tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post2545358290225424937..comments2024-03-11T01:39:11.362-04:00Comments on At the Scene of the Crime: The Simple Art of MurderPatrickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01844617192737950378noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-53467889459282818802018-08-20T11:02:05.512-04:002018-08-20T11:02:05.512-04:00I agree, as I often seem to, with Sergio. It's...I agree, as I often seem to, with Sergio. It's a great book, and if not all his opinions are right he is at least upfront and clear about them.Ken Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08207803092348071005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-68735882451074345782011-09-29T05:58:19.119-04:002011-09-29T05:58:19.119-04:00I don't really know much about publishing hous...I don't really know much about publishing house history, so I'll leave the floor open for anyone who does know about it to answer. However, Symons really did enjoy several GAD authors like John Dickson Carr, despite his reservation about length. He tends to focus more on the Brits, which is somewhat disappointing since the Americans tend to get passed over (with some exceptions, like Ellery Queen, whom he also likes a lot).<br /><br />The only time I seriously question his enthusiasm was when he kept praising "The Face on the Cutting Room Floor" while everything he praised about the book sounded hackneyed. For instance, it not only uses the oldest twist in the book, it has to use it *twice*!!!<br /><br />I'll post your inquiry on the GAD Facebook group, TomCat, and see if any members there can provide an answer.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01844617192737950378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-57557955459804841982011-09-29T04:06:31.077-04:002011-09-29T04:06:31.077-04:00TomCat, I have no special knowledge about Julian S...TomCat, I have no special knowledge about Julian Symons or any axe to grind - never met the man, just like his books. I am trying to understand where your criticism really stems from here - he was only in charge of the Penguin mystery list for a few years (1974 to 1979) so I don't know quite what unforgivable thing he is supposed to have done - he just did what anyone would do and included titles that he thought were good and excluded ones he didn't think were good - what's so strange about that? In the 1970s the publishing lists altered quite a lot as companies became more vertically integrated and a lot of material was no longer available to print or reprint in paperback by Penguin unless they had the hardback rights too. This above all had a big effect on what they were putting out, irrespective of what Symons personal tastes were - and again, he was a huge fan of Carr, Queen, Crispin, Philip Macdonald etc., so was not, as far as I am aware, exacting some kind of vendetta against the so-called humdrums. Why do you think he was?Sergio (Tipping My Fedora)http://bloodymurder.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-35872942635910377802011-09-29T02:37:32.863-04:002011-09-29T02:37:32.863-04:00I only just got around to reading this enormous re...I only just got around to reading this enormous review, and it literarily dwarves the one we've been assiduously penning together! Anyway, I'm afraid the two of you haven't bend my opinion on Julian Symons in one way or the other. He might cover his ass by saying that he's merely recording his enthusiasm, but the stunt he pulled when he landed himself a job as editor of Penguin is unforgivable and shows the despicable character of a self-appointed censor. I tried looking up the source, but I can't find it anymore – so I posted an <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GAdetection/message/27294" rel="nofollow">enquiry</a> at the GAD group. <br /><br />But I will attempt to read one of his books somewhere in the near future. I need some target practice. ;)TomCathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03415176301265218101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-51398350916920396042011-09-28T18:24:08.525-04:002011-09-28T18:24:08.525-04:00Sextonblake, I find myself agreeing with you. The ...Sextonblake, I find myself agreeing with you. The reviews on my copy of the book call it "staggeringly comprehensive" and so on, but it's a very personal look at the genre. Symons admits as much.<br /><br />Curt, well-said. I wish I'd thought of phrasing it like that.<br /><br />John: you're really starting to predict how I can get books. Wilfrid Laurier University and Guelph's University both have copies of Haycraft's book, and yes, I placed a hold. Thanks for directing me to it; it sounds very interesting! Also, I have no idea where I read this, but I recall reading that Symons actually liked "Mortal Consequences" better as a title.<br /><br />As for Margaret Millar, the GAD Facebook group was in a furore about her a while back. I'm in the middle of a book right now, but if Paul Halter's "The Fourth Door" doesn't come in, "How Like an Angel" will follow.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01844617192737950378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-87385590802476116242011-09-28T17:44:07.741-04:002011-09-28T17:44:07.741-04:00Nicely done, gentlemen! Thanks for this in-depth j...Nicely done, gentlemen! Thanks for this in-depth job. Although I, too, take exception to Patrick’s attack on John Irving. I'll spare you a mini dissertation on why I think THE CIDER HOUSE RULES is one of his better books. It was written as his homage to Dickens who is Irving's idol in all of literature. However, I don't particularly care for anything Irving wrote after THE FOURTH HAND.<br /><br />About time your guys start writing about Margaret Millar! ROSE'S LAST SUMMER is a favorite of mine. Brilliant piece of devilish misdirection -- though when it was televised on an episode of "Thriller" the tricks were sadly transparent. Shows how some stories can be work perfect on paper and use words to misdirect and befuddle the reader, but once the same story is transferred to a performance so much is lost and often so obvious.<br /><br />For some reason Symons' book was re-titled MORTAL CONSEQUENCES when it was published in the US. I have a copy but have never read it cover to cover. I used it for reference prior to finding Barzun & Taylor’s <i>Catalogue of Crime</i> and <i>Murder for Pleasure</i> by Howard Haycraft.<br /><br />Unlike Symons who gives short shrift to so many fine American mystery writers Haycraft covers a wide spectrum: American, British and even European writers. Haycraft's book is a fascinating historical read of the genre when it was still young and because it places the Golden Age writers (then mostly "modern") and their popularity in a contemporary 1940s context. So many writers who are out of print and forgotten come up in conversation in Haycraft's book and I still use it as a guide to hunt down the best of the more obscure mystery authors. You ought to hunt down a copy - perhaps via an Ontario library. The book is priced as a "collector's book" via the on-line booksellers unfortunately, though it may be possible to find a copy for under $15.J F Norrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06473487417479127354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-28623671121595527992011-09-28T14:33:06.569-04:002011-09-28T14:33:06.569-04:00Interesting read. I don't believe the Chinama...Interesting read. I don't believe the Chinaman prohibition had anything to do with Charlie Chan. Do we even have any evidence that Knox was aware of the Biggers books when he laid down his rule? Not all American books were that well known in Britain. What was very well-known was the Oriental master criminal in English thrillers, of which Sax Rohmer's Dr. Fu Manchu was the most (in)famous. Since these characters were racist caricatures, in my view, arguing for a their prohibition can be seen a positive step in that context! Though I guess we could criticize Knox for failing to appreciate that a "Chinaman" could be presented in a nuanced, nonracist way.<br /><br />But this gets a larger point that Symons fails to appreciate, I think: that a lot of the rules were designed to distinguish the "highbrow" detective novel from the "lowbrow" thriller that was so popular at the time. Knox's rules aren't really anti-literary, in my view (unlike Van Dine's--Van Dine specifically prohibits literary and stylistic flourishes--Knox doesn't really do that). The rules, as put forth by Knox, are, I think, compatible with more literary style--unless you think fair play detection is necessarily incompatible with good writing. But Marsh seems to have managed it, for example, in Surfeit of Lampreys, and Chandler, say, in The Lady in the Lake. And there's nothing in these books incompatible with Knox's rules, is there?The Passing Tramphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09830680639601570152noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-90910650738272624432011-09-28T13:46:59.294-04:002011-09-28T13:46:59.294-04:00An excellent debate, gentlemen. The book should pe...An excellent debate, gentlemen. The book should perhaps be taken as a personal agenda rather than an objective overview of the genre (which it is sometimes taken for). I'm not fond of the book overall, although I must say that Symons' THE GREAT DETECTIVES is one of my favourite crime books.Sextonblakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-34775306541817743682011-09-28T06:44:57.994-04:002011-09-28T06:44:57.994-04:00Thank you, Sergio! Writing this was a blast. :)
I...Thank you, Sergio! Writing this was a blast. :)<br /><br />Incidentally, if anyone tried reading this when the formatting was completely off (dark colours for the fonts, no pictures, etc.) I apologise. This was due to an error I experienced when posting, but it's fixed now. :)Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01844617192737950378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-2253546334429713862011-09-28T06:41:59.578-04:002011-09-28T06:41:59.578-04:00The cover you have for the hardback edition, the o...The cover you have for the hardback edition, the one in red, is the one I read circa 1980 (not quite in a land far, far away but ...).<br /><br />Happy 100th Patrick.<br /><br />Best,<br /><br />SergioSergio (Tipping My Fedora)http://bloodymurder.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com