Mon 16 Jul 2012
Reviewed by Allen J. Hubin: ROBERT GOLDSBOROUGH – The Bloodied Ivy.
Posted by Steve under Bibliographies, Lists & Checklists , Reviews[12] Comments
Allen J. Hubin
ROBERT GOLDSBOROUGH – The Bloodied Ivy. Bantam, hardcover, 1988; paperback, 1989.
The third of Robert Goldsborough’s re-creations of Nero Wolfe, The Bloodied Ivy, is, alas, the weakest of the trio. A professorial type from upstate New York’s Prescott University comes to see Archie Goodwin, of all people. He believes the recent death of Prescott’s leading luminary, the acerbic arch-conservative Hale Markham, was no accident but murder most foul.
He produces no evidence and names no suspect, but Archie agrees to investigate on his own time in hopes of awakening Wolfe’s interest. A journey to Prescott demonstrates to Archie that Markham was not beloved, and that just possibly he might have been helped to fall into the campus ravine called Caldwell’s Gash.
That’s not enough to attract Wolfian attention, but doubtless Archie will find a way. The action here divides between New York and Prescott, and, while academia takes some well-aimed jibes, the narrative does not have enough zest and substance to stay aloft.
Vol. 11, No. 1, Winter 1989.
Robert Goldsbrough’s Nero Wolfe series —
1986 Murder in E Minor
1987 Death on Deadline
1988 The Bloodied Ivy
1989 The Last Coincidence
1990 Fade to Black
1992 Silver Spire
1994 The Missing Chapter
July 16th, 2012 at 5:05 pm
Regarding other authors picking up a series after the original author has passed away, I don’t have any hard and fast rules about it. I can certainly understand the profit motive, perhaps mostly on the part of the publisher (?), and I know sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn’t.
Nor do I know how Nero Wolfe fans feel about the Goldsborough books, but here’s how it worked out for me. I bought each of them when they first came out in paperback — eagerly, even — but I’ve never read one of them.
I can’t say exactly why. After a while, they just didn’t interest me. As much as I enjoyed the Robert B. Parker’s Spenser novels, I doubt I’ll even obtain the ones done by whoever his estate has agreed to let write them.
July 16th, 2012 at 10:37 pm
I bought this series of paperbacks by Goldsborough also. But like you, I never got around to reading them. They must of been successful since there were 7 of them however.
Ace Atkins took over the Spenser series. Despite the fact that I like Atkins detective fiction, I doubt if I’ll ever read the books starring Spenser since I burnt out on the character long ago.
July 17th, 2012 at 5:29 am
Although I speak some French, the naked word
‘pastiche’ makes my back crawl.
The Doc
July 17th, 2012 at 11:30 am
While I am sure what a “parody” is, I have never quite understood what a “pastiche” is, and I have never used it in a review, for example, for fear that I am using it incorrectly.
Reading definitions in dictionaries has not helped, even those that give examples of usage in sentences.
Given books like those by Goldsborough have the permission if not the encouragement of the original author’s estates, in my mind I would put them in a different category than the multitude of Conan stories that have been written since the death of Robert E. Howard, for example.
This is only a personal distinction, mind you, and even so, it may be so subtle that even I cannot explain it.
I like the term “re-creation” that Al Hubin used in his review. It’s not perfect, but it suits me more than calling the Goldsborough books pastiches, although I’m sure they are.
July 17th, 2012 at 12:02 pm
A friend who looked at my Rex Stout books saw the Goldsborough pastiches shelves next to them and curled his lip as though to say that Stout would not have approved.
July 17th, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Let me curl with your friend,Randy .
The Doc
July 17th, 2012 at 5:03 pm
I know I wonder about a lot of things, many of which have no answer, but nonetheless, one of the things I wonder about is what Rex Stout may have thought about his characters playing parts for which he did not supply either the words or the music.
I think he’d call it a charade, but it is only a guess. It is certainly possible I’m wrong.
July 18th, 2012 at 10:16 am
I did read the Goldsborough books and thought they were an honest effort with the best of intentions–supposedly he wrote the first for his mother with no thought of publication–that weren’t really successful in approximating Stout. It’s likely Stout would not approve–he was quoted as saying that writers should “roll their own” rather than do somebody else’s characters. I have no problem with the term pastiche as Fred Dannay defined it. A parody is an imitation played for laughs; a pastiche is a serious attempt to adopt another author’s style and/or characters.
July 18th, 2012 at 12:29 pm
Jon
I think you are the first person to comment who’s actually read the books, other than Al, of course, who wrote the original review.
When you describe them as “an honest effort with the best of intentions,” that sums up how I’ve always thought about them. It’s also good to know you think the same way as I do about how Rex Stout might have felt.
I have no problem understanding (and agreeing) with Dannay’s definition of the word pastiche, the key phrase being “a serious attempt to adopt another author’s style and/or characters.”
It’s when I look up the consensus definition (from Wikipedia, say), that I get confused:
“Imitation: In this usage, the term denotes a literary technique employing a generally light-hearted tongue-in-cheek imitation of another’s style; although jocular, it is usually respectful.”
— Steve
July 18th, 2012 at 6:10 pm
The various attempts to continue the James Bond franchise have shown many of the drawbacks in continuing a dead author’s brainchild. The Kingsley Amis and Christopher Wood books are decent attempts at pastiche, but the John Gardner novels don’t really work. Gardner was a good thriller author, but he despised Fleming’s Bond, and as a result the character of 007 is completely wrong. The new Jeffrey Deaver book completely revamps the character, giving him a new history. Forgive me, but isn’t that a different character?
July 18th, 2012 at 8:02 pm
I’ve always meant to read one of the various followup Bond books, but just like the ersatz Wolfe ones, I never have. I bought the one by Deaver when it came out in paperback, thinking I really ought to give it a try, but so far, no.
And even if I did, I’d hardly be in a position to compare it with Ian Fleming’s version of the character. I gulped them all down when they first came out, and haven’t gone back to them since.
July 19th, 2012 at 4:33 pm
Like Steve I gulped down all of the original Bonds, but a couple of years ago I went back and gulped again and really liked them. I also tried a couple of the follow-ups and didn’t care for them.
I think Jon Breen’s definition of pastiche is the one I’ve always used. I have trouble accepting almost anything on Wikipedia as significant.