Reading the Detectives discussion

Welcome to our March 23 challenge read and, this month, our classic crime scene is perhaps the most famous Golden Age scene for a murder, the country house party.

Published in 1933, this is written by Henrietta Clandon, a pseudonym of John George Hazlette Vahey (1881-1938), an Anglo-Irish writer who also wrote as Henrietta Clandon, Vernon Loder, John Haslette, Anthony Lang, John Mowbray, Walter Proudfoot and George Varney.

The setting of Inquest is that most fabled of locales in Golden Age mystery fiction: a house party at an English country mansion. Hebble Chace is the residence of Marie Hoe-Luss, widow of a wealthy English businessman. The latter is said to have expired during a house party in France, from the accidental consumption of deadly mushrooms, though some believe a more sinister explanation.

Now Marie has reassembled all the original guests from that house party, with the addition of Dr. Soame, narrator of the tale. When one of their number falls to his death from a high window, is it misadventure—or foul play? And come to that, was William Hoe-Luss even murdered anyway?

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

This was a weak 3 stars for me. The plot for murder was was a bit different to usual crime books set in at this time, but there was a huge list of characters. The names of the characters were hard work , knowing who was who was difficult, but when shorten names, or first names were used on occasions, it was even more difficult. I found none of the characters likeable. Even the doctor who was doing the sleuthing. I don't know if it was just that I had little interest left at the end, but I found the end, explaining all the ins and outs of the motive, was being lost to me.

I gave up on this one about a quarter in, trying to do that more often, there are just too many books I want to read. I agree with everything Jill said, all good reasons I gave myself permission to chuck it and move on. ;)

I liked the start of this one and thought the concept of a duplicate house party to investigate the death at an earlier party in France was intriguing. Death by mushrooms is itself such a GA method!

But the switch into the ins and outs of business didn't work, and this got more complicated than it needed to.

So a bit two halves for me.

I basically agree with the earlier comments. The set up was fine though I was never sure what the wife hoped to accomplish. The characters were confusing and not really well-defined. The business merger intrigue went on too long and in too much detail for me. I was disappointed that the annoying Aunt got shuffled off stage so early as she had promise. I had great pleasure in imagining the marriage of the unpleasant nephew and his annoying girlfriend. They deserved each other. It held my interest enough so that I wanted to see who did it.

The trial results were interesting and reflected what we learned about juries in our earlier read, Verdict of Twelve

I did get to the end, but I did find the storyline rather bogged down and also I didn't quite understand why Marie invited everyone at the original party and then seemed so outraged if anyone was suggested as the murderer. She must, presumably, have thought something was amiss to reassemble the cast?

I have finished this now and agree with everyone's comments that it started off really well but then got a bit bogged down and the plot seemed to go astray - we didn't really get an inquest at the house party and the business dealings were tedious. I would also have liked to see more of the bullying aunt and annoying nephew and his girlfriend.

I do agree with you, Sandy, that the trial results were a good twist at the end, and I was also reminded of Verdict of Twelve.

I did finish this one but it was not a page turner for me. I agree with those who couldn't quite figure out why Marie got all these people back together. I was not invested in the characters.