#671: “At this point, everything seems too far-fetched to be taken seriously…” – The Invisible Circle (1996) by Paul Halter [trans. John Pugmire 2014]

Invisible Circle, The

A triptych of needs are being met here: firstly a last-minute replacement for the Modern Locked Room Mystery for TomCat I’d intended to write about, secondly the addressing of a Paul Halter book not yet reviewed on this blog, and thirdly some tangential research for next Saturday’s In GAD We Trust episode.

I’ve never made any secret of my admiration for The Invisible Circle (1996, tr. 2014) with its wild fusion of Arthurian legend, And Then There Were None (1939) by Agatha Christie, and The Plague Court Murders (1934) by Carter Dickson.  I remembered it as a heady, headlong rush of wild improbability and glorious impossible murder that’s clearly out to have as much fun as possible with the various hoary trappings the Golden Age found a plethora of ways to rejuvenate — disfigured corpses!, long-lost relatives!, hints of the eldritch!, disputed identity! — and all the more impressive for having such light and joyous fun with these conventions some five decades after the Golden Age was packed up, patted on the head, and told to leave the adults alone so that they could write Serious Crime Fiction.

Rereading it, then, was a risky business.  I’ve revisited a variety of books for this blog, and while I’ve enjoyed some at their second tour as much as, if not more than, the first time around — Erle Stanley Gardner’s Doug Selby novels being the most recent example of that — others like The Mystery of the Yellow Room (1907) by Gaston Leroux have found enthusiastic memory met with a slightly cold-shouldered modern reality.  Perhaps more so than any of Halter’s other books so far translated by John Pugmire, The Invisible Circle hinges on one key reveal that many people will tell you wouldn’t work, the revelation of which undoes all the intrigue and suspense built along the way.  So maybe I should have left this one alone, and opted for more certain ground by rereading The Tiger’s Head (1991, tr. 2013) or the overstuffed-but-ingenious The Demon of Dartmoor (1993, tr. 2012).

Oh, ye of little faith.  A second reading of The Invisible Circle has, if anything, only increased the regard I hold this book in, with the added perspective on the construction Halter brings to his murderous spree in an isolated castle showing it up as the borderline masterpiece it is.  The games of suspicion, the superb weaving of background mythology to inform and allow everything that occurs, and the subtle placing of hints, clues, indications, and outright in-your-face manipulations is glorious to watch knowing how they feed into the overall scheme.  Is it realistic?  No, of course not.  Is it trying to be realistic?  Well, only to the extent that all detective fiction is: it exists in our Newtonian universe of gravity and human motivation, and the rules of murder and the physically possible are the same here as they are for the reader who sits down to read it, but if you’re reading GAD-styled impossible crime fiction because you want a dose of strict realism…


“If characters don’t act exactly as I would in that situation, I burn the book and spit on the ashes.”

The setup here sees seven people invited to Cornwall to the castle home of Gerry Pearson.  He promises them an “extraordinary event” and, because it’s 1936, people take him at his word and actually turn up.  The castle itself is situated on an archipelago connected to the mainland by — uh-oh — a single rickety bridge which will definitely remain in place for the duration of the narrative, and when everyone arrives Gerry Pearson tells them that he’s going to be murdered that evening and one of those people here present will be his killer.  He even tells them which one will kill him, and how they’ve already arranged the perfect alibi so that no suspicion can possibly fall on them, and then he arranges to be incarcerated in a room at the top of the castle’s tower: a room overlooking the wild ocean, with a grating on the window that cannot be moved and which no object of more than a few inches across could pass through, and with a door sealed not by mere locks and bolts — which the impossible crime has been hocussing with string, magnets, blocks of ice, and whatever else you’d care to name for decades by this point — but by melted wax seals that his guests are encouraged to mark in any unique way they like to ensure the sanctity of the fastening.

Anyone expecting strict realism, then, will be shocked — shocked! — when an hour later Gerry Pearson is found stabbed in the back in this room, the seals on the door still in place and unmolested, and the sword which killed him an impossible presence for two reasons which I’ll leave for you to discover.  Suffice to say, the room had been searched before the door was sealed, and there’s no sign of his killer once the door is opened…so howdunnit?  And, of course, we add to this a few elements that are best experienced through the narrative itself, including the nature of the Arthurian legends mentioned above and the lengths the killer seems to have gone to in order to raise the question of whether the body in the room is indeed that of the man who was locked in the room in the first place (this is surely, surely, a nod to Halter’s debut The Fourth Door (1987, tr. 1999) wherein a man is sealed in a room in much the same way and then, an hour later, the seal broken and room opened to reveal the corpse of an entirely different man).

What makes this such a wild time on top of the breathless pace and delightfully evocative scene-setting is how quickly the layers of games then unfurl: the person Pearson named as his killer of course has a perfect alibi, immediately splitting the group along the lines of those who believe their innocence and those who don’t, and the sheer amount of history within the group begins to over-layer and thus complicate things further: among those present are Pearson’s ex-fiancée and the man who has loved her for 20 years, his adoptive niece plagued by vaguely unsettling memories of visiting the island as a young girl over a decade previously, and a respected psychiatrist against whom Pearson makes a quite slanderous accusation…in short, as Pearson points out, even if the group is able to ascertain that his indicated party isn’t the killer, there is no shortage of people who’d only too happily step into the role.


“Well, that’s not very realistic — surely he’d invite someone who liked him and would keep an eye out.”

And then, then things get really wild.

Rumours of a long hushed-up brother surface (“…I never saw him, but I was told they resembled each other closely…”), two policemen arrive — apparently having been forewarned of a murder that was due to take place — and bring their own revelation to up-end proceedings, and the murders begin to multiply as a ghostly knight may or may not be coming and going at will and killing off anyone who gets too close.  In short, the kitchen sink comes out and most of what’s underneath gets thrown in for good measure…and yet, when you know where this is going, to see the tight hand Halter keeps on his characters and events is magnificent.

GAD-inspired detective fiction has never been a hotbed of rich character insight — you want subtlety, read Dickens — but the way various characters control information and others seem to obfuscate it is ingeniously handled.  Our psychiatrist Dr. Charles Jerrold is, in many ways, a prime example of what Noah Stewart called the SEP gambit with his tedious dry way of volubly holding forth on any point he’s allowed to build up steam on (witness the lovely moment someone cuts across him as he’s warming up), and the roles played by the likes of Madge Pearson — the niece — and her fiancé Bill Page, an unexpected element in Pearson’s plan having attended with Madge sans invite, in unpicking the various misdirections and false information is perfectly balanced.  Even the vanity of Ursula Brown is used to justify part of the key element of misdirection, and local poet Gail Blake might not serve much narrative purpose beyond see-sawing incredulity and anger, but he at least brings the character of their discomfiting surroundings to life:

“[L]ook at the jagged coastline, the craggy rocks and that wild sea. They translate into a proud, independent and inflexible character.

“Now imagine the night of a storm, one much more violent than last night’s.  Listen to the roar of the ocean; look at the waves arching their monstrous backs; imagine liquid mountains which melt; hear the storm growl, its yataghans of fire cleaving the racing clouds.  Can you hear the howls of the tempest, like hungry wolves?”

Indeed, there seems to be little point isolating your cast somewhere without making the confinement felt, and Halter’s invoking of King Arthur’s final days, which found that legendary figure  “very embittered, in fact, after so much treachery. A sad end for such a noble individual, with wars as murderous as they were pointless having killed so many of his faithful subjects”, is a summarily pessimistic note on which to start the proceedings at the castle which then accelerate to “a contagious fear” as events spiral out of control and leave all present with “a close, almost palpable, danger…as elusive and invisible as a breath of air”.


“Well, I don’t understand why everyone didn’t just leave, then.”

All of these ingredients are part of the flavour that pays off with the revelation which seems to cause derision among this book’s nay-sayers.  And, I dunno — it seems to me that to cavil at that point having gladly swallowed every other delicious mouthful Halter serves is to wilfully manufacture complaints in the face of a sustained piece of majestic writing and plotting.  Is it ridiculous?  Yes, superbly.  Is it any more ridiculous than the majority of what has gone before?  No, not by a long chalk.  Indeed, when you see that whiplash speed with which events are piled on top of each other in these scrupulously-designed highly disorienting circumstances, I’d suggest that a second reading makes it all more plausible simply because of how unlikely it is.  But others, I’m sure, will disagree below.

In many ways, The Invisible Circle plays to Halter’s best strengths — detection has never been his strong suit and so the revelation of the ploy here is monologued in the grand tradition of Edwardian Villains of History, the fictional setting (inspired by St. Michael’s Mount, do we think?) means that he can play with mood more easily by not having to describe surroundings too minutely, and events are piled upon each other with a deftness and velocity that keeps the pages turning at too fast a rate for any objections to really register until it all finally pauses for breath in the last straight…and even then, my reaction on first reading this was to laugh out loud and tear through the final few pages.  You may disagree, and I feel a bit sorry for anyone who wants to split hairs over this since they obviously failed to get caught up in the buffet of insanity that Halter has laid out.  Nothing will convince me that this book isn’t a marvel, and in these uncertain times it was a complete joy to lose myself in the experience of revisiting Tincastle one more time.


Paul Halter reviews on The Invisible Event; all translations by John Pugmire unless stated

Featuring Dr. Alan Twist and Archibald Hurst:

The Fourth Door (1987) [trans. 1999]
Death Invites You (1988) [trans. 2015]
The Madman’s Room (1990) [trans. 2017]
The Seventh Hypothesis (1991) [trans. 2012]
The Tiger’s Head (1991) [trans. 2013]
The Demon of Dartmoor (1993) [trans. 2012]
The Picture from the Past (1995) [trans. 2014]
The Vampire Tree (1996) [trans. 2016]
The Man Who Loved Clouds (1999) [trans. 2018]
Penelope’s Web (2001) [trans. 2021]

Featuring Owen Burns and Achilles Stock:

The Lord of Misrule (1994) [trans. 2006]
The Seven Wonders of Crime (1997) [trans. 2005]
The Phantom Passage (2005) [trans. 2015]
The Mask of the Vampire (2014) [trans. 2022]
The Gold Watch (2019) [trans. 2019]


The Invisible Circle (1996) [trans. 2014]

Collected short stories:

The Night of the Wolf (2000) [trans. 2004 w’ Adey]

Individual short stories [* = collected in the anthology The Helm of Hades (2019)]:

‘Nausicaa’s Ball’ (2004) [trans. 2008 w’ Adey]*
‘The Robber’s Grave’ (2007) [trans. 2007 w’ Adey]*
‘The Gong of Doom’ (2010) [trans. 2010]*
‘The Man with the Face of Clay’ (2011) [trans. 2012]*
‘Jacob’s Ladder’ (2014) [trans. 2014]*
‘The Wolf of Fenrir’ (2014) [trans. 2015]*
‘The Scarecrow’s Revenge’ (2015) [trans. 2016]*
‘The Fires of Hell’ (2016) [trans. 2016]*
‘The Yellow Book’ (2017) [trans. 2017]*
‘The Helm of Hades’ (2019) [trans. 2019]*

23 thoughts on “#671: “At this point, everything seems too far-fetched to be taken seriously…” – The Invisible Circle (1996) by Paul Halter [trans. John Pugmire 2014]

  1. This is my favourite website on Crime Fiction. I hope you eventually publish a book or two (or three) on all this fascinating material!


  2. I share your love for this book so I am happy that it help up for you on a repeat reading. There are so many wonderful images and ideas here that really lodged themselves in my imagination – this is one of those books I think to myself I would like to revisit.

    Yes, it is one of the wildest Halters I have read so far (I loved the and then things get crazy comment midway through your review) but here all of that craziness feels built into the story rather than tacked on as color.

    Oh, and I do agree that the house feels a little inspired by St Michael’s Mount.


    • I love Halter’s stuff anyway, but rereading them does show up new elements to his writing and, especially, his construction. because there’s essentially one trick here that makes everything work, he has to ply a lot of the same misdirection in order to make it work, but the different ways he’s able to ply that essential same trick — without you noticing, I’d wager, or at least without you appreciating the depth of it — is dazzling to behold.


      • Totally agreed! It will be interesting to reread the book to be able to see the structure and misdirection being applied (I will be keen to reread The Seventh Hypothesis for much the same reason).


  3. What’s the next podcast topic? All about Halter? I’ll have to pass. I don’t understand the fascination with the guy. Haven’t read one book I found worthy of intense discussion. Granted, I’ve only read four but that was three too many for me. I keep getting suggestions on his best books but I’ve never followed through. Probably never will. The shallow characters drive me up the wall. And the historical anachronisms are equally annoying. I can’t write about them on my blog because for me it’s the equivalent of reviewing a puzzle from an issue of Games magazine. I see all of his books (those I’ve read) as similar to Murder in the Crooked House which I positively loathed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • For my part, I feel Halter plays the game a bit more enthusiastically than Shimada does in MitCH — that book is purely loopy over-the-top spectacle with no real restraint or common sense behind any of it. Halter, I feel, is more in love with the traditional mystery, which is in part why so much of his stuff is set in the 1930s and surrounds, and a lot of the joy I get out of him is the joy he clearly takes in repurposing those tropes and trappings. But, hey, he’s not for everyone — who is?

      So, no, you’ll be pleased to hear that the next podcast episode is not All Things Halter — I already did one of those for my previous podcast, and I’m not sure there’s anything meaningful to add to what I said there just yet. Reading this was tangential, as I say above, and — depending on how the editing goes — The invisible Circle might not even get a mention.

      But it, at least in part, has something to do with being trapped in a place with people while a lot is going wrong around you…


  4. I suppose that I qualify as a detractor for this book, but I’ll admit it may be the most fun when it comes to Halter (The Seventh Hypothesis being the other contender). Everything about the setup and execution is glorious, with the exception of the part where you have to be like – “yeah, I’d like to see that pulled off on film” I’d rather have an author go balls out with an effort like The Invisible Circle than to deliver something even moderately forgettable.

    I recently finished a Halter that tends to be regarded as one of his best, and I have to say that The Invisible Circle smokes it. We’ll see which one…

    Liked by 1 person

    • But…wanting your book to be a film is pure folly, surely. They’re not the same medium, and they don’t and can’t play the same tricks — that’s why some stuff is written on the page.

      Surely I don’t need to point out that the o ly thing books and films have in common is that they are designed for an external observer. It’s not so much about the effect on the characters within the narrative as it is on the unknown watcher. There’s no way the surprise of, say, The Usual Suspects would work in reality — it would make a much better book — but you buy into it because it’s entertaining. The only thing necessary is the belief that the people you’ve spent time with in the narrative would overlook what they have…and here, as I try to outline above, I really do.

      Would I fall for it? Dunno, I’ve never been in the same situation. But I could see how I could if shaken up in the same way. Hell, I’ve fallen for some ridiculous jokes and pranks while in full possession of my faculties, so confronted with a spooky castle, a bunch of strangers, and an actual murder in my midst, yeah, I could easily believe I’d be sucked in. Do I feel this would be easy to depict on a movie screen, where my form of engagement is entirely different — faster, with less lifting required by my imagination? No, not necessarily. But that’s not how I was asked to encounter this, so why does it matter…?


  5. I do think one’s enjoyment of this depends on one’s willingness to believe that the “who” deception will work. It’s been a few years since I’ve read this (oh god, do I need to read it again???) but, as I recall, that deception had been going on for a while before all the distracting craziness of the setting/plot began. I understand what Ben is getting at with his film comment; looking at it from the position of the characters and not the audience, I just don’t see how the killer could get away with certain issues of identity. And, sure, we leave it there, agreeing to disagree, but I want to remind you of the discussion around A Kiss Before Dying: the book was deserving of a film version (it even got two), but any fan of the book would wonder how they were going to make the trick work. In the end, they didn’t even try, and while the first movie is good, it ain’t got nuthin’ on the book.

    I watched a lot of Jonathan Creek years ago – I even own most of it (and should watch them all again). Did they ever try and pull a stunt over identity like this one does?


    • There’s one episode of Jonathan Creek that does the, er, inverse of the central deception here, and there’s a movie made in the last 15 years that does the central thing here to a minimised degree. I was tempted to refer to both in the foregoing, but didn’t wish to potentially spoil either or this novel by doing so.


      I know what you mean about the duration of the deception, and I don’t disagree. But, it says that “they’d only known each other for a month” and — in 1936, when this is set — it’s not as if they’d’ve been living together that whole time, or meeting daily. I don’t have difficulty allowing for her memories being of “a nasty man twice the size of the little girl you were at the time” to admit this.

      I understand that this is a deal-breaker for some, I just don’t believe it’s as unbelievable as those people — as you people — like to claim. If you expected me to recall accurately someone I met once for a week 10 years ago, I couldn’t. If anything, I find this central lapse in memory all too relatable 🙂


  6. This one’s ok. It has the typical kinetic energy and over-the-top premise that we know and love. The Seinfeldian intertwined plot points that converge at the end. A solid resolution to the “how” and some neat WTF moments.
    As a standalone, I ‘d say it’s pretty good. Yes, I’ ve rolled my eyes on a few occasions, including the “who”, but the book’s a romp.
    This is your halterian “near masterpiece “, JJ, “The Seven Wonders of Crime” is mine. Can’t wait for his new novel!


    • So we’re just going to have slightly diverging opinions and respect each other’s point of view like adults? Man, if the Ellery Queen fans could see us… 😄😄😄


  7. Ha ha, all that controversy about Ellery Queen periods is rather childish. We all know period 1 is their best… Emm… Right? I’ll tell you a little trick to make reading EQ a breeze, grab three or four Michael Innes novels and read them back – to-back… He’s the densest mystery writer ever, like swimming-through-a-tar-ocean dense. After the ordeal, you’ll learn to appreciate the twins more 😋


    • Plus, we’re free to pile into Michael Innes as much as we like, since it takes his fans so long to make any point in his favour that they largely forget what they’re saying halfway through…


  8. Three days after I post this review I remember that I forgot to mention the possible Agatha Christie reference on the final page — anyone reading this have an opinion on whether I’m imagining that?


  9. Great piece, JJ. I’m another sucker for the classic gathering of strangers on a remote island/mansion on a stormy night trope, so this simply had to be my next Halter (the first being Madman’s Room, as per your top 15 LRI titles). The scheme here is approaching parody in its over-the-toppedness, maybe that’s why it called to my mind the movie “Murder by Death”. Still, it gets points for the aforementioned set up, the relative brevity and focus of the narrative, the King Arthur motif which spoke to my childhood fondness for a certain Saturday morning cartoon, and quite unique (if bonkers) solution to its locked room puzzle. I think when I return to Halter, after my flirtation with shin honkaku is over, it’ll be “Tiger’s Head” next.


    • I’m with you in every single regard here — the gathering, the OTT King Arthur motif, the steady rising in hysteria…and the completely bonkers solution to the murder make a wonderful mix. I remember this getting some negative press ahead of me reading it, and I guess the gaudy malevolence of it isn’t to everyone’s taste, but Halter’s tongue is so firmly in his cheek that it’s difficult to raise any serious complaints.

      I’ve also been intending to return to The Tiger’s Head, since it’s one of the Halter books I’ve not yet reviewed on here. My copy of The White Lady should hopefully be arriving soon, so that will probably be my next Halter, but a reread of TTH isn’t far away.

      Hope you continue to get such joy from your reading; I eny you the hours of excitement ahead!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.