What do you think?
Rate this book
Before the Fact
Lina McLaidlaw waits until she is 30 before accepting a marriage proposal from the feckless and irresponsible Johnnie Aysgarth. As head of a fine household and guardian of both the morals and finances of the man she chose to marry, she finds her husband was, and perhaps still is, a killer.
Paperback
First published January 1, 1932
43 people are currently reading
1284 people want to read
About the author
Francis Iles
19 books41 followersFrancis Iles is a pseudonym of Anthony Berkeley Cox who also wrote under the names A.B. Cox, Anthony Berkeley and A. Monmouth Platts.
Cox was born in Watford and was educated at Sherborne School and University College London.
He served in the Army in World War I and thereafter worked as a journalist, contributing a series of humourous sketches to the magazine 'Punch'. These were later published collectively (1925) under the Anthony Berkeley pseudonym as 'Jugged Journalism' and the book was followed by a series of minor comic novels such as 'Brenda Entertains' (1925), 'The Family Witch' (1925) and 'The Professor on Paws' (1926).
It was also in 1925 when he published, anonymously to begin with, his first detective novel, 'The Layton Court Mystery', which was apparently written for the amusement of himself and his father, who was a big fan of the mystery genre. Later editions of the book had the author as Anthony Berkeley.
He discovered that the financial rewards were far better for detective fiction so he concentrated his efforts on that genre for the following 14 years, using mainly the Anthony Berkeley pseudonym but also writing four novels and three collections of short stories as Francis Isles and one novel as A Monmouth Platts.
In 1928 he founded the famous Detection Club in London and became its first honorary secretary.
In the mid-1930s he began reviewing novels, both mystery and non-mystery, for 'The Daily Telegraph' under the Francis Isles pseudonym, which he had first used for 'Malice Aforethought' in 1931.
In 1939 he gave up writing detective fiction for no apparent reason although it has been suggested that he came into a large inheritance at the time or that his alleged remark, 'When I find something that pays better than detective stories I shall write that' had some relevance. However, he produced nothing significant after he finished writing with 'Death in the House' (Berkeley) and 'As for the Woman' (Isles) in 1939.
He did, however, continue to review books for such as 'John O'London's Weekly', 'The Sunday Times', 'The Daily Telegraph' and, from the mid-1950s to 1970, 'The Guardian'. In addition he produced 'O England!', a study of social conditions and politics in 1934.
He and his wife lived in an old house in St John's Wood, London, and he had an office in The Strand where he was listed as one of the two directors of A B Cox Ltd, a company whose business was unspecified!
Alfred Hitchcock adapted the Francis Isles' title 'Before the Fact' for his film 'Suspicion' in 1941 and in the same year Cox supplied a script for another film 'Flight from Destiny', which was produced by Warner Brothers.
His most enduring character is Roger Sheringham who featured in 10 Anthony Berkeley novels and two posthumous collections of short stories.
He died on 9 March 1971.
Gerry Wolstenholme
January 2012
Cox was born in Watford and was educated at Sherborne School and University College London.
He served in the Army in World War I and thereafter worked as a journalist, contributing a series of humourous sketches to the magazine 'Punch'. These were later published collectively (1925) under the Anthony Berkeley pseudonym as 'Jugged Journalism' and the book was followed by a series of minor comic novels such as 'Brenda Entertains' (1925), 'The Family Witch' (1925) and 'The Professor on Paws' (1926).
It was also in 1925 when he published, anonymously to begin with, his first detective novel, 'The Layton Court Mystery', which was apparently written for the amusement of himself and his father, who was a big fan of the mystery genre. Later editions of the book had the author as Anthony Berkeley.
He discovered that the financial rewards were far better for detective fiction so he concentrated his efforts on that genre for the following 14 years, using mainly the Anthony Berkeley pseudonym but also writing four novels and three collections of short stories as Francis Isles and one novel as A Monmouth Platts.
In 1928 he founded the famous Detection Club in London and became its first honorary secretary.
In the mid-1930s he began reviewing novels, both mystery and non-mystery, for 'The Daily Telegraph' under the Francis Isles pseudonym, which he had first used for 'Malice Aforethought' in 1931.
In 1939 he gave up writing detective fiction for no apparent reason although it has been suggested that he came into a large inheritance at the time or that his alleged remark, 'When I find something that pays better than detective stories I shall write that' had some relevance. However, he produced nothing significant after he finished writing with 'Death in the House' (Berkeley) and 'As for the Woman' (Isles) in 1939.
He did, however, continue to review books for such as 'John O'London's Weekly', 'The Sunday Times', 'The Daily Telegraph' and, from the mid-1950s to 1970, 'The Guardian'. In addition he produced 'O England!', a study of social conditions and politics in 1934.
He and his wife lived in an old house in St John's Wood, London, and he had an office in The Strand where he was listed as one of the two directors of A B Cox Ltd, a company whose business was unspecified!
Alfred Hitchcock adapted the Francis Isles' title 'Before the Fact' for his film 'Suspicion' in 1941 and in the same year Cox supplied a script for another film 'Flight from Destiny', which was produced by Warner Brothers.
His most enduring character is Roger Sheringham who featured in 10 Anthony Berkeley novels and two posthumous collections of short stories.
He died on 9 March 1971.
Gerry Wolstenholme
January 2012
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 202 reviews
November 4, 2020
This crime classic is the basis of the Hitchcock masterpiece "Suspicion" and in this case the movie was definitely better than the book.
Lina McLaidlaw a plain spinster approaching 30 recklessly marries the charming Johnny Asygarth even though she suspects he is just marrying her for her money. Johnny's aristocratic family has fallen on bad times due to the spendthrift nature of his father and all the boys in his family seem to have taken after the old man. Johnny is dashing, charming and popular but is he also a murderer? Johnny has bad habits that require a steady flow of income and when reckless betting on the horses get him in big trouble will his new wife bail him out or will he have to resort to more extreme measures? The answer to that question makes for a very disturbing outcome to this classic novel.
This was a very enjoyable book to read and I kept turning the pages to find out what happens next. The question this book poses is whether some people are born to be murderers or are some people born murderees?
The author delves into the psychology of both Lina and Johnny which I found very fascinating. I would definitely recommend this book but the sanitized movie version might be more appealing to some.
Lina McLaidlaw a plain spinster approaching 30 recklessly marries the charming Johnny Asygarth even though she suspects he is just marrying her for her money. Johnny's aristocratic family has fallen on bad times due to the spendthrift nature of his father and all the boys in his family seem to have taken after the old man. Johnny is dashing, charming and popular but is he also a murderer? Johnny has bad habits that require a steady flow of income and when reckless betting on the horses get him in big trouble will his new wife bail him out or will he have to resort to more extreme measures? The answer to that question makes for a very disturbing outcome to this classic novel.
This was a very enjoyable book to read and I kept turning the pages to find out what happens next. The question this book poses is whether some people are born to be murderers or are some people born murderees?
The author delves into the psychology of both Lina and Johnny which I found very fascinating. I would definitely recommend this book but the sanitized movie version might be more appealing to some.
November 6, 2012
Francis Iles’ 1932 novel Before the Fact is best known today as the book on which Alfred Hitchcock’s classic movie 1941 Suspicion was based. As most fans of the movie are aware, the endings of the novel and the movie differ very significantly, and which you prefer is largely a matter of taste.
Anthony Berkeley Cox (1893-1971) was born in England and wrote detective stories under several names, including Anthony Berkeley, A. Monmouth Platts and Francis Iles.
Before the Fact, like another of his Francis Iles novels, Malice Aforethought, can be considered to be one of those crime novels that try to be more than just a straight detective novel. As literary critics would rather pompously put the matter, they are an attempt to transcend the limitations of the genre. In both cases there is no doubt whatever of the murderer’s identity (in both cases his identity is revealed on the very first page) - both are psychological studies of murderers (and in the case of Before the Fact of potential murder victims).
Before the Fact is told from the point of view of Lina Aysgarth (née McLaidlaw). Lina has always considered herself to be strong-willed and as a woman who will have to rely on brains rather than beauty if she is to find a husband. And at the age of twenty-eight Lina has decided that she very much wants to find a husband.
The man she chooses is Johnnie Aysgarth. This does not please her father, General McLaidlaw. He is convinced that Johnnie is simply after her money (she already has five hundred a year and will come into £50,000 on her father’s death, a very large sum of money at the time). The general believes that Johnnie, like all the Aysgarths, is no good. But Lina has made her choice.
She soon realises that Johnnie is not a terribly good catch. He spent a great deal of money on her on her honeymoon but then she discovers that it was all borrowed money. Johnnie does not have a penny to his name. Lina tells him that he will have to get a job, a suggestion that shocks him deeply. Work is something he has never contemplated. Lina insists, and Johnnie relents to the extent of taking a position as an estate manager. But there are more unpleasant discoveries to follow. Johnnie is a hopeless (and notably unsuccessful) gambler. He has huge debts. And he is as irresponsible as a child. Oddly enough, this is what makes Lina love him so much. She is convinced that he could not live without her.
Johnnie’s gambling continues to be a problem, and then a fortunate accident happens (fortunate indeed for Johnnie) - the general dies and Lina is now a wealthy woman.
As their marriage progresses Johnnie’s irresponsibility becomes if anything even worse. He takes to forgery. And then Lina makes an unnerving discovery. Her father’s death may not have been due to natural causes, Or rather, the natural causes (a heart condition) may have been given a helping hand by Johnnie. Whether Johnnie is actually, in strictly legal terms, a murderer is open to doubt.
Worse is to follow. There will be other deaths, and other revelations about Johnnie. Lina’s suspicions will continue to grow and drive her almost to breaking point.
The second half of the book differs substantially from the film and the ending differs even more dramatically. Interestingly enough Hitchcock originally intended to go with the ending of the book. I don’t propose even to hint at either ending, but they do represent a considerable change in the tone of the story. I personally prefer the ending of the film but the ending of the book certainly has its virtues.
Both book and film are concerned mostly with the effect of Lina’s suspicions on her own peace of mind, and indeed her sanity. Both are also fascinating case studies of a charming, even loveable, man who really is, as Lina’s father warned her, no good.
The book, even more than the film, is also concerned in an almost gothic manner with the heritability of evil. All the Aysgarths are charming, and none of them is any good. Are Johnnie’s weaknesses of his own making, or are they simply the inevitable results of heredity?
Compared to the movie the book is perhaps a trifle over-long, with a lengthy sub-plot which Hitchcock quite wisely dropped from the movie. Nonetheless the novel is an intriguing early example of the psychological crime novel, and in 1932 (at the height of the so-called golden age of the detective story as intellectual puzzle) was certainly ahead of its time. It can also be seen as a very bizarre love story. The psychological crime novel is not a favourite sub-genre of mine but this is a very good example of the breed and can certainly be recommended.
Anthony Berkeley Cox (1893-1971) was born in England and wrote detective stories under several names, including Anthony Berkeley, A. Monmouth Platts and Francis Iles.
Before the Fact, like another of his Francis Iles novels, Malice Aforethought, can be considered to be one of those crime novels that try to be more than just a straight detective novel. As literary critics would rather pompously put the matter, they are an attempt to transcend the limitations of the genre. In both cases there is no doubt whatever of the murderer’s identity (in both cases his identity is revealed on the very first page) - both are psychological studies of murderers (and in the case of Before the Fact of potential murder victims).
Before the Fact is told from the point of view of Lina Aysgarth (née McLaidlaw). Lina has always considered herself to be strong-willed and as a woman who will have to rely on brains rather than beauty if she is to find a husband. And at the age of twenty-eight Lina has decided that she very much wants to find a husband.
The man she chooses is Johnnie Aysgarth. This does not please her father, General McLaidlaw. He is convinced that Johnnie is simply after her money (she already has five hundred a year and will come into £50,000 on her father’s death, a very large sum of money at the time). The general believes that Johnnie, like all the Aysgarths, is no good. But Lina has made her choice.
She soon realises that Johnnie is not a terribly good catch. He spent a great deal of money on her on her honeymoon but then she discovers that it was all borrowed money. Johnnie does not have a penny to his name. Lina tells him that he will have to get a job, a suggestion that shocks him deeply. Work is something he has never contemplated. Lina insists, and Johnnie relents to the extent of taking a position as an estate manager. But there are more unpleasant discoveries to follow. Johnnie is a hopeless (and notably unsuccessful) gambler. He has huge debts. And he is as irresponsible as a child. Oddly enough, this is what makes Lina love him so much. She is convinced that he could not live without her.
Johnnie’s gambling continues to be a problem, and then a fortunate accident happens (fortunate indeed for Johnnie) - the general dies and Lina is now a wealthy woman.
As their marriage progresses Johnnie’s irresponsibility becomes if anything even worse. He takes to forgery. And then Lina makes an unnerving discovery. Her father’s death may not have been due to natural causes, Or rather, the natural causes (a heart condition) may have been given a helping hand by Johnnie. Whether Johnnie is actually, in strictly legal terms, a murderer is open to doubt.
Worse is to follow. There will be other deaths, and other revelations about Johnnie. Lina’s suspicions will continue to grow and drive her almost to breaking point.
The second half of the book differs substantially from the film and the ending differs even more dramatically. Interestingly enough Hitchcock originally intended to go with the ending of the book. I don’t propose even to hint at either ending, but they do represent a considerable change in the tone of the story. I personally prefer the ending of the film but the ending of the book certainly has its virtues.
Both book and film are concerned mostly with the effect of Lina’s suspicions on her own peace of mind, and indeed her sanity. Both are also fascinating case studies of a charming, even loveable, man who really is, as Lina’s father warned her, no good.
The book, even more than the film, is also concerned in an almost gothic manner with the heritability of evil. All the Aysgarths are charming, and none of them is any good. Are Johnnie’s weaknesses of his own making, or are they simply the inevitable results of heredity?
Compared to the movie the book is perhaps a trifle over-long, with a lengthy sub-plot which Hitchcock quite wisely dropped from the movie. Nonetheless the novel is an intriguing early example of the psychological crime novel, and in 1932 (at the height of the so-called golden age of the detective story as intellectual puzzle) was certainly ahead of its time. It can also be seen as a very bizarre love story. The psychological crime novel is not a favourite sub-genre of mine but this is a very good example of the breed and can certainly be recommended.
April 11, 2023
Está novela de 1932 es la base de la famosa película de Hitchcock 'Sospecha'. Narrada desde el punto de vista de una joven de buena familia pero no muy agraciada, que se casa con un caradura encantador... la intriga está servida. Mucho más realista y pesimista que la peli, es una lectura curiosa.
December 30, 2014
This book is another one of those classics from the golden age of mystery which is found on the all-time "best of" lists. Written in 1932, it has aged well and was used as the inspiration of the film Suspicion by Alfred Hitchcock. But the film and the book have very little in common except for the characters and a few of the scenarios, so if you have seen the film and liked it, you need to read the story in its original form which is vastly different.
A rather plain spinster from a moneyed family is swept off her feet by a real charmer named Johnny. She is warned that he is "a rotter", is a womanizer, and has no visible income. But she is madly in love with him and they marry. He is always attentive and she has no reason to think that his bad habits from the past will re-appear; unfortunately for her, they have and she catches him selling her jewelry, forging her name to checks, and other unpleasant practices like having affairs with their neighbors. She forgives him and feels that she can change his ways for the better. But then she begins to have suspicions which lead to.............read it and find out how it ends. Rather surprising and well done. Recommended.
A rather plain spinster from a moneyed family is swept off her feet by a real charmer named Johnny. She is warned that he is "a rotter", is a womanizer, and has no visible income. But she is madly in love with him and they marry. He is always attentive and she has no reason to think that his bad habits from the past will re-appear; unfortunately for her, they have and she catches him selling her jewelry, forging her name to checks, and other unpleasant practices like having affairs with their neighbors. She forgives him and feels that she can change his ways for the better. But then she begins to have suspicions which lead to.............read it and find out how it ends. Rather surprising and well done. Recommended.
December 6, 2021
Esta es de esas pocas veces que llego a una novela gracias a la película, cosa rara porque lo que me gusta es leer antes el libro: nunca me ha atraído leer un libro de una película ya vista. El caso es que me llamó especialmente la atención esta novela porque Hitchock la llevó al cine en 1941 y sabía que había tenido que vérselas y deseárselas con la censura del Estudio de cine porque en aquella época era casi imposible que una película no acabara en happy ending. Sin embargo, en Sospecha, Hitchcock se las arregló para engañar de alguna forma a la censura a través de pistas al espectador, gestos, miradas y a través de un personaje masculino muy ambiguo: después de leer la novela se entiende lo que se lo tuvo que currar Hitchcock para respetar de alguna forma la novela original, y de paso colársela a los Estudios, porque el final de la película fue medianamente impuesto, y sin embargo, la sensación del espectador cuando acaba Sospecha es que no es exactamente un happy ending lo que ha visto.
"Algunas mujeres dan a luz a asesinos, otras se acuestan con estos y algunas contraen matrimonio con ellos. Lina Aysgarth llevaba casi ocho años de convivencia con su marido cuando se dio cuenta de que estaba casada con un asesino."
Desde este primer párrafo con el que arranca la novela, está clarísimo que el autor, Francis Iles está sentando las bases de lo que será la novela. Desde un principio clava en el lector la duda, y durante toda la novela esta duda ya no le abandonará al igual que a Lina. Toda la novela está contada desde el punto de vista de Lina Aysgarth, una chica bien que iba para solterona y cuando se le cruza en el camino Johnnie Aysgarth, encantador de serpientes, apuesto y sin un duro, se casa con él en contra de los deseos de su familia. A partir de este momento seremos testigos de cómo Johnnie, quién no ha dado un palo al agua en su vida, estará continuamente endeudado por culpa de las apuestas y de negocios imposibles, lo que a lo largo de los años de matrimonio no le traerá a Lina más que problemas.
"Pronto descubrió que en su círculo la inteligencia, era por encima de todo lo demás, lo que no se practicaba. En una mujer equivalía a un delito imperdonable. La cleptomanía siempre se disculpaba pero la inteligencia jamás."
Sabiendo como sabe el lector que Johnnie es un tarambana sin remedio… siempre tenemos la duda que nos acompañará desde el primer párrafo de si además cabe la posibilidad de que pueda ser un asesino, tal como predice Lina al comienzo de la novela. Y ésta es el gran talento de esta novela, comprobar hasta qué punto es cierto o solo producto de la imaginación de una mujer que se ha vuelto algo inestable como producto de un matrimonio problemático. Aunque la novela en un principio tiene un tono engañoso, de felicidad conyugal, poco a poco se va convirtiendo en un domestic noir donde la mente de Lina juega un papel importantísimo: la duda continua sobre su marido, lo que comenzará a causar estragos en su mente, anulandola poco a poco.
"Se vio a la deriva, arrastrada por fuerzas más poderosas que ella misma. Renunció a su capacidad de tomar decisiones, nadie se la quitó. Ya no quería tomar decisiones."
Para ser un noir de 1932, tiene un ritmo muy ágil, es muy entretenida y tiene mucho rollo psicológico, sin cortarse un pelo a la hora de cuestionar ciertos dilemas sociales concernientes a la mujer de aquella época. No es que sea una novela feminista, pero si que Francis Iles saca a relucir ciertos roles que las mujeres se veían obligadas a ejercer solo por el hecho de ser mujeres. Y es interesante cómo el autor aborda el personaje de Lina, que cuando era soltera era una chica con ideales feministas, y sin embargo al casarse con Johnnie, se va ensombreciendo por un amor obsesivo hacia Johnnie.
Complicidad de Francis Iles me ha sorprendido mucho, sobre todo por lo poco conocido que es este autor, y merece mucho la pena leerse también por qué no, para establecer esa comparativa con la película que acabó dirigiendo Hitchcock. Una lectura totalmente recomendable.
"Conforme tomaban el té, Lina experimentó la extraña sensación de que vivía inmersa en una obra de teatro. . El público sabía que ella sería asesinada al final del tercer acto para que cayaera el telón, pero ella lo ignoraba. Tenía que brillar alegre e indiferente hasta el final. Acabó actuando para ese público inexistente.
Esa ilusión de irrealidad condujo a un convencimiento de irrealidad."
https://kansasbooks.blogspot.com/2021...
"Algunas mujeres dan a luz a asesinos, otras se acuestan con estos y algunas contraen matrimonio con ellos. Lina Aysgarth llevaba casi ocho años de convivencia con su marido cuando se dio cuenta de que estaba casada con un asesino."
Desde este primer párrafo con el que arranca la novela, está clarísimo que el autor, Francis Iles está sentando las bases de lo que será la novela. Desde un principio clava en el lector la duda, y durante toda la novela esta duda ya no le abandonará al igual que a Lina. Toda la novela está contada desde el punto de vista de Lina Aysgarth, una chica bien que iba para solterona y cuando se le cruza en el camino Johnnie Aysgarth, encantador de serpientes, apuesto y sin un duro, se casa con él en contra de los deseos de su familia. A partir de este momento seremos testigos de cómo Johnnie, quién no ha dado un palo al agua en su vida, estará continuamente endeudado por culpa de las apuestas y de negocios imposibles, lo que a lo largo de los años de matrimonio no le traerá a Lina más que problemas.
"Pronto descubrió que en su círculo la inteligencia, era por encima de todo lo demás, lo que no se practicaba. En una mujer equivalía a un delito imperdonable. La cleptomanía siempre se disculpaba pero la inteligencia jamás."
Sabiendo como sabe el lector que Johnnie es un tarambana sin remedio… siempre tenemos la duda que nos acompañará desde el primer párrafo de si además cabe la posibilidad de que pueda ser un asesino, tal como predice Lina al comienzo de la novela. Y ésta es el gran talento de esta novela, comprobar hasta qué punto es cierto o solo producto de la imaginación de una mujer que se ha vuelto algo inestable como producto de un matrimonio problemático. Aunque la novela en un principio tiene un tono engañoso, de felicidad conyugal, poco a poco se va convirtiendo en un domestic noir donde la mente de Lina juega un papel importantísimo: la duda continua sobre su marido, lo que comenzará a causar estragos en su mente, anulandola poco a poco.
"Se vio a la deriva, arrastrada por fuerzas más poderosas que ella misma. Renunció a su capacidad de tomar decisiones, nadie se la quitó. Ya no quería tomar decisiones."
Para ser un noir de 1932, tiene un ritmo muy ágil, es muy entretenida y tiene mucho rollo psicológico, sin cortarse un pelo a la hora de cuestionar ciertos dilemas sociales concernientes a la mujer de aquella época. No es que sea una novela feminista, pero si que Francis Iles saca a relucir ciertos roles que las mujeres se veían obligadas a ejercer solo por el hecho de ser mujeres. Y es interesante cómo el autor aborda el personaje de Lina, que cuando era soltera era una chica con ideales feministas, y sin embargo al casarse con Johnnie, se va ensombreciendo por un amor obsesivo hacia Johnnie.
Complicidad de Francis Iles me ha sorprendido mucho, sobre todo por lo poco conocido que es este autor, y merece mucho la pena leerse también por qué no, para establecer esa comparativa con la película que acabó dirigiendo Hitchcock. Una lectura totalmente recomendable.
"Conforme tomaban el té, Lina experimentó la extraña sensación de que vivía inmersa en una obra de teatro. . El público sabía que ella sería asesinada al final del tercer acto para que cayaera el telón, pero ella lo ignoraba. Tenía que brillar alegre e indiferente hasta el final. Acabó actuando para ese público inexistente.
Esa ilusión de irrealidad condujo a un convencimiento de irrealidad."
https://kansasbooks.blogspot.com/2021...
June 29, 2012
"Some women give birth to murderers, some go to bed
with them, and some marry them." First line of a whopper
dark comedy that Christopher Morley tabbed in 1932 as
"a masterpiece of cruelty and wit."
Rich, late 20s-something-virgin Lina succumbs to Johnnie
on the spot and elsewhere. She divines that he's a forger,
thief and an embezzler. Written decades pre-PC, but does it
matter? It'll make you gasp w literary pleasure if there's
an honest bone - any bone, it doesn't matter - in yer body.
"According to Johnnie," Lina reflected, "all men had some bias
toward abnormality. Johnnie had tried occasionally to hint
to her of his own, but Lina would never let him." Then the
author adds: "She knew very little about the subject." Lina,
now married to Johnnie, resisted the idea of having her face
slapped with his dick, we assume.
The ultimate masochist, Lina of pale blue eyes waits for Johnnie
to kill her cos she suspects Too Much. He obliges mit de poisoned
milk shake. Sipping her nightcap, 230 sublime pages later, the
author says of Lina, "A tear trickled slowly down her cheek
onto the pillow. She would have liked so much to live."
Geni filmmaker Hitchcock turned this into "Suspicion" w Cary
Grant-Joan Fontaine (Queen of M's). It went into production
without an Ending. Audiences, the moguls sighed, wouldnt accept Cary as Killer. What to do?? Hey, make milady - beyond an M - a neurotica whose "suspicions" are just sexio fantasies !
"Food and drink and love and bodies, the raw meat of life,"
these things concern us, advises the author, "not its
civilized complexities." ~~ The novel is a humdinger.
with them, and some marry them." First line of a whopper
dark comedy that Christopher Morley tabbed in 1932 as
"a masterpiece of cruelty and wit."
Rich, late 20s-something-virgin Lina succumbs to Johnnie
on the spot and elsewhere. She divines that he's a forger,
thief and an embezzler. Written decades pre-PC, but does it
matter? It'll make you gasp w literary pleasure if there's
an honest bone - any bone, it doesn't matter - in yer body.
"According to Johnnie," Lina reflected, "all men had some bias
toward abnormality. Johnnie had tried occasionally to hint
to her of his own, but Lina would never let him." Then the
author adds: "She knew very little about the subject." Lina,
now married to Johnnie, resisted the idea of having her face
slapped with his dick, we assume.
The ultimate masochist, Lina of pale blue eyes waits for Johnnie
to kill her cos she suspects Too Much. He obliges mit de poisoned
milk shake. Sipping her nightcap, 230 sublime pages later, the
author says of Lina, "A tear trickled slowly down her cheek
onto the pillow. She would have liked so much to live."
Geni filmmaker Hitchcock turned this into "Suspicion" w Cary
Grant-Joan Fontaine (Queen of M's). It went into production
without an Ending. Audiences, the moguls sighed, wouldnt accept Cary as Killer. What to do?? Hey, make milady - beyond an M - a neurotica whose "suspicions" are just sexio fantasies !
"Food and drink and love and bodies, the raw meat of life,"
these things concern us, advises the author, "not its
civilized complexities." ~~ The novel is a humdinger.
December 10, 2019
A study in moral monstrosity. At first it seems pretty clear who is the monster and who is the monster's victim; Lina's passivity and self-doubt are maddening, but her essential goodness seems clear. But as the story continues, that easy binary--of monster and victim--becomes increasingly troubled. Does she begin good and is her goodness twisted into monstrosity by life with a toxic, sociopathic narcissist? Or is she herself monstrous to the core? And her monstrosity seems awfully similar to ideal femininity and wifely forbearance; the suggestion that these ideals are themselves monstrous and toxic would get no argument from me. An unsettling and complex book and an object lesson in handling this sort of narrator.
November 18, 2008
This book in one sentence: the story of a sociopath and his wife, who happens to be the stupidest woman in the world.
I read this book because I'd seen Alfred Hitchcock's screen version (the movie's called "Suspicion"). I didn't like the end of the movie, so I thought maybe the book would be better. It wasn't. I actually prefer the movie.
I read this book because I'd seen Alfred Hitchcock's screen version (the movie's called "Suspicion"). I didn't like the end of the movie, so I thought maybe the book would be better. It wasn't. I actually prefer the movie.
January 29, 2024
Sospecha Francis Iles (Anthony Berkeley,1932)
SINOPSIS PERSONAL:
Lina McLaidlaw vive con sus padres en un aburrido pueblecito inglés y a sus 28 años, no ha conocido a ningún hombre que haya llegado a captar su interés como para pensar en el matrimonio. A Lina, su familia siempre le ha dicho que no es guapa pero sí muy inteligente, cosa que tampoco es nada buena para encontrar marido. Pero de pronto, aparece en escena Johnnie Aysgarth, joven, guapo, de una familia noble aunque venida a menos y se dedica a conquistar insistentemente a Lina. Johnnie tiene mala reputación y a pesar de que todo el mundo parece convencido que solo busca a Lina por su dinero, a ella parece darle igual, se ha enamorado y después de un breve noviazgo se casan.
La realidad golpea a Lina al regreso de su fastuosa luna de miel, Johnnie no tiene dinero, tampoco tiene interés en trabajar para conseguirlo y además, es jugador, derrochador sin freno, un vividor. A pesar de sus deudas, apuestas, mentiras y estafas, Lina sigue amándolo profundamente, manteniéndolo y sacándolo de todos sus apuros económicos.
Pero un día, Lina se da cuenta de que su querido esposo tal vez sea un asesino.
OPINIÓN PERSONAL:
- En realidad, gran parte de la novela es la reconstrucción del matrimonio entre Lina y Johnnie, desde que se conocen hasta un final impactante. No consiste para el lector en el típico ¿quién es el asesino?, en realidad, todo está en saber si los descubrimientos de Lina son ciertos y que va a hacer ella al respecto.
- Ritmo de lectura pausado que sólo acelerará prácticamente en el último capítulo.
- Fiestas, partidos de tenis,cócteles y lujo, esa es la vida que lleva este matrimonio a pesar de todo lo que los envuelve. Me han gustado especialmente las conversaciones sobre literatura que se desarrollan en diversas escenas del libro, interesante y que podríamos trasladar a nuestros días perfectamente.
- La tensión es palpable desde el comienzo y eso engancha al lector desde la primera página. Johnnie es carismático y manipulador, es un sinvergüenza y sus acciones y su forma de proceder serán cada vez más perturbadoras. Se sufre por Lina constantemente a pesar que ella no es desconocedora de muchos de esos engaños y trapicheos de su marido.
- Aunque la novela no está narrada en primera persona, sí iremos conociendo toda la historia a través de los ojos de Lina. Algunos diálogos me han resultado algo raros. con muchos ¡Oh!,¡Ah!que me han parecido algo cómicos y restaban tensión.
- El final es ciertamente impactante y creo que mucho más claro de lo que esperaba después de haber visto la adaptación cinematográfica.
- Johnnie es un personaje claro, sabemos lo que hace y sus motivos, pero Lina es una mujer a la que no entenderemos en muchas ocasiones, sospecha, perdona, salva una y otra vez a su marido e incluso, teniendo oportunidades para escapar de él y esa vida que la consume no lo hace, su amor y su afán de proteger a Johnnie son más fuertes que todo lo demás.
CONCLUSIÓN: Aunque no era exactamente lo que esperaba, he disfrutado mucho de esta novela, un clásico que tenía muchas ganas de leer y gracias a Who Editorial lo he podido hacer por fin.
Adaptación cinematográfica de 1941, dirigida por Alfred Hitchcock, con Cary Grant y Joan Fontaine en los papeles principales.
SINOPSIS PERSONAL:
Lina McLaidlaw vive con sus padres en un aburrido pueblecito inglés y a sus 28 años, no ha conocido a ningún hombre que haya llegado a captar su interés como para pensar en el matrimonio. A Lina, su familia siempre le ha dicho que no es guapa pero sí muy inteligente, cosa que tampoco es nada buena para encontrar marido. Pero de pronto, aparece en escena Johnnie Aysgarth, joven, guapo, de una familia noble aunque venida a menos y se dedica a conquistar insistentemente a Lina. Johnnie tiene mala reputación y a pesar de que todo el mundo parece convencido que solo busca a Lina por su dinero, a ella parece darle igual, se ha enamorado y después de un breve noviazgo se casan.
La realidad golpea a Lina al regreso de su fastuosa luna de miel, Johnnie no tiene dinero, tampoco tiene interés en trabajar para conseguirlo y además, es jugador, derrochador sin freno, un vividor. A pesar de sus deudas, apuestas, mentiras y estafas, Lina sigue amándolo profundamente, manteniéndolo y sacándolo de todos sus apuros económicos.
Pero un día, Lina se da cuenta de que su querido esposo tal vez sea un asesino.
OPINIÓN PERSONAL:
- En realidad, gran parte de la novela es la reconstrucción del matrimonio entre Lina y Johnnie, desde que se conocen hasta un final impactante. No consiste para el lector en el típico ¿quién es el asesino?, en realidad, todo está en saber si los descubrimientos de Lina son ciertos y que va a hacer ella al respecto.
- Ritmo de lectura pausado que sólo acelerará prácticamente en el último capítulo.
- Fiestas, partidos de tenis,cócteles y lujo, esa es la vida que lleva este matrimonio a pesar de todo lo que los envuelve. Me han gustado especialmente las conversaciones sobre literatura que se desarrollan en diversas escenas del libro, interesante y que podríamos trasladar a nuestros días perfectamente.
- La tensión es palpable desde el comienzo y eso engancha al lector desde la primera página. Johnnie es carismático y manipulador, es un sinvergüenza y sus acciones y su forma de proceder serán cada vez más perturbadoras. Se sufre por Lina constantemente a pesar que ella no es desconocedora de muchos de esos engaños y trapicheos de su marido.
- Aunque la novela no está narrada en primera persona, sí iremos conociendo toda la historia a través de los ojos de Lina. Algunos diálogos me han resultado algo raros. con muchos ¡Oh!,¡Ah!que me han parecido algo cómicos y restaban tensión.
- El final es ciertamente impactante y creo que mucho más claro de lo que esperaba después de haber visto la adaptación cinematográfica.
- Johnnie es un personaje claro, sabemos lo que hace y sus motivos, pero Lina es una mujer a la que no entenderemos en muchas ocasiones, sospecha, perdona, salva una y otra vez a su marido e incluso, teniendo oportunidades para escapar de él y esa vida que la consume no lo hace, su amor y su afán de proteger a Johnnie son más fuertes que todo lo demás.
CONCLUSIÓN: Aunque no era exactamente lo que esperaba, he disfrutado mucho de esta novela, un clásico que tenía muchas ganas de leer y gracias a Who Editorial lo he podido hacer por fin.
Adaptación cinematográfica de 1941, dirigida por Alfred Hitchcock, con Cary Grant y Joan Fontaine en los papeles principales.
August 22, 2010
SPOILERS ABOUND
If Before the Fact is remembered other than by enthusiasts of the “alternate” murder mysteries that were relatively popular in England in the 1930s it is as the inspiration of Hitchcock’s Suspicion. .
BTF was published in 1932 and for the reader who knows only the England of Marsh, Allingham and Christie it may come as a shock to find a story which deals so openly, if with a somewhat oblique form of openness, with matters of sexuality. The POV character, Lina, is clearly frigid during the first weeks of her marriage before finding pleasure in sex. Her husband, Johnnie, describes her then as having been like a wet fish in bed. We learn that, if Lina had allowed, Johnnie would have experimented unspecified sexual ‘abnormalities.’ Lina, during a time when she is estranged from her husband, frankly considers the possibility of not just taking a lover but of living openly with him.
The ‘twist’ of the book is that the ‘murderee’ as she comes to think of herself, is aware ‘ Before the Fact’ that her husband intends to murder her. Indeed she knowingly takes the poisoned drink from her husband only after she is sure that he will ‘get away’ with murdering her.
My lack of patience with the book is that after one gets over its novelty one realizes that it is a comparatively well written exercise in making the victim to complicit in her victimization that one ceases to blame her victimizer for his actions. Indeed one finishes the book blaming neither the murderer or the person who stood by watching his actions. The Lina whose mind the reader sees into is suffering from masochism so great that she talks herself into seeing her husband, a man of ruthless egotism who has robbed and murdered his way through life, as a child for whom she is responsible. How many women who end up in battered women’s shelters have bought into this idea that somehow it is their fault that they were not able to reign in the weaknesses of the man in their lives? Though Iles works hard to make Johnnie an attractive cad to this reader he is merely a man who preyed on other people. The author may have written the book to explore why people stay in such oppressive relationships but on rereading it seems more like a paean to wifely martyrdom. Rather than seeing Lina as a martyr or a woman who loved not wisely but too well this reader saw her as a woman who had a weak a moral compass as her husband. This reader ended the book feeling more sorry for the other people that Johnnie will murder after he has run through every last cent of his dead wife’s money than she did for Lina.
There was, at this time in England, an amazing amount of affection for the aristocratic cad. Had Johnnie been from the working class one cannot doubt that he would have been thrown into prison and any of Lina’s set who read about his exploits would have seen him as nothing but a common thief and murderer. It is this same affection one sees in Marsh’s A Surfeit of Lampreys wherein the reader is invited to find the fact that the titular family lives by not paying the money they owe to tradespeople and servants charming. Looking back over almost eighty years one sees the enormous degree of entitlement still enjoyed by members of the gentry and aristocracy at that time and one wonders if anything short of the intervention of a World War could have prevented serious class violence from erupting in England.
If Before the Fact is remembered other than by enthusiasts of the “alternate” murder mysteries that were relatively popular in England in the 1930s it is as the inspiration of Hitchcock’s Suspicion. .
BTF was published in 1932 and for the reader who knows only the England of Marsh, Allingham and Christie it may come as a shock to find a story which deals so openly, if with a somewhat oblique form of openness, with matters of sexuality. The POV character, Lina, is clearly frigid during the first weeks of her marriage before finding pleasure in sex. Her husband, Johnnie, describes her then as having been like a wet fish in bed. We learn that, if Lina had allowed, Johnnie would have experimented unspecified sexual ‘abnormalities.’ Lina, during a time when she is estranged from her husband, frankly considers the possibility of not just taking a lover but of living openly with him.
The ‘twist’ of the book is that the ‘murderee’ as she comes to think of herself, is aware ‘ Before the Fact’ that her husband intends to murder her. Indeed she knowingly takes the poisoned drink from her husband only after she is sure that he will ‘get away’ with murdering her.
My lack of patience with the book is that after one gets over its novelty one realizes that it is a comparatively well written exercise in making the victim to complicit in her victimization that one ceases to blame her victimizer for his actions. Indeed one finishes the book blaming neither the murderer or the person who stood by watching his actions. The Lina whose mind the reader sees into is suffering from masochism so great that she talks herself into seeing her husband, a man of ruthless egotism who has robbed and murdered his way through life, as a child for whom she is responsible. How many women who end up in battered women’s shelters have bought into this idea that somehow it is their fault that they were not able to reign in the weaknesses of the man in their lives? Though Iles works hard to make Johnnie an attractive cad to this reader he is merely a man who preyed on other people. The author may have written the book to explore why people stay in such oppressive relationships but on rereading it seems more like a paean to wifely martyrdom. Rather than seeing Lina as a martyr or a woman who loved not wisely but too well this reader saw her as a woman who had a weak a moral compass as her husband. This reader ended the book feeling more sorry for the other people that Johnnie will murder after he has run through every last cent of his dead wife’s money than she did for Lina.
There was, at this time in England, an amazing amount of affection for the aristocratic cad. Had Johnnie been from the working class one cannot doubt that he would have been thrown into prison and any of Lina’s set who read about his exploits would have seen him as nothing but a common thief and murderer. It is this same affection one sees in Marsh’s A Surfeit of Lampreys wherein the reader is invited to find the fact that the titular family lives by not paying the money they owe to tradespeople and servants charming. Looking back over almost eighty years one sees the enormous degree of entitlement still enjoyed by members of the gentry and aristocracy at that time and one wonders if anything short of the intervention of a World War could have prevented serious class violence from erupting in England.
July 12, 2024
The real genius of Alfred Hitchcock is that he reverses the usual 'the book is always better' mantra. So many of his great films are based on frankly mediocre books. He must have read with his imagination in fifth gear to be able to visualise the kernel of a great story, buried among pages of unnecessary drivel and uninteresting characterisation. Suffice it to say, this is the book on which his film Suspicion is based. The film is great...
March 30, 2019
Os comento cómo he llegado a este libro: leyendo "Villa Ruiseñor" de Agatha Christie; casi todo el relato me recordó mucho a la película "Sospecha" y pensé que Hitchcock se había basado en él, pero cual no sería mi sorpresa que buscando información, vi que era el libro de Francis Iles el que inspiró al director. Cuando comienzas un libro y te encuentras con esta primera frase, ya sabes que la experiencia va a ser brutal:
"Algunas mujeres dan a luz a asesinos, otras se acuestan con éstos y algunas contraen matrimonio con ellos."
A partir de ahí, el autor nos va llevando por las páginas de la novela con una maestría que en muchos momentos se me ha hecho angustiosa. No voy a decir la razón, ya que me consta que hay personas que no han visto la película que Alfred Hitchcock rodó en base a esta novela. Pero sí puedo decir que el director fue una vez más, un genio a la hora de plasmar en fotogramas lo que el autor había descrito con anterioridad en el libro.
Si os soy sincera, he odiado profundamente a la protagonista, más aún que en la película, ya que aquí el autor se regodea más en su personalidad y sí, realmente hay personas que nacen para ser víctimas como bien dice el libro... Yo misma la habría, ejem... Una mosquita muerta que aunque ella no lo crea, se siente superior al resto de la raza humana.
Me ha sorprendido el tono abiertamente sexual del libro, incluso rozando lo morboso y pienso en lo psicópata que era Hitchcock y lo que habría dado por poder plasmar algunas escenas de manera algo sutil, pero es complicado si se ve cómo está en el libro.
Por otro lado decir, que si habéis visto ya la película, no tengáis miedo ya que aunque es muy fiel al libro, el final es completamente distinto...¿Mejor? ¿Peor? al director no le gustó el final de su película... Y ahí lo dejo
¿Recomendaría este libro? Sí, sin duda alguna. Es, en definitiva es un libro que deja muy buenas frases y que todo cinéfilo debería poseer.
Por cierto, no sé a qué viene la traducción al español del título Complicidad.. No tiene nada que ver con el título original, y ni siquiera con la película "Sospecha"
"Algunas mujeres dan a luz a asesinos, otras se acuestan con éstos y algunas contraen matrimonio con ellos."
A partir de ahí, el autor nos va llevando por las páginas de la novela con una maestría que en muchos momentos se me ha hecho angustiosa. No voy a decir la razón, ya que me consta que hay personas que no han visto la película que Alfred Hitchcock rodó en base a esta novela. Pero sí puedo decir que el director fue una vez más, un genio a la hora de plasmar en fotogramas lo que el autor había descrito con anterioridad en el libro.
Si os soy sincera, he odiado profundamente a la protagonista, más aún que en la película, ya que aquí el autor se regodea más en su personalidad y sí, realmente hay personas que nacen para ser víctimas como bien dice el libro... Yo misma la habría, ejem... Una mosquita muerta que aunque ella no lo crea, se siente superior al resto de la raza humana.
Me ha sorprendido el tono abiertamente sexual del libro, incluso rozando lo morboso y pienso en lo psicópata que era Hitchcock y lo que habría dado por poder plasmar algunas escenas de manera algo sutil, pero es complicado si se ve cómo está en el libro.
Por otro lado decir, que si habéis visto ya la película, no tengáis miedo ya que aunque es muy fiel al libro, el final es completamente distinto...¿Mejor? ¿Peor? al director no le gustó el final de su película... Y ahí lo dejo
¿Recomendaría este libro? Sí, sin duda alguna. Es, en definitiva es un libro que deja muy buenas frases y que todo cinéfilo debería poseer.
Por cierto, no sé a qué viene la traducción al español del título Complicidad.. No tiene nada que ver con el título original, y ni siquiera con la película "Sospecha"
February 18, 2019
Its not like the story was not well written
Its not like it wasn't interesting
It was the heroine.
I wanted to finish this book, honestly. I have a short list of things that prompt me to abandon a book. I have abandoned very few books in the years I've been reading all things considered. But I just couldn't go on with this. As I mentioned, it was the infernal heroine. She infuriated me to the point that I couldn't any more with her. She didn't have a lick of sense, and chose to embrace spaghetti brains. This less than intelligent heroine I speak of is Lina, a born victim who was mentally preparing herself to be a spinster..until she met the dashing but reprobate Johnny who with his calculated attentions, dazzled her completely. Johnny was not attracted to Lina but had chosen to marry her for her money to fund his many perversions. Ignoring this reason, she accepts his marriage proposal and they were married. The story details their life together and Lina's justification and ongoing capitulation to Johnny's ways. Johnny was a thief, a chronic gambler, an embezzler, a scammer, a liar, a deadbeat, an adulterer and of course a murderer. He did all this under Lina's nose. After the disintegration of their marriage, Lina takes a lover 'to get back at Johnny' but it things only grew worse for her. She quite literally lost what little was left in her mind. This is when I decided that I had enough. I knew what Lina's demise would be as everything was lining up to be a most wretched story. I didn't need to read the end to confirm this to be true.
So I left Lina and Johnny. I hope Lina experienced an iota of peace before the final act.
*if you're the type that wants to cheer for and not scream at a heroine , this book is not for you. Other readers have confirmed these sentiments, and I regret not heeding their reviews. **
Its not like it wasn't interesting
It was the heroine.
I wanted to finish this book, honestly. I have a short list of things that prompt me to abandon a book. I have abandoned very few books in the years I've been reading all things considered. But I just couldn't go on with this. As I mentioned, it was the infernal heroine. She infuriated me to the point that I couldn't any more with her. She didn't have a lick of sense, and chose to embrace spaghetti brains. This less than intelligent heroine I speak of is Lina, a born victim who was mentally preparing herself to be a spinster..until she met the dashing but reprobate Johnny who with his calculated attentions, dazzled her completely. Johnny was not attracted to Lina but had chosen to marry her for her money to fund his many perversions. Ignoring this reason, she accepts his marriage proposal and they were married. The story details their life together and Lina's justification and ongoing capitulation to Johnny's ways. Johnny was a thief, a chronic gambler, an embezzler, a scammer, a liar, a deadbeat, an adulterer and of course a murderer. He did all this under Lina's nose. After the disintegration of their marriage, Lina takes a lover 'to get back at Johnny' but it things only grew worse for her. She quite literally lost what little was left in her mind. This is when I decided that I had enough. I knew what Lina's demise would be as everything was lining up to be a most wretched story. I didn't need to read the end to confirm this to be true.
So I left Lina and Johnny. I hope Lina experienced an iota of peace before the final act.
*if you're the type that wants to cheer for and not scream at a heroine , this book is not for you. Other readers have confirmed these sentiments, and I regret not heeding their reviews. **
August 23, 2024
One of the best of Francis Iles’s novels, a study in infamy and psychological tension. Where Anthony Berkeley wrote straight crime and investigation fiction, his novels under the pseudonym of Francis Iles contain a darker, more profound examination of the nature of crime and its victims. This is a solid suspense novel with an open-ended finish, and readers are free to interpret the final pages in the kindest manner they wish.
Imagine Cary Grant’s looks/film persona affecting Hitchcock’s film ‘Suspicion!’
Imagine Cary Grant’s looks/film persona affecting Hitchcock’s film ‘Suspicion!’
February 14, 2022
It took a while to get into this book but I'm glad I stuck with it. This is a clever and uniquely written crime story which was the basis for the Alfred Hitchcock thriller Suspicion. The book, which is as much about self-destruction and toxic relationships as the crimes committed, differs quite a bit from the movie but is good in its own way.
August 30, 2012
Is Lina's popular, carefree and handsome new husband really a crook? Well, yes he is. But is he a murderer? And if he is, will he kill again? Will he kill Lina? This is a masterful study of a true sociopath, a man who simply has no sense of remorse or guilt or anything other than his own needs. And it's all told from the point of view of his increasingly suspicious, increasingly scared but devoted wife. This was the basis of Hitchock's 'Suspicion' but the novel is so much more powerful. The tension builds steadily and the climax is all the more effective for being so understated. Highly recommended.
April 12, 2011
While I understand why some may find fault with Iles's portrayal of Lina, to think her stupid is to miss the point. Her descent into further depths of foolishness or irrationality is the major theme of the novel. Iles is a wonderful stylist, and I would count the book among the best written mysteries I have read. His prose gives the plot momentum and plausibility. It is touched by a peculiarly strong note of melancholy.
March 24, 2024
Como muchas otras personas, llegué a esta novela a raíz de la conocida película de Alfred Hitchcock, que me gusta mucho, si bien no es, ni de lejos, de mis preferidas del director.
Y la verdad es que me parece mucho más perturbadora, inquietante y redonda que la película. Después, informándome, entendí por qué: porque le obligaron a cambiar el final (aunque Hitchcock tampoco quería darle el mismo final de la novela, al menos era más coherente con el resto de la trama).
Y, efectivamente, el final del libro difiere bastante del final de la película. Pero yo iría más lejos todavía: todo el tono del libro y gran parte de la trama difiere de la película, que es bastante más amable y "luminosa" que el libro.
La novela de Iles es muy oscura, perturbadora, con dos protagonistas que resultan desagradables (sí, no solamente produce rechazo Johnny Aysgarth por razones obvias, sino que Linda McLaidlaw -apellido de soltera- también es un personaje que resulta desagradable en muchas ocasiones y está muy lejos de ser la pánfila inocentona que encarnaba Joane Fontaine en el film).
Y pese a todo, pese a tratarse de un relato en el que no pude empatizar con ninguno de los personajes, me ha parecido una obra soberbia, de esas que te dejan el cuerpo "removido" y que me han dejado un poso difícil de olvidar.
No entendía muy bien por qué Anthony Berkeley, afamado autor de novelas de misterio (de esos "murder misteries" que tanto me gustan) había adoptado un seudónimo para publicar estas y otras novelas que yo creía que eran del mismo género, a saber, el clásico "whodunnit", pero después de leerla lo he entendido perfectamente: el autor cambia completamente de registro y de tono.
Aquí no se trata tanto de saber "quién lo hizo", pues desde el principio se deja claro al lector con ese genial inicio de la novela: "Algunas mujeres dan a luz asesinos, algunas se meten en sus camas y otras se casan con ellos. Linda Aysgarth llevaba viviendo casi ocho años con su marido el día que se dio cuenta de que estaba casada con un asesino". Más bien lo que hace Berkeley (o Iles, como se prefiera) es hacer un retrato psicológico fantástico de un psicópata narcicista de manual que, además, es un ludópata y mentiroso irrendento, y de el poder de influencia que puede ejercer sobre determinadas víctimas.
Y, por otro lado, demuestra que, por muy inteligente, independiente y autónoma que sea una persona, eso no la salva de acabar cayendo en las garras de este tipo de seres, porque son capaces de identificar los puntos débiles de esas personas, y actuar en consecuencia para mantenerlos agarrados en sus redes, "enganchados" a ellos, como si de una droga dura se tratara. Porque al final, el punto débil de Linda, era el complejo de inferioridad respecto de su hermana menor, era el ego: cansada de que todo el mundo la tome por "la lista", se derrite cuando por primera vez alguien le dice que es guapa (cosa que por otro lado no es exactamente así, ya que es más bien una chica normal, del montón), y cuando, pese a todos los consejos de las personas que la quieren, sigue adelante con la relación, su ego y su engreimiento es tan fuerte, que es capaz de negar cualquier evidencia o, incluso, una vez reconocida, de autoengañarse y engañar y mentir a los demás, con tal de no verse "humillada" por haber caído ante alguien así.
Pero Linda solo tiene ese punto flaco respecto de Johnny... porque ella también puede ser "verdugo" y manipuladora cuando es la que tiene "el poder"... como digo, estamos ante una víctima "compleja" y no ante la típica santita y algo tontorrona que se mueve únicamente por el amor.
Y luego estamos ante ese soberbio final... que te da rabia, que te remueve toda, y que sin embargo yo no cambiaría por nada, porque me parece brillante, impactante y muy coherente con todo el razonamiento psicológico de la novela. Por cierto, si alguien quiere saber el final que había planeado Hitchcock para la película, lo puede encontrar en los diálogos que mantuvo con Truffaut: un final también satisfactorio (de hecho, para el lector justiciero puede que sea el final más satisfactorio) que, a mi juicio, si bien es mejor que el que le impusieron desde los estudios, no llega a ser del todo coherente con el retrato psicológico de Linda.
En definitiva: una novela que no es agradable, y que sin embargo me ha fascinado, de ahí que le haya dado la máxima puntuación
Y la verdad es que me parece mucho más perturbadora, inquietante y redonda que la película. Después, informándome, entendí por qué: porque le obligaron a cambiar el final (aunque Hitchcock tampoco quería darle el mismo final de la novela, al menos era más coherente con el resto de la trama).
Y, efectivamente, el final del libro difiere bastante del final de la película. Pero yo iría más lejos todavía: todo el tono del libro y gran parte de la trama difiere de la película, que es bastante más amable y "luminosa" que el libro.
La novela de Iles es muy oscura, perturbadora, con dos protagonistas que resultan desagradables (sí, no solamente produce rechazo Johnny Aysgarth por razones obvias, sino que Linda McLaidlaw -apellido de soltera- también es un personaje que resulta desagradable en muchas ocasiones y está muy lejos de ser la pánfila inocentona que encarnaba Joane Fontaine en el film).
Y pese a todo, pese a tratarse de un relato en el que no pude empatizar con ninguno de los personajes, me ha parecido una obra soberbia, de esas que te dejan el cuerpo "removido" y que me han dejado un poso difícil de olvidar.
No entendía muy bien por qué Anthony Berkeley, afamado autor de novelas de misterio (de esos "murder misteries" que tanto me gustan) había adoptado un seudónimo para publicar estas y otras novelas que yo creía que eran del mismo género, a saber, el clásico "whodunnit", pero después de leerla lo he entendido perfectamente: el autor cambia completamente de registro y de tono.
Aquí no se trata tanto de saber "quién lo hizo", pues desde el principio se deja claro al lector con ese genial inicio de la novela: "Algunas mujeres dan a luz asesinos, algunas se meten en sus camas y otras se casan con ellos. Linda Aysgarth llevaba viviendo casi ocho años con su marido el día que se dio cuenta de que estaba casada con un asesino". Más bien lo que hace Berkeley (o Iles, como se prefiera) es hacer un retrato psicológico fantástico de un psicópata narcicista de manual que, además, es un ludópata y mentiroso irrendento, y de el poder de influencia que puede ejercer sobre determinadas víctimas.
Y, por otro lado, demuestra que, por muy inteligente, independiente y autónoma que sea una persona, eso no la salva de acabar cayendo en las garras de este tipo de seres, porque son capaces de identificar los puntos débiles de esas personas, y actuar en consecuencia para mantenerlos agarrados en sus redes, "enganchados" a ellos, como si de una droga dura se tratara. Porque al final, el punto débil de Linda, era el complejo de inferioridad respecto de su hermana menor, era el ego: cansada de que todo el mundo la tome por "la lista", se derrite cuando por primera vez alguien le dice que es guapa (cosa que por otro lado no es exactamente así, ya que es más bien una chica normal, del montón), y cuando, pese a todos los consejos de las personas que la quieren, sigue adelante con la relación, su ego y su engreimiento es tan fuerte, que es capaz de negar cualquier evidencia o, incluso, una vez reconocida, de autoengañarse y engañar y mentir a los demás, con tal de no verse "humillada" por haber caído ante alguien así.
Pero Linda solo tiene ese punto flaco respecto de Johnny... porque ella también puede ser "verdugo" y manipuladora cuando es la que tiene "el poder"... como digo, estamos ante una víctima "compleja" y no ante la típica santita y algo tontorrona que se mueve únicamente por el amor.
Y luego estamos ante ese soberbio final... que te da rabia, que te remueve toda, y que sin embargo yo no cambiaría por nada, porque me parece brillante, impactante y muy coherente con todo el razonamiento psicológico de la novela. Por cierto, si alguien quiere saber el final que había planeado Hitchcock para la película, lo puede encontrar en los diálogos que mantuvo con Truffaut: un final también satisfactorio (de hecho, para el lector justiciero puede que sea el final más satisfactorio) que, a mi juicio, si bien es mejor que el que le impusieron desde los estudios, no llega a ser del todo coherente con el retrato psicológico de Linda.
En definitiva: una novela que no es agradable, y que sin embargo me ha fascinado, de ahí que le haya dado la máxima puntuación
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 28, 2024
"Sospecha" escrita por Anthony Berkeley Cox bajo el seudónimo de Francis Iles.
Amantes de la novela detectivesca,aquí tenéis para investigar no solo asesinatos ,también estafas y robos.
Lina a sus 28 años ya no es tan joven para ser una soltera de provincias.
Inteligente pero incauta se enamora de forma incondicional de Johnnie.
Pese a que este Don Juan no engaña a nadie con su descaro,Lina parece ser la única que no es consciente de que pretende vivir a su costa.
Johnnie, un jugador ahogado en deudas.Como irá Lina descubriéndolas y asumiendo como es su marido ,da juego al escritor para crear una novela de gran profundidad psicológica.
Uno de los motivos principales por los que quise hacer esta lectura ,es porque Alfred Hitchock adaptó el libro a película .
Quitando lo conocido ,que en la película ,el final nada tiene que ver con el libro por exigencias de la productora para no dañar la imagen de Cary Grant en un papel tan odioso.
Al film también le faltan tramas y personajes como las “amigas”de Lina.
El curioso personaje de la escritora de novelas de misterios: Isobel Sefbusk, con sus venenos.
Tiene por suerte en la novela mayor protagonismo.Una genialidad de personaje, muestra de la inteligencia del autor el incluirla.
El suspense y la tensión son constantes.Los giros nos introducen en una novela adictiva.Un protagonista odioso,en una sociedad clasista .
Una novela oscura en la que no encontrareis pistolas ni cuchillos,pero si el abismo de la maldad humana.
La portada me tiene enamorada,ese vaso de leche …La editorial hace un gran trabajo con su extenso catálogo y cuida los detalles al máximo.
He leído un ejemplar de Who editorial.
Amantes de la novela detectivesca,aquí tenéis para investigar no solo asesinatos ,también estafas y robos.
Lina a sus 28 años ya no es tan joven para ser una soltera de provincias.
Inteligente pero incauta se enamora de forma incondicional de Johnnie.
Pese a que este Don Juan no engaña a nadie con su descaro,Lina parece ser la única que no es consciente de que pretende vivir a su costa.
Johnnie, un jugador ahogado en deudas.Como irá Lina descubriéndolas y asumiendo como es su marido ,da juego al escritor para crear una novela de gran profundidad psicológica.
Uno de los motivos principales por los que quise hacer esta lectura ,es porque Alfred Hitchock adaptó el libro a película .
Quitando lo conocido ,que en la película ,el final nada tiene que ver con el libro por exigencias de la productora para no dañar la imagen de Cary Grant en un papel tan odioso.
Al film también le faltan tramas y personajes como las “amigas”de Lina.
El curioso personaje de la escritora de novelas de misterios: Isobel Sefbusk, con sus venenos.
Tiene por suerte en la novela mayor protagonismo.Una genialidad de personaje, muestra de la inteligencia del autor el incluirla.
El suspense y la tensión son constantes.Los giros nos introducen en una novela adictiva.Un protagonista odioso,en una sociedad clasista .
Una novela oscura en la que no encontrareis pistolas ni cuchillos,pero si el abismo de la maldad humana.
La portada me tiene enamorada,ese vaso de leche …La editorial hace un gran trabajo con su extenso catálogo y cuida los detalles al máximo.
He leído un ejemplar de Who editorial.
July 31, 2024
Good, but the main character is so incredibly stupid it's hard to feel any sympathy.
February 3, 2025
I literally can't wrap my brain around it. Everyone was awful. So incredibly awful.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 4, 2024
Oh my gosh! Wow! I’m going to have to watch the Hitchcock adaptation now.
April 2, 2017
This novel challenges the criteria I developed for rating books.
Before the Fact is compelling. Mr Iles's prose are good, and moments flow easily into one another. Even though the storytelling takes place, for the most part, within narration and not scenes, which isn't to my taste, the novel is easy to read.
What's more, it made me feel something and is unforgettable.
But... the feeling it gave me was frustration. As readers we are always extremely far ahead of the plot, not only expecting and predicting the next turn of events, but our own expectations and predictions are presented to us over and over.
So much in fact, it starts to feel like the protagonist won't be stuck as the moron we believe her to be, but that the author is presenting her with opportunities to grow, to change in some way in response to events.
I won't say whether or not that happens, but I will say watching this process as it ever so slowly unfolds is frustrating in a way I will never, ever, ever forget.
So there it is: compelling, evocative, and unforgettable, which until now has been my criteria for a five star review. But I wouldn't really recommend it to anyone.
In sum: good writing, proficient storytelling, bad experience.
Before the Fact is compelling. Mr Iles's prose are good, and moments flow easily into one another. Even though the storytelling takes place, for the most part, within narration and not scenes, which isn't to my taste, the novel is easy to read.
What's more, it made me feel something and is unforgettable.
But... the feeling it gave me was frustration. As readers we are always extremely far ahead of the plot, not only expecting and predicting the next turn of events, but our own expectations and predictions are presented to us over and over.
So much in fact, it starts to feel like the protagonist won't be stuck as the moron we believe her to be, but that the author is presenting her with opportunities to grow, to change in some way in response to events.
I won't say whether or not that happens, but I will say watching this process as it ever so slowly unfolds is frustrating in a way I will never, ever, ever forget.
So there it is: compelling, evocative, and unforgettable, which until now has been my criteria for a five star review. But I wouldn't really recommend it to anyone.
In sum: good writing, proficient storytelling, bad experience.
January 19, 2020
What a horrible book. It has no redeeming quality at all. It’s pure tripe and does not in any way reflect any knowledge of the human soul. Or any aspect of human behavior.
An amoral male of no obvious integrity, gets married to a woman who was nearing the age and situation of spinsterhood. Her family is well to do and he has no family. He was probably raised by wolves. But he has the gift of every bad maladjusted thieving lying lazy murdering charmer.
And as each despicable characteristic is revealed, she, the ever loving wife enabled him in Psycho behavior.
It’s really the story of two mentally inept people with no sense of right and wrong, living in dis-unison.
And despite hope of the reader that this sorry woman would wake up and smell the poison, it didn’t happen.
Stupid story by a writer who had nothing to say.
An amoral male of no obvious integrity, gets married to a woman who was nearing the age and situation of spinsterhood. Her family is well to do and he has no family. He was probably raised by wolves. But he has the gift of every bad maladjusted thieving lying lazy murdering charmer.
And as each despicable characteristic is revealed, she, the ever loving wife enabled him in Psycho behavior.
It’s really the story of two mentally inept people with no sense of right and wrong, living in dis-unison.
And despite hope of the reader that this sorry woman would wake up and smell the poison, it didn’t happen.
Stupid story by a writer who had nothing to say.
April 25, 2013
Really loved this. Didn't know whether to be infuriated by her inability to go and tell him to take a hike or understanding. Definitely psychologically convincing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s02y8
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s02y8
April 26, 2013
From BBC Radio 4 - Saturday Drama:
Emilia Fox, Ben Caplan and Patricia Hodge star in a dramatisation of the novel that Alfred Hitchcock based his film, 'Suspicion' on.
Emilia Fox, Ben Caplan and Patricia Hodge star in a dramatisation of the novel that Alfred Hitchcock based his film, 'Suspicion' on.
August 6, 2024
Can you be an accessory to murder before the fact? This book suggests that you can, in a twisted tale of a woman married to a man she slowly comes to realize is more than just "no good."
Never trust a man who calls you "monkeyface" as an endearment.
Never trust a man who calls you "monkeyface" as an endearment.
December 31, 2020
Lina was a complete idiot, and Johnnie was trash. Depsite the excellent opening lines, I wanted to chuck this book out a window.
May 3, 2021
So I’ve read my second Anthony Berkeley book (this time under his pen-name) and wow, he is proving to be one of the most innovative Golden Age Mystery writers that I’ve read! Trial and Error was about a man trying to prove himself guilty, and Before the Fact is a thriller from the perspective of the wife of a killer. I will be spoiling the ending for this book so please click away now if you don’t want to read any spoilers.
Reading this was a trip! I was expecting something a little more conventional (even though I knew that Trial and Error was not the normal golden age mystery) but I was blown away by this book and pretty much finished it in one evening. Although there are murders, this is not really a mystery. I think it’s more of a psychological thriller where we get a look into the mind of someone who would excuse any kind of action, even when she is the victim of murder.
This review was first posted at Eustea Reads
Reading this was a trip! I was expecting something a little more conventional (even though I knew that Trial and Error was not the normal golden age mystery) but I was blown away by this book and pretty much finished it in one evening. Although there are murders, this is not really a mystery. I think it’s more of a psychological thriller where we get a look into the mind of someone who would excuse any kind of action, even when she is the victim of murder.
This review was first posted at Eustea Reads
Displaying 1 - 30 of 202 reviews