Sat 23 Feb 2008
JOHN RHODE – Three Cousins Die
Geoffrey Bles, UK, hardcover, 1959. Dodd Mead & Co., US, hardcover, 1960. [The cover shown is of the latter.]
The first of the three seems to have killed himself; the second is the victim of a far too hasty knife attack; the last dies in a puzzling sort of automobile accident. Dr. Priestley asks a few pertinent questions of Superintendent Jimmy Waghorn, and although he’s never on the scene himself, he’s easily able to establish the common factor that connects all three events.
This is surely no-nonsense investigation at its finest. Rhode was indubitably an author at least a quarter century behind his time. Little or no effort is spent on the kinds of trivial matters that commonly pass for characterization or secondary motivation. Slow-moving; and, yes, I knew who did it as soon as Dr. Priestley did. [C minus ]
When I wrote this review, it looks as though I was channeling mystery critic Julian Symon and his opinion of the “humdrum” school of detective fiction. From Bloody Murder (1974) he describes what he means:
“Most of them came late to writing fiction, and few had much talent for it. They had some skill in constructing puzzles, nothing more, and ironically they fulfilled much better than S. S. Van Dine his dictum that the detective story properly belonged in the category of riddles or crossword puzzles. Most of the Humdrums were British, and among the best known of them were Major John Street …”
The Major Street he was referring to was also John Rhode, author of the Dr. Priestley books, as well as Miles Burton, who related to the world cases solved by Inspector Arnold and Desmond Merrion.
Three Cousins Die came toward the end of Street’s long writing career, which extended from 1925 to 1961. Only three more Rhode novels came later, and three more Burton’s.
For whatever reasons – supply? demand? – this particular book is also hard to find. There are seven copies on ABE at the moment, ranging in suggested price (and condition) from $30 to $65.
I couldn’t tell you whether my opinion today would match the one stated above or not. I seem to remember railing away at some private eye around the same time for having too much characterization; that is, too many details of his home life. What can I tell you? I was much younger then.
August 10th, 2008 at 12:27 am
One of Street’s worst books, coming very late after some 140 others, when his inspiration and invention were running low. A better book from this very late period is Licensed for Murder.
August 14th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Curt
Yes, I got the same impression — that it wasn’t one of his better books. I suspect that I was kinder toward it than I might have been if the book had been written by an unknown writer.
— Steve
August 14th, 2008 at 9:35 am
I think a lot of Julian Symons’ negative impression of Street in Bloody Murder came from his earlier reviewing of some of his very dull books from the fifties. I wonder how much of the earlier stuff he actually read? You probably to have to be a very committed humdrum fan to really like the late stuff. I actually liked some of them better the first time I read them, but, like you, I found they didn’t hold up at well.
“Three Cousins Die” was actually the first Rhode I read. It’s very tired, though “The Fatal Pool” is probably his worst (“well-nigh unreadable,” I think the Catalogue of Crime called that one). I try to be up front with readers about the dullness of a lot of his later books, in the hope they might find me more credible when I praise some of his earlier ones. Street actually is in my personal top ten of Golden age mystery writers, but he wrote way too many books for the good of his critical reputation.
Curt