Reading the Detectives discussion

Welcome to our Oct/Nov 22 buddy read of A Blunt Instrument first published in 1938 and the seventh of Georgette Heyer's Country House Mysteries and the fourth featuring Inspector Hannasyde.

When Ernest Fletcher is found bludgeoned to death in his study, everyone is shocked and mystified: Ernest was well-liked and respected, so who would have a motive for killing him?

Enter Superintendent Hannasyde who, with consummate skill, begins to uncover the complexities of Fletcher's life. It seems the real Fletcher was far from the gentleman he pretended to be. There is, in fact, no shortage of people who wanted him dead.

Then, a second murder is committed, with striking similarities to the first, giving a grotesque twist to a very unusual case.

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

This is not among Heyer's best mysteries and yet not near the worst, either. It's worth reading once, maybe, or maybe more but it's not a favorite.

I first read it decades ago and over time and re-reading I've come to believe it's just too long. We really get bogged down somewhere in the middle.

But I think the religious mania is well done: it begins as a surprise, becomes a focus for humor, then morphs into something very dark.

Over time I have come to find Helen more and more annoying, whereas I remember I used to find Neville annoying but over time I enjoy him more. A bit too much of the telegraphic speech, perhaps.

I have always enjoyed Sally as a character and wonder if Heyer ever had another character with a monocle. I think someone in Detection Unlimited did. I would have liked a lot more Sally.

The mystery is a good one and I never guessed the murderer (or the motive) before the final reveal.

It's interesting to see Sergeant Hemmingway change through the series: when he is the star, is is nearly flawless with his "flair" and I truly enjoy his goofing arund. He's more of a butt for humor, here, and I don't enjoy that so much. Hannasyde is OK has a lead chaacter but maybe a bit dull.

It seemed natural that Hemmingway called his superior "Super" and "Chief" , but less respectful that he called the Sergeant "Skipper". Hemmingway is much respected in the later books where he has proved his skill and I enjoy those more.

Jackie wrote: "I first read it decades ago and over time and re-reading I've come to believe it's just too long. We really get bogged down somewhere in the middle..."

I think you are right, I definitely got bogged down in the middle after enjoying the start. I think there was just too much of the religious mania and Biblical speech. I enjoyed Neville but that was about it.

Unusually for me, I guessed the killer early on (after thinking he was a comic character for the first few pages). I wondered why this character was involved at all and then realised the probable answer!

I also don't think there were enough other possible suspects, as it seemed obvious that the Norths were just trying to cover up for one another and Neville is a witty Heyer hero, so couldn't have done it!

I had never come across the use of Skipper to address a Sergeant elsewhere, but according to Wikipedia "Unlike the military and allowing for regional variations, addressing a police sergeant as "sarge" is commonplace. Additionally, in some forces (especially the Metropolitan Police) sergeants are referred to as "skippers" and again allowing for regional variations, context and expectations it is not necessarily wrong for a constable to address their sergeant as "skip" or "skipper".[citation needed]" So I don't think it's meant to be disrespectful of Hannasyde to call Hemingway Skipper.

Agree, this was probably one of my least favourite Heyers to date. Way too much gloomy biblical prophecies but also her usual wit and spark just didn't land for me.

I felt the murderer was obvious from the start and I always glaze over at 'timetable' murders.

As I've read this several times over the last fifty or so years, the identity of the killer didn't elude me for a moment, but it is always interesting to identify the clues as they are seeded in the book.

Unfortunately, that puts me one up on the detectives, and I felt that the theme of 'we can't take the timing from any of the witnesses as the truth, except of course for the constable's' ought to have struck them earlier as needing examination, especially as it became clearer that the timings had to be wrong.

Didn't Agatha Christie write a book (at least one) where the couple each confessing to the crime to shield their beloved turn out to have been in cahoots, believing that that would put the detectives off the scent?

Rosina wrote: "Didn't Agatha Christie write a book (at least one) where the couple each confessing to the crime to shield their beloved turn out to have been in cahoots, believing that that would put the detectives off the scent?..."

Very probably! Not sure if I've read a book with that twist or not, but must admit I'm terrible at remembering plot twists. If anyone remembers which one it is, please don't post the title (or alternatively you can use spoiler tags).

that's good info, Rosina, thanks for posting that.

I do see that Hannasyde and Hemmingway make a good team, but Hemmingway really is a more fun character when he is in charge of the investigation as in Envious Casca

In a way, it is strange that Heyer uses two such strong characters as Hannasyde and Hemmingway in the same mysteries. An author now would definitely have two separate series.

As time passes it's only natural that the senior detective passes the baton to the younger, and I don't think that Heyer was thinking in terms of 'series' as a separate marketing tool.

On TV (where series are important) we have in the UK two different approaches in Morse (which, when Morse the character dies, takes its name from his sergeant Lewis, now promoted, as a new 'series'), and Taggart, the series about Glasgow detectives, which retains the name of the first lead detective despite having several replacements.

I agree, this wasn't a very strong mystery, and I also suspected Glass by about 2/3's of the way in once the times didn't add up, and his religiousness started to seem unbalanced, particularly the way he would talk back to his superiors, suggesting a sort of "God's law is above Man's law" thinking. I also found the Helen/John couple both annoying and stereotypically weak foolish wife and strong silent husband.

I am always surprised by the wealth factor in these GA mysteries-John and Helen seem to be a middle class couple and yet there's a butler and cook and a hot breakfast served every day that can feed drop-in guests-does one just assume that someone has family money that supports all this?

I do plan to finish the series, and look forward to doing so over the next few months.

Frances wrote: "I agree, this wasn't a very strong mystery, and I also suspected Glass by about 2/3's of the way in once the times didn't add up, and his religiousness started to seem unbalanced, particularly the ..."

I got the impression that the Norths (a very annoying couple!) were quite wealthy. At one point John asks Helen if she would have married him without his money.

Jackie wrote: "This is not among Heyer's best mysteries and yet not near the worst, either. It's worth reading once, maybe, or maybe more but it's not a favorite.

I first read it decades ago and over time and r..."

Sorry so late to the spoiler discussion, I checked the box to get emails on this thread, but I don’t think I have gotten any.

I agree with everything you say, even the characters and “page time” each is given. I’ve read this several times over the years, definitely not Heyer’s worst, but not best, either. I also feel it’s just too long, gets hung up in the middle, and I really get tired of the melodramatic Helen and her transparent lies - a shame she doesn’t have a bit of sister Sally’s gumption! I also find Neville amusing, and wish an audiobook was available here in the U.S. - makes the slow bits go by faster, and I prefer audiobooks for rereads, especially when I remember whodunnit. Finally, I found Heyer’s descriptions at the beginning of Neville’s voice confusing, I think she makes him soft-spoken, but emphasizes it to the point where it makes him sound rather drippy and die-away. I’d like to hear what an actor makes of the description to portray him.

Judy wrote: "Jackie wrote: "I first read it decades ago and over time and re-reading I've come to believe it's just too long. We really get bogged down somewhere in the middle..."

I think you are right, I defi..."

Good points, especially about the killer being included beyond what is usual in Heyer mysteries. He was revealing a lot about himself through his quotes and comments, but people didn’t listen to him after awhile, he was so annoying.

Roman Clodia wrote: "Agree, this was probably one of my least favourite Heyers to date. Way too much gloomy biblical prophecies but also her usual wit and spark just didn't land for me.

I felt the murderer was obviou..."

Me, too, withe time table murders - I forget the name of the Peter Wimsey mystery where Sayers set herself the task of writing one of those, I only ever read it once, but ugh ; /!

Jackie wrote: "that's good info, Rosina, thanks for posting that.

I do see that Hannasyde and Hemmingway make a good team, but Hemmingway really is a more fun character when he is in charge of the investigation..."

I agree, I always felt like Hannasyde’s stolid presence was meant to be the straight man to Hemingway’s more lively, snarky insights about “flair” and everyone’s psychology!

I finished this today, and agree that this was quite a disappointment. I felt this went on for way too long.

Susan in NC wrote: "Me, too, withe time table murders - I forget the name of the Peter Wimsey mystery where Sayers set herself the task of writing one of those, ..."

I believe that one was The Five Red Herrings.