What do you think?
Rate this book
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 130 reviews
December 23, 2022
The beginning of this Golden Age mystery is a bit grisly, but it quickly moves on to matters of police procedure. Most interesting, however, is the framework about a quarter of the way into the story, which becomes a bit meta as it allows the reader to look at the situation through an additional layer of fiction, with the goal of identifying not just the culprit but also the victim.
I enjoyed the techniques on display in this novel. Ultimately, I didn't like the ending, though, which prevents me from giving it a higher rating. And judging from other reviews, it looks like I'm not alone in finding the ending objectionable.
Thanks to Netgalley and Poisoned Pen Press for this digital review copy!
I enjoyed the techniques on display in this novel. Ultimately, I didn't like the ending, though, which prevents me from giving it a higher rating. And judging from other reviews, it looks like I'm not alone in finding the ending objectionable.
Thanks to Netgalley and Poisoned Pen Press for this digital review copy!
April 11, 2023
This book opens with a letter from the press warning the reader about changing mores. I spent the book on guard for evidence of this ("I found some slight anti-Lancashire sentiment! Was that it?"), only to discover why in the last few pages, making an otherwise entertaining read a bit hard to endorse. The extraordinary conclusion of the amateur sleuth: it's okay to coerce a woman into sex, make her pregnant, and then murder her in a basement without suffering any consequences, providing she was kind of a brat about the whole thing. Oh, the past. :|
April 5, 2021
B+:
Terrific, but I have to dock a half-star for a strangely unjust ending that implies that the killer's heinously-motivated crime was partly justified. A baffling move from Berkeley that exemplifies his tendency to be idiosyncratic with his finales, but it hampers what is an otherwise faultlessly worked mystery that keeps you guessing until the eleventh hour.
Terrific, but I have to dock a half-star for a strangely unjust ending that implies that the killer's heinously-motivated crime was partly justified. A baffling move from Berkeley that exemplifies his tendency to be idiosyncratic with his finales, but it hampers what is an otherwise faultlessly worked mystery that keeps you guessing until the eleventh hour.
November 26, 2023
I do wish Berkley's books were less riddled with misogyny, because he plots some terrific crime stories, but I keep getting distracted by the way he treats the female characters.
April 6, 2022
(3.5 Stars)
A very enjoyable mystery, and an excellent introduction to Berkeley’s work.
The story opens with the discovery of a body, carefully concealed in the basement of a rented house in Lewisham – much to the horror of newlyweds Reginald and Molly Dane, who have just taken possession of their new home. The meticulous Chief Inspector Moseley and his team quickly confirm a few important particulars about the body – a young woman aged twenty to thirty, found naked except for a pair of gloves, probably murdered some six months earlier by a shot to the head. That said, the victim’s identity proves much trickier to establish due to the lack of any papers or visible distinguishing features on the body.
One of the most interesting things about this novel is its imaginative structure, the first third of which focuses on Moseley’s quest to put a name to the dead woman. After a few blind alleys and less than fruitful enquiries, the police trace the victim to Roland House, a boys’ Prep School on the outskirts of London.
Now, it just so happens that Moseley’s great friend, the detective writer Roger Sheringham, deputised for a Master at the very same school the previous year – partly as a means of gathering background for one of his novels. So, when Moseley calls on his friend for support, Sheringham offers the Inspector the manuscript of his unfinished book – a novel based directly on the Roland House staff, just as he perceived them at the time.
To read the rest of my review, please visit:
https://jacquiwine.wordpress.com/2022...
A very enjoyable mystery, and an excellent introduction to Berkeley’s work.
The story opens with the discovery of a body, carefully concealed in the basement of a rented house in Lewisham – much to the horror of newlyweds Reginald and Molly Dane, who have just taken possession of their new home. The meticulous Chief Inspector Moseley and his team quickly confirm a few important particulars about the body – a young woman aged twenty to thirty, found naked except for a pair of gloves, probably murdered some six months earlier by a shot to the head. That said, the victim’s identity proves much trickier to establish due to the lack of any papers or visible distinguishing features on the body.
One of the most interesting things about this novel is its imaginative structure, the first third of which focuses on Moseley’s quest to put a name to the dead woman. After a few blind alleys and less than fruitful enquiries, the police trace the victim to Roland House, a boys’ Prep School on the outskirts of London.
Now, it just so happens that Moseley’s great friend, the detective writer Roger Sheringham, deputised for a Master at the very same school the previous year – partly as a means of gathering background for one of his novels. So, when Moseley calls on his friend for support, Sheringham offers the Inspector the manuscript of his unfinished book – a novel based directly on the Roland House staff, just as he perceived them at the time.
To read the rest of my review, please visit:
https://jacquiwine.wordpress.com/2022...
April 16, 2023
Nothing wrong with the book, but the conclusion really takes a lot away from it.
Also, looking back, the introduction to the couple who found the body was needlessly elongated if they weren't going to make any further appearance in the story.
Plus, I didn't really care about anyone in the book, so it made no difference to me who the murderer was. Usually, used to Christy's mysteries, I start caring a lot about a number of potential suspects, which increases my interest in the book and its conclusion. This book did not do that.
The idea that Mr Harrison is going to be allowed to run free is abhorrent and makes me want to reduce the rating to one.
Roger Sheringham did not seem a likable character, and though Moresby started off as one, he, too, quickly denigrated himself to meh.
So, yeah, a lukewarm mystery.
Would have loved if Amy Harrison had turned out to be the murderer, her reason being the affair between her fiance and the girl. Instead, it was her sidelined father.
Also, I don't necessarily agree with the theory that murder is for the weak. Rather, it is done by a person of weak character, that is to say, unscrupulous, rather than someone inherently weak-minded. And in that manner, I see Wargrave as an unscrupulous, unprincipled character indeed, who is quite capable of murder, if it benefits him in any way. So, Roger's this theory, as his every little theory and supposition, rang too false and weak for me to respect his detecting skills. They held no water, and the only reason he hit on the right person was because he is a fictional character in a fictional story, and not because of any intelligence or practicality displayed.
Also, looking back, the introduction to the couple who found the body was needlessly elongated if they weren't going to make any further appearance in the story.
Plus, I didn't really care about anyone in the book, so it made no difference to me who the murderer was. Usually, used to Christy's mysteries, I start caring a lot about a number of potential suspects, which increases my interest in the book and its conclusion. This book did not do that.
The idea that Mr Harrison is going to be allowed to run free is abhorrent and makes me want to reduce the rating to one.
Roger Sheringham did not seem a likable character, and though Moresby started off as one, he, too, quickly denigrated himself to meh.
So, yeah, a lukewarm mystery.
Would have loved if Amy Harrison had turned out to be the murderer, her reason being the affair between her fiance and the girl. Instead, it was her sidelined father.
Also, I don't necessarily agree with the theory that murder is for the weak. Rather, it is done by a person of weak character, that is to say, unscrupulous, rather than someone inherently weak-minded. And in that manner, I see Wargrave as an unscrupulous, unprincipled character indeed, who is quite capable of murder, if it benefits him in any way. So, Roger's this theory, as his every little theory and supposition, rang too false and weak for me to respect his detecting skills. They held no water, and the only reason he hit on the right person was because he is a fictional character in a fictional story, and not because of any intelligence or practicality displayed.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 20, 2022
I've read a few of Anthony Berkeley's detective novels now, and I rather enjoy the way he plays with the formula. In this one, a body is discovered buried in a basement, and chief Inspector Moresby has to find out who the victim is in order to discover the culprit. When he manages to trace the body to Roland House, a boys prep school, he catches up with his old friend Roger Sherringham, who had worked there for a time in order to gain local colour for his novel. In part two, the manuscript Sherringham wrote is handed over as he has based it on the teachers working in the school; this is the clue Moresby has been looking for, and is supposed to lead him to the identity of both the victim and murderer.
The structure is interesting, and it was an entertaining read, but the ending left a particularly bad taste. Roger Sherringham comes across in the novels I've read with him as a morally bankrupt character. Never the less, I will probably carry on reading these books when I get the opportunity, and just bare in mind that the ending may be less than satisfactory.
*Many thanks to Netgalley and the publishers for a review copy in exchange for an honest opinion.*
The structure is interesting, and it was an entertaining read, but the ending left a particularly bad taste. Roger Sherringham comes across in the novels I've read with him as a morally bankrupt character. Never the less, I will probably carry on reading these books when I get the opportunity, and just bare in mind that the ending may be less than satisfactory.
*Many thanks to Netgalley and the publishers for a review copy in exchange for an honest opinion.*
July 26, 2023
This my 3rd British Crime Library Classics book in a row, they just seem to be grabbing my attention lately. It's also my 3rd Berkeley book. I really liked this one too-the sleuth Roger Sherringham is studying teachers at a private school(while working there temporarily)and journals about their behavior, while a detective friend of his calls on him for assistance. I tend to enjoy murder stories that take place in schools when they deal with the faculty so, this was right in my wheelhouse. Lots of red herrings and character development. If you like school settings, golden age mysteries or the British Crime Library series then you might want to give this a look! 4stars!
September 18, 2024
Two stars for the setup of the story: the first part with painstaking police work to discover the identity of the titular body in the basement; the second part a snippet of Sheringham's manuscript with the thinly-veiled characters who represent the main suspects in the case; the third part, more painstaking police work to find enough evidence to convict the murderer.
Where it all fell apart was at the end. The whodunit doesn't make sense, but then I'm not a man in 1932 with an obvious disdain for womankind.
If you want fair play or some sense of justice, give this vintage crime novel a miss, because you will find neither.
Where it all fell apart was at the end. The whodunit doesn't make sense, but then I'm not a man in 1932 with an obvious disdain for womankind.
If you want fair play or some sense of justice, give this vintage crime novel a miss, because you will find neither.
June 20, 2023
This was my first book from the British Library Crime Classics collection, and what a surprise! :) It was a nice cozy reading and I especially liked the ending. Very different from the usual ones.
January 27, 2022
Whowasdunin?
When a newlywed couple move into their new house, their happiness soon turns to dismay on discovering a body buried in the basement. Enter Chief Inspector Moresby, whose first task is to discover the identity of the victim – a young woman who has been dead for just a few months. His investigations lead him to a small preparatory school, Roland House, and he remembers that his friend, the novelist and occasional amateur detective Roger Sheringham, had worked at the school for a few weeks the year before to get some local colour for a novel he had been planning to write, So Moresby calls on Sheringham’s knowledge of the staff of Roland House, and soon decides who is the culprit. But now the task begins of trying to prove it – not easy when the assumed murderer has so carefully ensured there would be no evidence to link him to the crime…
This has an unusual structure for a mystery novel which is successful in parts and rather less so in others. The first section follows Moresby as he and his team carry out the painstaking work of identifying the victim. This is quite interesting and is short enough that it doesn’t have time to start dragging. By the end of it, Moresby knows who the victim was, but the reader is kept in the dark a little longer.
Sheringham, it turns out, has written the first few chapters of his planned novel, using the various staff members as models for his characters. He gives the manuscript to Moresby, and Moresby challenges him (and, therefore, the reader) to name the victim based on his knowledge of the people involved. So the second part is Sheringham’s manuscript, through which we learn about all the personalities involved and see the tensions that exist among the group in the rather claustrophobic setting of a boys’ boarding school. I enjoyed this section – Sheringham’s authorial “voice” has a tone of mild mockery which makes his depiction of the characters quite amusing. In fact, I think I’d have been quite happy if the whole story had been told by Sheringham as an insider at the school, rather than the more formal investigation by Moresby. Martin Edwards calls this section the first appearance of a “whowasdunin” element in a mystery novel, a technique that has been used often by other authors since. I must admit I didn’t think there was any real way to solve that aspect – any of the female characters could easily have been the victim, for any number of reasons.
At the end of section two, Moresby reveals the identity of the victim, and from that extrapolates who he thinks is the only possible murderer. So the third section is mostly of Moresby trying to get evidence to prove his theory, followed at the very end by Sheringham taking over to wrap up the case. This third section didn’t work so well for me. I felt it went on too long and became repetitive, and I wasn’t convinced that Moresby would so quickly have stopped considering other solutions. And when Sheringham did his stuff, it seemed abrupt and too pat – he leaps almost magically to the correct interpretation of events based on little more than guesswork, though he would no doubt say it was founded on his understanding of human psychology. I felt that the victim got rather forgotten in the end – it all became something of a game of cat and mouse between the men in the story, a battle of wills, and none of them seemed too bothered about getting justice for the murdered woman.
So a bit of a mixed bag, enjoyably and entertainingly written but not wholly satisfactory in terms of the mystery solving element. I was surprised by how little Sheringham appeared in it, and rather regretted that since I found him more interesting and amusing than the somewhat stolid and unimaginative Moresby. I enjoyed it overall, though, and certainly enough to want to read more of the Sheringham novels.
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, the British Library.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
When a newlywed couple move into their new house, their happiness soon turns to dismay on discovering a body buried in the basement. Enter Chief Inspector Moresby, whose first task is to discover the identity of the victim – a young woman who has been dead for just a few months. His investigations lead him to a small preparatory school, Roland House, and he remembers that his friend, the novelist and occasional amateur detective Roger Sheringham, had worked at the school for a few weeks the year before to get some local colour for a novel he had been planning to write, So Moresby calls on Sheringham’s knowledge of the staff of Roland House, and soon decides who is the culprit. But now the task begins of trying to prove it – not easy when the assumed murderer has so carefully ensured there would be no evidence to link him to the crime…
This has an unusual structure for a mystery novel which is successful in parts and rather less so in others. The first section follows Moresby as he and his team carry out the painstaking work of identifying the victim. This is quite interesting and is short enough that it doesn’t have time to start dragging. By the end of it, Moresby knows who the victim was, but the reader is kept in the dark a little longer.
Sheringham, it turns out, has written the first few chapters of his planned novel, using the various staff members as models for his characters. He gives the manuscript to Moresby, and Moresby challenges him (and, therefore, the reader) to name the victim based on his knowledge of the people involved. So the second part is Sheringham’s manuscript, through which we learn about all the personalities involved and see the tensions that exist among the group in the rather claustrophobic setting of a boys’ boarding school. I enjoyed this section – Sheringham’s authorial “voice” has a tone of mild mockery which makes his depiction of the characters quite amusing. In fact, I think I’d have been quite happy if the whole story had been told by Sheringham as an insider at the school, rather than the more formal investigation by Moresby. Martin Edwards calls this section the first appearance of a “whowasdunin” element in a mystery novel, a technique that has been used often by other authors since. I must admit I didn’t think there was any real way to solve that aspect – any of the female characters could easily have been the victim, for any number of reasons.
At the end of section two, Moresby reveals the identity of the victim, and from that extrapolates who he thinks is the only possible murderer. So the third section is mostly of Moresby trying to get evidence to prove his theory, followed at the very end by Sheringham taking over to wrap up the case. This third section didn’t work so well for me. I felt it went on too long and became repetitive, and I wasn’t convinced that Moresby would so quickly have stopped considering other solutions. And when Sheringham did his stuff, it seemed abrupt and too pat – he leaps almost magically to the correct interpretation of events based on little more than guesswork, though he would no doubt say it was founded on his understanding of human psychology. I felt that the victim got rather forgotten in the end – it all became something of a game of cat and mouse between the men in the story, a battle of wills, and none of them seemed too bothered about getting justice for the murdered woman.
So a bit of a mixed bag, enjoyably and entertainingly written but not wholly satisfactory in terms of the mystery solving element. I was surprised by how little Sheringham appeared in it, and rather regretted that since I found him more interesting and amusing than the somewhat stolid and unimaginative Moresby. I enjoyed it overall, though, and certainly enough to want to read more of the Sheringham novels.
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, the British Library.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
May 3, 2023
Set in England during the World War times, the story commences with a young couple moving into a new house and when the husband later explores the basement, he finds a dead body buried under uneven freshly cemented grounds. The Scotland Yard arrives but the body is quite old, hence it becomes difficult to identify her. The story basically follows months of police work to establish the victim’s identity and the murderer’s.
I really liked the book in the beginning. I liked that the detective work conducted by Scotland Yard was perceptive and thorough. The detective in charge Mr. Moresby, left virtually no stones unturned in his quest and his methods laudable. However, the conclusion and the way the identity of the murderer was revealed to the readers, didn’t sit well with me.
**Not a major spoiler, SPOILER ALERT**
I didn’t like that Moresby wasn’t able to solve the case but some author named Roger Sheringham was. More to the point, Sheringham was introduced as friend of Moresby who writes murder mysteries and was present in the school where the victim was an assistant to the headmaster when she was alive. I realise that the book is a part of the Sheringham series but there was so little mention of him from the start that when he solved it in the end, I was disappointed. Moresby presented him with all the data of his and his colleagues thorough research, requesting the later to go undercover in the school which the police postulated to be the current address of the criminal. Sheringham refused for some moral high ground but for some utterly childish reason went out on his own, to badger the suspect into spilling the whole story. Spoiler alert it was somebody else so both Sheringham and the cops were wrong but somehow Sheringham still one upped Moresby. 🤷🏾♀️ As per the last line suggests Sheringham didn’t betray the confidence of the suspect, led Moresby and the Scotland Yard on a goose chase to incriminate a totally different person. Why? Some convoluted sense of honour in PROTECTING the MURDERER because the VICTIM, who had some prison history, DESERVED IT. Reason, she was a woman with loose morals. Maybe the misogyny is at par with the early 1930s, when the book was published, but having read so many stories by Agatha Christie, I was sorely disappointed by the author.
Anyway, the book is available in the Kindle Unlimited collection.
Did you know that the authors, Anthony Berkley Cox and Agatha Christie were contemporaries? I wonder if they ever met.
I really liked the book in the beginning. I liked that the detective work conducted by Scotland Yard was perceptive and thorough. The detective in charge Mr. Moresby, left virtually no stones unturned in his quest and his methods laudable. However, the conclusion and the way the identity of the murderer was revealed to the readers, didn’t sit well with me.
**Not a major spoiler, SPOILER ALERT**
I didn’t like that Moresby wasn’t able to solve the case but some author named Roger Sheringham was. More to the point, Sheringham was introduced as friend of Moresby who writes murder mysteries and was present in the school where the victim was an assistant to the headmaster when she was alive. I realise that the book is a part of the Sheringham series but there was so little mention of him from the start that when he solved it in the end, I was disappointed. Moresby presented him with all the data of his and his colleagues thorough research, requesting the later to go undercover in the school which the police postulated to be the current address of the criminal. Sheringham refused for some moral high ground but for some utterly childish reason went out on his own, to badger the suspect into spilling the whole story. Spoiler alert it was somebody else so both Sheringham and the cops were wrong but somehow Sheringham still one upped Moresby. 🤷🏾♀️ As per the last line suggests Sheringham didn’t betray the confidence of the suspect, led Moresby and the Scotland Yard on a goose chase to incriminate a totally different person. Why? Some convoluted sense of honour in PROTECTING the MURDERER because the VICTIM, who had some prison history, DESERVED IT. Reason, she was a woman with loose morals. Maybe the misogyny is at par with the early 1930s, when the book was published, but having read so many stories by Agatha Christie, I was sorely disappointed by the author.
Anyway, the book is available in the Kindle Unlimited collection.
Did you know that the authors, Anthony Berkley Cox and Agatha Christie were contemporaries? I wonder if they ever met.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 8, 2023
3.5 stars
The big mystery in this newly returned to readers from obscurity classic is "who was the murder victim?" After a dead body is discovered in a cellar by the new tenants/owners of a home, Inspector Moresby and his team spent months trying to figure out who the dead woman was, and who wanted her dead? She was shot in the back of the head and buried, and after a postmortem, discovered to have been 5-months pregnant at the time of her death, so that gives Moresby motive, but nothing else.
The slow, painstaking searches through many types of information by the team is interesting, and once Moresby has enough to go on, he visits his old friend Sherringham who actually has a possible acquaintance with the dead woman. (Sherringham had actually worked, for a short time, at the same school that the dead woman had in order to get some background for a book he was contemplating writing.)
Sherringham shares the first few chapters of the abandoned book which actually lays out who the staff were and their various resentments and affairs, which enable Moresby to confirm his suspicions and began talking to suspects.
This was an interestingly structured mystery, and I enjoyed the sections of the story where the police had to figure out who the dead woman was. I did think that Anthony Berkeley didn't go where I wanted him to have gone, as far as the identity of the murderer was concerned. Perhaps it would have been too unpalatable for his readers of the time, but I think this would have been a more plausible resolution to the murder than the one the author provided.
Thank you to Netgalley and to Poisoned Pen Press for this ARC in exchange for my review.
The big mystery in this newly returned to readers from obscurity classic is "who was the murder victim?" After a dead body is discovered in a cellar by the new tenants/owners of a home, Inspector Moresby and his team spent months trying to figure out who the dead woman was, and who wanted her dead? She was shot in the back of the head and buried, and after a postmortem, discovered to have been 5-months pregnant at the time of her death, so that gives Moresby motive, but nothing else.
The slow, painstaking searches through many types of information by the team is interesting, and once Moresby has enough to go on, he visits his old friend Sherringham who actually has a possible acquaintance with the dead woman. (Sherringham had actually worked, for a short time, at the same school that the dead woman had in order to get some background for a book he was contemplating writing.)
Sherringham shares the first few chapters of the abandoned book which actually lays out who the staff were and their various resentments and affairs, which enable Moresby to confirm his suspicions and began talking to suspects.
This was an interestingly structured mystery, and I enjoyed the sections of the story where the police had to figure out who the dead woman was. I did think that Anthony Berkeley didn't go where I wanted him to have gone, as far as the identity of the murderer was concerned. Perhaps it would have been too unpalatable for his readers of the time, but I think this would have been a more plausible resolution to the murder than the one the author provided.
Thank you to Netgalley and to Poisoned Pen Press for this ARC in exchange for my review.
August 19, 2023
When a new householder finds the body of a dead woman in his basement, the police are, at first, at a loss. They see no way to identify the almost-naked woman, nor has she been reported as missing. Months of painstaking work finally find her name, and more work tracks her to a boy's prep school. That's where Inspector Moresby's luck changes--his friend Roger Sheringham, who had spent some time as a substitute for one of the teachers, knows the people at the school.
Read
November 18, 2022One of a series in a kind of classic crime type of read.
A young recently married couple move joyously into their first home. They did not expect
to find a body in their basement neatly cemented over. Chief Inspector Moresby and Roger
Sherringham are given the job of finding the woman, and how she got to be buried in this
basement
Unravelling clues after six years is going to be difficult. Missing Persons does not give any clues at all to fit the description of a young woman, a couple of months pregnant. Painstakingly
going one step at a time, tracing possible leads the story of a hard young woman emerges. Sherringham is totally convinced who the murderer is, but how to get the conviction to stick.
The murderer is slick, clever and very confident. the way it finally ends is a surprise. A bit
unexpected but a nice one at that.
Very descriptive, good characterization in this story.
A young recently married couple move joyously into their first home. They did not expect
to find a body in their basement neatly cemented over. Chief Inspector Moresby and Roger
Sherringham are given the job of finding the woman, and how she got to be buried in this
basement
Unravelling clues after six years is going to be difficult. Missing Persons does not give any clues at all to fit the description of a young woman, a couple of months pregnant. Painstakingly
going one step at a time, tracing possible leads the story of a hard young woman emerges. Sherringham is totally convinced who the murderer is, but how to get the conviction to stick.
The murderer is slick, clever and very confident. the way it finally ends is a surprise. A bit
unexpected but a nice one at that.
Very descriptive, good characterization in this story.
March 16, 2023
After reading the intro by Martin Edwards, that this was a more subdued story as Roger Sherrington as he wasn’t in the picture as much— I found it to be the opposite. I find Roger Sherrington to be a bit over the top at times; and so, having a bit less of him made his appearance have more punch. We follow Inspector Mosley and watch how he finds all sorts of threads that peter out or land home some important evidence. It was actually this hunting that really allowed the reader to try and figure out the who how etc…. Then Mosley talks with R.S. You get a bit of insight from a “novel” that features the people suspected. This gives you an idea of the psychology of the situation which is better than him just telling you. Finally - there is a definite working point of who the victim is. From here you go from Mosley to R.S. To figure out who is the murderer. And as usual, there is a twist at the end.
Well done, and uncomfortable as well.
Well done, and uncomfortable as well.
September 19, 2023
I’m a big fan of Anthony Berkeley’s mystery fiction and I bought this book forgetting completely that British Library Crime Classics is one of those publishers bent on “updating” classic texts for “sensitive” modern readers. I’ve got a pag-wamp on my ass when it comes to Orwellian things like censorship and memory-holing and all the rest of those dystopia staples, sue me.
The British Crime Library Classics edition of John Dickson Carr’s The Seat of the Scornful insulted its readers with its small-minded acquiescence to political correctness. In that book, the heart of the word NEGRO is obscured with dashes. But for those three dashes the book would have been an asset to any library and a net positive for mystery literature as a whole. Here’s a snippet of my (admittedly hysterical) review (which I fully stand behind, there’s no shame in doing the right thing):
[When did the word NEGRO even become offensive to the degree that it dare not appear in a book? What’s next, “colored?” This book, not a children’s book by the way, describes a tramp named Black Jeff as a “N- - -O.” How ludicrously moronic is that? How inane and how cowardly are the men and women at British Library Crime Classics that they felt the need to do this? It’s not like the word “negro” is used 45 times or in an especially derogatory manner. It is patently absurd. They have marred an otherwise fine, worthy edition. If British Library Crime Classics lacks the guts to publish classic mystery fiction without pandering to an infinitesimal demographic of immature luddites then they should let someone else do it. This is tantamount to cultural vandalism.]
Anyway, this censorship—to call it anything else is delusional—was dumb and unnecessary—as I think would agree the good people at the United Negro College fund as well as all the men and women who have benefited from that worthy charity!
The publisher’s note in Scoundrel explaining the “updating,” by the way, solicited reader feedback, and so I fed them to any email addresses I could find (since none were provided.) I’m happy to say both of the individuals I corresponded with treated the matter seriously even if we disagreed utterly. My point in summary: granted, where art meets commerce can be a sticky street, concessions often need to be made, sure, but this wasn’t one of them, agree to disagree, I’ll stick with the old paperbacks in future, thanks.
Anyway, cut to a few weeks later. In the little black mirror in my hand I see a small thumbnail of a new edition of a Roger Sheringham book. I tap the screen, setting in motion the enormous wheels of the global marketplace, and a few days later the brand new book rolls up to my doorstep. I turn the pages over and see “A Note from the Publisher” and the whole ugly censorship episode tumbles out of a broom closet in the back of my brain. Dang it…
But, wait! What’s this? This note from the publisher is not the same. It essentially just says to the reader, “hi folks, most of the books we publish were written a very long time ago but it’s impossible to separate art from history, yadda yadda yadda, heads up, in this book there might be some outdated language and stereotypes.”
Thank you! This is the right way to do present older works of art to newer audiences. Maybe this is only because Murder in the Basement has no words that can be construed as racial epithets anyway? I don’t know. Maybe some people would say some ideas in the book are sexist? (That charge should be answered with a “so what if it is, move along, idiot.”) In good faith, I’m assuming British Crime Library Classics got feedback from other readers with horse, if not common, sense. Here’s the essential line from the note:
“With this series British Library Publishing* aims to offer a new readership a chance to read some of the rare books of the British Library’s collections in an affordable paperback format, to enjoy their merits and to look back into the world of the twentieth century as portrayed by its writers.”
(*For some reason the ebook includes Poisoned Pen Press but the physical book doesn’t.)
The key phrase there is “the world of the twentieth century as portrayed by its writers.” I have a theory that the reason why gen z and (young) millennials are so hysterical about social justice is because they’re ignorant of history. Mostly, it hasn’t been taught to them except in the broadest strokes and they’re not keen on discovering it for themselves. It’s almost no wonder why they’re constantly foaming at the mouth: they have no context. They haven’t the world gradually change for the better, decade by decade, because their parents raised them in a sanitized, Disneyfied world, a fantasy land. The Western world has this bizarre obsession with coddling kids on the one hand and sexualizing them on the other. Hell, YouTube will demonetize creators if they mention the word “rape” but not if they show a video of a baby twerking. Talk about dystopias.
Publishers like BLCC are doing a very good thing putting out these old mysteries for new readers. Personally, I think the covers are a bit boring but I love the color and tone of the paper and the shape of the typeface. I’m relieved that I can buy these books again, to be honest. Although I’ll try to remember to read the publisher’s note first. Murder in the Basement might have been completely offensive-less to begin with. My only remaining reservation with BLCC is their “minor edits” for “consistency of style and sense.” Anthony Berkeley was a great stylist, number one, so why? Who is “improving” his and his original publisher’s text? I fully accept this might be a perfectly cromulent vagary of the publishing business of which I am ignorant, but I don’t recall seeing this kind of note elsewhere.
Problem number two: I guess “consistency” is subjective. Example from the text:
“And what I mean is, he must have known some time ahead that he’d have that bit of the road to himself then, and how could he possibly, have known it if he hadn’t got it (or she hadn’t got it) from Miss Staples herself?”
Why is there a comma after “possibly?” How does that help consistency of sense? It’s not in the other edition of this book I have and I believe it’s not grammatically correct. But, hey, I’m no expert. I’m just a reader with an opinion. That comma is an obstacle and should be removed in any future editions. Annoyingly, it makes me wonder what other “improvements” have been made.
AND NOW, FINALLY, FOR THE ACTUAL STORY…
One thing about Berkeley I see as a positive and as a negative is that he was always experimenting. He likes to mix things up. He didn’t just write country house murder after country house murder. I’m Basement, Berkeley plays with form.
Initially I thought, wow, this has to be the most police procedural-ish of all the Roger Sheringham books I’ve read. A woman is murdered and we follow along as Scotland Yard go through great lengths to identify her. Then it turns out the murdered woman was known by our Mr. Sheringham. And not incidentally Sheringham actually penned a roman à clef in which the murdered woman and the suspects feature. This story-within-a-story makes up the middle of the book. The beginning is the official investigation and the ending is the amateur detective’s.
The police procedural bit got a little dry and overlong, even if it was cool to see efficient investigating from law enforcement in a GAD novel. The middle bit was a fun comedy about the staff at a boarding school and their end of term melodrama (Berkeley is by far the funniest of all the golden age detective fiction writers.) The final third of the book was of the cat-and-mouse variety.
This middle chunk is a lot of fun to read but it’s especially thrilling because you wonder which of these characters will en the victim and which the murderer? And who will marry whom? Who will sack whom? Who will sack up with whom? I bet Berkeley wrote it as setup for a more traditional mystery novel and got bored with it, so he couched it in the investigations by Scotland Yard and Roger. Maybe that was a mistake.
What about the ending? Well, personally, I’m not a fan of mysteries where the identity of the murderer isn’t part of the mystery. I like Columbo, sure, but that show’s the exception. Without giving anything away, I found the whodunnit aspect kind of unsurprising (in two ways.) Also, I think Berkeley slightly makes his lead character out to be a tad narcissistic with his views on justice. Or lack thereof. I usually love when golden age detectives mete out justice on their own terms. This time I definitely did not. Although actually this wasn’t even Roger’s own idea of justice—solving the mystery was merely an intellectual pursuit, like a crossword puzzle, which Roger solved it to his own satisfaction. Police? Courts? Bah, who needs ‘em! Never mind the fact that there’s a literal killer at-large, another human being was murdered. Oh, but she was a shoplifter! A crook!
…yikes, Roger.
Overall, not my favorite Roger Sheringham outing but not bad. I don’t expect to ever feel the need to read it again, but I would recommended it. It’ll be a soft too from me, though. I still have one or two Sheringham books left to read, thankfully. As there are only ten, I’ve been saving them. When I finish I’ll revisit my favorites, starting with Panic Party.
THINGS I LEARNED FROM READING MURDER IN THE BASEMENT
“I’ll buy it” was English slang, “I’ll bite” was American. I’d say they’re both slightly dated and interchangeable now.
They used to screw metal plates onto bones. Maybe they still do. Yuck.
Of the many people reported missing, many aren’t reported unmissing when they return. If that’s true, that is an amazingly interesting fact. I found it hard to verify, though.
A pag-wamp is a herpes breakout. (Wink!)
The British Crime Library Classics edition of John Dickson Carr’s The Seat of the Scornful insulted its readers with its small-minded acquiescence to political correctness. In that book, the heart of the word NEGRO is obscured with dashes. But for those three dashes the book would have been an asset to any library and a net positive for mystery literature as a whole. Here’s a snippet of my (admittedly hysterical) review (which I fully stand behind, there’s no shame in doing the right thing):
[When did the word NEGRO even become offensive to the degree that it dare not appear in a book? What’s next, “colored?” This book, not a children’s book by the way, describes a tramp named Black Jeff as a “N- - -O.” How ludicrously moronic is that? How inane and how cowardly are the men and women at British Library Crime Classics that they felt the need to do this? It’s not like the word “negro” is used 45 times or in an especially derogatory manner. It is patently absurd. They have marred an otherwise fine, worthy edition. If British Library Crime Classics lacks the guts to publish classic mystery fiction without pandering to an infinitesimal demographic of immature luddites then they should let someone else do it. This is tantamount to cultural vandalism.]
Anyway, this censorship—to call it anything else is delusional—was dumb and unnecessary—as I think would agree the good people at the United Negro College fund as well as all the men and women who have benefited from that worthy charity!
The publisher’s note in Scoundrel explaining the “updating,” by the way, solicited reader feedback, and so I fed them to any email addresses I could find (since none were provided.) I’m happy to say both of the individuals I corresponded with treated the matter seriously even if we disagreed utterly. My point in summary: granted, where art meets commerce can be a sticky street, concessions often need to be made, sure, but this wasn’t one of them, agree to disagree, I’ll stick with the old paperbacks in future, thanks.
Anyway, cut to a few weeks later. In the little black mirror in my hand I see a small thumbnail of a new edition of a Roger Sheringham book. I tap the screen, setting in motion the enormous wheels of the global marketplace, and a few days later the brand new book rolls up to my doorstep. I turn the pages over and see “A Note from the Publisher” and the whole ugly censorship episode tumbles out of a broom closet in the back of my brain. Dang it…
But, wait! What’s this? This note from the publisher is not the same. It essentially just says to the reader, “hi folks, most of the books we publish were written a very long time ago but it’s impossible to separate art from history, yadda yadda yadda, heads up, in this book there might be some outdated language and stereotypes.”
Thank you! This is the right way to do present older works of art to newer audiences. Maybe this is only because Murder in the Basement has no words that can be construed as racial epithets anyway? I don’t know. Maybe some people would say some ideas in the book are sexist? (That charge should be answered with a “so what if it is, move along, idiot.”) In good faith, I’m assuming British Crime Library Classics got feedback from other readers with horse, if not common, sense. Here’s the essential line from the note:
“With this series British Library Publishing* aims to offer a new readership a chance to read some of the rare books of the British Library’s collections in an affordable paperback format, to enjoy their merits and to look back into the world of the twentieth century as portrayed by its writers.”
(*For some reason the ebook includes Poisoned Pen Press but the physical book doesn’t.)
The key phrase there is “the world of the twentieth century as portrayed by its writers.” I have a theory that the reason why gen z and (young) millennials are so hysterical about social justice is because they’re ignorant of history. Mostly, it hasn’t been taught to them except in the broadest strokes and they’re not keen on discovering it for themselves. It’s almost no wonder why they’re constantly foaming at the mouth: they have no context. They haven’t the world gradually change for the better, decade by decade, because their parents raised them in a sanitized, Disneyfied world, a fantasy land. The Western world has this bizarre obsession with coddling kids on the one hand and sexualizing them on the other. Hell, YouTube will demonetize creators if they mention the word “rape” but not if they show a video of a baby twerking. Talk about dystopias.
Publishers like BLCC are doing a very good thing putting out these old mysteries for new readers. Personally, I think the covers are a bit boring but I love the color and tone of the paper and the shape of the typeface. I’m relieved that I can buy these books again, to be honest. Although I’ll try to remember to read the publisher’s note first. Murder in the Basement might have been completely offensive-less to begin with. My only remaining reservation with BLCC is their “minor edits” for “consistency of style and sense.” Anthony Berkeley was a great stylist, number one, so why? Who is “improving” his and his original publisher’s text? I fully accept this might be a perfectly cromulent vagary of the publishing business of which I am ignorant, but I don’t recall seeing this kind of note elsewhere.
Problem number two: I guess “consistency” is subjective. Example from the text:
“And what I mean is, he must have known some time ahead that he’d have that bit of the road to himself then, and how could he possibly, have known it if he hadn’t got it (or she hadn’t got it) from Miss Staples herself?”
Why is there a comma after “possibly?” How does that help consistency of sense? It’s not in the other edition of this book I have and I believe it’s not grammatically correct. But, hey, I’m no expert. I’m just a reader with an opinion. That comma is an obstacle and should be removed in any future editions. Annoyingly, it makes me wonder what other “improvements” have been made.
AND NOW, FINALLY, FOR THE ACTUAL STORY…
One thing about Berkeley I see as a positive and as a negative is that he was always experimenting. He likes to mix things up. He didn’t just write country house murder after country house murder. I’m Basement, Berkeley plays with form.
Initially I thought, wow, this has to be the most police procedural-ish of all the Roger Sheringham books I’ve read. A woman is murdered and we follow along as Scotland Yard go through great lengths to identify her. Then it turns out the murdered woman was known by our Mr. Sheringham. And not incidentally Sheringham actually penned a roman à clef in which the murdered woman and the suspects feature. This story-within-a-story makes up the middle of the book. The beginning is the official investigation and the ending is the amateur detective’s.
The police procedural bit got a little dry and overlong, even if it was cool to see efficient investigating from law enforcement in a GAD novel. The middle bit was a fun comedy about the staff at a boarding school and their end of term melodrama (Berkeley is by far the funniest of all the golden age detective fiction writers.) The final third of the book was of the cat-and-mouse variety.
This middle chunk is a lot of fun to read but it’s especially thrilling because you wonder which of these characters will en the victim and which the murderer? And who will marry whom? Who will sack whom? Who will sack up with whom? I bet Berkeley wrote it as setup for a more traditional mystery novel and got bored with it, so he couched it in the investigations by Scotland Yard and Roger. Maybe that was a mistake.
What about the ending? Well, personally, I’m not a fan of mysteries where the identity of the murderer isn’t part of the mystery. I like Columbo, sure, but that show’s the exception. Without giving anything away, I found the whodunnit aspect kind of unsurprising (in two ways.) Also, I think Berkeley slightly makes his lead character out to be a tad narcissistic with his views on justice. Or lack thereof. I usually love when golden age detectives mete out justice on their own terms. This time I definitely did not. Although actually this wasn’t even Roger’s own idea of justice—solving the mystery was merely an intellectual pursuit, like a crossword puzzle, which Roger solved it to his own satisfaction. Police? Courts? Bah, who needs ‘em! Never mind the fact that there’s a literal killer at-large, another human being was murdered. Oh, but she was a shoplifter! A crook!
…yikes, Roger.
Overall, not my favorite Roger Sheringham outing but not bad. I don’t expect to ever feel the need to read it again, but I would recommended it. It’ll be a soft too from me, though. I still have one or two Sheringham books left to read, thankfully. As there are only ten, I’ve been saving them. When I finish I’ll revisit my favorites, starting with Panic Party.
THINGS I LEARNED FROM READING MURDER IN THE BASEMENT
“I’ll buy it” was English slang, “I’ll bite” was American. I’d say they’re both slightly dated and interchangeable now.
They used to screw metal plates onto bones. Maybe they still do. Yuck.
Of the many people reported missing, many aren’t reported unmissing when they return. If that’s true, that is an amazingly interesting fact. I found it hard to verify, though.
A pag-wamp is a herpes breakout. (Wink!)
November 12, 2021
This is a really interesting mystery - with a corpse that's hard to identify, a book within a book and a Very Obvious Suspect. I raced through it and enjoyed it a lot.
Read
May 17, 2023One of my favorite mystery devices….a manuscript within a novel that gives the clues to the murder. I wonder if this novel started the device. Tight plotting, and I didn’t guess the murderer.
Displaying 1 - 19 of 130 reviews