez…

[holmesoldfellow]

"The Life of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle: The Man Who Was Sherlock Holmes" by John Dickson Carr (1975 copy, 1949 copyright)

[zmkccommonplace]

Humility is an excellent spiritual virtue, but one that no woman can endure.

A character's observation in The Black Spectacles by John Dickson-Carr

[from1837to1945]

"그때 전 스티븐스 부인, 데스파드 부인과 함께 식당에 앉아 있었어요. 3월 말, 바람이 강한 날이었기 때문에 우린 난롯가에 앉아 있었죠. 버터토스트에 계피를 얹어 먹으면서 바로 그 무렵 신문에 났던 캘리포니아 살인 사건 기사에 대한 얘기를 했어요. 그러다가 여러 가지 살인 사건이 화제에 올랐죠. 그러자 데스파드 부인이 저에게 독약에 대한 걸 물으셔서..."

"스티븐스 부인이겠죠"하고 블레넌이 말했다.

"아니에요, 그렇지 않아요." 코베트 양은 엄하게 블레넌을 돌아보며 대답했다.

"이곳에 앉아계시는 데스파드 부인이었어요. 부인께 물어보시죠. 스티븐스 부인은 처음부터 한 마디도 하지 않았어요. 아, 그래요. 꼭 한번 얘기했군요... 제가 실습간호사를 지내고 있을 때 스트리크닌을 마신 남자가 병원에 실려왔던 얘기를 했더니, 스티븐스 부인이 그 환자가 많이 괴로워하냐고 물었어요."

"아하, 제가 알고 싶었던 것이 바로 그겁니다. 그때 그녀는 어떤 모습이었죠? 어떤 얼굴을 하고 있었나요?"

"아름다웠어요."

블레넌은 어이가 없다는 듯 한동안 코베트 양을 응시하다가 힐끗 메모에 눈을 준 뒤 물었다.

"좀 묘한 대답이군요. 아마 제 질문의 뜻을 이해하지 못하신 것 같은데. 아름다웠다...는 건 무슨 뜻인가요?"

"말 그대로에요. 부인은... 솔직히 말하라는 말씀인가요?"

"그래요. 솔직하게 말해주세요."

코베트 양은 냉소적인 또렷한 목소리로 말했다.

"성적으로 흥분한 여자처럼 보였어요."

소름이 끼치는 격렬한 분노가 스티븐스의 가슴에서 치밀어 올라, 그것이 폭탄의 폭발이나 강렬한 술처럼 온몸으로 퍼졌다.

-존 딕슨 카, 『화형법정』, 오정환 역, 동서문화사, 2003, pp.218~219

[veryslowreader]

It Walks By Night by John Dickson Carr

Separation

[meinelesewelt]

John Dickson Carr: Fünf tödliche Schachteln

"Also gut, dann will ich Ihnen das auch noch erklären. Sehen Sie sich diese vier Leute da drinnen einmal genau an. Sie sind wohlhabend. Sie sind bekannte Persönlichkeiten. Sie schlafen in komfortablen Betten und werden nciht von Angstträumen geplagt. Aber wollen Sie die Wahrheit hören? Sie sind alle Verbrecher, und einige von ihnen haben sogar gemordet. Das Problem ist, dass man nicht genau weiß, wer zu den Mördern gehört und wer vergleichsweise saubere Hände hat."

[iklees]

Death in five boxes / Carter Dickson

Sir Henry Merrivale #7

In een kamer zitten vier mensen om een tafel; ze zijn allevier vergiftigd, maar drie zijn nog in leven. De vierde is dood door een dolksteek. De drie overlevenden hebben in hun tassen of jaszakken vreemde voorwerpen, waarvan ze zelf niet weten hoe die daar komen. Inspecteur Masters onderzoekt en wordt, of hij nu wil of niet, geholpen door Sir Henry Merrivale van de geheime dienst.

'[…] If you creep into a chemist's in false whiskers, and buy a little bit of poison on some lame excuse, and sign the book with a false name, they'll have you as sure as hangin'. You can go to five different chemists and get traced five times as easily, as Monte Christo pointed out years ago. The only way to buy poison invisibly is to buy it in such enormous quantities that nobody ever thinks twice about it. F'r instance, take nicotine: as deadly a poison as there is. You can't buy dabs of it. But there are places in the hop-district in Kent where you can buy a lorry-load of it and roll away with no questions asked. it was the same with […]'s atropine. He set himself up as a "firm" manufacturing eye-lotions. He bought a ten-ounce bottle of pure atropine from the wholesalers, so much that it couldn't even be thought of as a poison.'

Die Sir Henry is niet echt sympathiek -- zeker niet naar de maatstaven van nu, met z'n 'wenches'. Hij houdt niet alleen informatie achter voor Masters, maar ook voor de lezer. Niet mijn ding, dus ik denk niet dat ik naarstig op zoek zal gaan naar meer boeken uit deze reeks. Dit was een tweedehandsje (of meer) dat bij het lezen van ellende uit elkaar viel en nu gaat worden gerecycleerd.

Carter Dickson is een pseudonym van John Dickson Carr.

[julianworker]

Castle Skull by John Dickson Carr - Review

I really enjoyed this book. It was refreshing in its way even though I could feel my credulity being stretched on one or two occasions. It would be unfair of me to say why this is, as it’s important to the plot. A man called Myron Alison is an idol of the stage and has a flair for the dramatic. It seems appropriate then that he dies in dramatic circumstances, shot three times, and burnt to a…

[princessalmost]

"The thought shot through my mind, 'The woman's mad!' and was answered only by that eerie jingle of bracelets. 'No,' it struck me again, 'She's not mad; she's terribly sane.'"

~It Walks By Night, John Dickson Carr

[lurinatftbn]

What are some of your greatest writing/stylistic inspirations, or works that have really influenced you?

When They Cry is the obvious one for TFTBN, and there are a lot of Shinhonkaku-isms and VN-isms generally (I think I've used the 'puppet with its strings cut' line like 3 times at this point, lmao) and I could probably give some other particular answers for specific subplots and threads in the story, if anyone is curious. But in terms of my overall writing inspirations, that's kind of hard to answer... I've consumed so much stuff that's impacted me that it's hard to trace it all back and pick out the most important without writing an essay.

I guess to speak very generally in terms of what got me started writing in the first place, my biggest fantasy influences are probably Terry Pratchett and Le Guin, my biggest sci-influence is probably Iain Banks, and my biggest mystery influence is probably John Dickson Carr-- All pretty typical stuff, except for horror, which like I say on my RR profile is honestly more old RPG Maker games than anything literary.

[frimleyblogger]

The Ten Teacups

A review of The Ten Teacups by Carter Dickson – 250214 Carter Dickson was a nom de plume used by John Dickson Carr for his Sir Henry Merrivale of which The Ten Teacups, which also goes by the title of The Peacock Feather Murders, was the sixth. Originally published in 1937, it has now been reissued as part of the British Library Crime Classics series and a great read it is too. The story starts…

[alwaysalreadyangry]

my comfort listening while Tom is away in Edinburgh seeing shows and I’m trying to cut out the caffeine because it’s making my OCD worse again: the Bodies from the Library anthologies, made up of otherwise forgotten/unpublished stories by writers from the era of classic crime fiction.

cannot express enough how wild these books are. i finished 2 tonight and am now a good chunk of the way through 3, after previously having listened to 4? i think? and a spinoff called Ghosts from the Library which is actually the best so far because it’s ghost stories and related spooky stories by writers of classic crime. they’re all weird and fun. but i digress.

what’s great about these anthologies is that like so in each one if you’re lucky you’re going to get an agatha christie story and a dorothy l sayers story. will they feature their famous detectives? maybe! maybe it’ll just be a fantasia about some guy getting drugged and arranging for a mysterious agency to murder his wife!

but along with the writers you’ve actually heard of, my other fav actually good writer from this era is edmund crispin and he turns up here too, you’ll get a whole load of stories by totally forgotten writers and they’re mad. my favourite so far is one about somebody dressing up as a scarecrow to commit murders. it’s called something like the scarecrow murders. they’re all titled something like that and you wonder if it’s a bit of whimsy referring to a motif. no. the scarecrow did it.

and then there are the writers with a very specific niche. like oh yes this woman worked as a doctor and wrote eight novels about murders in hospitals. yes she was a horrible racist. yes this story is about how criminality runs in families. yes there’s a reason why nobody reads her now. but also it’s about weird pranks at a hospital and how if a nurse is too conscientious everybody will hate her and it’ll get her killed.

then there are the stories by your john dickson carrs of this world; the writers you may or may not have heard of (he’s the most famous but there are others like this) whose whole thing is constructing the MOST labyrinthine and incomprehensible mysteries you’ve ever come across. oh what you thought the maltese falcon was too simple? sit down while john dickson carr makes you read a list of characters and their various different names, all french for some reason, so he can unravel a locked room mystery that involves layers of impersonation and disguise so byzantine that at the midway point you’ll feel like you have to start again so you can even understand who it is that’s been murdered.

it’s making my brain melt and it is scratching the same kind of itch that x-men comics do in that like. does this plot make sense? no. can i explain it to you? also no. but i am having a LOT of fun.

oh and shout out to christopher cauldwell who has a story in here very much in the niche of mysteries about planes written by somebody who had written books about planes so he’s kind of making his niche interests everybody else’s problem, but he’s got the best and maybe most moving bio of all the writers in these books that i’ve come across so far as it’s like. he joined the communist party, took an ambulance to spain in the civil war, and was killed in battle as he stayed with his machine gun to cover his retreating comrades. is his story “good”? i mean it’s fairly middling in terms of these anthologies. but what a life!

[tristantzara]

i went to a used book sale today... procured:

railroad color history: new york central railroad (brian solomon & mike schafer) — i'm not actually that into trains but it appealed to me.

the complete guide to the soviet union (jennifer louis & victor louis) — travel guide from 1980

an anthology including the big sleep (raymond chandler), "the undignified melodrama of the bone of contention" (dorothy l. sayers), "the arrow of god" (leslie charteris), "i can find my way out" (ngaio marsh), instead of evidence (rex stout), "rift in the loot" (stuart palmer & craig rice), "the man who explained miracles" (john dickson carr), & rebecca (daphne du maurier) (i already have this one..) — it's volume 2 of something (a treasury of great mysteries) which annoys me but whatever

an anthology including "godmother tea" (selena anderson), "the apartment" (t. c. boyle), "a faithful but melancholy account of several barbarities lately committed" (jason brown), "sibling rivalry" (michael byers), "the nanny" (emma cline), "halloween" (mariah crotty), "something street" (carolyn ferrell), "this is pleasure" (mary gaitskill), "in the event" (meng jin), "the children" (andrea lee), "rubberdust" (sarah thankam mathews), "it's not you" (elizabeth mccracken), "liberté" (scott nandelson), "howl palace" (leigh newman), "the nine-tailed fox explains" (jane pek), "the hands of dirty children" (alejandro puyana), "octopus vii" (anna reeser), "enlightenment" (william pei shih), "kennedy" (kevin wilson), & "the special world" (tiphanie yanique) — i guess they're all short stories published in 2020 by usamerican/canadian authors

an anthology including the death of ivan ilyich (leo tolstoy) (i have already read this one..), the beast in the jungle (henry james), heart of darkness (joseph conrad), seven who were hanged (leonid andreyev), abel sánchez (miguel de unamuno), the pastoral symphony (andré gide), mario and the magician (thomas mann), the old man (william faulkner), the stranger (albert camus), & agostino (alberto moravia)

the ambassadors (henry james)

the world book desk reference set: book of nations — it's from 1983 so this is kind of a history book...

yet another fiction anthology......... including the general's ring (selma lagerlöf), "mowgli's brothers" (rudyard kipling), "the gift of the magi" (o. henry) (i have already read this one..), "lord mountdrago" (w. somerset maugham), "music on the muscatatuck" (jessamyn west), "the pacing goose" (jessamyn west), "the birds" (daphne du maurier), "the man who lived four thousand years" (alexandre dumas), "the pope's mule" (alphonse daudet), "the story of the late mr. elvesham" (h. g. wells), "the blue cross" (g. k. chesterton), portrait of jennie (robert nathan), "la grande bretèche" (honoré de balzac), "love's conundrum" (anthony hope), "the great stone face" (nathaniel hawthorne), "germelshausen" (friedrich gerstäcker), "i am born" (charles dickens), "the legend of sleepy hollow" (washington irving), "the age of miracles" (melville davisson post), "the long rifle" (stewart edward white), "the fall of the house of usher" (edgar allan poe) (i have already read this one..), the voice of bugle ann (mackinlay kantor), the bridge of san luis rey (thornton wilder), "basquerie" (eleanor mercein kelly), "judith" (a. e. coppard), "a mother in mannville" (marjorie kinnan rawlings), "kerfol" (edith wharton), "the last leaf" (o. henry), "the bloodhound" (arthur train), "what the old man does is always right" (hans christian anderson), the sea of grass (conrad richter), "the sire de malétroit's door" (robert louis stevenson), "the necklace" (guy de maupassant) (i have already read this one..), "by the waters of babylon" (stephen vincent benét), a. v. laider (max beerbohm), "the pillar of fire" (percival wilde), "the strange will" (edmond about), "the hand at the window" (emily brontë) (i have already read this one..), & "national velvet" (enid bagnold) — why are seven of these chapters of novels....? anyway fun fact one of the compilers here also worked on the aforementioned mystery anthology. also anyway Why did i bother to write all that ☹️

fundamental problems of marxism (georgi plekhanov) — book about dialectical/historical materialism which is published here as the first volume of something (marxist library) which is kind of odd to me tbh

one last (thankfully tiny) anthology including le père goriot (honoré de balzac) & eugénie grandet (honoré de balzac)