For those of you who know me, and for both of you who follow this blog, you will immediately understand that this post’s title does not refer to my love of horseback riding (went twice – fell off the horse both times) or wearing brief tops. (I guard my assets well.) No, I am referring to Paul Halter, the popular French mystery writer of locked room mysteries, who clearly models his style and tricks after his idol, John Dickson Carr.
Readers can be divided over Halter, some relishing his intricate mysteries that pile one fantastic event on top of another like the Lasagna of Babel, while others find his lack of characterization, setting, good dialogue and over the top plots off-putting. After reading three Halter titles, I fear I’ve fallen into the second category. I sort of liked The Demon of Dartmoor, but I balked at The Fourth Door, and I really hated The Invisible Circle.
So what made me return to Halter? Well, so many people whose opinions I admire in the blogosphere seem to like him, including my buddy JJ at The Invisible Event. Then I got the idea of slipping one of these babies on my Kindle. The paperbacks are damned expensive, so I sacrificed the cover and downloaded one for half the price. And you know what? I had fun!
Death Invites You, translated from the French by John Pugmire, is actually the one that JJ recommended all Halter neophytes begin with. I can understand this because it feels like the most traditionally structured of all the titles I’ve read so far, more character-driven and better paced, and while the author does furiously pile on events and ideas as always – a bizarre murder scene, a vengeful ghost, a decades-old murder, a recently solved spate of serial killings – somehow this one doesn’t feel so over the top.
The novel begins with noted criminologist Alan Twist relaxing in a bar with his friend and colleague, Scotland Yard detective Archibald Hurst. They are discussing Jack the Ripper because that’s what chums talk about in the downtime in a Paul Halter novel. Hurst spots a subordinate of his, Sergeant Simon Cunningham, who has recently distinguished himself by capturing the notorious Lonely Hearts Killer.
Cunningham appears anything but smug this evening: he has to cancel a theatre date with his temperamental fiancée, the daughter of well-known mystery writer Harold Vickers, because the author himself has invited Simon and one other guest to a secret dinner that evening. Yet, when he arrives at the Vickers residence, Harold’s wife Diane greets him in confusion. Her husband has been locked in his study working for well over a day, something that is typical behavior for him, and he left no word that he was expecting guests. The door seems to be locked and bolted from the inside, and when the alarmed group decides to break down the door, a bizarre sight greets them: Vickers lies shot to death at a table laid for three. A just-cooked meal covers the table, and Vickers’ face and hands lie burning in a pan of boiling oil.
The source of this scene is part of the mystery that embroils the family members, a mysterious neighbor, and perhaps the ghost of Vickers’ father, who died of a heart attack after bemoaning his son’s choice of career. It appears to have been the scenario of Vickers’ next novel, and it also deeply resembles a decades-old crime that was never solved. In typical Halter fashion, one of the characters is an actress, another a magician, and everyone at one point or another comes under suspicion in a satisfactory way – even the victim himself!
After recently completing Norman Berrow’s Don’t Go Out After Dark, where nothing much happened. maybe I was more eager to read a book where very much happens. This time around, Dr. Twist lets Hurst take the lead in investigating and deciphering the events and clues that come up, and in true Watsonian fashion, Hurst is almost invariably wrong. But the mistakes he makes are amusing, particularly in the clever way that Halter utilizes the timeworn trope of twin brothers. Even though the novel is typically short, it never felt padded like some of the others do. The conferences between Twist, Hurst and Simon don’t rattle on and on, and they are interspersed with interesting scenes and interviews with the suspects, as well as another murder or two.
I will confess that this book did nothing to make me relish the mechanics of a locked room mystery. I didn’t understand the explanation when it happened, and frankly I don’t much care. There is a mystery of a bowl of water left by the window, and I thought the reasoning behind this was highly anticlimactic. But other than that, I’m sure the mystery played fair, and if you want to play along by trying this out in your own study, I’d be interested in hearing how well it worked for you. (Not the murder, silly, just the “locked room” part!) I can’t say the characterizations were particularly rich, but everyone stood out more than usual (I couldn’t tell anybody apart in The Invisible Circle), and some characters, like the magician uncle and the “crazy” sister, were highly enjoyable.
If there’s anything that kept me from heaping high praise on this novel, it’s that once you start reading Halter, it becomes easier and easier to spot the killer. I picked this one out with the same ease that I did in The Invisible Circle, but this time the killer’s actions and motivations made greater sense. I do think Halter gives the game away shamelessly in one odd scene, but even though I felt no shock at the end of the journey, it was a very enjoyable ride.
Another thing I think I learned about reading Paul Halter this time around was that it really helps to get it down in as few sittings as possible. The more you stall or interrupt the experience, the harder it is to keep things straight. And so I read Death Invites You pretty quickly for me, and I think I got more out of the whole experience. Enough so that I already possess another Halter, The Seventh Hypothesis, which some consider his masterpiece. I think this will be my reading on the plane ride to New York next week. We’ll see how I do with it.
Happy Fourth of July, everybody!
10 thoughts on “EUREKA! Found a Halter I Like”
HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEYYYYYY!!! Well this must be what it feels like when your children actually achieve something and you can stop pretending to be pleased with their life decisions and wishing they’d do something meaningful for one…
Sorry, I digress.
The strucutre of DIY certainly is far more conventional, and the games it plays much more suited to typical detective fiction fans (very much unlike The Invisible Circle, which I’m sorry you don’t enjoy as much as I do), and its superb to have it borne out by experience that this is the best place to start — I shall continue recommending it in that case.
And the fact that you’ve found a Halter novel to be enthusiastic about more than makes up for our having lost your country all those years ago. I mean, who even remembers what happened, really?
LikeLiked by 1 person
If you ever return to visit the States, we Americans intend to throw all our copies of Halter into Massachusetts Bay, crying: “Lower the prices, LRI! Lower the prices, LRI!”
Then you’ll remember what happened . . .
LikeLiked by 3 people
I’ve not read this one, but I’m glad someone else has a difficult time with Halter. I REALLY want to like him – it’s exactly the kind of mystery and story I love, but I just… don’t think he’s a very good writer? (I’m an editor, so I’m inclined to be anal about these things, but his habit of frantically switching POV from character to character then to omniscient narrator, sometimes mid-sentence, is completely infuriating!)
Crimson Fog is certainly ambitious, but a total failure, I think. The opening paragraph telegraphed where it was going, but then it took forever to get there, and when it did it didn’t make much sense.
Invisible Circle was even more of a mess. There was hardly any atmosphere, none of the Arthurian stuff came through at all for me, and I couldn’t understand why it did for any of the characters, either. It’s like Halter feels he just needs to assert that things are spooky and tense and they magically will be. I also had a lot of trouble keeping track of who was who there, especially their Arthurian pairings.
Like you, I worked out the murderer almost immediately (Halter always plays fair, but I agree his clues to the murderer often stand out a mile), so it was kind of amusing to follow along with crazy things they were obviously doing to make their bonkers scheme work, but I couldn’t understand the mechanics of the impossible crime at all.
Sigh. But despite those experiences, I’m almost tempted to give this one a go. I really love mysteries like this, and no-one else seems to be writing them.
Well, I totally agree with you on all you said and that one of the biggest problems is Halter’s writing. All the things you mentioned are true, plus he tends to start a conversation, tire of the dialogue, and bring the scene to an abrupt halt with a quick wrap-up. (Halter is a halter! Yuk yuk!)In structure, at least, I thought Death Invites You was better and more amusingly written. But that still takes in the fact I don’t much appreciate Halter’s way with words. I thought it might be a translation thing, but I’m reading The Riddle of Monte Verita, also translated from the French by John Pugmire. I don’t know if I like it, but the writing is much richer.
And yet, like you, I keep wanting to give this guy another chance. So I’m taking The Seventh Hypothesis to New York with me. Folks who like Halter seem to love this one. We’ll see . . .
Yeah, I initially laid the blame with Pugmire too. But having read Spiral in French, Pugmire’s only fault seems to be an unwillingness to stray much from the original. Which I think is the wrong strategy with Halter, but I can understand it – especially as once you started tweaking things I think you’d basically end up rewriting most of it.
I’m very interested to hear what you think of The Seventh Hypothesis. I’ve only read the synopsis, and it seems like another one where he’s just chucked every idea he can think of into the mix.
I liked this one, and I only liked ‘Seventh Hypothesis’ more, out of the titles by Halter I’ve read. I caught onto the mechanics of the locked room, and therefore the culprit(s), thanks to a certain episode of the BBC series ‘Death in Paradise’. 😛 Otherwise, I thought the culprit(s) was reasonably well-hidden; in any case, better hidden than was the case in ‘Invisible Circle’ and ‘Crimson Fog’. I think what I liked about ‘Death Invites You’ was that the culprit, although hidden, made some sense; I felt like the endings of ‘Fourth Door’ and ‘Crimson Fog’ tried too hard to pin the blame onto the most unexpected character.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely, and even worse in The Invisible Circle, where we are supposed to believe that nobody would glom onto the killer’s identity or tricks at close range. SPOILER: Just because we find a make-up table downstairs, we must accept that somebody can alter their looks so completely, or that a person could fall in love with the person they feared most!!! It’s stupid, (as is the forcing of Arthurian legend on us just so a killer can do a trick with a sword!) There’s a Christie where something like this happens, too, but it’s so much better written that I barely cringe when I re-read it! 🙂
There! I feel better now! 🙂
That kind of thing always seems so stupid that it’s hardly worth cluing. Like when detectives say something like, “You remember we heard she was in a play forty years ago at school, so naturally she’d have no difficulty disguising her voice…” or “He was on the village cricket team for a season, so naturally he’d have no problem hurling an object more than fifty yards with pinpoint accuracy.”
Because obviously these skills are so easy to acquire that the only reason we’re not all perfect at them is that most of us don’t bother to try!
Pingback: HERE I GO AGAIN: Looking for a Halter That Works | ahsweetmysteryblog
Pingback: Death Invites You by Paul Halter – Mysteries Ahoy!