Tue 28 Jun 2016
Archived Review: HENRY KITCHELL WEBSTER – Who Is the Next?
Posted by Steve under Reviews[9] Comments
HENRY KITCHELL WEBSTER – Who Is the Next? Perennial Library, paperback reprint, 1981. First edition: Bobbs-Merrill, hardcover, 1931. Also: Garland, hardcover, 1976.
For a book first published fifty years ago, Who Is the Next? is amazingly fresh and up-to-date. The subdued, unacknowledged love interest between a guardian and his much younger ward would not be played quite the same today, but Webster’s version of this scenario has an attraction that is both pleasing and frustrating, as it was meant to be then, and as it still is today.
Nor would Camilla Lindstrom’s airplane be of the same model and vintage, but in the process of becoming a woman, there’s no better symbol of her budding independence, even today. Her childhood is in the process of disappearing, and as it does, her guardian, Prentiss Murray, realizes that he is falling in love with her.
Well, of course it’s more than a love story. (Need you ask?) Camilla’s aged grandfather is murdered, and almost immediately afterward so is Miss Parsons, his newly acquired secretary and companion. Also soon on the scene is Camilla’s prodigal brother, and of course there are numerous mysterious strangers seen lurking around the estate.
There is a good reliance on fate (on the part of the murderer), and some good detective work (on the part of the police). My only real complaint is that too much of the latter is done behind the scenes, and it comes out only in retrospect, at the end.
But for mystery, vintage atmosphere, and romance, with one of the spunkiest heroines you’d ever want to meet, this book would be hard to beat. I read the last one hundred pages in twenty minutes. That’s three times my usual reading speed.
Rating: A.
[UPDATE] 06-28-16. This old review was first posted on this blog in December 2014. I finished reading the book a second time last night, and while I think everything I said about it the first time is true, I found that I didn’t enjoy it quite as much this time aroud.
First of all, it really is more of an old-fashioned romance than it is a mystery, and the young girl in the story is one of the spunkiest heroines you’d ever want to meet. I think, in fact, perhaps she may have been the first heroine in a mystery novel to fly her own airplane, which turns out to be an integral part of the plot.
Keep in mind that has been 35 years since I’d read the book the first time, and that I’d totally forgotten it. I had in fact forgotten that I’d posted this review on this blog, and that was less than two years ago. What bothered me this time is that (a) the mystery plot promises so much and delivers so little, and (b) it still take 30 pages to explain all of the coincidences that dovetail together so nicely to make a rather unsatisfying whole.
Tastes change over the years, and while I still read this one with enjoyment, I didn’t have the same feeling of happy contentment I seem to have had when I finished it the first time.
December 20th, 2014 at 3:23 pm
This is surprising. I rated this one an “A” but other than the review, I don’t remember it at all. Until I read it again, I’ll have to rely on what I said then, some 33 years ago.
But it was reprinted by Garland as part of the series of Classic Mystery novels, that gives me cause to believe that my recommendation is a good one.
On the other hand, Mike Grost, who often comments here, did not like this one particularly well:
http://mikegrost.com/hibk.htm#Webster
For more information on the author himself, here’s a link to his Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Kitchell_Webster
December 20th, 2014 at 5:13 pm
Considering that I often finish a book without remembering much about what I have just read, I am not surprised that you can’t remember what you read more than 30 years ago.
December 20th, 2014 at 8:59 pm
Steve
The review is right on, it is a classic and a delight to read still. It’s also a Catalog of Crime choice Barzun and Taylor were enthusiastic about. Really good mystery enthusiastically written and read.
December 21st, 2014 at 7:05 am
Thank you for the link!
I don’t remember anything about the book either. My review (linked to) was written decades ago. I really disliked the book at the time.
But considering all the enthusiasm people have for this work, perhaps I should revisit, or read other Webster.
June 28th, 2016 at 5:45 pm
I’m not going to suggest you go back and read it again and keep reading it until you achieve some sort of contentment.
June 28th, 2016 at 8:37 pm
After reading my first written opinion of the book, I’d have to say that there was no way but down from there.
June 29th, 2016 at 4:42 pm
And unfortunately, despite my 2014 comment, I have not yet gone on to read any more Webster. Maybe this review will be a wake-up call!
Thanks for a lively review.
June 29th, 2016 at 5:42 pm
Mike
My thoughts on this book this week are verging closer to your original and quite negative ones, Mike. Only verging, though. If I gave it an A the first time, I’d still give it a B minus, say, if I had to give it a letter grade, which I don’t do anymore.
June 29th, 2016 at 6:20 pm
I still hold this a success, largely based on the heroine and a certain liveliness. He did label this one a ‘romance’ originally, and perhaps that is part of the problem, plus it starts slow.
Of his others I would suggest THE WHISPERING MAN, THE MAN WITH THE SCARRED HAND, THE CLOCK STRIKES TWO, or THE QUARTZ EYE all of which I enjoyed for one reason or the other.
THE SEALED TRUNK was first a serial and may have read better in that form.