What do you think?
Rate this book
219 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1939
My first reaction? Usual Gardner crap. So I decided to take a step back. Gardner, originally a pulp writer, was the master at setting up a problem or complication and keeping the pressure on until the resolution. And once everything was revealed, it perfectly explained all those obstacles and mysteries. His major fault was his hero’s deductions were pulled out of thin air. I went into this one already knowing all the answers and there was still not enough evidence to infer the solution. Clearly I’m not a fan, so . . . usual Gardner crap.Recently I slipped into Reread Mode and as I felt myself coming out of it I decided to give this book one more try. Why did I fail to learn my lesson? Again! Several reasons, most Goodreads related. Lately I’ve been involved in several Robert B. Parker discussions where I was too hard on his later novels because I was there for the sheer quality of the first fifteen or so; those later books were best sellers for a reason. Erle Stanley Gardner was a best seller for a reason. Also, many of my GR friends hold Gardner in high regard, though admittedly more with Cool & Lam than Perry Mason. (Doug Selby has yet to be mentioned.) And finally, I recently read a shorter piece called “The Case of the Crying Swallow” that I completely enjoyed. Less room necessitated less complications to untangle, which in turn allowed for a solution based on facts still firmly set in the reader’s mind. Deductions did not come out of nowhere.