Sat 18 Jul 2009
CAROLYN WELLS – The Wooden Indian. J. B. Lippincott, hardcover, US, 1935.
A recent replacement of a hot water heater in our basement necessitated the moving of several boxes of books in order in order to make room for the old one to be dragged out and the new one brought in. This brought to the light of day (figuratively speaking) several shelves of other books that I was glad to lay my eyes on again. It had been six or seven years, at least.
I am talking several hundred books in total — being moved and/or coming to light again — and of these, I picked one to read, not realizing at the time that Bill Pronzini had beaten me to it. One of his reviews from 1001 Midnights is of this same book and was posted here on this blog back in January of this year.
This is a Fleming Stone mystery, and while Bill called him “colorless and one-dimensional,” I’d say he’s a step or two above that in both categories, but on the other hand, he’s certainly no more than that.
Dead is a man whose demise is so certain, and at the hand of another, that Bob Barnaby, a friend of Stone’s staying in the same elite area in Connecticut (near the Pequot Club Grounds, a center of the book’s activities), senses it too, and calls him in on the case long before the murder actually happens.
It seems that David Corbin, a noted stamp collector as well as that of Indian memorabilia, is rather a bully to his wife, in public, at least, and his wife is also one of those beauties who suffers in silence while attracting other men to her like, well, moths to a flame.
The murder weapon is an arrow, fired from the bow of, well, guess what, a wooden Indian in full regalia in the dead man’s study. There is limited access to the room, but I do not believe that the mystery could really be called one of the locked room variety.
I’d expected the story to be stodgy and formal, but I was in error in that regard. The banter is generally witty, although of the upper crust type– no dark and dirty streets here — and the tale is heavy on dialogue, so much so that one must stop every once in a while and trace the paragraph back to rediscover who it is that’s talking.
This is also one of those books in which all of the suspects are gathered together in one room for a final confrontation, whether it’s necessary or not. Stone claims not to have known who the killer was until the very last moment, but an even less than astute reader should know from the questions he’s been asking who it is that he suspects long before then.
As a detective story, then, The Wooden Indian lands solidly in the “mediocre” category. Enjoyable enough, but distinctly below par. Bill concludes his comments about Carolyn Wells’ detective stories in general by saying, “… the casual reader looking for entertaining, well-written, believable mysteries would do well to look elsewhere.”
While I’m far from discouraged enough to say I’ll never read another one of her books, I’d have to say that I’m not especially encouraged to do so either — not immediately, at any rate.
July 19th, 2009 at 9:57 am
Carolyn Wells is so uneven. Her best book I’ve read so far is “Raspberry Jam” (1920), an unlikely title for a lively impossible crime mystery.
There are some good ideas too in “Anbody But Anne” (1913) and “The Man who Fell Through the Earth” (1919).
Wives in Wells seem oftne to be bullied by well-to-do husbands. This is a major theme in “Raspberry Jam”.
July 19th, 2009 at 10:00 am
I think stolid is the only word I can apply to Carolyn Wells and Fleming Stone. I rate the ones I read below mediocre trending toward actually being bad and dull.
Still Wells, like Lee Thayer (the Peter Clancy books) was popular, prolific, and lasted a long time. But I can’t say I’d read one of either writers works unless there was just nothing else around. Neither were exactly high points of the genre despite their popularity.
Still, it is interesting that someone that dull got consistently published for so long and had so many devoted readers adding fuel to the theory that many have put forward (H.R.F. Keating among them) that at least one branch of mystery fan wants the comfort of dullness and not brilliance and innovation.
July 19th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
I’m going to step back a little from my statement that “I’m not especially encouraged to [read another].”
If there’s an impossible crime involved in one her mysteries, I’m sure I’d move it up several notches in one of my various “to be read” piles. Mike has analyzed quite a few of them on his website.
See http://mikegrost.com/hanshews.htm#Wells
Wells seems to have written other early examples of standard plots in the genre, such as “dying messages,” so she’s important from a historical point of view, there’s no doubt about that.
But as Mike says in Comment #1, she’s awfully uneven, and as far as I’ve been able to determine, she doesn’t always follow through on the promising openings some of her books provide.
I’ve never quite put my finger on why her books were so popular, but so are McDonald’s hamburgers today. Maybe what David says is right. There’s a lot of comfort involved in knowing ahead of time what you’re going to be getting.
July 19th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
I’ve got one called Feathers Left Around that Jacques Barzun mentioned favorably in an article once. Rather surprising, given that the Catalogue of Crime comments about her work can be pretty scathing. I don’t believe her impact was too big in England, but in the US she definitely seems to have had a following.
July 19th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Oh, on her popularity, recall that J. S. Fletcher was extremely popular in the US in the 1920s as well. Often the mediocre IS popular. Look how the TV series Bewitched ran for, what, a decade? I could never figure that one out as a little kid. HRF Keating compares mediocre Golden Age mysteries to “anodyne, samey television,” something people engaged with to stay “barely awake” at night. He puts the “Humdrums” in that category too, which I think is unfair to the more technically sophisticated ones, like Rhode and Crofts (some of their books kept very good minds quite occupied); but it may be more fairly applied to a lot of Wells and Fletcher from the twenties and thirties (though I haven’t read any Wells yet).
July 19th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
I do think there is — or at least used to be — a goodly proportion of the mystery readership that didn’t want thrills, chills, cleverness, or even drama, but preferred a sort of steady humdrum pace that seldom wavered and seldom shined, but like a good cheap flashlight only illuminated what the reader wanted to see.
For me Fleming Stone went beyond dull. Thayer’s Peter Clancy is a little better — but not much. I would not rate them anywhere near as good as the best of Rhode, Crofts, or the Coles, but I do think I understand what their readers wanted and got from them; a sort of mental comfort zone along the lines of all’s right with the world, and Wells and Thayer are part of that.
I suspect the hard boiled version of this type of writer and book are some of the more generic private eye series, while for spy fans it might be Nick Carter, and for men’s action, some of the lesser Executioner imitators.
I think we sometimes miss that some readers don’t even want to be entertained in quite the way we mean — they don’t want to be challenged, tested, or even to play intellectual games, they just want to be pleasantly and familiarly bored.
It’s easy for us to be dismissive of Wells or Thayer. Neither is exactly a good or even capable writer, but both found a niche reader that kept them going for long periods. I can’t imagine even their fans distinguished one book from another, but then in talking to fans of Murder She Wrote, I’m often struck that some of them don’t seem to have favorite episodes, and yet they watch the reruns faithfully. It is the world of Jessica Fletcher as a whole and not the individual episodes in that world that attract them.
And that may be the appeal of Wells and Thayer, that same draw that compels endless rewatchings of television series that weren’t always that innovative or good the first time around, but which were in fact mental comfort food.
As Steve suggests, Big Mac’s for the mind.
But I have to say I think I’d rather have a taco or a Whopper.
July 19th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
And not even Whoppers are as good as they used to be.
July 19th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Carolyn Wells was a well known humorist, anthologist, poetry expert and writer of children’s books in her day. This name recognition probably helped her popularity.
Wells’ books are mainly pure mysteries. They are not intended to have thrills. No one should compare them with, say, ROGUE MALE or other thriller classics, to put it mildly!
I wonder what today’s mystery fans would think of RASPBERRY JAM. At the least, it’s got plenty of story,
July 19th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
I don’t know about Wells, but I would put Fletcher in the “mystery” category. Sometimes he does actual thrillers, with gangs and such, but more often he seems to have murder mystery plots with classic trappings but lacking the rigorous detection of true detective novels. There’s mystery, in other words, but not so much fairly clued detection.
July 20th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
I don’t think I was comparing Wells to thrillers. But even compared to other classical mysteries she’s pretty dull — a critical opinion shared by Howard Haycraft who said as little about her and Fleming Stone as he could considering their popularity.
Pure mystery doesn’t mean it is okay to be dull or colorless. I can think of any number of pure mysteries that aren’t as tiresome as I find Wells and Stone. Some manage to raise purely intellectual thrills to the level of adventure.
But, as I said, I think many of her readers wanted dull, and by that I mean not even a particularly challenging mystery, just a sort of by the numbers affair with a good enough story to keep them turning the pages and a satisfying but not surprising solution.
And though J.S. Fletcher can be hard going today, I can’t think of a single Wells that comes up to the level of Fletcher’s best.
And to be fair I don’t think I care enough to wade through the Wells books to find the gems.
Wells was certainly popular in her time, and I appreciate Mike showing why that may be, but my own exposure to Fleming Stone hasn’t encouraged me to read more. I really don’t think either Wells or Stone are worth more than a footnote in literary or historical terms, but for anyone who wants to know more it’s good there is some place to turn.
But if you ever wonder why detective stories had such a long uphill climb in terms of literary acceptance, the popularity of writers like Wells and Lee Thayer was one of the reasons. Every genre has it’s beloved writers who are less than geniuses, but few have anyone as consistently dull as Wells and Fleming Stone.
July 20th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
This conversation oddly enough is making me want to read a Wells. I have a few: Feathers Left Around, The Doomed Five, a few others, I think.
It’s no surprise to me that a mediocre writer would be very popular back then. This happens today, so why not eighty years ago? It happens with books, film, music, etc. Readers don’t always want brilliance! They sometimes want just a cozy, comfortable read that doesn’t tax them.
July 20th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
RASPBERRY JAM is available free on-line at Google. Just do a search with the Books tab picked.
It has also been reprinted recently in trade paperback. I haven’t seen this edition (I read it on-line).
I’m not trying to claim Wells moved from triumph to triumph. But at least a few of her novels are functioning mystery stories with pleasing plots, characters, story-telling, detectives, etc.
Wells is definitely more soothing in tone than thrilling.
Still, people who like puzzles and Golden Age style mysteries might find her best books a pleasant experience.
July 20th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
I think by now that anyone reading my original review and all of these comments — thanks everyone! — will know by now whether Carolyn Wells is an author for you or not.
If she sounds promising but you’re not sure enough that you want to spend the money, as Mike says, many of them are online, and they won’t cost you a penny.
And if you do give her a read, especially for the first time, why not report back and tell us what you think?
— Steve
July 21st, 2009 at 12:57 am
Sure, will do so. I’ve been meaning to read more American mysteries. It’s hard to read as much British stuff as I have and have time left over for the Americans!
This site has a lot of interesting detail on American work especially.
The other Wells I have is The Clue in the Crypt, I think.
You’d think with all the people in the world, there would be ONE person anyway who has read about all her books and could give the complete assessment of the lady. Absent that, Mike Grost may be our greatest living expert! Though as I recall Bill Pronzini wrote her up (down?) in Gun in Cheek.
July 21st, 2009 at 10:47 am
The critics were largely indifferent to Wells and Fleming Stone (if not downright hostile). In Murder for Pleasure Howard Haycraft barely mentions them, and then only in passing as if to say “some people like these.” There isn’t a lot written about them so Mike may be our best hope. At least in Wells case she was better known in other areas as Mike points out.
Still, for anyone wanting to read American detective stories of this period there are much better choices than Wells or Thayer, neither of which are worth reading for much more than curiosity and at best one or two books that are better than the rest (Thayer lasted into the 1960’s). Wells may well have been the first to use some genre staples, but overall she just wasn’t good enough to make an impact outside of her readership (or bad enough to be fun).
And just for a curiosity (and not a bad mystery) try Brit Eden Phillipotts The Red Remaynes which has an American sleuth in a British mystery. It’s a classic for more than one reason.
And let me be clear, like anyone else there are bad writers that appeal to me for some reason. Wells and Thayer just don’t fall into that category.
I agree with Mike though, read one of them free on-line and see for yourself. Luckily for me there were one or two in the library back when I tried them for myself. If you happen to like them there are numerous titles and more are likely to show up as free e-books, but there is a reason no one revived these or wrote much about them, and it isn’t obscurity.
The British mystery has more than its fair share of bad writers and mysteries, but luckily many of them didn’t manage to get across the Atlantic, and even the worst of them have fogs, marshes, Scotland Yard, and those quaint villages going for them. Murder in Yew House in Molehill on the Thames just sounds better than murder on Main Street in Pottsville.
July 21st, 2009 at 11:25 am
Some thoughts:
My web article tries to be as concrete as possible, in pointing out contents of Wells’ books.
It tells where there are impossible crime ideas (lots of them in Raspberry Jam).
It tells where there is interesting architecture (in Anybody But Anne & The Man Who Fell Through The Earth) and floor plans (in Anybody But Anne).
It tells were the Great Detectives are well characterized and seen detecting (Fleming Stone gets his best moments early in Anybody But Anne; Zizi in the last chapters of The Room with the Tassels; Fibsy in the finale of Raspberry Jam).
It tells about a crime with a logical choice of killer (in The Room with the Tassels).
It even tells which chapters in novels actually contain accomplishments like the above. You don’t have to read the whole books – you can go right to where Wells is actually doing something creative.
This is not a discussion in terms of vague generalities, such as whether Wells is “dull” or a “good writer”. IMHO, talking about a book at that level is not useful. Instead, it tries to talk about very concrete things in the novels.
July 21st, 2009 at 11:32 am
See Comment #3 for a link to Mike’s website, and to his page on Wells in particular.
— Steve
July 21st, 2009 at 1:50 pm
I’ve been meaning to read the three I actually own.
My statement about American writers shouldn’t be taken to mean that I have no familiarity with them. I’ve read Queen, Van Dine, Stout, Chandler, Hammett, Rinehart, Eberhart and McCloy for example. But I’m interested in as well more obscure names that were popular back then, like Rufus King, Milton Propper, Lee Thayer and, yes, Wells.
I find Mike Grost’s website extremely interesting.
Will get back to you after I’ve read some Wells!
July 21st, 2009 at 3:36 pm
By the sheerest of coincidences, coming up soon are a two reviews of books by Milton Propper, who is far more obscure, I’m sure, than Carolyn Wells.
There are also two by Rufus King I could post sometime, and one by Lee Thayer. I’d also like to do a few by Phoebe Atwood Taylor, who was extremely popular in her day — that day being the 1930s and 40s, but she was appearing in paperbacks through the mid-1970s, as I recall.
July 21st, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Steve,
These reviews sound fascinating.
Curt,
Thank you for all the kind words!
A thought:
Milton Propper is certainly very obscure today. But he has an advantage: a major mystery expert (Francis M. Nevins) once read and reviewed Propper’s complete works! As Curt (vegetableduck) pointed out above, no one seems to have ever done this for Carolyn Wells.
July 21st, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Taylor I believe was reprinted in the 1990s, along with Joyce Porter, by a Vermont-based small press, I believe. I have some by her too, but have never read. Another on the to-do list. Propper had his following in his day (not of Welles proportions, of course), but really seems to have faded out. Some considered him America’s most Croftsian writer.
July 21st, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Mike,
I always check out your site before reading a book by a GA American.
Wells seems like a victim of her own fecundity, rather like Edgar Wallace or Fletcher. Surely some of their many works were better than others, but they wrote so much it is hard to tell which those are. I managed to read all but three of the novels by John Street under his three pseudonyms, but I’ve read less than ten apiece of Fletcher and Wallace and nothing yet by Wells or Thayer. With such prolific authors as these, I would want to read over ten books by each to get more of a fairly-won feeling for them.
July 21st, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Somehow a couple of really deserving and semi forgotten writers managed to get their names in here. Phoebe Atwood Taylor wrote the Asey Mayo books (the Codfish Sherlock) and the wonderful Leonidas Witherall books (by Alice Tilton). I can’t recommend them enough.
Rufus King is a triple threat. I love his books about Lt. Valcour of the New York Police Department, his tales of Florida deputy Stuff Driscoll, and his suspense novels, one of which became Fritz Lang’s film Secret Behind the Door.
I haven’t read much Milton Propper, but he is far more unjustly forgotten than either Wells or Thayer, as is his sleuth Tommy Rankin.
Since I’m commenting on Thayer and Wells and not reviewing them I don’t think it is harmful to say I found them dull without going into detail. Mike is writing about them from a historical perspective and thus rightfully goes into more detail. But I was under the impression that these comments were meant as opinion and not further reviews, and of the three or four Wells I read and five Thayer’s all were tiresome, stolid, dull, and unsatisfying reads.
J.S. Fletcher at his worst could write rings around Wells and Thayer. A fact that Haycraft concurs with.
That said, I’m not in bad company. All Howard Haycraft said of Wells in Murder for Pleasure is “Carolyn Wells holds some sort of record for quantity of production, yet it cannot be pretended that her detective Fleming Stone sits in the Detective Valhalla.” And elsewhere:
“The best and most workmanlike Stone stories are, in general, the sleuth’s earlier investigations… the surprising fact, perhaps, is not that some of the stories scarcely rise to the mark, but that they have not perceptibly diminished in popularity, Carolyn Wells is in many ways a remarkable woman — gracious, well loved, gallant. She would presumably be the last to maintain that Fleming Stone belongs in the company of the immortals of detective literature. The fact that his adventures have given harmless pleasure to many thousands of readers she undoubtedly considers full and sufficient reward.”
The part I didn’t quote only discusses her schedule and output, not the quality of her work. That’s about as close as you can come to calling something second (or third) rate without actually telling readers not to bother with it, and no doubt was inspired only by his admiration of Wells the woman — not the mystery writer.
Haycraft does rightfully praise her The Technique of the Mystery Story, which I would suggest is more important to the genre than the entire Fleming Stone canon.
Of Thayer he only notes she is still writing about Peter Clancy, whether he is suggesting it surprises him or not I’m not sure.
July 22nd, 2009 at 12:37 am
My favorite is from the Catalogue of Crime, on Wells’ The Mystery of the Sycamore:
“The worst cock-and-bull story ever put together by a rational being. The things said and done in this pseudo-political tale would not only not get published today, but would get the author committed by her loving friends and relatives.”
It piques the interest, in an alternative classic sort of way.
I didn’t like King’s Murder by the Clock much, though I know it made a pretty big splash in its day. There was “atmosphere,” but the events just did not grip me.
July 22nd, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Started reading Feathers Left Around. It’s not bad so far, actually, if completely artificial. I’ll send a review to Steve when done (shouldn’t take long).
April 8th, 2010 at 1:45 am
Will Cuppy seems to have liked her!
May 7th, 2022 at 1:50 pm
[…] Obviously forgetting I’d read this back in 1991, I read and reviewed again on this blog here, comments that followed Bill Pronzini’s take on it here, a 1001 Midnights […]