My reading copy of this story was from the Detective Book Club series, which produced 3 in 1 mystery fiction volumes. However, The Fifth Caller was also reprinted in 2019 by Stark House Press, in a twofer which included the additional story: Borrow the Night (1956). This is not my first experience of Nielsen’s work as I have also read and thoroughly enjoyed False Witness (1959) and Sing Me a Murder (1960).
Synopsis
‘Lillian Whitehall has been brutally murdered. DA Inspector Doug Marshall knows that the crime occurred at 5:20pm because she was bludgeoned to death with a clock. Everyone assumes that the murderer is her Hungarian nurse, Anna Bardossy, who is lying in a hospital bed, the victim of a suicide attempt and now suffering amnesia. But there were other callers that day: her high-strung patient, her exacting lawyer, her unemployed brother. They all paint a picture of poor put-upon Dr. Whitehall, badgered by her unfaithful nurse. But could there have been another caller, someone who knew what had happened to Anna—and what had caused the doctor’s all-too-timely end?’
[Stark House Press Blurb]
Overall Thoughts
This mystery was written outside of the Golden Age, and it is not aiming for that style, but at its core The Fifth Caller still has traditional mystery components, such as the limited/restricted number of suspects.
Douglas Marshal (who works at the D. A. Office) is the character we start with, waiting for Anna Bardossy to come round at the hospital. She has lost lots of blood, having been found on a beach dying. She has needed transfusions, and her life hangs in the balance. It is touch and go. Yet enigmatically (as I hadn’t read the blurb before starting this book) the doctor in charge wishes he had failed in saving her. Why? We learn she is 32 years old, and she has a tattoo which indicates that she is a survivor of a European concentration camp. Is she a witness, victim, or a suspect? The latter is quickly suggested by Douglas’ reaction to her: ‘He watched her face as the words brought her eyes back to his. This was the important moment – when adversaries met.’ Nielsen does not tell the reader everything straight away, and they must piece together what the situation is.
There are certainly some puzzling circumstances which Anna needs to explain if she wants to prove she is innocent of her employer’s murder. In her car expensive lingerie, which she could not afford, is discovered. At the beach, she was found with her wrists slashed. Why did she do this? Douglas Marshal is confident he knows why and goes into meeting Anna determined to make her confess to the murder. As readers I think our sympathy naturally stay with Anna and Douglas, to begin with, is not instantly likeable as a character, in the manner he tries to jog Anna’s memory. He tries to trap and trick her into incriminating herself without knowing about Dr Whitehall’s death and it is Anna’s own doctor who has to suspend the interview. We need to remember that Anna is in a precarious state health wise, and as soon as she wakes up, she is being interviewed.
Douglas becomes less palatable as a person with his fixed negative attitudes towards displaced persons:
“The DPs, the victims, the refugees of society. I’m not being self-righteous, Huntziger, merely realistic. Prolonged deprivation and fearful punishment will make almost anyone dishonest. They have to learn to lie; it’s their only chance of getting out alive.”
Marshal based this opinion on his own war experiences however, I think as readers we know this is a reductive and limited picture. With these kinds of attitudes, it makes sense of why so many people blame Anna for the murder automatically, without giving it much thought. Nielsen’s story does not become repellent as whilst the characters might condemn Anna, the narrative voice and structure do not. The reader is not encouraged to agree with the characters’ viewpoint. If anything it makes you support Anna, more strongly as an underdog figure.
Nevertheless, despite his views Douglas Marshal is not fully convinced that the “obvious” solution is the right one. A year ago, his department received complaints that Dr Whitehall was violating her legally prescribed practice, performing treatment she was not qualified for. Who wrote these complaints? Yet I think the narrative suggests there is something more behind Marshal’s drive for the truth:
‘He couldn’t escape the feeling of frustration. If Anna Bardossy maintained her silence, she could be convicted. But her silence was an aggravation. He wanted to break it; he wanted to probe at it as the doctor might probe for a malignant condition.’
Questions need to be answered in Douglas’ ‘disciplined world’. You could say he somewhat lacked compassion, and I don’t think his search for the truth is presented as dis-interested. There is a real sense of Douglas perceiving this as a personal battle that he must win.
I liked the structure of this novel as Douglas Marshal brings, one by one, the relevant other witnesses (who we would also regard as suspects) to Anna’s hospital room, to see if their presence and interaction will overcome her amnesia. These interviews are helpful for the reader wanting to puzzle out the truth, as they throw out new threads for Marshal to investigate. Although I do think Nielsen’s prose acknowledges the toll this process has on Anna. Nevertheless, Anna may be silent at times, but she is not silenced, and during these conversations she is allowed to speak and to challenge what the others are saying, and she is also able to critique America and its ideas of heroism.
I felt the case was very engrossing and I liked how information is teased out and disseminated. The conversations allow the reader, as well as the sleuthing characters, to evaluate the evidence. Over time I think Douglas becomes fairer minded, compared to the other suspects who remain convinced of Anna’s guilt until the end. I liked how Dr Huntziger is in Anna’s corner too. The denouement has a real sense of pathos, and I found this story to be a surprisingly traditional mystery in many respects. The solution and choice of culprit was interesting. There perhaps needed to be a smidge more cluing for a couple of things – that or you really needed to get your eye in on some of the information that was present. After all we can’t rule out me being dozy! Irrespective of my sleuthing skills, I would recommend this book.
Rating: 4.25/5
P. S. This novel was adapted for a teleplay in 1961 and this link goes to a website which shows the opening credits to this adaptation.