“As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!”

   It has often been surmised by the critics and historians of detective fiction that had the word “detective” been in use in 1841 when Poe’s “The Murders In the Rue Morgue” appeared in the April issue of Graham’s Magazine, Poe might have used that word to describe his character, G. Auguste Dupin.

    In fact, John Ball in his essay “Murder At Large” in The Mystery Story (Del Mar, CA., 1976) states the following:

    This concept had probably been fostered by the fact that the earliest recorded use of the word cited by the Oxford English Dictionary places it in Chamber’s Edinburgh Journal, vol. XII, p.54 of the March 4, 1843 issue

    However, the use of the word “detective” can be documented to have appeared in print before the example given by the Oxford English Dictionary. I first encountered an earlier use in The Examiner #1787 (April 30, 1842), pp. 283-284, which is hereby produced in part:

    The article goes on to expound the inefficiencies of the metropolitan police in the handling of this case, and towards the end states that “we think quite enough has been given to prove that the existing system of police is not a detective one, and that unless some most important alterations are made by the appointment of a detective police, or an improvement in the system, the perpetrators of crimes, however horrid and revolting in their nature, will in nine cases out of ten, escape the hands of justice.”

    Although this use of the word detective only pushed the date back by not quite a year, it was not enough to warrant a claim that Poe could have used the word.

    My next encounter with the word would prove that it could have been used by Poe. It is in the form of a letter to the editor of The Times (London), May 30, 1840, p. 6; and the entire letter is hereby reproduced because of its importance not only to show that the word was in existence at this early time, but it lays the groundwork for the formation of a “detective police” force:

    Thus, it is evident that the word detective did exist in print prior to 1841 and may well have been used in everyday parlance prior to the example given above.

    (*) This is in reference to the David Good case (1842), details of which can be found in Martin Fido’s Murder Guide to London (Chicago, 1990), as well as in Colin Wilson’s Encyclopedia of Murder (New York, 1962).

   From the Wordle website:

    “Wordle is a toy for generating ‘word clouds’ from text that you provide. The clouds give greater prominence to words that appear more frequently in the source text. You can tweak your clouds with different fonts, layouts, and color schemes. The images you create with Wordle are yours to use however you like. You can print them out, or save them to the Wordle gallery to share with your friends.”

   The one you see below is a fine example. It was taken of this blog earlier today by J. Kingston Pierce and is shown to great advantage over on his Rap Sheet blog.

   Here’s a blow-up.

   We’ve had to install a new WordPress interface here. All seems to have gone well — no posts lost! — but if you go back a few weeks you’ll see that strange symbols have replaced some (not all) apostrophes, dashes and stray quotation marks.

   I’ve edited them out of the most recent posts, I hope, but it will be a while before they disappear altogether. All part and parcel of doing business in the age of the future — constant upgrades — this time because of security concerns — but not always perfectly!

    Or, things that have occurred to me to say, later the same day as the preceding post.

    ● I’ve watched the movie To Catch a Thief one and a half times since David Vineyard reviewed both the book (by David Dodge) back about a month ago. The first time was upstairs on our small 24″ TV, which was OK, but when I started watching it again downstairs on our large screen with the commentary on, the difference was like night and day.

    What a spectacular movie! The colors are magnificent, and the people — well, who could ever outshine Cary Grant and Grace Kelly in a movie together? The fireworks are what everybody remembers, but the first time she turns and gives him a kiss at her hotel room door, that was something else again. The stuff dreams are made of? You’d better believe it.

    ● After reviewing the 1937 movie made of H. Rider Haggard’s novel, King Solomon’s Mines, I soon afterward watched the one that came out in 1950. The later version starred Deborah Kerr, Stewart Granger and Richard Carlson, and was nominated for an Oscar as Best Picture of the Year.

    It didn’t win the big one, but the film did pick up two Oscars anyway, one for Best Cinematography (Color), and one for Best Film Editing. The characters were shuffled around some from both the book and the earlier film, leaving Richard Carlson with not much to do, but the photography, as the small safari made its way further and further into unknown bush country, was once again spectacular, if I may use the word again. The plot is fairly simple, and some people leaving comments on IMDB complain about the slow pace, but that’s only to be expected after Indiana Jones has come and gone.

    ● Looking back over the past month, I see that I’ve read only two books, one a science fiction novel by Alan Dean Foster entitled Quofum. I thought it was a stand-alone, and in a sense it is, but it’s also Book 8 in the author’s “Humanx Commonwealth” series

   And as such, while tremendously inventive in itself — a strange planet is discovered with an unbelievable abundance of strange fauna and flora, plus many incompatible forms of intelligent life within miles of each other — it’s also spinning its wheels in anticipation of the next book to come along — a fact the reader (me) doesn’t realize until the book is over, only to discover the story’s not finished.

    ● The other book I read this June perhaps ought to have its own post, but since I never got around to writing the review, I think this is all the space it’s going to get. After tackling and mostly enjoying One Shot by Lee Child, the first “Jack Reacher” adventure I’ve read, but #9 in the series, I tried another.

   This one was Nothing to Lose, which is #12 out of fifteen Reacher books, so far. The reason it took me all month to read it, or one of them, is that it’s 544 pages long. But another reason is that after a great opening setup — two adjoining towns in Colorado connected by a single highway, one called Hope, the other Despair — most of the 544 are not necessary. I think the technical name for this is “padding.” Lots of repetitious action, in other words, plus the female chief police officer of Hope has personal problems that Reacher of course takes on as his own.

   What I really found amusing — I think that’s the technical term — is that this book has gotten a terrific panning by the reviewers on Amazon. Some 169 reviews, out of 420, have given it only one star. A typical comment goes something like this. Well, to be truthful, it goes exactly like this:

    “I found it impossible to buy into the far-fetched ‘conspiracy theory’ with its pathetic ‘villains’ and was surprised at Child’s foray into political opinion (putting his opinions into Reacher’s mouth — which completely changed Reacher’s character). This was totally out of place, I thought, and awkward at best.”

   Turns out that the main villain is a born-again Christian with delusions of grandeur, and that Child’s foray into political opinion are some statements that come up relating to the war in Iraq.

   In any case, it looks like I’ve just reviewed the book after all.

    ● I think I’ve reviewed here all of the movies I’ve watched in June, except for the last two, which will be posted soon. I shall have to start forcing myself to take some time for reading, else I shall be falling even more behind. Otherwise I have been making my way through various TV shows on DVD in box sets, which I seldom report on here.

   To fill in that particular gap, though, at least in a small way, here are the ones I’m currently watching: Stargate Atlantis, the final season; Vega$, the one with Robert Urich, the first season; The Professionals, a 1970s British series about the fictional adventures of CI5, a high-powered governmental agency that handles security issues inside the country; NCIS, the first season; and Have Gun, Will Travel, also the first season.

    ● Tomorrow marks the 3.5th anniversary of this blog, which I believe has finally found its niche. It’s taken a while, having had no goals in mind to begin with, but the current mix of old and new reviews seems to be working. I don’t think many people celebrate their 3.5th anniversaries, and I probably won’t do anything out of the ordinary, but since it just occurred to me that that’s what it will be, I thought I might mention it.

    Or, call this an attempt to catch up on a few items posted here on the blog or that have come up here and there in recent comments —

    ● Cover images for the jackets of all three mysteries written by Means Davis have been added to the review that Bill Deeck wrote of her Murder Without Weapon. Nominating this novel as an alternative mystery classic is a motion that Bill Pronzini is in full agreement with. (See the comments.)

    ● Al Hubin agrees that Love Insurance, by Earl Derr Biggers, should be downgraded in Crime Fiction IV to having only marginal criminous content. The book was the basis for the first Abbott and Costello movie, One Night in the Tropics, which David Vineyard reviewed here.

    ● And given the discussion that followed David’s review of A Summer in the Twenties, by Peter Dickinson, Al has also accepted the general consensus that it should be included in CFIV. Both this change and the revised status of the Biggers book will appear in the next installment to the online Addenda.

    ● My review of the film The Sword of Lancelot, starring, written and directed by Cornel Wilde, elicited a number of comments about other movies about the ill-fated trio of Arthur, Guinevere, and Lancelot, including Knights of the Round Table, perhaps the most spectacular of them all — the one starring Robert Taylor, Ava Gardner and Mel Ferrer. If you’ve never seen it, or haven’t seen it in a while, it will be shown early tomorrow evening on Turner Classic Movies, between 6 and 8 pm, EDT.

    ● David Vineyard’s review of JFK Is Missing!, by Liz Evans, led to the discovery (generally known but to neither of us) that she also wrote four novels as by Patricia Grey that take place in England during World War II. It is difficult to determine from the short synopses we’ve found on the author’s website, nor are the covers particularly attractive, but it’s possible that those who like Foyle’s War might also find something of interest in this short series of mysteries. (I’ve already ordered two of them for my own edification.)

   A character-driven detective novel is one in which the plot develops entirely from the people who inhabit it, protagonists and secondary characters both — their psychological makeup, strengths, weaknesses, vulnerabilities, etc. The plot is not created first and the characters inserted to fit the prearranged storyline.

   Whodunit, howdunit, detection are all less important than what happens to the people themselves; the impact on them of the crime(s) in which they’re involved; how they and/or the world they live in are altered by these crimes and by other external events, some within their control, some beyond it.

   In a character-driven series, the protagonists and those close to them have personal as well as professional lives. And they do not remain the same from book to book; they evolve, change, make mistakes, better their lives, screw up their lives, love, marry, grieve, suffer, rejoice, you name it, the same as everybody else.

   A plot-driven detective novel is just the opposite. Characters are subordinate to plot; the mystery, the gathering and interpretation of clues, the solving of the puzzle are of primary focus and importance. If the detectives have personal lives, they’re generally mentioned only in passing and treated as irrelevent.

   This is not to suggest that this type is inferior to the character-driven variety; far from it. I’m a great admirer of the Golden Age writers — Carr (particularly), Queen, Christie, Stout — but their books mostly fall into the plot-first category.

   The puzzle, the game is everything. Sir Henry Merrivale, Dr. Fell, EQ, Poirot, Nero Wolfe are all superb and memorable creations, but each remains essentially the same from first book to last. There is no evolution, no significant change. The crimes they solve have no real effect on them, or in other than a superficial fashion on the people good and bad whom they encounter.

   One reads their adventures mainly for the cleverness of the gimmicks and the brilliance of the deductions (and in the cases of Wolfe and Archie for the witty byplay, and of H-M for the broad and farcical humor). With the exception of Wolfe and Archie, we never really get to know any of them all that well; and even with that inimitable pair, there are no significant changes in their lives or their relationship with each other.

   The private eye fiction of Hammett and Chandler is likewise plot-driven (remember Chandler’s oft-quoted remark that when he was stuck for something to happen, he brought in a man with a gun?). The mystery is dominant. As memorable as Sam Spade and the Continental Op and Philip Marlowe are, they’re larger-than-life heroes who remain pretty much the same over the course of their careers.

   This is true even in The Long Goodbye, which many consider to be Chandler’s magnum opus (I don’t, but that’s another story); Marlowe’s complex relationship with Terry Lennox and its results, while a powerful motivating force, has no lasting or altering effect on Marlowe’s life.

   Ross Macdonald’s novels, on the other hand, are character-driven to the extent that the convoluted storylines devolve directly from the actions past and present of the large casts of characters; but Lew Archer is merely an “I” camera recording events. His life and career remain unaltered by the crimes he solves or any other influences. We hardly know him; he hardly seems real.

   Contemporary private eye fiction tends to be primarily character-driven, in the sense that I used the term above. The cases undertaken by Thomas B. Dewey’s Mac, for instance, evolve from the complexities and eccentricities of the individuals he encounters; crime and violence have a profound effect on him as well as on those individuals, in subtle as well as obvious ways.

   The same is true of Hitchens’ Long Beach private eye Jim Sader in Sleep with Slander, a book I’ve called “the best traditional male private eye novel written by a woman.” And of Lawrence Block’s Matt Scudder. And of Marcia’s Sharon McCone (see Wolf in the Shadows, her Shamus-nominated Vanishing Point). And of my “Nameless” series (Shackles, Mourners). All, for better or worse, character-driven and character-oriented. Which is why our readers continue to read us.

Editorial Comment:   This essay by Bill is a repost. It first appeared here on this blog on 07 Aug 2007. It has belatedly dawned on me that it fits right in with the ongoing discussion that’s developed here on this blog about author Jane Haddam’s comments on hers about a review of one of her books I wrote and posted on mine about a year ago.

   Whew! If this sounds complicated, it is, but if you go here and follow the links and read the comments, some 24 of them at the moment, all will be explained.

[UPDATE] About 15 minutes later.   Synchronicity strikes again. I took a few minutes out to see what the the other crime-fiction bloggers have been talking about today, only to discover Ed Gorman reporting on a movie version of Boobytrap in the works, a suspense-filled standalone novel by Mr. Pronzini.

   Congratulations, Bill! (And what took them so long?)

[UPDATE #2] 30 May 2010.   It was either late last night or my mind suffered a small brain glitch. I really did know better. Here’s Bill’s email to me, received earlier today:

    “Thanks for the posted congrats on the Boobytrap film deal. The irony is that it’s a Nameless novel and the first thing the Informant Media people did was to dump him and the rest of the series characters; their only interest was in the basic story, which they’ve also revamped from the novel version.

    “Okay with me; I still retain all film rights to Nameless, not that there’s any likelihood he’ll ever appear on a big or little screen. But I suspect that I’m not going to like the film version much. Action films loaded with special effects, explosions, blood and gore leave me cold. But maybe it’ll surprise me.”

   Copied from the TCM website, the following news:

      TCM Ready to Shine Brightly with Eighth Edition of SUMMER UNDER THE STARS —

   The dog days of summer are the best time of the year for movie fans as they turn on the air conditioning and park themselves on the couch for the latest edition of Turner Classic Movies’ (TCM) ultimate movie star showcase: SUMMER UNDER THE STARS. Now in its eighth year, the August festival dedicates each of its 31 days to one of Hollywood’s most enduring actors and actresses. Assembled from the network’s library of more than 5,000 films, this one-of-a-kind festival is an opportunity for viewers to enjoy a varied selection from each star’s body of work, uncut and commercial free.

   Fourteen of the month’s actors and actresses featured in this year’s SUMMER UNDER THE STARS are first-timers to the festival. The memorable performers include five Oscar® winners: Julie Christie (Aug. 2), Ethel Barrymore (Aug. 4), Margaret O’Brien (Aug. 8), Warren Beatty (Aug. 9) and John Mills (Aug. 22). Other stars getting their first showcases include Woody Strode (Aug. 5), Kathryn Grayson (Aug. 10), Gene Tierney (Aug. 14), Robert Stack (Aug. 17), Ann Sheridan (Aug. 18), Walter Pidgeon (Aug. 19), John Gilbert (Aug. 24), Lee Remick (Aug. 26) and Thelma Todd (Aug. 30).

   This year’s SUMMER UNDER THE STARS also features 52 films making their first appearances on TCM during the festival, including I Was Monty’s Double (1958), starring John Mills and M.E. Clifton-James, who really was General Montgomery’s double during World War II; Richard Lester’s decade-defining film Petulia (1968), with Julie Christie and George C. Scott; the film adaptation of Joe Orton’s frantic play Loot (1970) and the concert-piano drama The Competition (1980), both starring Lee Remick; Richard Rush’s incisive black comedy The Stunt Man (1980), with Peter O’Toole in a brilliant performance; an extensive collection of early comedies featuring Thelma Todd; and the Hope-and-Crosby-style comedy Ishtar (1987), with Warren Beatty and Dustin Hoffman.

          >>>

   Thanks and a tip of the hat for this advance notice to Ivan G. Shreve, Jr., whose Thrilling Days of Yesteryear is one of the blogs I take a look at every day, and if you love old movies and old TV shows, as well as Old Time Radio, then you should too.

   You can see the entire August schedule for yourself, but Ivan goes through each of the 31 days of the month and points out the highlights of each from his point of view. (Follow the link above.) Often his is the same as mine, but what he has to say depends on which of the movies he already has on tape or DVD, and which he doesn’t, and I have a feeling that his collection is bigger than mine. Either way, there’s a lot to be looking forward to!

Or at least I hope I am, because I thought I was where I think I am now a couple of times before.

I hope that sentence makes sense.

To explain, working on my own, I thought I’d cleared up the problems at least twice before, only to have the virus vermin come back again, and in full force.

But thanks to the long distance assistance of my son-in-law Mark — they live in IL while we’re here in CT — everything appears to be back to normal, and in fact my old clunker of a computer is working better than it has in quite a while.

What seems to have done the trick are two Anti-Virus programs you might think about trying: Malwarebytes (free) and Hitman 3.5 (free for 30 days). A Google search will turn each of them up very quickly. Both of them found and deleted 10 or 12 pesky infestors, even after Norton and SpySweeper had done their thing and scanned my entire computer system several times each.

As for the coincident problems with the latest Firefox download, I really don’t know what to make of that. The last time I downloaded it, early yesterday morning, I refused all of the proffered add-ons, mostly Java-based, but at Mark’s suggestion, I did choose an AdBlock add-on and a Noscript program.

So far, so good, and it’s been nearly a day now. It’s time to switch over to a new computer, but after this week’s woes, I think some good-fashioned R&R is what I need more, techwise, that is.

If I owe you an email or other response, my apologies. I’ll get back to you soon, and if I don’t, give me a nudge.

I can use my wife’s computer to post here, but without having access to my scanner and WordPerfect files upstairs, not to mention the Internet itself, there aren’t any easy workaround’s to be able to say this blog will be back in business anytime soon.

Every time I think I’ve found all of the bad stuff on my computer, I blink twice and it comes back. Last night I was able to receive and send email for the first time, but I can’t use Firefox as a browser, or so it seems. Whenever I try, it stalls and goes dead, and when I give Explorer a try, it sends me a continual stream of error messages and popup windows, even after I turn it off and stop using it.

I don’t know if it was coincidence or not, but it was right after I’d downloaded the latest version of Firefox (and/or the fixes and add-ons that came soon after) that the troubles began.

It’s time to let the professionals go to work, I think. I have a new computer that I can switch over to, but setting up the networking is beyond me. And if they can clean up the old one while they’re here, it can always be saved as a backup machine so we can have easy access to the Internet whenever we want downstairs.

So that’s the news from here. Not good, but not disastrously bad. Go out and enjoy the good weather, which I hope is as nice where you are as it is here today. I am!