The Great Detectives
Page 1
The Great Detectives
edited by
Otto Penzler
A MysteriousPress.com
Open Road Integrated Media
Ebook
To my mother and my brother—
With thanks for caring so much
Contents
Foreword by Otto Penzler
Roderick Alleyn by Ngaio Marsh
John Appleby by Michael Innes
Lew Archer by Ross Macdonald
Father Bredder by Leonard Holton
Flash Casey by George Harmon Coxe
Pierre Chambrun by Hugh Pentecost
Inspector Cockrill by Christianna Brand
Captain José Da Silva by Robert L. Fish
Nancy Drew by Carolyn Keene
The 87th Precinct by Ed McBain
Fred Fellows by Hillary Waugh
Inspector Ghote by H. R. F. Keating
Matt Helm by Donald Hamilton
Duncan Maclain by Baynard H. Kendrick
Mark McPherson by Vera Caspary
Lieutenant Luis Mendoza by Dell Shannon
Mr. and Mrs. North by Richard Lockridge
Patrick Petrella by Michael Gilbert
Superintendent Pibble by Peter Dickinson
Quiller by Adam Hall
Inspector Schmidt by George Bagby
The Shadow by Maxwell Grant
Michael Shayne by Brett Halliday
Virgil Tibbs by John Ball
Dick Tracy by Chester Gould
Inspector Van der Valk by Nicolas Freeling
Bibliography and Filmography
Foreword
THE SEASON OF THE HERO appears to be ended. While that may be cause for mourning, it should be no cause for surprise. Whether art imitates life, or whether the influence is the other way around, literature, inarguably, is the mirror of its time.
It is a commonplace of literary history that the rise of naturalism in the late nineteenth century is primarily responsible for the interment of the romantic hero. Knights in shining armor, performing selfless, fearless deeds, galloped down the road to oblivion. Readers of contemporary literature will find few protagonists in “serious fiction” who appear to be stronger and wiser, more courageous, more compassionate, than themselves. The glorious hero of the kind of story that held listeners and readers spellbound for a thousand years or more—that lifted up their hearts, gave them models to emulate—is almost no more. The Übermensch, the superman, has almost vanished with the culture that extolled singular men performing singular deeds. Almost—but not quite. The detective story still flourishes.
With the creation of C. Auguste Dupin in “The Murders in the Rue Morgue” in 1841, Edgar Allan Poe fascinated an international body of readers with the astonishing feats of deduction of the first great literary detective. When Arthur Conan Doyle introduced Sherlock Holmes in A Study in Scarlet in 1887, the ultimate literary detective—dedicated to the pursuit of excellence, justice, and truth—was born. (Holmes bears not a little resemblance to the concept of that ultimate human being, the Übermensch, as developed by Friedrich Nietzsche in the series of narratives published as Thus Spake Zarathustra between 1883 and 1892.)
Holmes, of course, was not entirely unflawed. We know that he was, for a time, if not an addict, then an irregular user of cocaine. And, in several instances, Holmes was defeated in his quest to bring a case to a successful conclusion.
Yet the great detective in fiction today still carries the aura of invincibility, the power of omniscient ratiocination, the unwavering determination to see the game through, the infallible knowledge of truth and justice, that characterized Holmes.
Naturalism, to be sure, has had its impact on this species of hero. Although some English detectives (Dorothy L. Sayers’s Lord Peter Wimsey, Margery Allingham’s Albert Campion, Ngaio Marsh’s Roderick Alleyn) have been actual (or at least nature’s) aristocrats, the type of American detective who came to flower with Dashiell Hammett’s Sam Spade and Raymond Chandler’s Philip Marlowe has been a more dubious sort of hero—troubled by many of the failings to which the flesh is heir, from being occasionally lustful to being frequently broke.
Today’s literary detectives are hardly perfect heroes. Consider the weary cynicism of Ross Macdonald’s Lew Archer, the alcoholism of George Harmon Coxe’s Flash Casey, the self-effacement of H. R. F. Keating’s Inspector Ghote, and the collective roughnecked opportunism of Ed McBain’s 87th Precinct squad.
Yet the idea of the Great Detective still grips us. Flawed though they may be, as a class great detectives are a testimony to the concept of the superhero. Where else can we read of a protagonist who risks life, limb, and often reputation for little recompense? Who persists doggedly to the grim end of the trail, unraveling the case? Who ultimately apprehends the villain? And who upholds the law and—more important—glorifies the concept of justice?
We know that, in life, detectives do not always triumph. The odds, in fact, favor the felon. And if captured, the criminal often goes free because of overloaded, ineffectual, bureaucratic systems more concerned with law than justice.
So the mystery story, the saga of a detective at work, is characterized, not unfairly, as escape fiction. It not only permits the reader to share vicariously the experience of the detective hero, but to escape from an imperfect society. In detective literature, the detective is invariably victorious. And such victors must endure.
What makes a great detective in fiction? Is it his winning personality? Who would be enchanted by Quiller, Van der Valk, or Pibble? Is it his commanding presence? If so, how can one account for Ghote, or Cockrill? Is it the style, the subtlety, the magisterial prose of the detective writer? Rarely. Pulp magazine writers drew their characters with only the broadest strokes, in hundreds of thousands of words a year. Yet The Shadow is not forgotten.
The characters, the heroes, immortalized in the literature of detection do tend to be more memorable than the corner greengrocer or the mousey blonde down your apartment hallway, or the bored cop who interrogates you about the theft of your TV set.
The genre of the detective story has produced more recognizable and unique (and, yes, desirable, in the sense of craving their company) characters than all other forms of fiction combined. This phenomenon has never been more evident than in the fiction of the last three decades.
How many readers can recall the appearance, habits, or even the names of the protagonists in novels by, say, Norman Mailer, Saul Bellow, John Fowles, John Updike, William Styron, or Thomas Pynchon? Can you name six of them? But millions will not forget the introspective Lew Archer; two-fisted Mike Shayne; ruthless Quiller; aristocratic Roderick Alleyn; tough, raunchy Matt Helm; phlegmatic, schnapps-loving Van der Valk; or even the charming Nancy Drew.
The enduring detectives of fiction have recognizable traits that remain consistent throughout their adventures. Their points of prowess and their frailties draw us to them. And we welcome their return, in case after case.
The accomplishments of some are known to us through the scantest literary legacy. Mark McPherson, the sleuth of Vera Caspary’s Laura, has had only that one recorded case. On the other hand, Maxwell Grant’s narratives about The Shadow exceed three hundred. Some of these detectives conduct investigations that are meticulously planned and that have, to an extent, a predictable end. Others habitually become embroiled in cases that seem bizarre beyond the wildest roll of fortune’s dice.
This book, then, is a mixed collection of diverse personalities and varied styles, reflecting a slightly idiosyncratic (and certainly personal) taste.
A lifetime of savoring the rich flavors and abundant textures of detective fiction had proved inadequate. I wanted to know more about some favorite characters—more than w
as contained in the books and stories, more than could be inferred from the texts, more than had been written. Convinced that others shared a curiosity about the origins of the great literary heroes of our time, I decided to ask the creators of those detectives for additional information. On what real-life people might their heroes be based? How did the adventures come to be written? Did they like their creations? What is the secret of inventing a character who will outlive its author?
Doubtless another addict of detection would put such questions to a somewhat different group of authors. These detectives were chosen after considerable deliberation. There were some limiting criteria. Only authors who write in English were invited to contribute to the book (because of my inability to read anything else). Only authors still alive were asked (as the others could hardly testify). And, regrettably, a very few authors had to decline the invitation because they found writing directly about their heroes impossible, either physically or psychologically.
It is my hope that the gracious and highly individual contributions which follow will provide useful clues for a fuller understanding of these great detectives. An even greater hope is that they will recruit new readers to share the pleasures of one of literature’s most entertaining and enduring forms.
— Otto Penzler
September 1977
Roderick Alleyn
Ngaio Marsh
HANDSOME SOCIALITE DETECTIVES ARE a mainstay of “Golden Age” British mystery novels of the 1920s and 1930s, and are not unknown to the American writers who affected Britishisms for their prose style and the language mannerisms of their detectives. Lord Peter Wimsey is a notable example of the former, and Philo Vance and the early Ellery Queen are examples of the latter.
Dame Ngaio Marsh’s Roderick Alleyn is one of the few aristocrats officially connected with Scotland Yard, rising quickly from inspector to superintendent, and he has found his familial connections of invaluable assistance on cases that might have proved a trifle sensitive to police officers of a different social stratum. He is also one of the few who have survived into the 1970s.
The supporting cast in Alleyn’s exploits includes Inspector Fox, whom he persists in calling “Br’er Fox” or “Foxkin,” and Nigel Bathgate, a reporter for the London Clarion, who sometimes chronicles the cases of Scotland Yard’s most attractive detective.
Dame Ngaio Marsh (she was made a Dame Commander of the British Empire in 1966) was born in New Zealand in 1899 and has divided most of her adult life between that country and England. Her unusual first name (it is, actually, her middle name, since she was born Edith Ngaio Marsh) is the Maori word for a regional flower; it is pronounced NY-o. Much of her time has been devoted to the theater: first writing plays, then acting in them, and finally directing and producing them.
Roderick Alleyn
by Ngaio Marsh
HE WAS BORN WITH the rank of Detective-Inspector, C.I.D., on a very wet Saturday afternoon in a. basement flat off Sloane Square, in London. The year was 1931.
All day, rain splashed up from the feet of passersby going to and fro, at eye-level, outside my water-streaked windows. It fanned out from under the tires of cars, cascaded down the steps to my door and flooded the area: “remorseless” was the word for it and its sound was, beyond all expression, dreary. In view of what was about to take place, the setting was, in fact, almost too good to be true.
I read a detective story borrowed from a dim little lending library in a stationer’s shop across the way. Either a Christie or a Sayers, I think it was. By four o’clock, when the afternoon was already darkening, I had finished it and still the rain came down. I remember that I made up the London coal-fire of those days and looked down at it, idly wondering if I had it in me to write something in the genre. That was the season, in England, when the Murder Game was popular at weekend parties. Someone was slipped a card saying he or she was the “murderer.” He or she then chose a moment to select a “victim” and there was a subsequent “trial.” I thought it might be an idea for a whodunit—they were already called that—if a real corpse was found instead of a phony one. Luckily for me, as it turned out, I wasn’t aware until much later that a French practitioner had been struck with the same notion.
I played about with this idea. I tinkered with the fire and with an emergent character who might have been engendered in its sulky entrails: a solver of crimes.
The room had grown quite dark when I pulled on a mackintosh, took an umbrella, plunged up the basement steps, and beat my way through rain-fractured lamplight to the stationer’s shop. It smelled of damp newsprint, cheap magazines, and wet people. I bought six twopenny exercise books, a pencil and pencil-sharpener and splashed back to the flat.
Then with an odd sensation of giving myself some sort of treat, I thought more specifically about the character who already had begun to take shape.
In the crime fiction of that time the solver was often a person of more-or-less eccentric habit with a collection of easily identifiable mannerisms. This, of course, was in the tradition of Sherlock Holmes. The splendid M. Poirot had his mustaches, his passion for orderly arrangements, his frequent references to “grey matter.” Lord Peter Wimsey could be, as one now inclines to think, excruciatingly facetious. Nice Reggie Fortune said—and he said it very often—“My dear chap! Oh, my dear chap!” and across the Atlantic there was Philo Vance, who spoke a strange language that his author, I think I remember, had the nerve to attribute, in part, to Balliol College, Oxford.
Faced with this assembly of celebrated eccentrics, it seemed to me, on that long-distant wet afternoon, that my best chance lay in comparative normality—in the invention of a man with a background resembling that of the friends I had made in England—and that I had better not tie mannerisms, like labels, round his neck. (I can see now that with my earlier books I did not altogether succeed in this respect.)
I thought that my detective would be a professional policeman but, in some ways, atypical: an attractive, civilized man with whom it would be pleasant to talk but much less pleasant to fall out.
He began to solidify.
From the beginning I discovered that I knew quite a lot about him. Indeed I rather think that, even if I had not fallen so casually into the practice of crime-writing and had taken to a more serious form, he would still have arrived and found himself in an altogether different setting.
He was tall and thin with an accidental elegance about him, and fastidious enough to make one wonder at his choice of profession. He was a compassionate man. He had a cockeyed sense of humor, dependent largely upon understatement, but for all his unemphatic, rather apologetic ways, he could be a formidable person of considerable authority. As for his background, that settled itself there and then: he was a younger son of a Buckinghamshire family and had his schooling at Eton. His elder brother, whom he regarded as a bit of an ass, was a diplomatist and his mother, whom he liked, a lady of character.
I remember how pleased I was, early in his career, when one of the reviews called him “that nice chap, Alleyn,” because that was how I liked to think of him: a nice chap with more edge to him than met the eye—a good deal more, as I hope it has turned out. The popular press of his early days would refer to him as “The Handsome Inspector,” a practice that caused him acute embarrassment.
On this day of his inception I fiddled about with the idea of writing a tale that would explain why he left the diplomatic service for the police force but somehow the idea has never jelled.
His age? Here I must digress. His age would defy the investigation of an Einstein, and he is not alone in this respect. Hercule Poirot, I have been told, was, by ordinary reckoning, going on 122 when he died. Truth to tell, fictional investigations move in an exclusive space-time continuum where Mr. Bucket (“of The Detective”) may be seen to go about his lawful occasions, cheek-by-jowl with the most recent of fledglings. It is enough to say that on the afternoon of my man’s arrival I did not concern myself with his age and am still of the same mind in this re
spect.
His arrival had been unexpected and occurred, you might say, out of nothing. One of the questions writers are most often asked about characters in their books is whether they are based upon people in the workaday world—“real people.” Some of mine certainly are but they have gone through various mutations and in doing so have moved away from their original begetters. But not this one. He, as far as I can tell, had no begetter apart from his author. He came in without introduction and if, for this reason, there is an element of unreality about him, I can only say that for me, at least, he was and is very real indeed.
Dorothy Sayers has been castigated, with some justification perhaps, for falling in love with her Wimsey. To have done so may have been an error in taste and of judgment, though her ardent fans would never have admitted as much. I can’t say I have ever succumbed in this way to my own investigator, but I have grown to like him as an old friend. I even dare to think he has developed third-dimensionally in my company. We have traveled widely: in a night express through the North Island of New Zealand, and among the geysers, boiling mud, and snow-clad mountains of that country. We have cruised along English canals and walked through the streets and monuments of Rome. His duties have taken us to an island off the coast of Normandy and the backstage regions of several theaters. He has sailed with a psychopathic homicide from Tilbury to Cape Town and has made arrests in at least three country houses, one hospital, a church, a canal boat, and a pub. Small wonder, perhaps, that we have both broadened our outlook under the pressure of these undertakings, none of which was anticipated on that wet afternoon in London.
At his first appearance he was a bachelor and, although responsive to the opposite sex, did not bounce in and out of irresponsible beds when going about his job. Or, if he did, I knew nothing about it. He was, to all intents and purposes, fancy-free and would remain so until, sailing out of Suva in Fiji, he came across Agatha Troy, painting in oils, on the deck of a liner. And that was still some half-dozen books in the future.