What do you think?
Rate this book
Ask a Policeman
With "a touch of genius," this round-robin mystery follow-up to The Floating Admiral features famous detectives including Lord Peter Wimsey (The Times Literary Supplement).
Following the success of The Floating Admiral, in which certain members of the Detection Club--including Agatha Christie, Dorothy L. Sayers, and G. K. Chesterton--collaborated on a whodunit, six writers pooled their talents to create another coauthored mystery. This time the premise had an added authors would swap their detective characters, allowing for some extremely entertaining parodies of one another's sleuths.
When a ruthless British newspaper tycoon is shot dead in his home, the high-level suspects include the assistant commissioner of Scotland Yard, casting doubt on the impartiality of a formal police investigation. As a solution, the home secretary brings in four brilliant detectives to solve the Mrs. Bradley, Sir John Saumarez, Lord Peter Wimsey, and Roger Sheringham.
Featuring a preface by inaugural Detection Club member Agatha Christie, this playful tour de force gathers together half a dozen Golden Age Mystery John Rhode, Helen Simpson, Gladys Mitchell, Anthony Berkeley, Dorothy L. Sayers, and Milward Kennedy.
Following the success of The Floating Admiral, in which certain members of the Detection Club--including Agatha Christie, Dorothy L. Sayers, and G. K. Chesterton--collaborated on a whodunit, six writers pooled their talents to create another coauthored mystery. This time the premise had an added authors would swap their detective characters, allowing for some extremely entertaining parodies of one another's sleuths.
When a ruthless British newspaper tycoon is shot dead in his home, the high-level suspects include the assistant commissioner of Scotland Yard, casting doubt on the impartiality of a formal police investigation. As a solution, the home secretary brings in four brilliant detectives to solve the Mrs. Bradley, Sir John Saumarez, Lord Peter Wimsey, and Roger Sheringham.
Featuring a preface by inaugural Detection Club member Agatha Christie, this playful tour de force gathers together half a dozen Golden Age Mystery John Rhode, Helen Simpson, Gladys Mitchell, Anthony Berkeley, Dorothy L. Sayers, and Milward Kennedy.
337 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1933
332 people are currently reading
802 people want to read
About the author
The Detection Club
13 books108 followersFormed c. 1930, the Detection Club is a group of (mostly British) mystery writers who occasionally write collaborative works.
Presidents:
G.K. Chesterton (1930–1936)
E. C. Bentley (1936–1949)
Dorothy L. Sayers (1949–1957)
Agatha Christie (1957–1976)
Lord Gorell (1957–1963)
Julian Symons (1976–1985)
H. R. F. Keating (1985–2000)
Simon Brett (2000–2015)
Martin Edwards (2015–)
Past members include: Anthony Berkeley, G.D.H. Cole, Margaret Cole, Freeman Wills Croft, Clemence Dane , Edgar Jepson, Milward Kennedy, Ronald Knox, John Rhode, Henry Wade, Victor L. Whitechurch, Gladys Mitchell, E.C.R. Lorac and Helen de Guerry Simpson
Presidents:
G.K. Chesterton (1930–1936)
E. C. Bentley (1936–1949)
Dorothy L. Sayers (1949–1957)
Agatha Christie (1957–1976)
Lord Gorell (1957–1963)
Julian Symons (1976–1985)
H. R. F. Keating (1985–2000)
Simon Brett (2000–2015)
Martin Edwards (2015–)
Past members include: Anthony Berkeley, G.D.H. Cole, Margaret Cole, Freeman Wills Croft, Clemence Dane , Edgar Jepson, Milward Kennedy, Ronald Knox, John Rhode, Henry Wade, Victor L. Whitechurch, Gladys Mitchell, E.C.R. Lorac and Helen de Guerry Simpson
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 104 reviews
October 18, 2019
Originally published in 1933 this crime novel is put together by famous writers of the day. To add to the fun the crime writers write about each others detectives instead of their own!
The opening section of the book describes how a newspaper tycoon is found dead at his home & the numerous suspects at the house at the time. Although this part of the story is a little long winded it sets the scene very well & also provides some nice touches of humour.
Some of the writing is understandably old fashioned, & with so many contributors to the story it is a little long. As a piece of nostalgia it is worth reading, but perhaps it's not the best example of a classic crime story from the period.
There is a nice opening essay, written by Agatha Christie in 1945 for a Russian magazine, discussing English detective writers. It's a good article. I just wish she had contributed to the novel instead.
The opening section of the book describes how a newspaper tycoon is found dead at his home & the numerous suspects at the house at the time. Although this part of the story is a little long winded it sets the scene very well & also provides some nice touches of humour.
Some of the writing is understandably old fashioned, & with so many contributors to the story it is a little long. As a piece of nostalgia it is worth reading, but perhaps it's not the best example of a classic crime story from the period.
There is a nice opening essay, written by Agatha Christie in 1945 for a Russian magazine, discussing English detective writers. It's a good article. I just wish she had contributed to the novel instead.
May 20, 2016
Depois de Quem Matou o Almirante?, publicado em 2014, a coleção Crime à Hora do Chá aposta novamente na escrita a várias mãos do The Detection Club com este Perguntem ao Polícia. Lembro-me de já não ter ficado maravilhada com o anterior livro, mas este Perguntem ao Polícia deixou-me ainda mais decepcionada. E eu que já estou fã desta série...
Mas parece que não sou a única. Já naquela época Agatha Christie tecia duras críticas a alguns membros do clube, do qual também ela fazia parte. Este foi o quarto livro do clube, criado três anos antes e apenas seis membros (a rainha do policial já não entrou neste) o escreveram. Mesmo assim achei-o bastante confuso talvez por trocarem de detectives sempre que era um autor novo a escrever e no fim de cada capítulo estava o caso solucionado, com a justificação do crime bem fundamentada e descoberto o assassino, sempre diferente em cada caso. Confuso?
Opinião completa: http://marcadordelivros.blogspot.pt/2...
Mas parece que não sou a única. Já naquela época Agatha Christie tecia duras críticas a alguns membros do clube, do qual também ela fazia parte. Este foi o quarto livro do clube, criado três anos antes e apenas seis membros (a rainha do policial já não entrou neste) o escreveram. Mesmo assim achei-o bastante confuso talvez por trocarem de detectives sempre que era um autor novo a escrever e no fim de cada capítulo estava o caso solucionado, com a justificação do crime bem fundamentada e descoberto o assassino, sempre diferente em cada caso. Confuso?
Opinião completa: http://marcadordelivros.blogspot.pt/2...
August 5, 2019
Clearly members of the Detection Club got carried away by the success of earlier collaborative writing-The Floating Admiral. The initial sales must have been disappointing which forced Harpers to include preface by Agatha Christie for the 80th anniversary edition. That her name is in larger font than the other actual writers speaks volumes about the novel. Hugely disappointing read with all the collaborative writers making fun of the reader's intelligence. The end is the most disappointing when you suddenly discover that there were facts that were deliberately hidden to just confuse. Avoid.
November 3, 2015
I think the books and stories the Detection Club did together must have been a lot of fun to do and to share around with other writers, but they come off less well for someone outside that context, and particularly given that many of the authors and detectives are no longer well-known. Sayers/Lord Peter were the only ones I knew from this bunch, so the parody and playing in other people’s sandboxes doesn’t really interest me.
Going through the same murder in however many different ways just… didn’t interest me enough. The parody of Sayers was quite fun, since I know what Wimsey is like, but other than that, I found this fairly boring. Alas.
Originally reviewed here.
Going through the same murder in however many different ways just… didn’t interest me enough. The parody of Sayers was quite fun, since I know what Wimsey is like, but other than that, I found this fairly boring. Alas.
Originally reviewed here.
September 19, 2019
Too many cooks spoil the broth, should be the tagline for this book. What we have here is several members of the famed detection club writing each other's characters (Wimsey/Sherrington etc) competing against each other in order to solve a lacklustre mystery plagued by moralistic overtones and bloated dialogues.
It seemed from the outset that this was perhaps not meant for the audience but rather for each other at the club's gatherings for a witty evening while having sherry and a game of canasta in 1930's London. Things were so bad for this book that the publisher's brought in Agatha Christie to write the preface for later editions.
A definite no-no from me!
My Rating - 1/5
It seemed from the outset that this was perhaps not meant for the audience but rather for each other at the club's gatherings for a witty evening while having sherry and a game of canasta in 1930's London. Things were so bad for this book that the publisher's brought in Agatha Christie to write the preface for later editions.
A definite no-no from me!
My Rating - 1/5
September 4, 2024
This is a quite fascinating murder mystery, a round-robin collaboration by six eminent members of the ‘Golden Age’ Detection Club. Published in 1933, an opening scenario was penned by John Rhode, who then handed the matter over to his partners in crime, so to speak.
To add a little spice to proceedings, the great literary luminaries were required to exchange sleuths.
Thus, Dorothy L. Sayers and Anthony Berkeley Cox swapped Lord Peter Wimsey and Roger Sheringham, while Gladys Mitchell traded her Mrs Bradley for Helen de Guerry Simpson’s Sir John Saumarez.
Each author’s task was to unravel, through their designated investigator, the death by shooting of Lord Comstock, a universally detested English newspaper magnate, murdered on the very morning that he was consecutively visited by a bishop, a government chief whip, a senior Scotland Yard commissioner and a mysterious lady of the upper classes … all of whom had been targeted by the despicable hack via his disreputable organs.
Four quite different solutions were arrived at, and an overview and conclusion were duly provided by the sixth participant, Milward Kennedy (although neither of his most famous characters, Sir George Bull and Inspector Cornford took part).
I have to say, I particularly enjoyed Anthony Berkeley Cox’s version of Lord Peter Wimsey; the liberties he took with the noble peer must have had Dorothy L Sayers pulling out her hair!
Whilst there are no glaring plot-holes, the journey is a little bumpy, as successive authors invent new and conflicting facts. However, it makes for an entertaining read and provides a warming insight into the heyday of the detective novel, the mores of its distinguished proponents, and sample encounters with their celebrated protagonists.
To add a little spice to proceedings, the great literary luminaries were required to exchange sleuths.
Thus, Dorothy L. Sayers and Anthony Berkeley Cox swapped Lord Peter Wimsey and Roger Sheringham, while Gladys Mitchell traded her Mrs Bradley for Helen de Guerry Simpson’s Sir John Saumarez.
Each author’s task was to unravel, through their designated investigator, the death by shooting of Lord Comstock, a universally detested English newspaper magnate, murdered on the very morning that he was consecutively visited by a bishop, a government chief whip, a senior Scotland Yard commissioner and a mysterious lady of the upper classes … all of whom had been targeted by the despicable hack via his disreputable organs.
Four quite different solutions were arrived at, and an overview and conclusion were duly provided by the sixth participant, Milward Kennedy (although neither of his most famous characters, Sir George Bull and Inspector Cornford took part).
I have to say, I particularly enjoyed Anthony Berkeley Cox’s version of Lord Peter Wimsey; the liberties he took with the noble peer must have had Dorothy L Sayers pulling out her hair!
Whilst there are no glaring plot-holes, the journey is a little bumpy, as successive authors invent new and conflicting facts. However, it makes for an entertaining read and provides a warming insight into the heyday of the detective novel, the mores of its distinguished proponents, and sample encounters with their celebrated protagonists.
April 17, 2017
Ask a Policeman is written by members of The Detection Club. Four members are asked to come up with a solution of who killed Lord Comstock, a newspaper tycoon, found shot dead in his study. The authors and their detectives are jumbled so that each member uses anothers detective. The only detective I was familiar with was Lord Peter Wimsey, but it did make me want to go back and read more of the others. It was strange to have so many solutions. An odd but interesting experiment.
January 15, 2025
ENGLISH: One of the Detection Club's choral novels, with six different authors. The first part, written by John Rhode, poses the problem. In the second part, four authors write parallel developments, in which their favourite detectives act, but exchanged two by two. Thus, Lord Peter Wimsey's investigation is described by Anthony Berkeley, and Roger Sheringham's by Dorothy Sayers; while Helen Simpson and Gladys Mitchell also exchange their detectives (Mrs. Bradley and Sir John Saumarez). This part is less successful, because sometimes these authors contradict each other, making a character who is in custody in one chapter to be free in another at the same time; and the house where the crime took place may be under police surveillance in one place and unguarded in another.
I think that Anthony Berkeley tries (as he did in The Floating Admiral) to take control of the argument and force his colleagues to accept his solution, but in this case he does not succeed, because he does not have the last word, which corresponds to Milward Kennedy, who is in charge of the outcome. His attempt to combine the four contradictory solutions in a coherent whole, although commendable, seems to me flawed, and the proposed solution is somewhat ridiculous. I think these Detection Club experiments cannot possibly work out. It is better when each one writes their own story, as they did in Six Against the Yard.
ESPAÑOL: Una de las novelas corales del Detection Club, con seis autores diferentes. La primera parte, escrita por John Rhode, plantea el problema. En la segunda parte, cuatro autores escriben desarrollos paralelos, en los que actúan sus detectives favoritos, pero intercambiados dos a dos. Así, la investigación de Lord Peter Wimsey es descrita por Anthony Berkeley, y la de Roger Sheringham por Dorothy Sayers; mientras Helen Simpson y Gladys Mitchell también se intercambian sus detectives (Mrs. Bradley y Sir John Saumarez). Esta parte está menos lograda, porque a veces estos autores se contradicen, haciendo que un personaje que en un capítulo está detenido, en otro esté libre en el mismo momento; y que la casa donde tuvo lugar el crimen esté acá controlada por la policía y allá sin vigilancia.
Me parece que Anthony Berkeley intenta (como hizo en The Floating Admiral) apoderarse del argumento y forzar a sus colegas a aceptar su solución, pero en este caso no lo consigue, porque él no tiene la última palabra, que corresponde a Milward Kennedy, que se encarga del desenlace. Su intento de combinar las cuatro soluciones contradictorias en un todo coherente, aunque encomiable, me parece fallido, y la solución propuesta es algo ridícula. Creo que estos experimentos del Detection Club no pueden salir bien. Es mejor cuando cada uno escribe su propio cuento, como hicieron en Six Against the Yard.
I think that Anthony Berkeley tries (as he did in The Floating Admiral) to take control of the argument and force his colleagues to accept his solution, but in this case he does not succeed, because he does not have the last word, which corresponds to Milward Kennedy, who is in charge of the outcome. His attempt to combine the four contradictory solutions in a coherent whole, although commendable, seems to me flawed, and the proposed solution is somewhat ridiculous. I think these Detection Club experiments cannot possibly work out. It is better when each one writes their own story, as they did in Six Against the Yard.
ESPAÑOL: Una de las novelas corales del Detection Club, con seis autores diferentes. La primera parte, escrita por John Rhode, plantea el problema. En la segunda parte, cuatro autores escriben desarrollos paralelos, en los que actúan sus detectives favoritos, pero intercambiados dos a dos. Así, la investigación de Lord Peter Wimsey es descrita por Anthony Berkeley, y la de Roger Sheringham por Dorothy Sayers; mientras Helen Simpson y Gladys Mitchell también se intercambian sus detectives (Mrs. Bradley y Sir John Saumarez). Esta parte está menos lograda, porque a veces estos autores se contradicen, haciendo que un personaje que en un capítulo está detenido, en otro esté libre en el mismo momento; y que la casa donde tuvo lugar el crimen esté acá controlada por la policía y allá sin vigilancia.
Me parece que Anthony Berkeley intenta (como hizo en The Floating Admiral) apoderarse del argumento y forzar a sus colegas a aceptar su solución, pero en este caso no lo consigue, porque él no tiene la última palabra, que corresponde a Milward Kennedy, que se encarga del desenlace. Su intento de combinar las cuatro soluciones contradictorias en un todo coherente, aunque encomiable, me parece fallido, y la solución propuesta es algo ridícula. Creo que estos experimentos del Detection Club no pueden salir bien. Es mejor cuando cada uno escribe su propio cuento, como hicieron en Six Against the Yard.
August 14, 2015
Lord Comstock is murdered in his country house. There are plenty of suspects - Mills, his secretary; an Archbishop who had a loud altercation with him minutes before he died; the Parliamentary Chief Whip who had called to see him; and a commissioner of police who had also called to see him. That's not to mention the servants and any stranger who happened to be passing the gates of his house from which his open study window was visible.
John Rhode describes the initial crime and Helen Simpson, Gladys Mitchell, Dorothy L Sayers and Anthony Berkeley each propose a solution using each other's detective characters. Milward Kennedy wraps it all up with yet another solution. In each version new facts are revealed as well as new red herrings.
In other hands this could have been an unfortunate mish-mash but these writers were masters of their craft and the result is entertaining and intriguing and has stood the test of time extremely well in my opinion. It is good to see these entertaining books in print again and they are perfect reading for anyone who loves the Golden Age of Crime as well as being a good introduction for anyone who hasn't read any books by these authors before.
John Rhode describes the initial crime and Helen Simpson, Gladys Mitchell, Dorothy L Sayers and Anthony Berkeley each propose a solution using each other's detective characters. Milward Kennedy wraps it all up with yet another solution. In each version new facts are revealed as well as new red herrings.
In other hands this could have been an unfortunate mish-mash but these writers were masters of their craft and the result is entertaining and intriguing and has stood the test of time extremely well in my opinion. It is good to see these entertaining books in print again and they are perfect reading for anyone who loves the Golden Age of Crime as well as being a good introduction for anyone who hasn't read any books by these authors before.
June 9, 2017
If you're looking for a mystery book written in the usual Dorothy Sayers style, skip this book. If you'd enjoy reading a mystery with a puzzle with many possible endings explored, this is the book for you! I really enjoyed it! It was the first book that I've read written by the members of the famous Detection Club. It will not be the last! Happy reading!
June 8, 2016
I got this mainly because it said "AGATHA CHRISTIE" in really large font on the cover. As it turns out, she only wrote the preface. But I guess she was the most well-known member, so her name has to be biggest.
Ask a Policeman is a group-mystery. Basically, someone wrote the set up (unpleasant man gets murdered, everyone has a motive) and 4 members write their deduction down.
The twist is, all of them are writing with a detective that isn't theirs. In other words, it's Fanfiction (of a sort).
After all four of them have given their solution, an actual solution was presented. Oh, and all four accused a different person of being the culprit, so clearly they weren't going for the "everyone is right" type of book. Unless we're talking about that Poirot story where everyone was a murderer.
I think my problem with the book is that I'm not familiar with any of the characters. I only know Peter Wimsey, who was written by (if I remember correctly) Dorothy L. Sayers. So I have no idea which aspects were parody and which weren't.
Out of the four sections, I think the second, "Sir John takes his cue" by Gladys Mitchell was my favourite. So.... Gotta check out who this Sir John was, and what Gladys Mitchell wrote.
My least favourite section was "The Conclusions of Mr. Roger Sherringham" by Dorothy L. Sayers. It was just too ridiculous and felt like it was dragged on. I guess out of the four, it most resembled parody. Or a farce. Either one.
By the way, the Lord Peter section (by Anthony Berkeley) was a little bit silly, but not bad. It reminded me that I might want to check out more of Lord Peter's books, since I've only read one.
All in all, it's not a bad book. I'm quite tempted to read all the author's works, then come back and reread this, because I have a feeling that I've missed a lot of important details.
This review was first posted at Inside the mind of a Bibliophile
Ask a Policeman is a group-mystery. Basically, someone wrote the set up (unpleasant man gets murdered, everyone has a motive) and 4 members write their deduction down.
The twist is, all of them are writing with a detective that isn't theirs. In other words, it's Fanfiction (of a sort).
After all four of them have given their solution, an actual solution was presented. Oh, and all four accused a different person of being the culprit, so clearly they weren't going for the "everyone is right" type of book. Unless we're talking about that Poirot story where everyone was a murderer.
I think my problem with the book is that I'm not familiar with any of the characters. I only know Peter Wimsey, who was written by (if I remember correctly) Dorothy L. Sayers. So I have no idea which aspects were parody and which weren't.
Out of the four sections, I think the second, "Sir John takes his cue" by Gladys Mitchell was my favourite. So.... Gotta check out who this Sir John was, and what Gladys Mitchell wrote.
My least favourite section was "The Conclusions of Mr. Roger Sherringham" by Dorothy L. Sayers. It was just too ridiculous and felt like it was dragged on. I guess out of the four, it most resembled parody. Or a farce. Either one.
By the way, the Lord Peter section (by Anthony Berkeley) was a little bit silly, but not bad. It reminded me that I might want to check out more of Lord Peter's books, since I've only read one.
All in all, it's not a bad book. I'm quite tempted to read all the author's works, then come back and reread this, because I have a feeling that I've missed a lot of important details.
This review was first posted at Inside the mind of a Bibliophile
did-not-finish
October 7, 2024If a regular cozy mystery was like peeling away a puzzle cube layer by layer to discover new mechanisms and puzzles underneath, this one felt like watching the exact same puzzle cube from different angles and perspectives. Each new view gives you limited insights and it can quickly get repetitive really quickly. I read up to Ch 2 of Part 2 (with only 2 more chapters left to the whole book) and skipped ahead to Conclusion. Even after all that, I still didn't understand who did it! The writing was really convoluted and weird. No shade on the authors though, I already love Dorothy Sayers myself. It might really just be the premise being too complex for its own good. so I'd still be interested to try out some of these others.
February 2, 2023
Overall a very mixed with this book...
The introduction by John Rhode was amazing. First part by Helen Simpson was slow. Second part by Gladys Mitchell was great. Third part by Anthony Berkeley was great. Fourth part by Dorothy Sayers was something I guess? And the concluding part by Milward Kennedy is not worth the paper it's printed on.
The introduction by John Rhode was amazing. First part by Helen Simpson was slow. Second part by Gladys Mitchell was great. Third part by Anthony Berkeley was great. Fourth part by Dorothy Sayers was something I guess? And the concluding part by Milward Kennedy is not worth the paper it's printed on.
April 21, 2020
DNF at 60%. Incoherent mess.
October 14, 2012
Ask a Policeman provides a treat -- albeit an uneven one -- thanks to a collaboration of six (mostly British) mystery writers who were members of the noteworthy Detection Club. (Dame Agatha Christie was a member, although she did not work on Ask a Policeman.) The 1934 novel began as an idea of Milward Kennedy, who wrote the Sir George Bull series and who also came up with the title. The author of the Dr. Lancelot Priestley series, John Rhode, penned the first fifth of the novel, Part I, which sets up the premise: A bullying press baron named Lord Comstock (clearly based on Lord Beaverbrook) is murdered while being visited by an archbishop, the chief whip of the ruling party, and the assistant commissioner for Scotland Yard. Who could have done it? One of these eminent people? Comstock's beleaguered secretary? Or someone else?
In Part II, each of four mystery writers take a crack at writing the solution to the mystery. However, rather than using their own detective creations, they swap. The first chapter of Part II, which features Mrs. Adela Lestrange Bradley, was written not by Gladys Mitchell, but by Australian writer Helen de Guerry Simpson. Mitchell returns the favor in the next chapter, "Sir John Takes His Cue," which features Simpson's amateur sleuth: the charming and handsome Sir John Saumarez, an actor and theater company manager. I am not really familiar with Sir John, but Simpson's portrayal of Mrs. Bradley was picture perfect, right down to the sly humor; I thoroughly enjoyed the chapter. While I enjoyed Mitchell's portrayal of Sir John, I wasn't in a position to know how accurate it was. Unfortunately, Mitchell did end the chapter with a whimper rather than a bang; even so, she piqued my interest in Sir John Saumarez, and I'll be reading the first of the three Sir John novels, Enter Sir John, as soon as I can.
The third chapter of Part II, "Lord Peter's Privy Counsel," penned by Detection Club founder and writer Anthony Berkeley rather than Lord Peters' originator, Dorothy L. Sayers, falls pretty flat. Admittedly, even in Sayers' skillful hands, at times, Lord Peter seems just on the verge of being a parody; however, Berkeley kicks him right over the edge and into an abyss. Berkeley's portrayal makes Lord Peter seem like a fey, flightly fool who, sadly, was born a century too soon to get the prescription for Ritalin or Adderall XR he needs to calm his distracted attention span. The chapter was literally unreadable -- I couldn't finish it. Berkeley was going for a light parody, but he stumbled into silly territory instead.
Sayers fared much better with her treatment of Berkeley's detective, the witty but guileful man about town Roger Sheringham. Indeed, Sayers' chapter, "The Conclusions of Mr. Roger Sheringham," was by far the most amusing part of the book. Roger Sheringham is portrayed as a sly and humorous gentleman who is not above a bit of deceit to suss out the truth. If Anthony Berkeley (whose real name was Anthony Berkeley Cox) was anything like the entertaining Roger Sherington, he must have been much in demand at London dinner parties in the 1930s and 1940s! Sayers' chapter on Sheringham was enough to convince me to buy a novel in the Sheringham series, Roger Sheringham and the Vane Mystery. (It's the third novel in the series, but at $1.99 for the Kindle edition, I thought it was a good case of trying before committing to the other, more expensive Sheringham novels.)
Needless to say, each of the four mystery writers develop the rest of the story in a different way and pin the murder on a different character. Who got it right? At the start of Part III, Milward Kennedy writes
In Part II, each of four mystery writers take a crack at writing the solution to the mystery. However, rather than using their own detective creations, they swap. The first chapter of Part II, which features Mrs. Adela Lestrange Bradley, was written not by Gladys Mitchell, but by Australian writer Helen de Guerry Simpson. Mitchell returns the favor in the next chapter, "Sir John Takes His Cue," which features Simpson's amateur sleuth: the charming and handsome Sir John Saumarez, an actor and theater company manager. I am not really familiar with Sir John, but Simpson's portrayal of Mrs. Bradley was picture perfect, right down to the sly humor; I thoroughly enjoyed the chapter. While I enjoyed Mitchell's portrayal of Sir John, I wasn't in a position to know how accurate it was. Unfortunately, Mitchell did end the chapter with a whimper rather than a bang; even so, she piqued my interest in Sir John Saumarez, and I'll be reading the first of the three Sir John novels, Enter Sir John, as soon as I can.
The third chapter of Part II, "Lord Peter's Privy Counsel," penned by Detection Club founder and writer Anthony Berkeley rather than Lord Peters' originator, Dorothy L. Sayers, falls pretty flat. Admittedly, even in Sayers' skillful hands, at times, Lord Peter seems just on the verge of being a parody; however, Berkeley kicks him right over the edge and into an abyss. Berkeley's portrayal makes Lord Peter seem like a fey, flightly fool who, sadly, was born a century too soon to get the prescription for Ritalin or Adderall XR he needs to calm his distracted attention span. The chapter was literally unreadable -- I couldn't finish it. Berkeley was going for a light parody, but he stumbled into silly territory instead.
Sayers fared much better with her treatment of Berkeley's detective, the witty but guileful man about town Roger Sheringham. Indeed, Sayers' chapter, "The Conclusions of Mr. Roger Sheringham," was by far the most amusing part of the book. Roger Sheringham is portrayed as a sly and humorous gentleman who is not above a bit of deceit to suss out the truth. If Anthony Berkeley (whose real name was Anthony Berkeley Cox) was anything like the entertaining Roger Sherington, he must have been much in demand at London dinner parties in the 1930s and 1940s! Sayers' chapter on Sheringham was enough to convince me to buy a novel in the Sheringham series, Roger Sheringham and the Vane Mystery. (It's the third novel in the series, but at $1.99 for the Kindle edition, I thought it was a good case of trying before committing to the other, more expensive Sheringham novels.)
Needless to say, each of the four mystery writers develop the rest of the story in a different way and pin the murder on a different character. Who got it right? At the start of Part III, Milward Kennedy writes
that the [four] Solvers have been more than good-natured. Even if they have introduced a touch or two of parody, they have nade their fellow sleuths extremely ingenious. In fact it seems plain to me that each of the four solutions is the right one.I can vouch that that's the case for three out of the four detectives' chapters. Part III reveals the actual denouement that Milwarad Kennedy envisioned. Read his solution for yourself and see who scored a hit.
December 22, 2024
I technically finished this book but, truth be told, I skimmed the last chapter where the murderer wasn't revealed. One of the least satisfying mysteries in a long while.
June 14, 2019
Agatha Christie’s essay on her fellow writers is also illuminating about her own work. I loved the ingenious set-up by John Rhodes, but am much less enamoured of Milward Kennedy’s wrap-up. The authors’ swapping around their detectives also casts an interesting light on the balance between puzzle/detection/crime, characterisation and writing skill of each author. Helen Simpson and Gladys Mitchell both prove themselves great at character and dialogue; Simpson makes murder and guilt serious while Mitchell makes them fantastical. Anthony Berkeley is an ingenious plotter but makes Lord Peter Wimsey an absolute caricature (though interesting to see what he takes as the essence of Wimsey and a Sayers novel. Dorothy L Sayers is a cut above all the other writers in sheer good writing and the Archbishop’s secretary and Mr ffulke Tweedle are delicious creations who deserve a life beyond this book. The really disappointing thing is that there is no round table denouement featuring all the detectives together, and like some other reviewers I ended slightly baffled as to which if any of the detectives had got it right. Definitely worth a read for Christie and Sayers fans; if you like golden age crime you might find a new person to read - but on the basis of this book I won’t be hauling Milward Kennedy out of obscurity any time soon.
Want to read
February 12, 2019Synopsis: six mystery writers take the same premise, that ruthless news tycoon Lord Comstock has been murdered. Each points a different direction.
December 14, 2017
Who murdered Lord Comstock? Four famous fictional amateurs, set free from the hands of their original creators, offer their own solutions. The result is an interesting but uneven experiment in collaborative crime writing. John Rhode sets up the mystery beautifully, and Berkeley and Sayers are typically excellent, even when switching protagonists. Yet, the element of parody was probably more fun for the writers than the readers, and the book is unsurprisingly disjointed. The lowpoint comes with Milward Kennedy's confusing closing chapter. If you are a golden age crime enthusiast, this is worth picking up, and the few strong chapters make it a good read. Otherwise, just pick up the solo efforts of one of the authors within.
September 8, 2019
Unique read. Multiple authors, multiple points of view, and a mystery that may or may not have been solved. Fun read that shows that detection involves sorting through a lot of data and identifying the truth. I enjoyed the various agendas underlying each character and how these affected what they said and how they said it. Places an individual murder within the context of a much bigger reality.
December 29, 2011
This was really writers writing for each other, not for readers - a mystery round robin. But they were writing each others' characters; which must have been fun for them, but resulted in an oddly boring story.
Almost unreadable. I had to force myself to keep reading.
Almost unreadable. I had to force myself to keep reading.
March 31, 2014
I like the fact some of my favourite authors switched characters was an interesting take especially since each had a different solution to the problem.
July 20, 2016
Quando não há nada de bom para dizer mais vale não dizer nada.
October 4, 2020
This is a collaboration of six members of the Detection Club. John Rhode introduces a case – the murder of an unlikeable newspaper editor with several high-profile suspects – and Gladys Mitchell’s Mrs Bradley, Helen Simpson’s Sir John, Dorothy Sayer’s Lord Peter and Anthony Berkleey’s Roger Sheringham all investigate and offer a solution. Milward Kennedy then wraps it all up. Except there’s a little twist: the writers don’t write the chapter about their own detective but someone else’s. So Mitchell writes Sir John, Simpson Mrs Bradley, Sayers Roger Sheringham and Berkeley Lord Peter.
Martin Edwards promises us in the introduction that this leads to a fun mixture of mystery and parody. And the idea is undoubtedly nice but the first problem for me is…that I’ve only read Sayers and Berkley before. I never read anything by Mitchell or Simpson and so I couldn’t enjoy the parody parts of those stories, except occasionally getting the vague feeling of this odd behaviour is probably a riff on one of the character’s quirks. I do know Sheringham (admittedly not that well) but I did find his chapter funny. I know Lord Peter much better and admittedly like him a lot, so perhaps I’m slightly less inclined to enjoy reading about him being mocked but it’s not that I think Peter is too great to be made fun off. Only that Berkeley goes for the very cheap shot (haha, look how posh he is) and that doesn’t carry through a whole story (I guess each one is somewhere between long short story and short novella).
So with the parody falling somewhat flat for me that leaves the mystery and well – a story like this is inevitably going to end up being very constructed. Not that other golden age mysteries aren’t but the whole set-up of this story really ramps it up to 11 and I also wasn’t the biggest fan of that.
In the end, I think that the whole round-robin style mystery is a fun idea but not one that really works for me. Even if everybody had written their own detective it still would have been a really over-the-top constructed mystery and that’s just not my thing.
Martin Edwards promises us in the introduction that this leads to a fun mixture of mystery and parody. And the idea is undoubtedly nice but the first problem for me is…that I’ve only read Sayers and Berkley before. I never read anything by Mitchell or Simpson and so I couldn’t enjoy the parody parts of those stories, except occasionally getting the vague feeling of this odd behaviour is probably a riff on one of the character’s quirks. I do know Sheringham (admittedly not that well) but I did find his chapter funny. I know Lord Peter much better and admittedly like him a lot, so perhaps I’m slightly less inclined to enjoy reading about him being mocked but it’s not that I think Peter is too great to be made fun off. Only that Berkeley goes for the very cheap shot (haha, look how posh he is) and that doesn’t carry through a whole story (I guess each one is somewhere between long short story and short novella).
So with the parody falling somewhat flat for me that leaves the mystery and well – a story like this is inevitably going to end up being very constructed. Not that other golden age mysteries aren’t but the whole set-up of this story really ramps it up to 11 and I also wasn’t the biggest fan of that.
In the end, I think that the whole round-robin style mystery is a fun idea but not one that really works for me. Even if everybody had written their own detective it still would have been a really over-the-top constructed mystery and that’s just not my thing.
July 29, 2021
Book #: 24
Title: Ask A Policeman
Author: The Detection Club
(Dorothy L. Sayers, Milward Kennedy, Anthony Berkeley, Gladys Mitchell, John Rhode, Helen de Guerry Simpson, Agatha Christie)
Format: ebook purchase
Pub Date: Published July 9th 2019 by MysteriousPress.com/Open Road (first published 1933)
Started: 7/01/2021 Ended: 7/24/2021
Awards: none
Categories:
A book that has fewer than 1,000 reviews on Amazon or Goodreads (PpSgr 36); A book whose title refers to person(s) without giving their name (GrRds 51); * Two Or More People On The Cover - Self Explanatory (BkHdr 06); Read In SUMMER - Read in JUNE JULY OR AUGUST (BkHdr 14); 16-3 Word Title - Self Explanatory (BkHdr 16); A Book where the Author uses a Character created by a Different Author (Dag);
A-Z Title: A for Ask
A-Z Author: D for Detection Club
Rating: *** three out of five stars
I was thrilled to see this pop up as an e-book purchase. A murder mystery with no less than four British detectives, each detective being written by someone other than their regular author! Apparently, The Detection Club has done ten of these novels.
The victim, Lord Comstock, is a deplorable human being and it's discussed whether his killing counts as murder or public service. Each section is devoted to a different sleuth using his own methods to solve the case. Each detective comes up with a different suspect as the guilty party, and none of them are too hasty to turn a guilty party in. As much as I enjoyed the concept, the execution left a lot to be desired. The methodology of each detective felt a little 'off'. It's a nice novel for reading in line, but I won't be buying any of their other novels.
Title: Ask A Policeman
Author: The Detection Club
(Dorothy L. Sayers, Milward Kennedy, Anthony Berkeley, Gladys Mitchell, John Rhode, Helen de Guerry Simpson, Agatha Christie)
Format: ebook purchase
Pub Date: Published July 9th 2019 by MysteriousPress.com/Open Road (first published 1933)
Started: 7/01/2021 Ended: 7/24/2021
Awards: none
Categories:
A book that has fewer than 1,000 reviews on Amazon or Goodreads (PpSgr 36); A book whose title refers to person(s) without giving their name (GrRds 51); * Two Or More People On The Cover - Self Explanatory (BkHdr 06); Read In SUMMER - Read in JUNE JULY OR AUGUST (BkHdr 14); 16-3 Word Title - Self Explanatory (BkHdr 16); A Book where the Author uses a Character created by a Different Author (Dag);
A-Z Title: A for Ask
A-Z Author: D for Detection Club
Rating: *** three out of five stars
I was thrilled to see this pop up as an e-book purchase. A murder mystery with no less than four British detectives, each detective being written by someone other than their regular author! Apparently, The Detection Club has done ten of these novels.
The victim, Lord Comstock, is a deplorable human being and it's discussed whether his killing counts as murder or public service. Each section is devoted to a different sleuth using his own methods to solve the case. Each detective comes up with a different suspect as the guilty party, and none of them are too hasty to turn a guilty party in. As much as I enjoyed the concept, the execution left a lot to be desired. The methodology of each detective felt a little 'off'. It's a nice novel for reading in line, but I won't be buying any of their other novels.
January 25, 2021
This book was written by six celebrated mystery writers of the 1930s. As a bonus there was a preface by Agatha Christie and a forward by Martin Edwards, the president of The Detection Club from 2015. I enjoyed these as well as the first two sections of the body of the story. The set up of the mystery was fine, and the parodies of the well known literary detectives by authors who had not created them were delightful. This was particularly so for the one I'm most familiar with, Dorothy Sayer's Lord Peter Wimsey, and for the one featuring Gladys Mitchell's Mrs. Bradley. I have never read any of the Mrs Bradley Mysteries before, but that section of the book was absolutely hilarious. Not being certain whether this was due to the brilliance of the original author or Helen Simpson who wrote the parody, I will be looking for both authors' works. However, I really, really disliked the last section that wrapped up the disputed deductions of the four famous detectives. There was ample warning that the rules of mystery writing would be broken, but they were so trampled by Milward Kennedy that it was painful to read. At the very least that part should have been shorter. Much shorter. It was a tiresome end to what had been a fun read. I have checked out another Detection Club mystery, because through so much of this the authors are having a great time gently skewering the classical mystery genre I love. If the format is similar I only hope the writer who draws the short straw to bring it all together at the end has a better time of it.
August 18, 2019
A Hard Slog
While I have always loved British detective stories from the Golden Age, this effort - a collaboration of some of the best writers of this genre - was all too much of a good thing. I had to follow each detective's "solution" so closely that I was no longer enjoying the ride. It was rather more like working a puzzle just above your skill level. Challenging, intense and headache producing.
I'm sure I missed most of the subtleties of parody undertaken by the authors in rendering the detectives of another author. Perhaps these undertones would have increased my enjoyment of the romp. In addition to the above mentioned complexities, the e-book itself was very poorly produced. There was a recurring "I" which appeared willy-nilly near any quotation marks that was particularly infuriating. Despite all this, I'm glad I read it. I enjoyed the other two Detection Club offerings, so now I am going to try to get my hands on the elusive first book in the series. Give it a try if you are a diehard BritMystery lover.
While I have always loved British detective stories from the Golden Age, this effort - a collaboration of some of the best writers of this genre - was all too much of a good thing. I had to follow each detective's "solution" so closely that I was no longer enjoying the ride. It was rather more like working a puzzle just above your skill level. Challenging, intense and headache producing.
I'm sure I missed most of the subtleties of parody undertaken by the authors in rendering the detectives of another author. Perhaps these undertones would have increased my enjoyment of the romp. In addition to the above mentioned complexities, the e-book itself was very poorly produced. There was a recurring "I" which appeared willy-nilly near any quotation marks that was particularly infuriating. Despite all this, I'm glad I read it. I enjoyed the other two Detection Club offerings, so now I am going to try to get my hands on the elusive first book in the series. Give it a try if you are a diehard BritMystery lover.
August 25, 2019
"Lord Comstock is a barbarous newspaper tycoon with enemies in high places. His murder poses a dilemma for the Home Secretary: with suspicion falling on the Chief Whip, an Archbishop, and the Assistant Commissioner for Scotland Yard, the impartiality of any police investigation is threatened. Abandoning protocol, he invites four famous detectives to solve the case: Mrs. Adela Bradley, Sir John Saumarez, Lord Peter Whimsy, and Mr Roger Sheringham. All are on their own -- and none of them can ask a policeman ...
"This unique whodunit involved four of the 1930s' best crime writers swapping their usual detectives and indulging in sly parodies of each other."
~~back cover
I found this book somewhat confusing, with the only fact a timetable which left only seconds for the murder to have been committed. Or did it? Each of the four detectives came up with a different murderer & motive, but then as the police recapitulated all four ...
"This unique whodunit involved four of the 1930s' best crime writers swapping their usual detectives and indulging in sly parodies of each other."
~~back cover
I found this book somewhat confusing, with the only fact a timetable which left only seconds for the murder to have been committed. Or did it? Each of the four detectives came up with a different murderer & motive, but then as the police recapitulated all four ...
December 20, 2025
I’m rather glad this isn’t how we investigate crimes in modern times.
Ask A Policeman is a uniquely interesting thriller experiment by the famous group known as The Detection Club. Instead of the standard iconic main detective, we’re handed four, each written by a different author. The suspects themselves are delightfully stereotypical, with their wildly clashing social statuses played up to comedic effect.
All roads eventually lead to a final twist that is, somehow, both completely unforeseeable and faintly underwhelming, anticlimactic in a very funny, British way.
My only critique is that, while watching each detective tackle the mystery in their own way is half the fun, it does require some patience. The constant shift in writing styles can feel a bit disjointed, and readers looking for a smooth, unified narrative may find themselves doing more mental gear-shifting than expected.
Ask A Policeman is a uniquely interesting thriller experiment by the famous group known as The Detection Club. Instead of the standard iconic main detective, we’re handed four, each written by a different author. The suspects themselves are delightfully stereotypical, with their wildly clashing social statuses played up to comedic effect.
All roads eventually lead to a final twist that is, somehow, both completely unforeseeable and faintly underwhelming, anticlimactic in a very funny, British way.
My only critique is that, while watching each detective tackle the mystery in their own way is half the fun, it does require some patience. The constant shift in writing styles can feel a bit disjointed, and readers looking for a smooth, unified narrative may find themselves doing more mental gear-shifting than expected.
February 18, 2020
This is a pleasant little train wreck—a murder mystery written by committee (but a committee of fine Golden Age mystery authors). One author sets the stage, putting forth a classic murder scene in a country house with a tight timetable and an impeccable array of suspects. Then 5 more authors offer sections having sleuths investigate and "solve" the mystery (with the added twist that they swap sleuths with each other). As each adds to the evidence, the level of implausibility builds, which adds to the entertainment (for me, anyway).
I wish I had been familiar with more of the authors and detectives involved. I know Dorothy Sayers and her Lord Peter Wimsey very well, but of the rest involved I only know Gladys Mitchell and her Mrs. Bradley by reputation (but I really want to track her books down).
I wish I had been familiar with more of the authors and detectives involved. I know Dorothy Sayers and her Lord Peter Wimsey very well, but of the rest involved I only know Gladys Mitchell and her Mrs. Bradley by reputation (but I really want to track her books down).
Displaying 1 - 30 of 104 reviews