This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Louis Joseph Vance was a novelist educated in the preparatory department of the Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute. He wrote short stories and verse after 1901, then composed many popular novels. His character "Michael Lanyard", also known as "The Lone Wolf", was featured in eight books and 24 films between 1914 and 1949, and also appeared in radio and television series.
Vance was separated from his wife (whom he married in 1898 and by whom he had a son the next year) when he was found dead in a burnt armchair inside his New York apartment; a cigarette had ignited some benzene (used for cleaning his clothes or for his broken jaw) that he had on his body and he was intoxicated at the time. He had recently returned from the West Indies, where he gathered material for a new book. The death was ruled accidental.
This largely forgotten thriller from 1920 is an intriguing mix of Radium-Age sci-fi and Jazz-Age noir, and I found it an immensely readable page-turner. But it irritated me at the end.
Wealthy young artist Priscilla, also known as Cilla, hangs out with the New York jet set, and is quite busy attending bridge games, dances, and cocktail parties with all the beautiful people. Yet she knows details about crimes committed in the dark alleys and opium dens of Manhattan's underbelly before they ever hit the papers. She confides in her best friend, a psychiatrist who is also madly in love with her, that she knows these things because she was there. Is she living some kind of a double life? Is this a Jekyll and Hyde story? The doctor tries to explain the mystery as Priscilla starts getting threatening visits to her Greenwich Village studio from some pretty shady characters who claim to know her.
The writing is absolutely outstanding, bordering on sheer poetry at times, and delving into acid-trip descriptions of metaphysical experiences beyond the unconscious mind. The high class of the prose is in stark contrast to the plentiful old time gangster dialogue that peppers the book like an Eddie G. Robinson film. This is one of those books that is so cinematic that when I think of it years from now, I might confuse the story with something I saw on Turner Classic Movies.
In fact, many of Louis Joseph Vance's works have been translated into film, and this one is no exception, having been made into the 1920 silent Paramount horror film of the same name.
The pacing and suspense are also tight, making this feel quite modern if it wasn't for the archaic language. It's one of those books that you may find yourself reading in one sitting. Besides some pretty outdated notions about what hypnotism is like and some other hokey science, this is a pretty solid piece of classic literary entertainment. All except that ending.
Now, in order to explain my dislike of the finale, I'll have to go seriously into spoiler territory, so if you want to check out this rare gem for yourself, you may want to skip the rest of the review. You have been warned!
SPOILERS ahead in one, two, three...
The main character's "alter ego" is in reality her twin sister, Leonora, with whom Priscilla has a psychic link. This itself is not the spoiler, as the reader will likely guess this before the second act. Separated as infants during their parents' divorce, Nora went to live with her mother and Cilla went to live with her father. Nora's artsy and flighty mother died young, and so she grew up street-wise, getting enmeshed in the seedy underbelly of New York's criminal underworld. Cilla meanwhile was raised by her father in the lap of Park Avenue luxury. But the two dream of each other, and we watch Nora's struggles to break from her drug-addicted and sociopathic pals to marry the man she loves. Eighty percent of the book deals with Nora and the reader is supposed to be invested in her arc. But at the end of the book, Nora is unceremoniously killed "off-screen," and Cilla is mistaken as Nora by the criminals and Nora's husband Mario. Just three pages left in the book and everything is explained to Cilla by her psychiatrist boyfriend. The book allows no time for Cilla or Mario to digest this information. Just when Cilla was on the verge of being reunited with a lost sibling with whom she psychically spent all of her resting hours, and just when Mario finally marries the woman for whom he risked life and limb, their loved one is taken from them. But instead of grieving for her lost sister, this person with whom she has shared a link with for years, the person who Cilla hoped would someday have her Cinderella ending and run off with her handsome prince, what does Cilla do? Shacks up with Nora's husband it seems. The author wraps things up abruptly, and furthermore practically tells the reader that this is supposed to be considered a happy ending. But I saw it as rushed. All the emotional investment the author built over the course of the novel was torn down in a few pages. Nora's fight was all for nothing. And are we to believe that just because Nora and Cilla look alike that Mario would love Cilla the same, like some twisted consolation prize? That's a pretty shallow ending for what up to that point had been a thoughtful piece of melodrama. Since this sentiment is such an abrupt about-face in tone and taste, it makes the ending even more jarring. In addition, all the characters are brought together under the most contrived circumstances at the final hour that any suspension of belief I held in good faith came suddenly crashing to earth.
Ah, but so many writers have problems with endings that I guess it's best if you just enjoy the journey, right? I mean, look at Stephen King!
And I did enjoy the journey overall and I think you lovers of classic thrillers will get a kick out of this too.