|
Post by The Lurker In The Shadows on Nov 21, 2017 10:20:32 GMT
Did you finish it yet, Dan? I've just started it - chapter one this morning. So far it seems quite promising. Very nasty first murder! Do you think the book should be reviewed in Ghosts & Scholars, or does it just need the paragraph I've already drafted for the News section? If you think it deserves a full review, you know what my next question is going to be! I finished it last night and enjoyed it. It read almost like a Jamesian version of The Abominable Dr Phibes in a way. The author - or perhaps the character speaking - gets slightly muddled about the plot of a particular story, but as it's only one mentioned in passing rather than a major plot driver, it doesn't interfere too much in the enjoyment. I think I'll be going back and reading the earlier books in the series as well as trying some genuine golden age mysteries as it's a genre that interests me but I know little about. With the MRJ aspect playing such a big part in the proceedings, I'd say it warrants a review. And, yes, I'll be happy to provide one.
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Nov 21, 2017 11:36:52 GMT
Did you finish it yet, Dan? I've just started it - chapter one this morning. So far it seems quite promising. Very nasty first murder! Do you think the book should be reviewed in Ghosts & Scholars, or does it just need the paragraph I've already drafted for the News section? If you think it deserves a full review, you know what my next question is going to be! I finished it last night and enjoyed it. It read almost like a Jamesian version of The Abominable Dr Phibes in a way. The author - or perhaps the character speaking - gets slightly muddled about the plot of a particular story, but as it's only one mentioned in passing rather than a major plot driver, it doesn't interfere too much in the enjoyment. I think I'll be going back and reading the earlier books in the series as well as trying some genuine golden age mysteries as it's a genre that interests me but I know little about. With the MRJ aspect playing such a big part in the proceedings, I'd say it warrants a review. And, yes, I'll be happy to provide one. That's good. And thanks for picking up my (subtle - ha!) hint about the review. Will January 31st be okay for your deadline? On browsing through before starting the book (avoiding the final chapters, of course), I think I noticed the bit where the character gets slightly muddled about an MRJ plot. If it's the one you mean, then I agree that it's not too significant.
|
|
|
Post by The Lurker In The Shadows on Nov 21, 2017 17:42:42 GMT
Will January 31st be okay for your deadline? Yes. Will get it roughed out while still fresh in my memory then tidy and polish at my leisure.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Connolly on Nov 22, 2017 13:08:36 GMT
Did you finish it yet, Dan? I've just started it - chapter one this morning. So far it seems quite promising. Very nasty first murder! Do you think the book should be reviewed in Ghosts & Scholars, or does it just need the paragraph I've already drafted for the News section? If you think it deserves a full review, you know what my next question is going to be! I finished it last night and enjoyed it. It read almost like a Jamesian version of The Abominable Dr Phibes in a way. The author - or perhaps the character speaking - gets slightly muddled about the plot of a particular story, but as it's only one mentioned in passing rather than a major plot driver, it doesn't interfere too much in the enjoyment. I think I'll be going back and reading the earlier books in the series as well as trying some genuine golden age mysteries as it's a genre that interests me but I know little about. With the MRJ aspect playing such a big part in the proceedings, I'd say it warrants a review. And, yes, I'll be happy to provide one. On the strength of these posts, I've just made a library request for a copy of The Nine Lessons. Hopefully I can have it for the dread Christmas period. On the whole, I would recommend that you read genuine golden age mysteries. While I do realize that he is very uneven, at his best Edmund Crispin is excellent. While his first two books The Case of the Gilded Fly (1944) and Holy Disorders (1945) are of huge Jamesian interest, I think his best book is Buried for Pleasure (1948), which, unusually for a detective novel, introduces a poltergeist that is real and contributes to the climax. Roger Johnson (yes, him again) wrote a good article on Crispin for Ghosts & Scholars 12.
|
|
|
Post by The Lurker In The Shadows on Nov 22, 2017 13:25:25 GMT
On the whole, I would recommend that you read genuine golden age mysteries. While I do realize that he is very uneven, at his best Edmund Crispin is excellent. While his first two books The Case of the Gilded Fly (1944) and Holy Disorders (1945) are of huge Jamesian interest, I think his best book is Buried for Pleasure (1948), which, unusually for a detective novel, introduces a poltergeist that is real and contributes to the climax. Roger Johnson (yes, him again) wrote a good article on Crispin for Ghosts & Scholars 12. I have read both The Case of the Gilded Fly and Holy Disorders, both bought on the strength of that very G&S article you mention. G&S articles have been responsible for some very happy purchases over the years. I also have Crispin's story St Bartholomew's Day in a Richard Dalby ghost story collection which I need to turn my attention to soon.
|
|
|
Post by helrunar on Nov 22, 2017 15:30:24 GMT
Interesting thread. I read several of Edmund Crispin's novels back sometime in the early 80s, but barely remember them now. Such are the vicissitudes of time and middle-aged memory... I do remember enjoying the books very much. The only things I really remember are a strange novel called The Moving Toyshop (but all I can recall is the title, and how it made me think of Doctor Who) and a detective named something like Gervase Fen.
H.
|
|
|
Post by The Lurker In The Shadows on Nov 22, 2017 19:33:13 GMT
The only things I really remember are a strange novel called The Moving Toyshop (but all I can recall is the title, and how it made me think of Doctor Who) and a detective named something like Gervase Fen. H. You're not the first person I've seen draw comparisons between The Moving Toyshop and Doctor Who - I think specifically the Tom Baker era. And, yes, Gervase Fen is Crispin's regular, somewhat eccentric detective.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Connolly on Nov 24, 2017 13:20:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Nov 24, 2017 15:39:05 GMT
It's a decent solid whodunnit and I like the use of MRJ's stories, even though she does make some mistakes in describing them ("Oh, Whistle" isn't set in Seaburgh and "The Mezzotint" isn't set in Cambridge, for instance!). I did guess both of the culprits quite early on, but then again I do read a lot of whodunnits and crime thrillers.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Connolly on Nov 24, 2017 15:50:05 GMT
It's a decent solid whodunnit and I like the use of MRJ's stories, even though she does make some mistakes in describing them ("Oh, Whistle" isn't set in Seaburgh and "The Mezzotint" isn't set in Cambridge, for instance!). I did guess both of the culprits quite early on, but then again I do read a lot of whodunnits and crime thrillers. So there are two culprits? I'm not reading it now.
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Nov 24, 2017 15:55:46 GMT
It's a decent solid whodunnit and I like the use of MRJ's stories, even though she does make some mistakes in describing them ("Oh, Whistle" isn't set in Seaburgh and "The Mezzotint" isn't set in Cambridge, for instance!). I did guess both of the culprits quite early on, but then again I do read a lot of whodunnits and crime thrillers. So there are two culprits? I'm not reading it now. I'm not giving anything away - I wouldn't do that to you! As you can see from the interview with Nicola Upson, there are two separate crime sprees going on - the MRJ-related one, and the attacks on women. So all I've revealed is that the same person isn't responsible for both! I suppose that's a spoiler but it's a very small one.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Connolly on Nov 24, 2017 16:01:31 GMT
The only things I really remember are a strange novel called The Moving Toyshop (but all I can recall is the title, and how it made me think of Doctor Who) and a detective named something like Gervase Fen. H. You're not the first person I've seen draw comparisons between The Moving Toyshop and Doctor Who - I think specifically the Tom Baker era. And, yes, Gervase Fen is Crispin's regular, somewhat eccentric detective. I read about that comparison but couldn't see it myself. As it stands, while The Moving Toyshop is Edmund Crispin's most popular book (and the only one filmed, for BBC1 in 1964 and Alfred Hitchcock used its climax for Strangers on a Train), it's not his best. That's a toss-up between Buried for Pleasure and Love Lies Bleeding.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Connolly on Nov 24, 2017 16:02:46 GMT
So there are two culprits? I'm not reading it now. I'm not giving anything away - I wouldn't do that to you! As you can see from the interview with Nicola Upson, there are two separate crime sprees going on - the MRJ-related one, and the attacks on women. So all I've revealed is that the same person isn't responsible for both! I suppose that's a spoiler but it's a very small one. Damn you too!
|
|
|
Post by Jojo Lapin X on Nov 24, 2017 16:11:52 GMT
You're not the first person I've seen draw comparisons between The Moving Toyshop and Doctor Who - I think specifically the Tom Baker era. And, yes, Gervase Fen is Crispin's regular, somewhat eccentric detective. I read about that comparison but couldn't see it myself. As it stands, while The Moving Toyshop is Edmund Crispin's most popular book (and the only one filmed, for BBC1 in 1964 and Alfred Hitchcock used its climax for Strangers on a Train), it's not his best. That's a toss-up between Buried for Pleasure and Love Lies Bleeding. LOVE LIES BLEEDING is great. Here is an amusing passage in which a superintendent of police is interrogating the wife of a man who has just been found murdered in his home:
|
|
elricc
Devils Coach Horse
Posts: 100
|
Post by elricc on Nov 24, 2017 17:49:15 GMT
I'm reading it now, I've read all the previous ones and I'm finding it gives me lots of little insights which you might miss if you haven't read the others.
|
|