
The lovely thing about this is that Conan Doyle casually throws in a very key piece of misdirection without striking a jarring note and quietly works away at building further misdirection on top of it without you realising what he’s doing – truly an invisible event if ever I’ve seen one, and arguably an under-appreciated facet of his writing (which, to be fair, he didn’t necessarily indulge in all that frequently). Modern audiences will, of course, start to twig to the nature of how the murder was worked, and it doesn’t really qualify as fair play unless you…well, no, it doesn’t qualify as fair play, and indeed the very first time I read this – as a callow youth, need I remind you – I was somewhat irritated at the simplicity of the answer. But, then, that’s arguably the idea. A lovely flourish has this particular crime and this particular solution as deciding factors in Holmes’ return, and in fact the whole enterprise is concoted and executed with more skill than was necessary given its guaranteed rapturous reception.
” …and…well, something else – let’s say one of his more successful minor books – has a very similar solution to Adair’s murder”
Are you referring to a novel published in 1937?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Santosh, I was also thinking of that 1937 book, but you can also argue, knowing both solutions, it was similar to an even earlier entry in that series.
Interestingly, that 1937 book shares some similarities with an R. Austin Freeman story from John Thorndyke’s Cases, which, in turn, has a situation/solution inspired by Doyle’s “The Adventure of the Empty House.” I think they call that the trickle-down effect.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ha, you are of course both correct, but I was actually thinking of a book from 1957 at the time I wrote that. Wow, who knew that Carr had so few ideas…
LikeLike
Pingback: #120: On the Many Wonderful Faces of Dr. John H. Watson, MD – Part 1 of 2 | The Invisible Event