Reading the Detectives discussion

Welcome to our latest in the Ngaio Marsh challenge. This is the 22nd in the Roderick Alleyn series and was first published in 1962.

This novel sees a cast of characters following the clues in a mystery hunt party which ends in murder...

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

Having not been that keen on some of the recent Marsh mysteries, I really enjoyed this one. I thought it was a lot of fun, although it felt odd in terms of time - half fifties, half thirties in terms of period.

Finished this and did enjoy it. I found it to be one of the better books in the series. I do wish though that the authors of this time wouldn't make the doubtful characters Cockneys
Marsh did include quite a bit of humour in this, and some pretty eccentric characters, even extending this to the dogs.

This book was filled with utterly unlikable characters (especially stupid Moppet & smarmy Leonard) in my opinion but I loved the way the old crew solved the mystery. Fox is my favorite. Alleyn has such beautiful manners. I agree with you, Jill, that making Cockneys questionable characters seems to be the norm in quite a few GA mysteries.

What did everyone think of Leonard? He reminded me of a Teddy Boy. I read this thinking, it was published in 1962. By 1963, London would be much more Sixties than Fifties. I wonder if the next mystery will reflect this?

The Teddy Boys here went through to about mid 1960s before fading out. In NZ and Australia the off-spring to them running about the same time were the Bodgies and Widgies (girls). They were the very rebellious version and added a lot of leather and flick knives to their 'uniform'. So, I am wondering whether she had been back to London by this time, or whether she based him on what our Teddy Boys here.

From a time setting point of view, it felt to me she was still back in the immediate post war era still, but then there'd be touches of the late 1950s pop in. One of my interests in reading her books in order was to see if she moved with the times in her settings, and if she did then the next couple should be very familiar to me. I read a selection of her books at college for my NZ author studies, but by the time this one was released I was only a year or so from leaving school.

I have watched the TV episode on YouTube for this book. I will say they've not got Leonard as a true Teddy Boy, but he is trendy in dress and behaviour. I won't say anything more until later in the month other than the film is quite different from the book in a quite major way I thought.

I have now finished this one and really enjoyed it, lots of humour. I loved PPP! Definitely one of my favourites from the series. Agree the time period felt mixed, with all the servants!

I enjoyed this book except for the depiction of the London crook. Considering his past, his crimes are ridiculously stupid. The scheme for the car - what is it? He will just dry away with it? The seller and the whole village know his name! And the cigarette box? Obviosly, the first suspect is Leonoard with the Moppet as the love-blind accomplice.

Otherwise the book was very readable and the mystery puzzling

I didn't think that Leonard and Moppet were planning to just drive away with the car. After all they showed up at the party house, with the car, hoping for an invitation. I thought they would buy the car on credit, using Moppet's relatives as guarantees, then leave them to pick up the tab. As for the cigarette case, they tried very hard to get the help blamed.

Except that I really hated both of them, they were almost comic. I see no hope for Moppet's future and don't think she deserving of any.

I find it interesting that many of Marsh's setting seem to include people, who are the last of their type? !962- a book on etiquette by a gentleman? Love for esoteric forms of Morris dancing? Eccentric and yet rich Dukes?

Having done jury service, it seems to me that most crimes are equally poorly thought out! Perhaps criminals just aren't that bright, generally. I also think the cost of the car was intended to be dumped on others, who would pick up the tab, in order to avoid embarrassment.

I just thought that for a London thief, he was shown to be rather unsophisticated-playing to the readers' prejudices?

Undoubtedly, Bicky. Bit snobbish, I agree, but I suspect readers of Ngaio Marsh would have expected it.

I agree the portrayal of Leonard is quite snobbish - also of Moppett, who seems to be getting “above herself”!

What did anyone think of the solution of this one, and did you guess who did it? I didn't, I must say, and I do wonder if the culprit would really be up to wandering around in a ditch and moving drainpipes.

Judy wrote: "What did anyone think of the solution of this one, and did you guess who did it? I didn't, I must say, and I do wonder if the culprit would really be up to wandering around in a ditch and moving dr..."

I didn't guess, nor did I buy into the solution, however besotted she was with Moppet. I did like the connection of the gloves, her thumb medication and the book's title.

Sandy wrote: "Judy wrote: "I did like the connection of the gloves, her thumb medication and the book's title. ..."

Yes, that was clever - Marsh loves to have titles which somehow tie in with the solution, but this time it wasn't too obvious how it would do, I thought.

On Leonard, I thought it was a bit odd that he keeps being made to sound so unattractive, and yet he has the women swooning!

Well, he didn't have a lot of competition, to be fair, did he? And his young lady was a bit of an outsider, who probably felt more comfortable with him. There was much about snobbishness and class in this mystery, which did make it feel a little earlier in era than it actually was.

Has anyone watched the TV episode on You Tube?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPl2n...

And if you have, what did you think of this compared to the book; what did you think of the change they made?

I like this version as much as I liked the book, but admit I was taken by surprise enough I had to go back and check the book to make sure I hadn't missed something.

Thanks for the reminder, Lesley - I've got the episode recorded from TV (recorded the whole series from Alibi a while back) but haven't had a chance to watch it yet. I will get to it very soon!

I've watched the first half of the episode - hope to finish tomorrow. Talk about a star-studded cast, with Sir John Gielgud (aged 90) as PPP, and Geoffrey Palmer as Harold!

He was a magnificent choice for PPP I thought.

Yes, wonderful choice.., I could hardly believe it when I saw him in the opening scene.

Lesley wrote: "Has anyone watched the TV episode on You Tube?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPl2n...

And if you have, what did you think of this compared to the book; what did you think of the change they made?..."

I've finished watching it now, but was rather surprised by all the changes to the plot - I suppose they wanted to make Troy more prominent. I thought it was a very good episode overall, anyway, though I never get the full impact of the mystery after reading the book just before!

Also, as I've already said, the cast was fantastic.

I like this one, I am very fond of Mr Pyke Period who I find very endearing. Lady Desiree is quite a good character too. And there is plenty of humour. Not quite sure about the devoted servants - think they were a rarity by the early 60s, but at least there are only two of them.

I enjoyed this one - it had a light, humorous touch, including some of the names, and a logical solution. Ngaio Marsh kept going with the golden age style after the war in various ways and I think the presence of the servants, among other features, reflects that. Ngaio Marsh has been accused of snobbery in the past; here, she provides an obvious snob in PPP, possibly being snobbish about snobs!

That's a great point about PPP, Nick - and of course he is something of a fake snob with his made-up family background, too!

Sandy wrote: "I didn't think that Leonard and Moppet were planning to just drive away with the car. After all they showed up at the party house, with the car, hoping for an invitation. I thought they would buy t..."

Isn't it all the more tragic that the murder (and attempted one) were committed on her behalf? Not that even righteous people would be said to "deserve" that honor, but its even more pointless for someone that can't be saved anyway.