“Weeks afterwards I was to remember that conversation: to see Mrs. Curtis standing uneasily by the door, and to know she had told me something that day which was vitally important. But it was too late then. The thing was done.”
Pastoral in its evocative depiction of another time and place, imbued with an involving murder mystery that deepens as the disappearances and bodies begin to pile up, and with a feminine young woman of class fallen on hard times, Mary Roberts Rinehart’s The Wall, released in 1938, might be the zenith of the more than considerable mark she left on the genre.
Often touted as the American Agatha Christie, their styles and approach to the form is so very different it is a disservice to both Rinehart and Christie to compare them. Both writers at their best can be wonderful, but they are not similar in any way other than genre. It is sad that since her passing, Rinehart, who was tops in sales and popularity for decades, has become more obscure, while Christie’s reputation has only grown, keeping her in print all over the world.
Not in style or form certainly, but in her post-passing reputation, Rinehart has more similarities to the great master of noir suspense, Cornell Woolrich. He suffers the same “modern-day” literary comparisons to Chandler and Hammett and Spillane, as Rinehart does to Christie. The reason is obvious. Like Woolrich, Rinehart never relied on a true series, Fill-in-the-Blank detective; there was her nurse, Hilda Adams, a.k.a. Miss Pinkerton, in a few mysteries, but there is not a single series character of longevity for which Rinehart is remembered, such as Christie with Poirot, or Wentworth with Miss Silver, or Raymond Chandler with Philip Marlowe.
Rinehart’s mysteries weren’t all great, just as Christie’s weren’t all cracker jacks, but at her absolute best she crafted wonderfully atmospheric mysteries where the people involved were left to figure out what had happened and why, sometimes aided by a sheriff or local policeman, as in The Wall. Usually there was a dash of romance in the mix as well, and The Wall is no exception.
Rinehart used foreshadowing in so brilliant a manner that it became associated with her name. Most mystery lovers will find it wonderful, but it has also become a very unfair knock on her in “modern” times. Perhaps that says more about today’s reading public however, than it does her excellent skill and value as a writer, and her well-deserved lofty place in the history of the genre.
One doesn’t think of The Yellow Room or The Wall and get excited at another Archibald Whatshisname detective story! No, it’s more a fond memory of a time and place, and mystery and romance. Reading one of Rinehart’s best mysteries — and The Wall is most assuredly that! — is like standing under a cool waterfall in the blistering heat of summer, and recalling afterward how refreshing it felt. I can think of no better way to describe The Wall than that.
Marcia Lloyd returns to Sunset House at the summer colony long after the events as this novel begins, and it makes for a wonderful mystery full of hindsight and foreshadowing, allowing Marcia to recall all the momentous events before and after the murder. Rinehart magically turns the expansive summer playground of the well-to-do into a claustrophobic Petri dish where all the ingredients combine for murder. There is even a touch of something otherworldly at Sunset, as bells ring in unoccupied rooms of this grand summer house, with no natural explanation.
“It would be idiotic,” he observed, “to think we know all about this universe of ours.”
But the weightier problem is the very real danger that Marcia’s brother Arthur might be arrested and charged with the murder of his former wife, who has returned to Sunset. Juliette was a beautiful leech who affected more than one male among the wealthier set who summer on those New England shores. Why had Juliette returned to Sunset of all places? Why was she so desperate to renegotiate the exorbitant alimony which had already drained both Arthur’s and his sister Marcia’s funds? Was it the reason for her murder?
The foreshadowing is expertly done as Marcia recalls the events in detail, painting a picture of that time and place, and the people of the colony Julia’s disappearance affects in startling ways. There is suspicion and quiet resentment among some, but hardly anyone seems truly sorry that Juliette is gone — at least none of the women. Juliette was awful, yet through Marcia, Rinehart hints at something more to Juliette and her callous, nary a care for anyone other than herself. And what of her servant, Jordan? She seems frightened even after Juliette is murdered. What does she know? Then she too disappears…
“In a way, the island at the time was divided into three schools of thought, as old Mrs. Pendexter put it: those who believed Arthur guilty of the murders, those who suspected Lucy, and those who never had an idea in their heads anyhow.”
Love has passed Marcia by in the past but Tony, who dropped her and is now regretful, is still around. But it is someone new to the island Marcia begins to take into her heart, hoping the charming but mysterious Allen Pell can help in some way. But Marcia is also suspicious of his motives, and his vaguely suggested prior connection to Juliette. Her quiet and old-fashioned romantic feelings intermingle with the mystery, and they are artfully and skillfully captured by Rinehart in a naturally flowing way that is unobtrusive to the solving of the crime. It is in fact, a very important element to the story.
“This is not a love story. In a way it is the story of a story, hidden from us at the time but underlying everything that happened.”
As the mystery deepens, new motives emerge, widening the pool of suspects. Even once someone is finally arrested, neither Marcia, nor other members of the summer colony are anywhere near certain that it could be true —
“There was only one question I could not answer. Had he hated her enough to kill her?”
The unraveling of the murders is both complex and exciting, as well as logical, with nearly everyone obscuring the facts for personal reasons which have nothing to do with justice; but rather protecting someone they believe to be innocent, or self-sacrifice and empathy. The last few chapters of this brilliant novel are about as riveting as it gets, the reader unable to turn pages fast enough.
Though in the end it is wily and kindly old sheriff, Russell Shand, who finally puts all the pieces together, it feels like Rinehart’s wonderful and relatable heroine Marcia Lloyd is the impetus for his determination to protect those who look guilty yet are innocent. He doggedly gets to the bottom of everything, despite, as he laments, having too many leads and not enough clues.
This is a masterwork of mystery fiction as fine as any you will ever come across. Rinehart paints a rich and vibrant world not only vividly, but so intimately that the reader feels a part of it, as though we’re right there by Marcia’s side as she stands looking out at the bay, with her little dog Chu-Chu by her side:
“I came back home, to this porch, to the monotony of high tide and low tide, dawn and sunset. It seemed as though the world had suddenly stood still; that everything had stopped and my mind went on, feverishly active.”
I can’t overstate the pleasurable experience of reading this wonderful mystery novel. The ending is as satisfying as any in mystery fiction. I place Mary Roberts Rinehart’s The Wall in the lofty stratosphere of Vera Caspary’s Laura, Dorothy Macardle’s The Uninvited, and Robert Nathan’s Portrait of Jennie; they are on a mental shelf containing stories so good they transcend genre, and are simply classics.
This writer, this book, and this heroine all hold an affectionate place in this reader's heart. If you only read one Mary Robert’s Rinehart novel in your lifetime, I would suggest The Wall, from 1938. Magnificent.