I tried reading Agatha Christie but disliked what I call the "crossword puzzle" aspect of the plots. Two detective series that I do recommend are Sherlock Holmes, of course, and Montalbano. After breakfast, I will stroll into town in search of more Montalbano titles. Meanwhile, I continue to reread Anderson's "The Plague of Masters."
6 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I agree, it was fortunate that writing science fiction and fantasies paid off better for Anderson than mysteries. Because I believe he wrote better in SF and F than in whodunits. But he did sometimes use elements of mysteries in the first two genres. Successfully, IMO.
Did you ever read any of the mysteries of Dorothy L. Sayers and John Dickson Carr? I did, and enjoyed them.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I read one Lord Peter Wimsey novel. No Carr.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Dang! I liked Sayers' novels well enough that I replaced paperback copies with hardbacks decades ago.
I have fond memories of Carr's mysteries because of how FUNNY some of them were!
I also like the Judge Dee mysteries of Robert van Gulik, set in early T'ang Dynasty China.
Ad astra! Sean
The 3 mysteries Poul did are fine work -- and they have a very unconventional protagonist for work done in the 1950's, too. The depth of imagination is also unusual -- the mysteries are linked to much larger questions and forces.
Sean: also a Judge Dee fan here!
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Then I will have to rethink my opinion of Anderson's three mystery novels. Yes, Trygvi Yamamura, his Japanese-Norwegian detective, was unusual. I'll have to watch out for those larger forces and questions you cited.
I'm glad you too like the Judge Dee mysteries. The glimpses we get of the criminal law and police procedures of Imperial China were esp. interesting. So much so that when I found and obtained a copy of Bodde and Morris' LAW IN IMPERIAL CHINA, I read it more than once with keen interest.
Merry Christmas! Sean
Post a Comment