Some Thoughts on Ngaio Marsh

Curtis Evans’s typically knowledgeable and perceptive review of Ngaio Marsh’s Swing, Brother Swing over at his blog reminded me that I had long wanted to do a piece on one of my favorite mystery writers and certainly the one « Crime Queen » who gets the least critical love these days, so here it is.

My fondness for Dame Ngaio rests on a paradox: I see her both as the best writer of all Crime Queens in purely literary terms but also the poorest as far as plots are concerned, and the latter is probably the reason or one of the reasons why she often gets a bad rap these days. She obviously tried hard – Josephine Tey she wasn’t – but the sad fact is that few of her plots are more than adequate, and many are badly flawed – either the solution is obvious or the clueing is deficient or both. Marsh by her own admission wasn’t a great plotter and her work provides considerable evidence that she actually considered all the murder/investigation/solution business as a bore. It is often said about some extremely gifted crime writers that they’re wasting their talent and should write « serious » fiction; it’s undoubtedly true as far as Marsh is concerned. She was obviously more in her element drawing characters and describing settings than devicing a puzzle and explaining everything in the end.

That is why, as has often been noted, a typical Ngaio Marsh novel (for there are some atypical ones) falls into two parts that never connect. She begins by setting the scene and introducing the characters, which she does extremely well and provides the most pleasurable moments in the book – then someone gets killed and trouble arises. Marsh despite being five decades in the business never found out how to conciliate drama and detection, character development and puzzle. The crime puts a stop to the narrative as the focus switches from the suspects to Inspector Alleyn whose investigations take center stage. The problem is, said investigations are often dull as they merely consist in repetitive interviews of the suspects, interspersed with some physical examination of the crime scene. The stuff of all detective stories, but Marsh unlike her colleagues never manages to make it interesting because she didn’t know how or care to build up suspense, and the reader’s interest dangerously falters as the investigation proceeds. Then suddenly comes the solution, which is sometimes clever but rarely groundbreaking and may appear kind of a cheat as Alleyn often doesn’t bother explaining how he got there – and so ends the book. Frustrating, you said?

Another problematic feature is the rather monolithic quality of her work, both in artistic and social terms. Her early books set a formula which she more or less followed for all her career; she rarely tried to stray away from it and never made any attempt at « pushing the envelope » like her fellow Crime Queens did. Neither did she envision writing about someone else than Inspector Alleyn, to whom she was as committed as Chandler was to Marlowe. Also and finally her post-war books stubbornly refused to reflect the changes in British society and mores. Christie is often – unfairly – criticized for having ignored the evolution of the genre in the years after WW2 but Marsh was arguably even more conservative, though slightly more liberal politically than Agatha.

All this leads to one question: Why did Marsh write detective novels? Her interests and talent obviously lay elsewhere, and she didn’t put too much effort in hiding it. Money is an obvious answer; it also accounts for their work’s immobilism – you don’t tinker with a successful formula. Marsh knew what her readers wanted, and she happily (?) obliged.  At this point I can hear you asking: « Wait, that’s a rather damning analysis, isn’t it? And yet you said she’s one of your favourite mystery writers? How come? » Just wait a minute. The praise is coming.

Marsh, as I said above, was not the best of the Crime Queens when it came at intricate, unguessable plots, which may be a problem when these are the only things you’re after as a reader, but she largely makes up for it in the « literary » department. Her prose is elegant yet economical – she doesn’t have Allingham’s occasional tendency to overwrite. Her characterization is also second to none and in some respects more « adult » than that of her sisters in crime, a fact that is reflected by her choice of detective.

Kate Jackson and I had recently a mild disagreement over Alleyn’s literary/historical importance, and I readily admit that Roderick is not as flamboyant and memorable a character as Hercule or Lord Peter – and it is indeed the point. Alleyn is one of the most normal of all Golden Age sleuths, his aristocratic lineage notwithstanding. He has no quirks, he is not a supermind and except for his odd way to address his sidekick behaves and thinks like a regular human being. Also he is a policeman, not an amateur – and Marsh is the only Crime Queen to have made her primary sleuth a member of the police force. In other words, he is believable and relatable in a way that most of his « colleagues » were not (and I’m not intending this as criticism – unlike Raymond I don’t see realism as the ultimate goal of « respectable » fiction)

I also admit to a fondness for his wife, Agatha better known as « Troy » and for two reasons. The first one is that like her husband she is a credible, likeable character – much more credible and likeable, blasphemous as it is, than Harriet Vane. The second one is that she seems to have acted as a stimulant on Marsh’s imagination as some of the latter’s best books have her presence in common. The finest is certainly Clutch of Constables where she is the main protagonist and that also happens to boast one of Marsh’s most clever plots. The way she switches suspicion from one character to the other is masterful and suggests that Marsh, had she been more interested in the mechanics of plotting, might have been a more than competent puzzler; as it is, she was a more than competent writer and that’s not bad either.

8 commentaires sur “Some Thoughts on Ngaio Marsh

  1. Barzun liked Clutch of Constables a lot too, it’s another one of hers I need to go back and read. My review of it was censored on Amazon about two decades ago if you can believe it.

    Over a few years in the 1990s I read everything she wrote excepting Spinsters in Jeopardy, which I just couldn’t get into and a handful of others I just never got around to. I liked most of them, except for a few like Last Ditch, Vintage Murder and False Scent.

    I agree with her you on her strengths as a writer relative to Allingham (in fact I just made the same point in a comment on my blog). I also find her oddly, for someone who seems like she should have been liberal, conservative. So, yes, agree with your comparison there of her and Christie. Marsh seemed to have a lot of bourgeois attitudes while also mocking the bourgeoisie, Christie never made fun of her readers, she was more broadly repeatable I think. PD James said simply that Marsh was a snob and maybe that’s it.

    There are definitely some Marshes with rather tediously worked out plots (Vintage Murder, False Scent) or very weak mystery plots (Last Ditch), but I think a number of her books were well plotted. She complained about plotting when she was older, but she kept it up, working through a full-scale entanglement in Photo Finish when she was 85. It must be one of the best mysteries written by an octogenarian, and I definitely mean that as a complement. I think Artists in Crime, Death in a White Tie, Overture to Death, Death at the Bar, Colour Scheme, Final Curtain, Swing Brother Swing, Opening Night, Scales of Justice, Off with His Head for example all have good mystery plots. That’s a third of her output and there are probably a few more.

    I know the criticism of the interrogations–the Marshy inquisitions–goes back to Symons and Robert Barnard, but I have grown to enjoy these. First time I came across these was in Surfeit of Lampreys, first time I read it,.and I hated everything about the book, especially the who was where when questions. Now I see the interrogations as a battle, especially well done in Lampreys. It’s formulaic, but then so are the clashes between Cramer and Wolfe in Rex Stout. I used to hate those too, but now see that as part of the novels’ formal ritual.

    I like Troy too, in fact more than Alleyn, lol. Chandler dismissed her as a Mary Sue, like he was one to talk! Hers and Rory’s offspring now….I wish rather that Marsh had written the Fox mystery instead of the adult Ricky one (last Ditch), which is a real dud. But even Alleyn fascinates me with appallingly precious Alleynisms! 😉

    Aimé par 3 personnes

  2. Praising with faint damns?

    I agree that Marsh’s prose is excellent, and that she’s one of the few crime writers who could have, had she chosen, become a successful mainstream novelist.

    I don’t agree, though, that she never figured out how to conciliate drama and detection, character development and puzzle. True, there aren’t (and I’m repeating what I’ve said on Curt’s site) stunt solutions, but her best books combine the pleasures of the detective story (plot, action, structure, mystery) with those of the novel proper (characterisation, atmosphere, style). Too many detective writers (particularly the British) can plot but can’t write; a writer who can, like Marsh, do both is to be commended.

    And I believe she can do both. Her early books are shaky, but she hit her stride in the late ’30s, and
    maintained it for 20 years. Artists in Crime, Overture to Death, Death and the Dancing Footman, Colour Scheme, Died in the Wool, Final Curtain, Scales of Justice, Off WIth His Head, and Singing in the Shrouds all conciliate drama and detection, character development and puzzle. There’s some good physical detection in Artists in Crime and Death of a Bar in particular. Several of her other books are finely clued: Overture to Death and Final Curtain, for instance, while the connection between the victims in Singing in the Shrouds is a real ‘Of course, dammit!’.

    She also reflects changing times – When in Rome, or Black as He’s Painted aren’t set in a ’30s timewarp.

    Aimé par 2 personnes

Votre commentaire

Entrez vos coordonnées ci-dessous ou cliquez sur une icône pour vous connecter:


Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Connexion à %s