A Whiff of Death

by Isaac Asimov

The murder of his graduate student in the University chemistry laboratory causes an assistant professor to turn sleuth

Genres: Mystery, Fiction, Crime, Science Fiction, Detective, Novels, Mystery Thriller

Hardcover

First published January 1, 1958

About the author

Works of prolific Russian-American writer Isaac Asimov include popular explanations of scientific principles, The Foundation Trilogy (1951-1953), and other volumes of fiction.

Isaac Asimov, a professor of biochemistry, wrote as a highly successful author, best known for his books.

Asimov, professor, generally considered of all time, edited more than five hundred books and ninety thousand letters and postcards. He published in nine of the ten major categories of the Dewey decimal classification but lacked only an entry in the category of philosophy (100).

People widely considered Asimov, a master of the genre alongside Robert Anson Heinlein and Arthur Charles Clarke as the "big three" during his lifetime. He later tied Galactic Empire and the Robot into the same universe as his most famous series to create a unified "future history" for his stories much like those that Heinlein pioneered and Cordwainer Smith and Poul Anderson previously produced. He penned "Nightfall," voted in 1964 as the best short story of all time; many persons still honor this title. He also produced well mysteries, fantasy, and a great quantity of nonfiction. Asimov used Paul French, the pen name, for the Lucky Starr, series of juvenile novels.

Most books of Asimov in a historical way go as far back to a time with possible question or concept at its simplest stage. He often provides and mentions well nationalities, birth, and death dates for persons and etymologies and pronunciation guides for technical terms. Guide to Science, the tripartite set Understanding Physics, and Chronology of Science and Discovery exemplify these books.

Asimov, a long-time member, reluctantly served as vice president of Mensa international and described some members of that organization as "brain-proud and aggressive about their IQs." He took more pleasure as president of the humanist association. The asteroid 5020 Asimov, the magazine Asimov's Science Fiction, an elementary school in Brooklyn in New York, and two different awards honor his name.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_As...

Reviews

[Craig · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was Asimov's first contemporary genre mystery novel. It's set in a chemistry laboratory on a university campus in the 1950s, which is where Asimov had been spending a lot of time, so it feels quite realistic. His asides on the politics and rituals of academia are more entertaining than the crime solving, but I found it to be a pleasant brain-puzzler, too.

[Stephen · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book probably only deserves 2 of 5 stars. The book begins with some amazingly over the top hyperbole about lab chemicals as Death (capitalized of course), though the book settles down after a couple of pages to a more neutral style. And then there's the mystery--the identity of a killer hinges on a line reported to the main character. The way it's reported doesn't make it clear that line was the only thing said at the time to the main character's daughter--the fact that is the only thing the character in question says at the time, that there is no preamble, is evidence of his guilt. But that disappears if the reader isn't aware that there was no preamble to the statement.

However, I enjoyed this book, mostly because I had fun reading about the lax lab safety standards of the 50s. (Something that Asimov the biochemistry professor was clearly trying to bring to light, and highly disapproved of. The murder is disguised at first as a lab accident). And it's also an interesting insight into Asimov who, at the time of writing (I only learned this after finishing) was undergoing a tenure dispute, while the main character is having trouble because his tenure keeps getting delayed.

[Mark Oppenlander · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dr. Lou Brade is a chemistry professor who has been overlooked for tenure for several years. When one of the researchers under his supervision, a graduate student named Ralph Neufeld, is found dead after using the wrong chemical in an experiment, Brade is certain that there was foul play. Neufeld was too careful a chemist and would never have made the careless mistake that led to his untimely demise. Brade must play amateur sleuth and try to uncover the killer, before police detective Doheny decides that Brade belongs behind bars and he loses his chance at earning tenure forever.

Probably more than any of Isaac Asimov's other fiction books, "A Whiff of Death" plays out the old writer's axiom "write what you know." The murder mystery described above propels the plot, but there is nothing particularly innovative about the detective story. Instead, the most effective element in the novel is the description of academic life - the politics, the personalities, the pettiness, egos and insecurities. Asimov was a Professor of Biochemistry himself for many years. He clearly knows whereof he speaks and the authenticity of his descriptions grounds the book.

This is not a major work from Asimov, and it doesn't break much new ground. But the book is well written and it is (mildly) entertaining. It's most important contribution is that it will give those not familiar with academia a glimpse behind the veil of life in the ivory towers. The metaphor of "publish or perish" has never been so vividly brought to life as it is here.

[Jeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

Later called 'The Death Dealers'. Asimov loved mysteries and wrote a few. Never matched his Sci-Fi ratings, but he loved to write them regardless. He call them 'Cottage mysteries' in that he gives the reader an opportunity to solve puzzle early by giving the clues along the way. I bought my first edition off ebay for $3. Sweet...

[Ivan Lutz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Moj prvi non-fiction Asimov. Izvrsna detektivska priča, zgodan zaplet i klasični tko-je-ubojica način pisanja...

Knjiga je odlična , 156 strana...čita se u dahu i danu

[Mihai M Tiganus · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sincer nu stiam la ce sa ma aștept de la acesta carte cand m-am apucat sa o citesc, dar m-a surprins plăcut. O carte polițistă care nu te lasa sa te plictisești garantat.

[Dane Cobain · Rating 4 out of 5]

I knew that Isaac Asimov has written books in nine of the ten Dewey Decimal categories, but I was still surprised to find that this was a mystery. I’ll be honest, I pretty much buy every Asimov book I spot going second hand in charity shops, and so I grabbed this without even bothering to see what it was about.

But it turns out that Asimov was a pretty skilled mystery writer, and even though I’m not particularly familiar with the academic setting in which this was set and the world of professors and tenure, it was easy enough to wrap my head around it. The characters were great too – super believable and with a range of potential motivations for committing murder. I couldn’t figure out who did it, but I still enjoyed it. Yeah.

[Vados · Rating 4 out of 5]

Чудовий детективчик від майстра у незвичному для нього жанрі. Кмітливий, тримає в напрузі, логічний, якісний.

[Liedzeit Liedzeit · Rating 2 out of 5]

A young student is killed. To his professor it is clear that a) it was murder and b) that he would be a suspect. That is why he says nothing. And this is quite ridiculous. Because he has no motive. And neither has anyone else, including the actual murderer. At one time his wife declares that she had a motive because the victim had broken a vase of hers.

If only the solution were clever. It is not. It is nearly as lame as the motive.

The book is sort of nicely written. But it feels like it followed some how-to-write-a-mystery formula. Including some little cliff-hanger at the end of each chapter.

It is rather depressing, considering that Asimov had at that time already written SF master pieces including SF mysteries. There are some amusing things. One of the characters sees himself as a ladies-man. Obviously meant a parody of himself. Also interesting from a psychological point of view the obsession with tenure. One can imagine how his then-wife Gertrude was pestering poor Isaac.

Not a good book.

5/10

----
Just saw that I have read this in a German translation a long time ago and attached 4 stars. I was a bigger fan of Asimov then, it seems.

[D. Dorka · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ez Asimov első krimije, és legalább annyira élveztem, mint a Gyilkosság a könyvvásáront. A recept nagyon hasonló, bár ezek szerint itt debütált: történik egy haláleset, és az áldozathoz kapcsolódó nem detektív egyén meg van róla győződve, hogy gyilkosság történt, és elkezd nyomozgatni. A nagy helyzet viszont az, hogy kb. a háromnegyedéig nem is igazán nyomoz. Engem pedig ez egyáltalán nem zavar.

Mint krimi-nem-annyira-kedvelőnek, Asimov krimijei tökéletesek nekem. Mert itt a fókusz egy kémiapfrofesszoron van, hogy milyen az akadémiai lét, ha valaki nem zseniális. Hogy folyton publikálni kell, és az ember nem feltétlenül azt kutatja, ami érdekli, hanem amire pénzt lehet szerezni. Hogy micsoda hierarchia van akár ugyanolyan titulusban lévő emberek között is. Hogy mekkora a felelősség a tanáron a diákjaival szemben. Hogy a magánéletre hogyan hat ki a tudósok kissé belterjes életvitele.

Egy szó mint száz, nagyon élveztem, remek pszichével foglalkozó utazás volt a kémikusok specifikus környezetében.

[Karl Stark di Grande Inverno · Rating 1 out of 5]

Non mi è piaciuto quasi per niente. Per far "tornare i conti" e dare una spiegazione all'omicidio, Asimov parla troppo di chimica e si lancia in pipponi scientifici che annoiano. I personaggi sono piuttosto scialbi e quindi non aiutano nell'immedesimazione.
Sicuramente Asimov è meglio come divulgatore "puro" mentre, come romanziere, era più a suo agio con la fantascienza.

[Calum Reed · Rating 4 out of 5]

B:

A cracking read; reasoned and impeccably written. Just a shame that it's a bit conservative and opts for probably the least interesting motive/killer.

[stefania · Rating 2 out of 5]

Eh. Decent book. Nothing special. I’m actually surprised that it kept me reading. I really just... eh. That’s all I have to say.

[Steven · Rating 3 out of 5]

*** 3.2 STATS ***

Word Count 54,593

An ok mystery set in-and-around a chemisty University lab.

Asimov's science fiction is so much better.

[Kathleen · Rating 3 out of 5]

At first glance, a mystery by Isaac Asimov had me intrigued. Sadly, the first third of the book let me down, but I persevered. All written from the perspective of the main character, I missed being inside the minds of any of the others. One also needs to look past some 1950’s-isms. However, once the focus shifted from chemical reactions to human emotions, I found it easier to keep reading, and I was satisfied with the conclusion. Still, I will likely stick with Asimov Sci-Fi in the future.

[Malcolm Evans · Rating 4 out of 5]

Asimov is a prolific writer having published hundreds of books both fiction and non-fiction. His work covers most genres but he is usually known for Science Fiction. This book cleverly bridges the divide between science and crime mystery. I do not read a lot of crime novels but I thought I would reread this one now (read it originally when it was first published back in the 1960s).

The plot line itself is set in the world of academia focussing on the postgraduate world of chemistry; a field Asimov knew well being a doctor in biochemistry. The science is a bit deep in places but does not detract from the fast paced gripping storyline.

Following the death of postgraduate student Ralph Neufeld by what looks on the face of it as a careless accident when he mixes up chemicals causing him to inhale a fatal whiff of cyanide, his supervising professor Louis Brade soon becomes the prime suspect in what now appears more like murder.

Asimov choses to twist the conventional crime novel format by concentrating not on the enquiries of the detective but on the efforts of the prime suspect to prove his innocence. The story line helps the reader empathise with his dilemma. The harder he tries the more he appears to implicate himself. In true crime story fashion there appears to be a number of likely murderers with motive ,opportunity and in most cases the scientific ability to carry out the deed. Readers have commented that clues are left in the story and some claim that a clue in the early pages shows the true facts. I didn't spot it until I read the last few pages when the final truth comes out (no spoilers here).

I would recommend this book both to fans of crime stories and science fiction alike. A typically clever story by the master of story telling.

[Charles Harrison · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have been putting off reviewing this one for a while. As a murder mystery it is ok, not mind blowing but entertaining enough. As an insight into the workings of a chemistry lab (all be it quite a while ago) it is simply outstanding. As someone who has encountered some really nasty things in his time in chemistry the first and last lines of the first section are simply perfect. 'Death sits in the chemistry laboratory and a million people sit with him and don't mind. They forget he's there' It goes on to describe the various nasties and finishes on 'In every way, Death was there and no one minded. And then, once in a while, as now, one of those who sat with him did not rise again, ever.' As well as chilling me to the bone this in a way acurately describes my job, I am called upon to take away other peoples death bottles and make them safe. Asimov was himself a skilled chemist so it comes as no supprise that this is such an accurate vision of an academic department. For the average member of the public this is probably a non descript book (thus the 3 star review) but for a chemist it is something much more.

[Barbara Douglas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Quite enjoyable as a whodunnit, and a good look at how academic science departments work ... or worked at the time. Also a reminder of how marked by the depression the American psyche was for that generation; the grasping after security was something I saw in my own family. Of course it is competently written, by Asimov, but I only give it three stars because it lacks a certain spark present in his SF work ... it's a little too bogged down in the mindset of its main character.

[Kostiantyn Kravchenko · Rating 5 out of 5]

Легкий та дуже захоплюючий детектив, зроблений по канонам жанру. Ідеальний варіант задля того, щоб відволіктися між прочитанням емоційно важких книг. Вона не забере багато часу, зацікавить й буде постійно тримати в напрузі.
Ця книга про катедру хімії, тож особливо цікаво буде тим, кого захоплює ця наука.

[Matthew Mitchell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ripping great tale. A murder mystery set in a laboratory with a desperate "detective." I not only enjoyed reading it but took away a life lesson. How about that?

[Arash Raeisbahrami · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed it. The characterization and the story progress are on a great balance. I felt what Brade felt, and meanwhile, I was curious about the identity of the murderer. The major reason for the case, I think, is that Asimov was a professor of biochemistry. He knew the details of being a professor in a university and all the concerns that a professor has in his/her mind. The result is forming a great sympathy for the main character. The main character of this murder-mystery story is not a detective and all the charm begins from here. Brade is not a sharp intelligent character. He has flaws. He is not great at his work. He seeks a permanent position. His student is dead. And he feels miserable, insecure. He is the exact opposite of a powerful, confident protagonist. And yet, in the end, he solves the problem and finds what he wants in his entire life. This makes him believable. This is what I like about the character. In fact, nearly (and I will come back to this "nearly" later) all the characters in the story are multidimensional and vulnerable. Hence, the interaction between them is believable and feels real.

On the other hand, you have a strong plot in front of you. You know the goals. Brade wants to know who is the murderer and what are the motives. you know the threats. Brade's job position in university is shaky, and he is the first suspect of the murder. And at the end, there is the urgency. The murderer tried to kill Bare, and the detective is going to conclude that Brade is the murderer. And the point is that Brade is the main and first cause of all these. He is the active character that all the story is pushed forward by his acts.

However, there is one big flaw in the story, and that is the Cap Anson character. As I said before, nearly all the characters in the story are multidimensional and vulnerable. But not all the characters. Cap Anson is one of the one-dimensional characters of the classic stories. And if he was a side character like other professors in the story I did not find it a problem. I did not really understand his motives. This was because I did not know him very well. Every time he was in the story, the same things happened and we did not know more than he is an old prestigious professor whose all life is chemistry and science. And he did the most important act of the story and risked his all academic life for a student who cheated and changed his experiment results. That was a bit questionable because we did not see the potential of murder in his actions.

A Whiff of Death is an entertaining book. I recommend it to everyone who wants to read a decent crime-solving story.

[Ian Anderson · Rating 3 out of 5]

I bought this book in the science fiction section at a book fair as a random Isaac Asimov sci-fi novel to see if I liked his writing. I (and presumably the book fair organisers) were unaware that Asimov was also a keen reader and writer of detective stories, so I was surprised by this murder mystery. (Reading other reviews on Goodreads and looking at how other readers have tagged/shelved it, I am far from the only person expecting a science fiction novel.)

Assistant Professor Louis Brade drops into a lab to say goodnight to his post graduate students and finds one dead. The anxious and paranoid chemist worries that the evidence seems to point to himself as the murderer and turns sleuth.

The first half of the book includes quite a bit of scene setting about the psyche of people like Brade who grew up during the Great Depression, about the way American science research was heading in the 1950s and the importance of tenure to University staff. In fact, the opening is so laid back that it is unclear for a while whether this will be a police procedural or an amateur detective novel. Asimov's favourite detective was Hercule Poirot so it is not surprising that this is a non-violent, more cerebral thriller. The final scene is an Agatha Christie-style (or Arthur Conan Doyle-style) flourish.

It is an easy read and kept me interested enough to polish it off quicker than I normally would.

[Rj Lesch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Isaac Asimov is my favorite writer, and yet I have never read this particular novel until now. Published in 1958, it was his first attempt at a contemporary mystery (as opposed to his science fiction mysteries, like THE CAVES OF STEEL). It wasn't well-received, even after it was reprinted in the 1970s. I found a copy earlier this month and I enjoyed it. That might be because, as I mentioned, I’m partial to Asimov. However, Asimov himself didn’t think highly of the novel (he says as much in his autobiographies), so, knowing this, I went in with low expectations. Those were exceeded.

Asimov was at his peak, as a fiction writer, in the 1950s. He shifted his attention to nonfiction after the launch of Sputnik in October 1957, or he probably would have written more novel-length mysteries. As it was, he only did one other (MURDER AT THE ABA), and that was more of a stunt by his publisher than anything. In this novel, though, he shows he could have done quite well as a mystery writer.

Something else interesting about Asimov’s writing in the 1950s: his depiction of married couples is fascinating. In A WHIFF OF DEATH, the couple is Dr. Louis Brade, the protagonist, and Doris, his wife. Their conversations are tense, frank, and low-key realistic. In some ways, the relationship between Louis and Doris is more fascinating than the murder mystery.

It isn’t great Asimov, but it’s certainly good Asimov, and not as dismal as the author himself made it out to be.

[Jon Bradley · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this on the Internet Archive. It appears to be a scan of a paperback copy. I have been on a kick of trawling through Asimov's back catalog, and I came upon this little book. It's not science fiction, but a straight mystery novel with a twist. The plot involves a graduate student in chemistry who dies alone in a university chemical laboratory while performing an experiment. The student's PhD sponsor, an associate professor whose academic career is in the doldrums, finds the circumstances surrounding the death to be suspicious. Suicide is suspected, but then the police begin to suspect the associate professor is behind his student's death. The associate prof must turn amateur sleuth to find the actual murderer among a host of other potential suspects. There is not a lot of suspense, and the pace of the book is pretty slow. There is however quite a but of discussion of chemistry as the story follows the prof's lecture subjects and his thoughts on how the murder could have been committed. The setting of the book in the chemistry depart of a university is not surprising since Asimov was a professor who taught chemistry and biochemistry. The book also includes some events that highlight the wrangling and competition among academics for position and tenure. Overall I didn't find it to be that satisfying of a mystery novel. I much prefer Asimov's science fiction writing. Three out of five stars.

[Donald Johnson · Rating 3 out of 5]

I must have read this a long time ago, when I was a teenager, as I noticed a little mark I made in the book by a typo. However, I didn't remember the story at all.

Other reviews will tell you a bit more of the plot. Apparently, Asimov liked to write mysteries, and this was his first. The trouble with most mysteries, even by "top" mystery writers, is making the crime and criminal believable. Could this really have happened the way the author describes it? A lot of times, it seems to me, the solution is contrived. The fact is, most murders aren't hard to solve. The evidence usually points one way, and the trick is catching up to the culprit who is on the lam. Yes, some go unsolved for many years, but they are exceptions.

Anyway, this story is reasonably believable. The murder is set in a chemistry lab in the 50s, the main character is a professor who discovers the body but isn't the culprit (though he had opportunity, he had very little motive). As he works through work pressures and marital problems and the anxiety the murder causes, he grows as a character. His wife does as well. That is what I like best about the book. The main character is real, whether the whole plot is or not. The other characters are not as well developed, but we do see the main character grow and develop in the story. That gives it a satisfying ending.

[Chris · Rating 2 out of 5]

Laboratory Murder, despite being Asimov this is not a SF novel it is set in the real world. The novel shows that Asimov is a good writer because he understands people and is able to weave his stories in a believeable manner; however, for me this did not cut it in this novel. Mystery novels are not my thing because they are based around the suspense of who did it and I actually hoped that it was a complex scenario that proved to be an accident. Alas I was disappointed as like most myster novels they are predictable early, I would say I had the purpetrator pegged around 1/3 of the way in with certainty, with new information I hoped that it would get more complex but it did not. With more details came a more accurate prediction, which is something I hate. For me it was an arguement between one or two stars, I gave him the benefit of the doubt becuase it was kept short and because the character development and evolution were excellent, the observations of academia included. If you are thinking reading this book because it was written by Asimov and are not a fan of quick mystery, skip it.
OK onto likely my last book of 2018, and the last of Asimov's 1950 SF, and the last David Star novel: The Rings of Saturn.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was the first "straight" Asimov genre mystery that I've read, and although a sporadically entertaining piece of fluff, it has not aged well, and its climax leaves something to be desired. On the plus side, Asimov does manage to keep the reader (or at least this reader) guessing, dropping red herrings left and right along the way. The story involves what appears, at first sight, to be the accidental death of a chemistry graduate student but turns out to be murder. This fundamental choice of setting requires Asimov to frame his story in terms of academia, and as we all know, while there may be bitter rivalries within that sphere, it very seldom leads to murder. Asimov is already asking us to suspend a significant amount of disbelief from the outset. Additionally, because this was written in 1958, all the prejudices of the age are in evidence, particularly the baseline misogyny that bestowed upon the 1950s some of its stereotypical shallowness. Regardless, Asimov skillfully weaves an intricate mystery and, for the most part, demonstrates an advanced knowledge of chemistry, all while deigning to explain it to the lay reader. It is not necessarily bad as escapist literature. I'd go back for a second helping.

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

This detective story started off with a dullness which did not grip me in the slightest, premised in Asimov's former occupation as research chemist - and so consequently I missed a significant early clue. I put it aside for a year, half-finished, vaguely intending to get back and finish it off some day. Then today it popped up in my mind, and I finished it with a will... And I'm glad I did, for it turned out to be as unexpectedly enjoyable as lots of his other good-but-not-great (as in Foundation-great) sf works, most of which I've read.

But you know that, even if you're not gripped, Asimov is a thoroughly enjoyable and entertaining writer; this he has shown in everything so far that I've read of his. And it turned out to be the case with Whiff Of Death. So it just goes to show: give a book another chance, especially if you trust the writer. Don't consign it to the DNF bin; put it on the started-but-not-finished shelf, with the intention of picking it up again sometime. It works!

[Jonathan Waugh · Rating 4 out of 5]

- great opening third (after oddity of a first chapter)
- slows down in the middle as author switched from steady accumulation of plot to development of main character
- at the end couldn't put it down to find out who did it
- main character seems less and less reliable. This is an interesting thing for the author to try, but ultimately it doesn't really quite work as we are never really led to believe the main character could actually be a suspect.
- character flaws of main character arguably make him a little dumb in a naive way when dealing with the police detective, not sure if this is a good or bad thing
- the inside has a short comment from someone saying the book has a least-likely suspect for a villain. Saw this, guessed the answer a third of the way in.
- there is a nice clue to the villain, which I completely missed
- the ending is clever but short

[Ginevra · Rating 3 out of 5]

What can a scientist do, when a murder occurs in his place of work and he seems to be the only one with the knowledge to identify it as a non-natural death? What can a professor, desperate for security, tenure and peace, do, when his student is the one murdered?

Asimov reproduces the world of university and science beautifully, portraying the politics, the personalities, the insecurities, in a slow paced, but interesting who done it.
Whilst not a perfect mystery, the treatment of the theme was good, the characters well rounded, with the book’s two most glaring faults being a rather arduously slow pace and a monomaniac focus on the main character. The professor is lovely and interesting, but somehow his perspective is not enough to keep the narrative from seeming too straightened. The ending too was less than it could have been, the solution feeling somewhat simple and the finale rather abrupt.

However, despite any and all shortcomings it was a fun read, especially when one already has a fondness for Asimov’s works.