Mon 25 Jan 2010
Reviewed by William F. Deeck: MEDORA FIELD – Blood on Her Shoe.
Posted by Steve under Authors , Bibliographies, Lists & Checklists , Crime Fiction IV , Reviews[12] Comments
William F. Deeck
MEDORA FIELD – Blood on Her Shoe. The Macmillan Co., hardcover, 1942. Paperback reprint: Popular Library #201, no date stated [1949].
Despite the fact that her cousin, assumedly a levelheaded chap, calls to tell her not to come to St. Simon’s Island, Georgia, though with no explanation, Ann Carroll goes anyhow.
Despite the fact she would rather not be there, she attends a ghost-seeking session at a graveyard, where murder occurs.
Despite the murderer being still at large and she possessing, or so it is presumed, information that might identify the murderer, she visits a lonely farm house alone at dead of night.
Despite nearly dying from that dunderheadedness, she goes later to the graveyard by herself to gather evidence.
At the end of the novel, the young man she is in love with has been arrested for being AWOL and has assaulted the M.P.’s. This novel isn’t a matter of had-I-but-known. She does know, and she deserves all she gets, including her future husband.
Bibliographic Data: [Taken from the Revised Crime Fiction IV, by Allen J. Hubin.]
FIELD, MEDORA. Working byline of Medora Field Perkerson, 1892-1960. Born in Georgia; newspaper columnist in Atlanta as “Marie Rose.”
Who Killed Aunt Maggie? Macmillan, hc, 1939. Film: Republic, 1940.
Blood on Her Shoe. Macmillan, hc, 1942. Film: Republic, 1944, as The Girl Who Dared (with Lorna Gray, Peter Cookson).
January 25th, 2010 at 9:48 pm
I’ve had the book in paperback for many years, and the cover has always made it tempting to read, but I never had. And after Bill’s review, I probably never will … but I have to admit, it’s still tempting.
Even more tempting are the two B-mystery movies made from Medora Field’s two novels. Comments have been left on IMBD for each, so they do exist.
I also wonder how many mystery writers had a greater percentage of their books made into films. Medora Field is two for two. Who’s better than that?
— Steve
January 25th, 2010 at 11:59 pm
Steve, I’ve been writing a bit currently about HIBK in my introduction and mention Medora Field. She seems actually quite an interesting person, being of course closely connected to Margaret Mitchell of Gone with the Wind fame. I have a copy of her first book, with a letter she wrote and from her comments apparently the two books sold extremely well for the genre. The films were Grade Z Republic films as I recall, but still, that couldn’t have hurt.
I’ve always meant to read one of her books after reading Barzun’s comment that “Blood on Her Shoe” was “not fit for rational consumption”–surely one of the most damning comments in the COC! If I read Who Killed Aunt MAggie? will review here!
By the way, may I quote from Mr. Deeck’s review?
January 26th, 2010 at 12:21 am
I have to confess, Curt, that I knew nothing about Medora Field’s connection with Margaret Mitchell until you left your comment, prompting me to go investigating.
Herewith the results of that investigation:
“Medora Field Perkerson was an author, journalist, and editor. She was Assistant Editor and columnist at the Atlanta Journal and Constitution Magazine. In 1922 she married Angus Perkerson, a journalist and editor of the Atlanta Journal Magazine.”
“Interestingly, Perkerson is one of the driving forces behind the publication of Gone with the Wind, being that she was Margaret Mitchell’s editor while Margaret worked at the Atlanta Journal…”
Some photos of Medora Field as Medora Field Perkerson
http://collections.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm4/results.php?CISOROOT=/ABR
Interesting that Barzun & Taylor had almost exactly the same reaction to BLOOD ON HER SHOE as did Bill Deeck.
And by all means, please feel to quote Bill. I’m sure he’d be pleased to say so himself, if he could.
— Steve
January 26th, 2010 at 11:15 am
Who Killed Aunt Maggie? is a southern-fried imitation of Rinehart’s THE CIRCULAR STAIRCASE. It is not very good.
Had no idea so many other critics had negative reactions to Field, too.
Have not read her other book.
January 26th, 2010 at 4:09 pm
“the cover has always made it tempting to read”
I read BLOOD ON HER SHOE a couple of years ago. The artwork is the best thing about the book…but the graveyard scene depicted on the cover doesn’t occur in the novel!
January 26th, 2010 at 4:16 pm
Mike
All of the negative comments make me wonder how she managed to get two books published, but on the other hand, without meaning any malice, I think it’s clear whey there were only two…
Harry
Re: the scene on the cover. I don’t know why, but I always had a feeling that it wasn’t in the book — artistic license and all — but it’s nice to have it confirmed. Thanks!
— Steve
January 26th, 2010 at 10:19 pm
According to this letter written by Medora Field in the 1950s, Blood on Her Shoe went through five printings in hardcover and then 175,000 copies were printed in the Popular Library edition, so it sounds like her publisher would have taken another title had she written it!
What it says about the taste of mystery readers may be another question, however…. 😉
January 26th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
Curt
That’s a lot of copies sold. Looks like I was wrong this time. I’m curious enough now to find my copy of the paperback edition, and read it for myself.
Well, make that “almost curious enough.”
We’ll have to see whether I follow through or not.
— Steve
January 26th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Had I But Known (HIBK) books were apparently very popular in this era. My favorite, after Rinehart herself, is Dorothy Cameron Disney. She was a good plotter, and Anthony Boucher was a big fan of her work. The best is maybe “Strawstacks” (aka “The Strawstack Murders”).
Medora Field was a competent professional writer, who knew how to craft a mystery. Her work is probably not as bad as that hilarious quote from Barzun suggests. But Field seems awfully dreary, too.
January 27th, 2010 at 1:22 am
Mike, I know, I find it so interesting when people like P. D. James reduce the whole period in the US to hardboiled writers–it’s just so wrong! Writers like Rinehart and Eberhart and other HIBK gals clearly were extremely popular. I’m guessing Chandler had people like Eberhart in mind when he condemned writing for the “slicks”–she made a great deal of money doing it!
The slicks could be artistically limiting–I think Eberhart for example would have been a greater figure in the genre if she had not become so formulaic, she obviously had talent–but clearly a lot of readers (more women, one assumes) wanted these sorts of works over many decades. It’s really absurd for a genre survey just to ignore them completely.
December 3rd, 2010 at 2:43 pm
Medora Field was a first cousin of my father-in-law so we have copies of all her books. As far as her relationship to Margaret Mitchell, it was more than being her editor. She served as Mitchell’s Matron 0f Honor for her wedding so they were likely best friends.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:06 pm
Danny
It’s always interesting to find out more about authors on a personal and social level — without the need of getting too personal, of course. The close connection between Medora Field and Margaret Mitchell is an excellent example. Thanks for stopping by. It’s nice to know more!
— Steve