A review of Ngaio Marsh's first novel, "A Man Lay Dead", which is also the first appearance of Roderick Alleyn. This review is spoiler free for the first part.
After watching your Queens of Crime video I decided to give Marsh a try. And yep, it was this one. I always like to start at the beginning if possible. I absolutely agree with your review. Certain parts just didn't seem to fit. I actually had to read the slide part twice to make sure I read it correctly. Ridiculous. I am looking forward to reading more from her though. Thanks for the recommendation.
I'm glad to know my assumptions were correct and this is the first one people pick up. I believe I cut it out of the video but I also wondered how much time one would really save by sliding down the banister. The adaptation does that experiment and of course it says it saves a lot of time but I'm doubtful. I give her credit for creativity and trying a new thing, at the very least.
I also watched the adaptation (a review of the series will be two videos from now) and I think it's fine. The adaptations don't change much and I think it did as good a job as it possibly could. The whole religious artifact theft ring is different in content from the Russian stuff in the book but it functions the same way so I don't think it's better or worse. It's better incorporated into the plot in the episode but that's not really saying much.
The discussion of the implausability of sliding down a banister while grabbing a knife, to commit a murder in 60 seconds, brings up the question: what plot point or scenario in a mystery do you find hard to swallow, now that you are older and wiser, and have read dozens of classics? One that bugs me now is in Peril at End House: if somebody has tried to kill this sweet, young thing several times, then she should darned well be dead, Poirot! Come on, you are smarter than that!
This is another tough question. I used to be totally taken in by cryptic dying words but I now I find them ridiculous (still enjoyable though). I think the plot of Christie's Nemesis is too hard to swallow. Why does Jason Rafiel keep everything a secret and make Miss Marple's task harder? How did he arrange all of this, including knowing when he was going to die? And why does everyone Miss Marple encounters just not tell her the information they know and why doesn't she ever ask them to elaborate? I'm always willing to suspend belief for the sake of having a clever and fun mystery but there is a limit to that.
Very good retrospective. I read this one many, many years ago, and even as an unsophisticated reader, I found the Russian plot to be a waste of time. But I liked the characters, just not as much as in the other Marsh books I had read previously (because even back then, I heeded your advice to not always read a series in order of publication, mostly because you had to take what you could find at our library). I found nothing wrong with the bit about the banister, but I was pretty credulous back then.
Thanks! I was also pretty credulous when I first read this book as well and didn't mind the banister. But it's not so much the banister as it is grabbing the dagger off the wall while sliding and the gong and the bathtub. The bathtub scene is not written properly. It doesn't match the events that Alleyn says happened because there isn't a large enough gap between Wilde's dialogues.
I just finished this novel today. I agree with you. Weak story, well written overall, but kinda sloppy with the murder and not so interesting characters (aside from Alleyn).
Do you have thoughts on what makes a good title? Something obvious, such as 'Body in the Library' or something oblique, like 'Sad Cypress'? I think 'Sparkling Cyanide' is clever and 'Unpleasantness at the Bellona Club' is nicely understated.
That's a tough question - and a good one! I personally like the Body in the Library as a title but I feel the blank in the blank titles are getting a bit overused the past couple of years. I think a good title should give a sense of what the book is about, fits with a mystery novel and doesn't spoil anything. There are actually a decent number of titles that spoil the book's solution if you pay attention to that sort of thing. I also like quotes as titles but they don't often tell you anything about the book itself. "Sad Cypress" doesn't tell me anything about the plot even if it is a fitting title. I think Peril at End House is a good title. It feels mysterious, tells me something about the plot and doesn't give anything away while you're reading it. It boomerangs around because - spoil for Peril at End House - but you think the peril is the attempts on Nick's life but at the end of the novel, the peril is revealed to be Nick herself. I like the use of the word peril as a switch up from the generic "murder" or "death". It sounds thrilling.
I just grabbed an old 3-book omnibus of Marsh theatrical mysteries: the titles are "A Wreath for Rivera," "Spinsters in Jeopardy," and "Night at the Vulcan." Personally, I think the first 2 titles give a good mysterious vibe. The 3rd does explain the set-up, but sounds like a Star Trek ep now. Just my opinion.
@@sherinameless1618 That's a pretty strong trio there. I think they are all about midtier Marsh. The first two will get reviews this year probably. Spinsters in Jeopardy is an adventure thriller not really a theatrical one as far as I remember. You might want to read the short story I Can Find My Way Out before Night at the Vulcan as it is referenced but not spoiled in that book. I don't recall it being necessary to read first however.
@@sherinameless1618 The alternate title for Wreath for Rivera is Swing Brother Swing which I always found to be a great title playing off the musical theme of the book and relating to the hangman.
I had a sudden thought, and forgive me if you've actually done it, but have you done a video listing the best introduction to mystery novel series? I mean which book in the series you would recommend the novice reader start with Hercule Poirot, Roderick Alleyn, and all the others you've discussed?
I have not done that video yet but I intend to. I probably should have made it a while ago but I want to make sure I get things right for some of these authors. There are few approaches to take and I can't make up my mind.
That is indeed a good idea. I look forward to the discussion. I will be thinking of what I would recommend for Rex Stout, since we will be hearing about the Nero Wolfe novels soon, right?
@@sherinameless1618 Yes Rex Stout is next. I haven't given much thought yet on the recommendations there. I typically recommend starting with one of the better books of a series because if you don't like that one or two, you can safely move onto something else. Some Buried Caesar is a personal favorite of mine. Will it be #1? Im not sure. It's been a while since I've read through the series but I am making quicker progress than I thought. They are all typical P.I. novels so you either like them or you don't.
@@summationgathering IMO there really isn't any backstory that you need to know for the Wolfe mysteries, so I agree that you can start with any of them. And like you said, the formula is pretty much the same for all: one of a small number of suspects is the muderer, and after Archie does the sleuthing and quipping, Nero will tell us which one it is. But I just like these books so much! Buried Ceasar, which i just pulled from the shelf to reread in your honor, is great. I also really like Where There's a Will, and Too Many Clients, and most of the rest of them. So, I am really looking forward to your videos on them.
Ngiao Marsh has been a favorite of mine for decades. I enjoyed this one a lot. Nigel is an endearing character. ❤
After watching your Queens of Crime video I decided to give Marsh a try. And yep, it was this one. I always like to start at the beginning if possible. I absolutely agree with your review. Certain parts just didn't seem to fit. I actually had to read the slide part twice to make sure I read it correctly. Ridiculous. I am looking forward to reading more from her though. Thanks for the recommendation.
I'm glad to know my assumptions were correct and this is the first one people pick up. I believe I cut it out of the video but I also wondered how much time one would really save by sliding down the banister. The adaptation does that experiment and of course it says it saves a lot of time but I'm doubtful. I give her credit for creativity and trying a new thing, at the very least.
You had it better, Summy, I saw the adaptation, it featured a subplot about nuns when I was promised a country-house murder mystery
I also watched the adaptation (a review of the series will be two videos from now) and I think it's fine. The adaptations don't change much and I think it did as good a job as it possibly could. The whole religious artifact theft ring is different in content from the Russian stuff in the book but it functions the same way so I don't think it's better or worse. It's better incorporated into the plot in the episode but that's not really saying much.
The discussion of the implausability of sliding down a banister while grabbing a knife, to commit a murder in 60 seconds, brings up the question: what plot point or scenario in a mystery do you find hard to swallow, now that you are older and wiser, and have read dozens of classics?
One that bugs me now is in Peril at End House: if somebody has tried to kill this sweet, young thing several times, then she should darned well be dead, Poirot! Come on, you are smarter than that!
This is another tough question. I used to be totally taken in by cryptic dying words but I now I find them ridiculous (still enjoyable though). I think the plot of Christie's Nemesis is too hard to swallow. Why does Jason Rafiel keep everything a secret and make Miss Marple's task harder? How did he arrange all of this, including knowing when he was going to die? And why does everyone Miss Marple encounters just not tell her the information they know and why doesn't she ever ask them to elaborate? I'm always willing to suspend belief for the sake of having a clever and fun mystery but there is a limit to that.
Very good retrospective. I read this one many, many years ago, and even as an unsophisticated reader, I found the Russian plot to be a waste of time. But I liked the characters, just not as much as in the other Marsh books I had read previously (because even back then, I heeded your advice to not always read a series in order of publication, mostly because you had to take what you could find at our library). I found nothing wrong with the bit about the banister, but I was pretty credulous back then.
Thanks! I was also pretty credulous when I first read this book as well and didn't mind the banister. But it's not so much the banister as it is grabbing the dagger off the wall while sliding and the gong and the bathtub. The bathtub scene is not written properly. It doesn't match the events that Alleyn says happened because there isn't a large enough gap between Wilde's dialogues.
I just finished this novel today.
I agree with you.
Weak story, well written overall, but kinda sloppy with the murder and not so interesting characters (aside from Alleyn).
Also the murder doesn't just need to be timed perfectly, Rankin had to be in the right place at the right time.
That's also an issue because Wilde did nothing to make Rankin be in that place and its not clear how he knew Wilde was there.
Do you have thoughts on what makes a good title? Something obvious, such as 'Body in the Library' or something oblique, like 'Sad Cypress'? I think 'Sparkling Cyanide' is clever and 'Unpleasantness at the Bellona Club' is nicely understated.
That's a tough question - and a good one! I personally like the Body in the Library as a title but I feel the blank in the blank titles are getting a bit overused the past couple of years. I think a good title should give a sense of what the book is about, fits with a mystery novel and doesn't spoil anything. There are actually a decent number of titles that spoil the book's solution if you pay attention to that sort of thing. I also like quotes as titles but they don't often tell you anything about the book itself. "Sad Cypress" doesn't tell me anything about the plot even if it is a fitting title. I think Peril at End House is a good title. It feels mysterious, tells me something about the plot and doesn't give anything away while you're reading it. It boomerangs around because - spoil for Peril at End House - but you think the peril is the attempts on Nick's life but at the end of the novel, the peril is revealed to be Nick herself. I like the use of the word peril as a switch up from the generic "murder" or "death". It sounds thrilling.
I just grabbed an old 3-book omnibus of Marsh theatrical mysteries: the titles are "A Wreath for Rivera," "Spinsters in Jeopardy," and "Night at the Vulcan." Personally, I think the first 2 titles give a good mysterious vibe. The 3rd does explain the set-up, but sounds like a Star Trek ep now. Just my opinion.
@@sherinameless1618 That's a pretty strong trio there. I think they are all about midtier Marsh. The first two will get reviews this year probably. Spinsters in Jeopardy is an adventure thriller not really a theatrical one as far as I remember. You might want to read the short story I Can Find My Way Out before Night at the Vulcan as it is referenced but not spoiled in that book. I don't recall it being necessary to read first however.
@@sherinameless1618 The alternate title for Wreath for Rivera is Swing Brother Swing which I always found to be a great title playing off the musical theme of the book and relating to the hangman.
I had a sudden thought, and forgive me if you've actually done it, but have you done a video listing the best introduction to mystery novel series? I mean which book in the series you would recommend the novice reader start with Hercule Poirot, Roderick Alleyn, and all the others you've discussed?
I have not done that video yet but I intend to. I probably should have made it a while ago but I want to make sure I get things right for some of these authors. There are few approaches to take and I can't make up my mind.
That's a great idea.
That is indeed a good idea. I look forward to the discussion. I will be thinking of what I would recommend for Rex Stout, since we will be hearing about the Nero Wolfe novels soon, right?
@@sherinameless1618 Yes Rex Stout is next. I haven't given much thought yet on the recommendations there. I typically recommend starting with one of the better books of a series because if you don't like that one or two, you can safely move onto something else. Some Buried Caesar is a personal favorite of mine. Will it be #1? Im not sure. It's been a while since I've read through the series but I am making quicker progress than I thought. They are all typical P.I. novels so you either like them or you don't.
@@summationgathering IMO there really isn't any backstory that you need to know for the Wolfe mysteries, so I agree that you can start with any of them. And like you said, the formula is pretty much the same for all: one of a small number of suspects is the muderer, and after Archie does the sleuthing and quipping, Nero will tell us which one it is. But I just like these books so much! Buried Ceasar, which i just pulled from the shelf to reread in your honor, is great. I also really like Where There's a Will, and Too Many Clients, and most of the rest of them. So, I am really looking forward to your videos on them.