Series
Original publication date
Collections
Genres
Subjects
Awards
Description
The very first case for Oxford-based sleuth Gervase Fen, one of the last of the great Golden Age detectives. As inventive as Agatha Christie, as hilarious as P.G. Wodehouse, this is the perfect entry point to discover the delightful detective stories of Edmund Crispin - crime fiction at its quirkiest and best. A pretty but spiteful young actress with a talent for destroying men's lives is found dead in a college room just yards from the office of the unconventional Oxford don Gervase Fen. Anyone who knew the girl would gladly have shot her, but can Fen discover who did shoot her, and why? Published during the Second World War, The Case of the Gilded Fly introduced English professor and would-be detective Gervase Fen, one of crime fiction's most irrepressible and popular sleuths. A classic locked-room mystery filled with witty literary allusions, it was the debut of 'a new writer who calls himself Edmund Crispin' (in reality the choral and film composer Bruce Montgomery), later described by The Times as 'One of the last exponents of the classical English detective story . . . elegant, literate, and funny.' This Detective Story Club classic is introduced by Douglas G. Greene, who reveals how Montgomery's ambition to emulate John Dickson Carr resulted in a string of successful and distinctive Golden Age detective novels and an invitation from Carr himself to join the exclusive Detection Club.… (more)
User reviews
This would fall into the "locked room" category of mystery stories. I figured out (correctly) early on who the murderer must have been, but not the motive or the means. I enjoyed the lively and intelligent dialogue, although I sometimes felt it was over my head. Crispin's vocabulary is broader than mine, and it would have helped to have a dictionary close at hand, but stopping to look up an unfamiliar word on every other page would break the flow of the story. It's full of literary allusions, some that I recognized, and some I'm sure that I missed.
Ngaio Marsh often used theatrical settings in her novels, and her readers might enjoy this mystery. Crispin's writing is definitely earthier than Marsh, Christie or Sayers, or at least more explicit. Recommended for all classic mystery lovers.
As Professor Fen and his wife are entertaining in their rooms at the college one evening, a gunshot rings out. An unpopular and scheming actress is lying dead in the rooms below. At first appearing like suicide, it quickly becomes apparent this was a murder. The case seems unsolvable to the police, but Gervase Fen proclaims to know who the murderer is but doesn’t wish to announce the name until he can tie all the pieces together.
Reminiscent of an Agatha Christie novel, the main characters are introduced at the start of the book with their motivations and desires laid out. It should have been easy for me to put the pieces together and solve this puzzler, but I got so involved in the story that the ending was a surprise to me.
An interesting book and one that I had to struggle with a bit, there were a lot of literary references that went completely above my head, but once I decided to relax into the read I found I enjoyed this book and I would definitely consider reading another of this author’s books.
Overall, I'm not impressed with my first Crispin novel. The mystery itself is a bit farfetched, with too much coincidence and luck needed for the means of the murder. The gilded fly of the title turns out to be the most pointless clue ever; even as a red herring it flops. The obligatory romance doesn't have much to it and feels very obligatory indeed. The character of Fen is fun, I suppose, but he's no Lord Peter. And as for theater mysteries, Ngaio Marsh has that subgenre pretty well covered. It's hard to see what Crispin brings that is new or interesting.
I will say that I enjoyed the writing itself. Crispin is certainly clever and there are oodles of literary allusions. I felt my vocabulary stretch as I read (sempiternal, anyone?). Despite my lack of enthusiasm for this particular title, I think I'll give Gervase Fen another try eventually and see if Crispin hones his plots in later books. Fen does have potential as an enjoyable character. But I have a feeling that Dorothy Sayers' Lord Peter is much to be preferred.
The
Rehearsal and performance of a new play provide the focus for the murder mystery and many colourful and intriguing actors, actresses and others associated with the play populate this novel.
Overall I enjoyed the book and I believe it will entertain those who favour murder mysteries that include a bit of humour. I must, however, add a word of caution. Edmund Crispin was obviously a very knowledgeable chap and he wanted to let people know that he was a very knowledgeable chap. This manifested itself in several ways.
Firstly, Gervase Fen considers himself to be intellectually superior to most people and is forever alluding to literary and musical works that I would suggest the majority of people would have to look up to appreciate the significance of the reference fully. I believe Crispin identified with this character.
Secondly, Fen uses many words that will also require looking up in a dictionary; at least I had to look them up.
Thirdly, and this was blatant teasing, there is a character named “Nigel” who is used as the reader’s eyes and ears into the mystery. Fen frequently turns to Nigel and jibes him for not having yet worked out who the murderer is. In this way Crispin is telling the reader that he is the smarter and that without his brilliance the poor dullard of a reader will never find out the solution to the mystery.
Fourthly, as one would expect in a golden age murder mystery, the police inspector is portrayed as rather stupid and not a match for Fen’s obviously superior mind.
Despite these elements of showing-off by Crispin the book is entertaining and there are many quotes that I have underlined and will reference time and again.
I may not read all eleven Gervase Fen mysteries, but I will read one or two more.
Having had a few days to allow this murder mystery to percolate through my brain, I have come to the conclusion that the whole thing is a novel-length p*ss-take of the genre and that the author was laughing up
We are introduced to the amateur detective Gervase Fen, a professor and literary critic who works out the crime in three minutes and spends the rest of the book dropping hints about how he knows what went on but he's not going to tell anyone until they've worked it out for themselves, neener neener neener. This, of course, allows time for another murder to take place, so Fen is in fact responsible for a death. In the meantime, the rest of the cast and crew get on with the show that must go on, nobody really caring a rat's *ss about the murder victim because she was a beyotch and a ho anyway. Which demonstrates that the author knew a lot about actors.
Fen makes me think of the lead character in the brilliant BBC Sherlock, so irritating he's fascinating (I think the original Sherlock was supposed to be that way, but time has hallowed him). The supporting cast is fairly unmemorable, except for Mrs. Fen whom I adore utterly. The "official" detective--whose passion is for literary criticism--is an absolutely brilliant idea, but he's not rounded out well enough for me.
Yep, I honestly think that everything I found annoying about this book was put there on purpose to annoy. I think Crispin was having his bit o' fun with us stupid readers. When he makes Fen say, mid-book, "In fact I'm the only literary critic turned detective in the whole of fiction", I think he's showing us right there that his intention is to subvert the murder mystery genre rather than add to it.
The writing, on the other hand, was superb and often very funny. Crispin displays very little sympathy for the world he describes and the people in it; he's laughing AT everyone, I swear.
This book may get a re-read just because. In the meanwhile, my feelings about a rating hover between a 3 (for being bloody annoying) and a 5 (for being a bloody good writer). Let's just call it a 4 and have done with it.
Unfortunately, the novel also includes many genre staples that date these novels and sometimes render them less accesssible/entertaining to modern audiences: little/no character development; a bewildering cast of characters (many of them with similar names, just to add to the confusion); lots of improbable coincidence; little action; and that hoariest of cliches, the "gather all the suspects in the living room and announce the murderer" denoument.
As it happens, I'm a fan of the Golden Age of British mystery (viva la Agatha Christie!), but even so, had trouble warming up to this one. One major reason is the red herrings. I love a cunningly planted misdirection as well as the next gal, but the problem here is that the red herrings (sorry - can't list them without spoiling the ending) turn out not to be even peripherally related to the outcome; which still might be forgivable if only the red herrings weren't so much more entertaining and fraught with dramatic potential than the rather lame, unexceptional solution that is eventually provided! A second reason I think I had trouble warming to this was way Crispin basically "phones in" the character of Gervase Fen. In later books in the series, he develops into an intriguing and believable character; in this first outing, however, Crispin does little to make Fen's eccentricities either relevant or interesting.
So there it is: though not without flaws, Gilded Fly is a creditable archetype of the genre, and you could certainly do a whole lot worse. (Cough - mysteries featuring cats, quilts, or recipes - cough!)
intriguing than the company currently in residence at Oxford University.
Center-stage is the beautiful, malicious Yseut -- a mediocre actress with a
stellar talent for destroying men. Rounding out the cast are more than a
few of
watching from the wings is Professor Gervase Fen -- scholar, wit, and fop
extraordinaire -- who would infinitely rather solve crimes than expound on
English literature. When Yseut's murder touches off a series of killings,
he more than gets his wish.
A British lady I know on another forum recommended Crispin to me and this
book in particular, when we were discussing witty novels. Ordinarily, I
trust this gal's judgment on authors because we seem to have similar tastes.
But this time, I have to say this book was a real oinker. While Fen is
supposed to be "brilliant, eccentric, and rude, much taken with himself and
his splendid yellow raincoat, and given to quoting Lewis Carroll at
inappropriate occasions," I found this novel extremely hard to get
interested in. It's written in the "old school" style of murder mysteries,
but also obviously written by a man who is quite taken with his own
verbosity. My eyes kept glazing over and it took me nearly two weeks to get
all the way through! I'd have declared it a DNF and moved on, but I had
promised this lady I'd read at least one of Crispin's mysteries. Ok, I've
done that. The book gets a 1.
Intricate plots are par for the course, but this one was so complex that when the time came to reveal all, I scarcely cared who did it and just skimmed over the details. Having the brilliant detective determine the murderer almost immediately then chastise others for not having his superhuman intellect added to the frustration.
I had hoped to find another good source of well-plotted mysteries, but I fear I shall not be trying another Crispin book.
However, the real motive was not revealed until the very end and I found this to be unfair to the point of cheating.
Overall I found the
This is not necessarily a remarkably unique closed-room case. It relies heavily on the characters to carry it along. I rather enjoyed the university setting of the book. Fen is certainly not my favorite literary academic, but he's well-drawn enough to keep me entertained. I was less interested in the world of the theater. Actors can be very tiresome. I'm hoping that the later installments in this series dispense with the theater and focus on the university
The Book Description: Theater companies are notorious hotbeds of intrigue, and few are more intriguing than the company currently in residence at Oxford University. Center-stage is the beautiful, malicious Yseult, a mediocre actress with a stellar talent for destroying men.
My Review: Tedious, fusty, and supercilious.
Well, that about sums that up.
A promiscuous actress dies with so many people that disliked her, it's hard to believe that she committed suicide, which is what the police are led to believe.
Fen, of course, is the only one who
By the end of the book, it was hard to keep up sympathy for Fen or for his playing with people nor for his reasoning for not revealing the truth. His eccentricities weren't really appealing, just annoying.
This is the first Fen mystery, and I suspect that's part of what I found tedious, along with the setting. I was also annoyed with Fen saying, at the half way mark, that he knew who the murderer was; as soon as he said that, all I could think was 'why do I have to read as many pages again before I find out?'
But I loved the way Crispin sort of did a Jasper Fforde with this book (and yes, I realise it's properly Jasper Fforde doing a Crispin with his Tuesday Next books, but go with it, please). The characters all have an awareness that they are, in fact, fictional characters living within the confines of the story, and the small asides that let the reader in on this knowledge are often subtle, but they always made me smile when I came across them. I've thoroughly enjoyed Crispin's sly humor in his other books and this one was no different, but I do think this might have made a better short story than a full-length novel.
When she is found shot dead in a college room by a gun that
Gervase Fen is an Oxford Professor of English Language and Literature, and an amateur detective on the side. For him, this is a great distraction from his usual duties. Nigel Blake, a former student of Fen's and who is now a journalist, is visiting the college. Blake serves as Watson to Fen's Holmes. With each character having a backstory that ties to their dislike of Yseut, Fen has to sift through that and the movements of the suspects to get rid of the chaff and find the guilty party. During the whole process, Fen keeps his solution to himself and keeps the reader guessing.
The style of this book is similar to Sayers, Christie, Tey and Chesterton. The Golden Age of mysteries. A fun Brit read with many twists and turns. This is the first in the 10 book series. Interesting to note is that Crispin's background is similar to one of the characters! Oh, and Crispin is a pen name.
The actual details of the crime to be solved were flighty and improbable. What if a locked room wasn't actually a room? That isn't a spoiler , but a nod to with weird wit at the core of the denouement. Another detail to savor is the amount of beer consumed before lunch in a rationed Oxford. Whither austerity?
The pacing is a little sketchy. The murder resolution is also a bit difficult to piece together. Some of the novel seems a bit too meandering. Its a first effort written by an undergraduate, though. I will definitely read more Crispin.