Wed 21 Jan 2015
MARY STEWART – The Ivy Tree. Hodder & Stoughton, UK, hardcover, 1961. M. S. Mill/William Morrow, US, hardcover, 1961. Fawcett Crest R590, US, paperback, January 1963. Reprinted many times.
Time ran down to nothing; stood still; ran back …
The moment snapped.
Before beginning properly I need to make a statement: Mary Stewart is one of my favorite writers. She is not one of my favorite women writers, one of my favorite suspense novelists, one of my favorite British writers, or one of any other sub-division. She is Mary Stewart and one my favorite writers and storytellers bar none.
Don’t expect an even-handed or unbiased review.
Aside from her brilliant Merlin trilogy her novels — The Moonspinners, My Brother Michael, Airs Above The Ground, The Gabriel Hounds, This Rough Magic, Nine Coaches Waiting, Wild Fire at Midnight — are some of my favorite works of the period she wrote in. She was a superb storyteller in the Buchan and Stevenson tradition as much as that of Daphne duMaurier.
Ironically I am not a great fan of the woman in danger genre that dates back the the Gothic era of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Beyond the classics like the Bronte’s, Collins, LeFanu, and duMaurier, this is a gray area for me. I’m not a fan of Mary Roberts Rinehart but I like Ethel Lina White; I admire some of Mignon G. Eberhart’s books but don’t want a steady diet of them. I seldom dipped into the lesser Gothic era of the sixties and all those superbly gowned damsels in danger and stormy backgrounds haunting the paperback kiosks. In fact, only if the names Elizabeth Peters are Mary Stewart were among them.
For that reason The Ivy Tree is an odd one for me to admire so much, because save for Nine Coaches Waiting, it is closest to a standard Gothic of any of her thrillers.
Taking a note from Daphne DuMaurier (consiously) it opens with one of those lines that will be repeated at the end.
That quality of writing is another reason I love Stewart.
Mary Grey is the narrator, she is a Canadian girl, an orphan, living and working in England in a dreary room with an uncertain future, and she is seated on a bit of the old Roman wall, Hadrian’s Wall, running the length of Northumberland, waiting for her lover Adam who lives nearby. It is someone else who shows up though. A wild angry young man who approaches her threateningly: “You’ve got a nerve … haven’t you? After all these years walking in as calm as you please, and in broad daylight!â€
His name is Con Winslow and he soon learns his mistake, she isn’t his hated cousin Annabel Winslow, but she is almost her double. A remarkable resemblance.
Mary Grey returns to London after her disappointing rendezvous, returns to her dull life, but a knock on her door turns out to be Lisa Dermott, Con’s sister, come to see for herself, and once she has seen with a proposal that seems suited to Mary Grey with no prospects of a future: Become Annabel Winslow. It’s not really fraud, she would only be assuring the right people inherited what they were entitled to.
There is an estate called Whitescar and it isn’t far from the once fabulous House of Forrest, as in Adam Forrest, the Adam Mary was waiting at on that piece of Roman Wall. There is a prospect of comfort, wealth, even romance. Of course its an absurd idea, but the more Lisa talks the more it seems as if it might work.
The plot isn’t new. Tey used it in Brat Farrar and du Maurier in The Scapegoat. There are actual incidents like the Anastasia impersonation and the infamous Tichborne Claimant, but Stewart’s skill are such you needn’t worry how she will handle things. Anthony Boucher considered her to be as good as anyone writing thrillers and suspense in her era, and I agree.
There is the dying old man who has waited for Annabel to return, a stallion called Rowan only Annabel/Mary can ride, and of course Adam will come back at the worst possible moment to provide the catalyst for the tragedy to follow.
Mary marries Con and together they will be wealthy, but nothing is quite what it seems, and though Mary was waiting for Adam it turns out Mary Grey never met him, he was Annabel’s lover… And the old ivy tree where he once left a note she never saw when she left, a misunderstanding that may be corrected too late. If Adam ever learns her secret, her real secret.
The ivy tree is the center for much of the novels action and its heart.
Tension and mystery swirl about her with fate and danger equally at play. Con is insanely jealous and if she isn’t Mary Grey she threatens all his plans for Whitescar and her death would be all too simple. Just a horseshoe in Rowan’s stall. Everyone would assume the wild stallion killed her. After all the animal is unstable dangerous, he could easily turn on his mistress.
What set Mary Stewart apart from the usual women in danger writers was more than just the quality of her writing, it was her voice, because she wasn’t just a good suspense novelist. Mary Stewart’s voice was that of a female Buchan or Household and when it came to describing the wild places, rough country, and the story of chase and pursuit she was just as sure a hand.
I suppose it sounds sexist, but as female as her heroines are, there is a practical masculine side to a Mary Stewart heroine. They aren’t prone to hysterics or unfounded fears. They are less likely to jump at a sudden movement in the dark than hit it with something heavy. They think even when they are frightened, and they don’t wait around for anyone on a white horse to rescue them.
The Mary Stewart heroine isn’t fainting, dainty, or the last one in on what’s happening. That quality separates Stewart from the pack as much as her at time lyric voice. Though different in style, like Helen MacInnes, Stewart was not really part of the woman in danger or romantic suspense sub-genre. She was a first class thriller writer and because there is a timeless quality to her books woven around the past intermingled with the present that means they still read well and hold up today.
If you have ever read Mary Stewart you’ll want to know what follows.
January 21st, 2015 at 3:32 pm
What I find surprising is that only one film has been made of Mary Stewart’s work (there was a TV version in the UK of MERLIN OF THE CRYSTAL CAVE), and I’m sure everyone knows what it is. But why only the one? One wonders.
I’ve not read this one, David. It sounds as though it would film very well, or am I mistaken?
January 21st, 2015 at 4:39 pm
It’s very cinematic, you will virtually find yourself casting the parts as you read.
I’ve never understood why they shied away from Stewart’s novels. The were big sellers, critical successes, had exotic locales, and the plots were twisty, but not too complex for a movie. Most like MY BROTHER MICHAEL, THIS ROUGH MAGIC, WILD FIRE AT MIDNIGHT, and AIRS ABOVE THE GROUND would all adapt well to the screen with little effort as MOONSPINNERS did.
All I can think of is that Disney producing the first of her books to hit the screen as a Haley Mills film branded her as juvenile somehow in Hollywood’s eye. I’m not claiming that was the cause, only suggesting it is one reason I can think of.
January 21st, 2015 at 5:12 pm
Perhaps Ms Stewart herself did not care for what the Disney people made out of MOONSPINNERS.
January 21st, 2015 at 6:06 pm
I’ve read, though I don’t recall where, that she wasn’t happy with it, but whether she refused to sell any other books or sold some and they were never made I don’t know.
They did tone MOONSPINNERS down a bit from the original, but its not a bad film and beautifully shot on location with a good cast. Even some of the atmosphere is there. But for all that it is not the adult book.
January 21st, 2015 at 11:25 pm
Of the two paperbacks (from Fawcett Crest), I like the later one (the lower one) a whole lot better.
January 21st, 2015 at 11:28 pm
According to Wikipedia, Anthony Boucher said of this novel: “No one writes the damsel in distress tale with greater charm or urgency.”
January 22nd, 2015 at 12:45 pm
I used to see her books on shelves in neighbors’ houses when I was a kid. I personally have only read her ‘Merlin’ trilogy and found it decent; but it did not make a powerful impression on me. I would say I enjoyed it at the time I was reading it but haven’t thought about it since. BTW, I don’t think I realized (until David’s post) that she was the same author of those other books of crime, mystery, danger, and intrigue. So, I’ve learned something new!
Very finely-worded appraisal, btw. As I’ve said before, one can’t hardly find this consistently high level of writing easily on the net.
January 22nd, 2015 at 2:56 pm
Thank you Feliks, I think we can all thank Steve and now Jonathan for creating a place we want to comment and write on.
I did warn at the first I am completely biased in relation to Stewart. I don’t expect everyone to feel as I do about her work, but I will point out she is one of the writers I first encountered in that sweet spot between 14 and 20, and the writers I liked a great deal in that period have an edge on most a more mature reader acquired.
January 22nd, 2015 at 4:28 pm
My favorite ‘movie reviewer’ is open and honest about the fact that his favorite movie of all time is the 1951 ‘Alice in Wonderland’. Why? Well, he says it is the first film he can remember viewing as a wee small lad. That’s the reason. Nothing wrong with that. He also would freely tell anyone and everyone that his favorite actor was Leslie Nielson, *before* Nielson’s comeback. Why? He simply always liked Nielson’s performing. He doesn’t have a highly-detailed explanation for his preference. Again: no demerit.
October 3rd, 2015 at 2:51 pm
Lovely to hear Mary Stewart praised. I sat in a cafe in Athens with “Nothing ever happens to me” and then went to Delphi. She gave me people and sights and recent history in such well-crafted narratives.
Helen Macinnes is another to travel with, for that time of the cold war – try North From Rome.