Wed 28 Dec 2016
HENRY KANE – Who Killed Sweet Sue? Avon, paperback original, 1956. Signet D2575, paperback, January 1965. British title: Sweet Charlie (Boardman, hardcover, 1957).
Here’s an example in which the British title makes a lot more sense than the US edition does. There are maybe a half dozen people named Charles, Charlie, Chas., Charlene, or C. Smith Applegate, Jr. and Sr., but no one named Sue. I can’t have missed her!
The private eye in most of Henry Kane’s novel was a Manhattan-based fellow named Peter Chambers, and though he can mix well enough in sophisticated circles, he’s a guy as tough as they come. And it always amazes me that he’s a pretty good detective too, at least in his earlier cases. You have to keep a close eye on the clues in this one. The smallest detail may matter.
He’s hired twice in the same day by two clients whose interests may overlap, but since the second one, a strip tease dancer who specialty is snakes as part of her act, doesn’t tell him why she’s hiring him, he takes her on also. (Twenty thousand dollars in cash helps make decisions like that very easy.)
The earlier client is a well known British actor now working in the US named Charles Rexy, and yes, he’s known to the tabloids as Sexy Rexy, which is part of his problem. He’s being blackmailed (home movies have been taken) and the stripper may be part of it.
The number of characters that Chambers comes across in the course of is investigation simply grows and grows. If it weren’t for a full page, one paragraph summary about halfway through, a veritable scorecard for all the players, a reader might throw up his or her hands in frustration and dismay. I know; I nearly did. But I’m glad I persevered. The second half of the book, story-wise, is well worth waiting for.
Henry Kane also had a way with words, there’s no doubt about it, and there a certain rhythm that you as a reader have to adjust to, or you’re going to left out in the cold. Luckily for me, I have the beat.
December 28th, 2016 at 2:15 pm
I often confuse Henry Kane with Frank Kane for no other reasons than their similar names and that they were both writing PI novels around the same time. I do remember once watching I’VE GOT A SECRET and one of the contestants was one or the other of the two. Panelist Henry Morgan immediately recognized the name and said, “I’ve read your books!” I still have no idea whether it was Henry or Frank on that show.
December 28th, 2016 at 6:26 pm
Well, you did it again. You ought to go into the psychic business. You seem to have tapped into some sort of collective unconscious — at least with my reading habits. I’m currently reading (and will be writing about) my first Henry Kane mystery, A CORPSE FOR CHRISTMAS. Post will appear this Friday.
That last paragraph sums up Kane very well. I’ve read a lot of private eye books, but I think Kane is the kind of thing people think of when anyone says “private eye novel”. It’s template “eye fiction”. He also has a hyper-real way of writing dialogue that reminds me of David Mamet’s early plays and a few of his screenplays.
December 29th, 2016 at 8:38 pm
Don’t know why we’ve been so much in synch recently. It’s almost spooky. I’ll make a point of looking for your review tomorrow.
December 28th, 2016 at 10:22 pm
Kane has an undercurrent of screwball in his work, but it most comes across as cool and cocky. Having him pen the PETER GUNN novelization seemed to me a natural.
At this best Kane could plot and write rings around many bigger names. I always found it gratifing that after slipping to writing near porn he came back and even had some major sellers, winning critical acclaim for his MacGregor books.
December 29th, 2016 at 12:42 am
James Reasoner and I were just kicking this around on Facebook, where we have opposite opinions of Kane’s work. I’m put off by the “look, ma, I’m writing” overload that mark the first-person Pete Chambers books going back to the 40s. Kane was a good plotter by that writing style totally distracts. I much prefer those later third person Chambers titles, the “near porn” ones that David refers to. “Kill for the Millions” is a good one of those. I much prefer Frank Kane’s Johnny Liddell novels when I need a generic private eye fix.
December 29th, 2016 at 8:33 pm
If I could join in the discussion between you and James, I the last paragraph of my review should tell that I side with James. I know that Kane’s approach to writing can very well be irritating to a lot of people, but me, I enjoy it.
As for his X-rated stuff, I can’t read it. I wonder if that’s true for everyone, one extreme versus the other. If you like his earlier stuff, the near-porn turns you off — and vice versa.