Fri 3 Jun 2016
A Mystery Review by Barry Gardner: ELISABETH BOWERS – No Forwarding Address.
Posted by Steve under Reviews[7] Comments
ELISABETH BOWERS – No Forwarding Address. Meg Lacey #2. Seal Press, hardcover, 1991; trade paperback,, 1994.
I didn’t have really high expectations for this, as it was only a second novel, published by a specialty press devoted to women writers and feminist issues. I was pleasantly surprised, and if you think you detect condescension, you misapprehend; its just that I’ve found that -isms (whatever the brand) and fiction often mix poorly, and I always approach`books with that potential cautiously.
Meg Lacey is a middle-aged, divorced private detective in Vancouver, British Columbia. She is hired to find a client’s sister, who is believed to be mentally disturbed and has left home with her small son. The simple (?) job leads to two murders, and more trouble then she could imagine.
I found Meg to be a very appealing character, strongly but not shrilly feminist, capable, and not inured to the horrors that human beings visit upon each other. The book isn’t without its faults; the relationship with the police (the Achilles heel of so many PI novels) was quite unrealistic, and some elements of the plot seemed unlikely at best.
The writing, however, was very good, and I enjoyed the book. Recommended.
Bibliographic Note: The first book in this two book series was Ladies’ Night (Seal, 1988). There was not a third.
June 3rd, 2016 at 9:04 pm
Kevin Burton Smith wrote a long, enthusiastic essay on PI Meg Lacey on his Thrilling Detective website devoted to, guess, what, private eyes:
https://www.thrillingdetective.com/lacey_meg.html
Of Bowers’ first book, he adds: “Meg’s first recorded adventure, 1988’s Ladies’ Night, published by The Seal Press, received quite a bit of attention, and several favorable reviews, including a notable one from Sara Paretsky. It also seems to have inspired CBC-TV’s Mom P.I., which also featured a divorced Vancouver mom, two kids and a sympathetic older eye.”
June 3rd, 2016 at 11:32 pm
I agree about isms and genre fiction in general, but once in a while someone gets the mix right.
June 4th, 2016 at 10:53 am
This has been debated before, but can only two books constitute a series? Shouldn’t there be at least three?
June 4th, 2016 at 11:04 am
Randy
Now that’s a good question.
From an online dictionary:
SERIES: a number of things or events of the same class coming one after another in spatial or temporal succession
As a former math professor, I’m going to say that “two” is a number.
Also, Al Hubin in CRIME FICTION IV includes as a series character as any one such who makes more than one appearance.
Case closed?
June 4th, 2016 at 12:12 pm
No, but I don’t think I’ll ever convince you. Series book collectors have been arguing this one for ages.
Online dictionaries are not always correct.
June 4th, 2016 at 10:47 pm
About online information being inaccurate, I was looking for information about Frederick Hazlitt Brennan. He was the major script writer in The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp. Wikipedia said he was the director and that Earp was only a deputy marshall.
I know, picky, picky…
June 5th, 2016 at 3:56 pm
Randy,
Re Wyatt Earp I believe he and his brothers were deputies to older brother Virgil. Later after the OK Corral in Tombstone when he was rounding up the Clanton’s I believe Wyatt finagled a Marshall’s badge of his own.
Bat Masterson was Deputy to his brother Ed, the Sheriff and not Wyatt Earp’s deputy as sometimes portrayed though he too was later a Marshall, briefly, on his own, though Town Marshall and U.S. Marshall are two different things. But I’m pretty sure Wyatt was only a deputy of Virgil’s until after Tombstone despite the movies and the television series. Since Wyatt was operating as a pimp and faro dealer until well after Tombstone it might have been awkward for him to be Marshall (though Hickock managed it). Virgil, though also married to a whore, was the respectable older one.
As for series, in math I agree to the number three at a minimum, but I think intent counts for something in fiction. Rex Stout’s Dol Bonner is clearly intended as a series character though she only appears in one book on her own (and of course in the Wolfe and Fox series). I was trying to think of other examples of only two outings being considered a series, however truncated, and the Fickling’s Erik March comes to mind though there is a third outing with Honey West.
Perhaps we should coin a new term, Series Interuptus.