Last week saw 10 bloggers, including myself, posting our first nominations for the 2024 Reprint of the Year Award. If you missed those posts here is a link to my own, which contains links to all the other nominations.
Today we’re doing it all over again, with our second and final nominations.
Aidan – Mysteries Ahoy
Bev – My Reader’s Block
Brad – Ah Sweet Mystery Blog
Hayley – Desperate Reader
Janet – From First Page to Last
Mallika – Literary Potpourri
Moira – Clothes in Books
Neeru – A Hot Cup of Pleasure
Puzzle Doctor – In Search of the Classic Mystery Novel
My own second choice is for Cecil M. Wills’ Midsummer Murder (1956), which was reprinted by Galileo Publishing. Here is their synopsis of the book:
‘It is slowly and insidiously that evil comes to the cathedral city of Storminster. Old scandals are awakened: there are hints of corruption and worse; the vicar is warned lest he meddle. But meddle he does, for the Reverend Selwyn Seddicombe, unassuming though he may be, is not one to be deterred by threats while a poison pen wreaks havoc amongst his parishioners; still less so when the poison increases in virulence and an unfortunate victim takes her own life. And this is only the beginning-murder follows suicide, the police are called in, and a citizen, well liked and respected finds himself on trial for his life. What is the truth behind these tragic happenings? Who among the citizens of this once quiet old town, could be the author of these outrages? It is Selwyn Seddicombe who, in his own original way, finds the answer to these questions and in doing so keeps the reader fascinated to the end.’
Midsummer Murder is a mystery with several strengths. The first of these is that it successfully deploys the poison pen trope, avoiding the pitfalls of the pace becoming too slow or the plot lacking direction. I enjoyed the rhythm of the story as the author is good at causing sharp changes for good dramatic effect.
Poison pen mysteries are not about explosive beginnings and nor should they act as quickly as cyanide. A good poison pen mystery works incrementally. The tension builds as the reader wonders when the first letter recipient will crack and when the letter writer will achieve their first kill. The swiftness of the prose in this opening reflects the efficiency of the poison pen writer. In addition, I liked the way Wills describes the ups and downs of the poison pen writer. For example, when one of their letters hits home the narrative notes: ‘And so the first hint of restraint came between them. The initial success of the virus distilled by an unknown poison pen. There were to be others.’ You can really feel the insidious nature of the crime, which can also be felt when a poison pen missive has not quite worked: ‘So was the first dose of poison neutralised. But what of the others?’ These moments of failure are important as when the poison pen writer finally does draw blood, greater impact is achieved.
Another key strength which kept me turning the pages at a rapid rate of knots, was the strong characterisation of the novel, for both minor and major characters. I was impressed with the social and physical setting Cecil M. Wills created. It was a place I wanted to immerse myself in. If you enjoy books where the societal rules are integral to the plot, then this is definitely a mystery you should check out. A fellow vintage fiction reviewing blog, Kaggsy’s Bookish Ramblings, made a similar remark in her review: ‘Interesting, class is a strong element in the story; the 1950s were, of course, a decade of change and the post-War shifting of class boundaries was resisted by many.’ But will this resistance cause resentment in Storminster?
Amateur sleuthing in this mystery is shared by more than one character and I enjoyed how this aspect of the plot has its surprising elements. It is certainly an activity, which can be bad for your health in this story, and I liked how this added an unpredictable element to the proceedings. In addition, a clerical sleuth is always a bonus, which we have in the character, Reverend Sneddicombe.
The solution to this mystery is good and it has an interesting reversal. The Puzzle Doctor, who blogs at In Search of the Classic Mystery Novel enjoyed this book when he read it back in 2021. In his review he wrote that ‘Wills wrong-footed me completely on the identity of the murderer. It’s often a case with a new author that you don’t know how clever they’re being, but I happily gobbled up the misdirection without realising that I was being misdirected. So that made me very happy to be nicely tricked – I prefer that to working out who the killer is, to be honest.’ So, if you are in the mood for a good red herring or two, then trot to your nearest bookshop or library, and for those who have read and enjoyed this book, then don’t forget to vote for it in the Reprint of the Year Award poll.
—
All the blogger nominations have now been put forward, so don’t forget to submit your own nominations to the comments section of the following post. You don’t have long as on the 22nd I shall be putting the reader nominations into an online generator to randomly select three to include in the final poll, which will go live the same day, and the results will be announced on the 31st December.