Four people are discovered sitting around a table as if at a dinner party, each with only a glass in front of them. Three of the four have been poisoned into a catatonic state and the fourth has been murdered by being run through with a narrow blade. Of the three who remain alive, one has two bottles of poison in their bag, one has the workings of an alarm clock in their pocket, and the third is carrying four pocket watches in various pockets about their person. At this point you are three chapters into the eighth Sir Henry Merrivale novel written by John Dickson Carr under his Carter Dickson byline and we haven’t even touched upon the revelation that greets you at the end of that chapter…suffice to say, boy are you in for a ride!




The poison trick was used by Carr in a radio play broadcast in February 1943.
SPOILER ALERT !
Regarding escape of Ferguson from the building without being seen, I quote from Chapter 4,” There’s a rainpipe on that back wall; but it’s nowhere near the window, and Ferguson would have to be first cousin to a gorilla to reach it ” We subsequently learn that Ferguson did indeed use the rainpipe though he is not a first cousin to a gorilla but only a cat burglar ! Isn’t this a cheat ?
The poison was in a certain item. While the various persons described the preparation and serving of drinks, this item was never mentioned by anyone. Isn’t it strange ?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Haha, yeah, that’s what I mean about it not being strictly fair-play…part of me wonders if the drinks would have implicitly included said item and this would simply be common knowledge at the time of writing: “Well of course you use that when making this drink”. I do feel, however (like with The Crooked Hinge, though regarding a completely different thing) that there was an opportunity missed to throw in a subtle little hint – even just one tiny nudeg in the direction required would have improved it for me.
But, well, it’s not like I ever wrote a raft of throroughly baffling puzzle novels, is it?
LikeLike
Thanks for this JJ, second tier Carr from the period is usually better than first rate anybody else in my view 🙂 This is actually one of, I think, only three Merrivales I have yet to read and which i have been saving for a rainy day so that I still have brand new ones to read a bit later in life (the others are the final two, which I have put off reading for rather different reasons, due to their critical reputation even among fans) – all sounds very good indeed. The best of Carr, as in EMPEROR’S SNUFFBOX and HE WHO WHISPERS, are those where the plots are dazzling and the characters also really pull you in. But I am very partisan, and will always prefer Carr to practically anybody else from the GAD period, definitely including la Christie,
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m starting to reach a point with Carr where I either pick off the few classics that remain or dive into the supposed weak end of his career to spread them out a bit, and I’m not sure what to do. I’ve been reading Christie in order for a good few years (not a first, but for at least the last 9 years or so) and have found the decline…undeniable but also very interesting and full of enough interest to keep me intrigued without any sense of dread or horror just yet (and, hey, I have only ten of her novels remaining).
The sensible thing with Carr would be to do the same, but due the the unavilability of his stuff I’ve read him in a rather mixed order. To be perfectly honest, I’ve lost track of precisely what I <have read with Carr given how long I’ve had to go between bursts of book-finding in the past. I definitely haven’t done Snuff-Box, though, so could always go there next since you rate it.
There is, as always, the chance that I’m over-thinking this…
LikeLike
I know people dismiss it, but I thoroughly enjoyed Dark of the Moon. I hope you find and enjoy that one. The last few Christie’s are gonna run you through the mill . . .
LikeLike
I think we got cut off there chum, but I see where you are going. With Christie the drop off after the late 60s is disastrous and terribly sad. With Carr THE HUNGRY GOBLIN is certainly very weak but I think PANIC IN BOX C (for example) is still highly memorable (though others strenuously disagree) – but I like his work much more than Christie – much more humour and atmosphere and ingenuity (at least to my liking, obviously).
LikeLike
Argh, now I’m kicking myself all the more for not snatching up that cheaply-priced second-hand copy. 😦
Then again, your assessment of its strengths and weaknesses makes me think that I might not quite like it. I’ve just finished ‘The Red Widow Murders’, and it reminded me of some of the things about Carr’s writing that don’t find endearing. Which slightly surprised me as the novels I read before that (‘Death Watch’, ‘Peacock Feather Murders’) were enjoyable – and made me think that I was getting used to the grand-master.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My feeling is that up until the late 1930s it’s still a bit of a choppy ride with Carr – once you hit the 1940s you’re on much steadier ground.
Red Widow Murders is one that I’ve not been able to track down yet, so I feel much the same about that as you do about this…
LikeLike
Pingback: #107: Vintage Cover Scavenger Hunt Update | The Invisible Event
There is some cheating in this one ..but not like the ones in To wake the dead . But as usual, utterly engrossing and very funny too….
I loved the section with the air pistol (real menace) and the section with Schumann and Pollard (unreal menace ..hehe) .
I feel so happy to think that I still got 20 odd Carr’s to read whenever I please .. 🙂 🙂
LikeLike
Ihave to be honest, I read this so long ago that I remember only the cheating of (rot13) abg orvat gbyq nobhg vpr phorf orvat chg va gur qevaxf and very little else of any detail.
Aside from that, my impression is that I thoroughly enjoyed it and that the opening tranche of chapters are delightful. I’m very pleased that your Carr reading continues to stir up such delights 🙂
LikeLike
Pingback: “Death in Five Boxes” by Carter Dickson – Tangled Yarns