Scan barcode
krobart's review against another edition
4.0
See my review here:
https://whatmeread.wordpress.com/2020/02/03/review-1467-the-billiard-room-mystery/
https://whatmeread.wordpress.com/2020/02/03/review-1467-the-billiard-room-mystery/
robinwalter's review against another edition
lighthearted
mysterious
relaxing
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
4.25
This was an exceptional debut to a mystery series. I always like to read at least the first two or three books in a series that features recurring characters, so that I can get a feel for the characters and particularly so that I'm in a position to see if the characters and the author develop over time. Sometimes, the initial outing is mediocre at best, as with Campion's debut in The Crime at Black Dudley. Allingham's Campion series is my favourite golden age mystery series by far, despite that very underwhelming start. Lord Peter Wimsey's debut in Whose Body? was so awful that it took me 2 to 3 years to sufficiently recover from the trauma to continue my planned sequential reading. Both Ellery Queens and Nero Wolfe's debut novels were likewise experiences I choose to forget.
Anthony Bathurst positively flew out of the starting gate in comparison.
I love the deft touches of self-aware humour, the subtle nods toward the fourth wall brought a smile to my face. The first example of this was the following passage
“You admire Holmes?”
“Yes, Mr. Arkwright, I do! That is to say—the pre-war Holmes!”
“You don’t admit that his key is always made to fit his lock?”
“Of course,” replied Anthony, “that must be so!"
That recognition that murder mysteries are constructed to make the detective look good was refreshing. That Bathurst immediately followed up by echoing my own feelings about Father Brown further endeared him to me.
"Father Brown—no. He’s too entirely ‘Chestertonian.’ He deduces that the dustman was the murderer because of the shape of the piece that had been cut from the apple-pie. I can’t quite get him.”
AMEN!
That acknowledgement of the way mysteries are constructed to show off the detective did cause me some minor irritation later in the book. I don't really care about "Fair Play" mystery novels in the sense of making it fair for the reader, since I lack the intellect to figure it out and read mystery novels for fun, not as exercises and honing my puzzle solving or deduction skills. However, I quite intensely dislike it when the "gifted amateur" makes the professional PC plod look like a plod primarily by means of receiving help from an uneven playing field. THAT kind of "Fair Play" is what I want to see. And in this book, Bathurst cheated, repeatedly and shamelessly.
In his initial interactions with the investigating inspector, he explicitly propose a 50-50 sharing of discoveries. Toward the climax of the book, the inspector was still playing by those rules, while Bathurst Hurst deliberately did not. His breaching of their "agreement" is even telegraphed in the two relevant chapter titles that show "his "key being made to fit his lock"
CHAPTER XVII
INSPECTOR BADDELEY PUTS HIS CARDS ON THE TABLE
followed by
CHAPTER XVIII
MR. BATHURST PARTIALLY EMULATES HIS EXAMPLE
What particularly annoyed me about this was the very negative impression it left of Bathurst's character. He says "let's share everything 50-50", then he doesn't do that. Even worse, when the inspector is berating himself for not figuring things out, Bathurst repeatedly pretends to be consoling and encouraging in telling him not to be too hard on himself - this despite the fact that the main reason the inspector hasn't figured these out is because Bathurst is withholding key clues from him.
So Bathurst as a person comes off as very distinctly, in the language of the time, "not quite quite". Frankly caddish, and with a smug conviction that he is always and in every situation entitled to be so. It remains to be seen if my opinion of his character and personality will change.
Nevertheless, the fact that the author was able to make me react so strongly to his lead character in the debut novel is another reason why I have scored this so highly. Wimsey, Alleyn, and Campion all come across as almost featureless caricatures in their first outings, Bathurst definitely does not.
Add to that the brisk pacing of the story, the delightfully surprising resolution, and the touches of humour, and this is a series I am looking forward to continuing.
Anthony Bathurst positively flew out of the starting gate in comparison.
I love the deft touches of self-aware humour, the subtle nods toward the fourth wall brought a smile to my face. The first example of this was the following passage
“You admire Holmes?”
“Yes, Mr. Arkwright, I do! That is to say—the pre-war Holmes!”
“You don’t admit that his key is always made to fit his lock?”
“Of course,” replied Anthony, “that must be so!"
That recognition that murder mysteries are constructed to make the detective look good was refreshing. That Bathurst immediately followed up by echoing my own feelings about Father Brown further endeared him to me.
"Father Brown—no. He’s too entirely ‘Chestertonian.’ He deduces that the dustman was the murderer because of the shape of the piece that had been cut from the apple-pie. I can’t quite get him.”
AMEN!
That acknowledgement of the way mysteries are constructed to show off the detective did cause me some minor irritation later in the book. I don't really care about "Fair Play" mystery novels in the sense of making it fair for the reader, since I lack the intellect to figure it out and read mystery novels for fun, not as exercises and honing my puzzle solving or deduction skills. However, I quite intensely dislike it when the "gifted amateur" makes the professional PC plod look like a plod primarily by means of receiving help from an uneven playing field. THAT kind of "Fair Play" is what I want to see. And in this book, Bathurst cheated, repeatedly and shamelessly.
In his initial interactions with the investigating inspector, he explicitly propose a 50-50 sharing of discoveries. Toward the climax of the book, the inspector was still playing by those rules, while Bathurst Hurst deliberately did not. His breaching of their "agreement" is even telegraphed in the two relevant chapter titles that show "his "key being made to fit his lock"
CHAPTER XVII
INSPECTOR BADDELEY PUTS HIS CARDS ON THE TABLE
followed by
CHAPTER XVIII
MR. BATHURST PARTIALLY EMULATES HIS EXAMPLE
What particularly annoyed me about this was the very negative impression it left of Bathurst's character. He says "let's share everything 50-50", then he doesn't do that. Even worse, when the inspector is berating himself for not figuring things out, Bathurst repeatedly pretends to be consoling and encouraging in telling him not to be too hard on himself - this despite the fact that the main reason the inspector hasn't figured these out is because Bathurst is withholding key clues from him.
So Bathurst as a person comes off as very distinctly, in the language of the time, "not quite quite". Frankly caddish, and with a smug conviction that he is always and in every situation entitled to be so. It remains to be seen if my opinion of his character and personality will change.
Nevertheless, the fact that the author was able to make me react so strongly to his lead character in the debut novel is another reason why I have scored this so highly. Wimsey, Alleyn, and Campion all come across as almost featureless caricatures in their first outings, Bathurst definitely does not.
Add to that the brisk pacing of the story, the delightfully surprising resolution, and the touches of humour, and this is a series I am looking forward to continuing.
More...