Status
Available
Call number
Series
Genres
Publication
New York: Pocket Books, 1964
Description
A corpse in a department store window offers a gruesome puzzle for Ellery Queen. The windows of French's department store are one of New York's great attractions. Year-round, their displays show off the finest in fashion, art, and home d�cor, and tourists and locals alike make a point of stopping to see what's on offer. One afternoon, as the board debates a merger upstairs, a salesgirl begins a demonstration in one of the windows, showing off French's new Murphy bed. A crowd gathers to watch the bed lower from the wall after a single touch of a button. But as the bed opens, people run screaming. Out tumbles a woman - crumpled, bloody, and dead. The victim was Mrs. French, wife of the company president, and finding her killer will turn this esteemed store upside down. Only one detective has the soft touch necessary - debonair intellectual Ellery Queen. As Queen and his police inspector father dig into French's secrets, they find their killer is more serious than any window shopper.… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member mmyoung
As I read this book I found myself asking several questions:
Why did The French Powder Mystery open not with the crime or the lead-up to the crime but rather with both Queens and a number of police officers complaining about the officiousness and meddlesomeness of the new police commissioner; why
By the time I finished this book I had arrived at the following answers:
Why did The French Powder Mystery open not with the crime or the lead-up to the crime but rather with both Queen’s and a number of police officers complaining about the officiousness and meddlesomeness of the new police commissioner?
By situating the police commissioner as at least troublesome and perhaps an actual antagonist to the regular police force it makes it reasonable to the reader (and to the police in the story) that Ellery withholds clues from the police commissioner and from any other member of the police force who might pass on information to the commissioner. In fact Ellery actually removes evidence from one possible crime scene and in another case sends evidence to an analyst with specific instructions not to let the commissioner know about the result of his tests.
Why were Ellery's "brilliant insights" so mundane?
I am torn in my answer to this question. In part, this “mundaneness” may be due to the fact that the authors wanted to have their literary cake and eat it too -- that is, they wanted the case to look difficult enough to justify calling in Inspector Queen and his son as well as the intervention of the police commissioner. The authors also want the clues to be obvious enough, or at least understandable enough, that the reader immediately ides with Ellery rather than with his doubters.
Why were Ellery's mundane insights repeated frequently and at length?
Perhaps the authors thought some members of the audience wouldn’t get them the first time. Perhaps the authors thought that some of the members of the audience were reading the book in a fragmented way and therefore needed to be frequently reminded about what just happened. Perhaps the authors thought (or the authors thought that the audience thought) that that was the way “really educated” people talked--certainly S. S. Van Dine’s Philo Vance also falls prey to the same tendency to speak too long and too repetitively. Perhaps the authors were getting paid by the word or the page. Or perhaps without the repetition it would have been clear that the authors had chosen to write a novel length short story.
Why were the "regular police" so painfully inadequate at even the most routine aspects of their job?
Authorial laziness? Ellery brilliance is established by his ability to outperform those around him. The more inadequate those around him are the more brilliant Ellery will appear to me. One might also suspect that the authors were themselves rather unaware of routine police procedures and may even have depended on other authors (all of whom also tended to show the police as inadequate) for their information as to how the police function. The inability of the police also makes Inspector Queen’s dependence on his son look less like unacceptable.
Why was Ellery, a complete outsider to the police, allowed such privileged access to crime scenes and witnesses often without any official oversight at all?
The only “in universe” explanation I can think of is nepotism. The “our world” answer is that it is the authors response to the problem faced by every writer who has as their detective someone who is not a member of the police force. Some authors, notably Conan Doyle, have their detectives either hired by people who are involved as victims, witnesses or suspects or asked to consult by the police themselves. Others, such as Rex Stout and Dashiell Hammett, had their detectives work, professionally, as private investigators. Every author needs to find a reason to have their detective on the scene of the crime. Ellery Queen, the writers, choose to have Ellery Queen, their detective, given as much access to the crime and witnesses as would a police officer without being limited by the rule of law as to what they can do and say.
The fact that all of these questions arose in my mind while reading this book, as indeed did the answers I have suggested, indicates the weakness of this particular mystery. So far neither the first nor the second Ellery Queen outing have done much to indicate why this particular fictional detective was so popular other than to highlight the nature of the audience they appealed to at the time they were first published.
Why did The French Powder Mystery open not with the crime or the lead-up to the crime but rather with both Queens and a number of police officers complaining about the officiousness and meddlesomeness of the new police commissioner; why
Show More
were Ellery's "brilliant insights" so mundane; why were Ellery's mundane insights repeated frequently and at length; why were the "regular police" so painfully inadequate at even the most routine aspects of their job; and finally why was Ellery, a complete outsider to the police, allowed such privileged access to crime scenes and witnesses often without any official oversight at all?By the time I finished this book I had arrived at the following answers:
Why did The French Powder Mystery open not with the crime or the lead-up to the crime but rather with both Queen’s and a number of police officers complaining about the officiousness and meddlesomeness of the new police commissioner?
By situating the police commissioner as at least troublesome and perhaps an actual antagonist to the regular police force it makes it reasonable to the reader (and to the police in the story) that Ellery withholds clues from the police commissioner and from any other member of the police force who might pass on information to the commissioner. In fact Ellery actually removes evidence from one possible crime scene and in another case sends evidence to an analyst with specific instructions not to let the commissioner know about the result of his tests.
Why were Ellery's "brilliant insights" so mundane?
I am torn in my answer to this question. In part, this “mundaneness” may be due to the fact that the authors wanted to have their literary cake and eat it too -- that is, they wanted the case to look difficult enough to justify calling in Inspector Queen and his son as well as the intervention of the police commissioner. The authors also want the clues to be obvious enough, or at least understandable enough, that the reader immediately ides with Ellery rather than with his doubters.
Why were Ellery's mundane insights repeated frequently and at length?
Perhaps the authors thought some members of the audience wouldn’t get them the first time. Perhaps the authors thought that some of the members of the audience were reading the book in a fragmented way and therefore needed to be frequently reminded about what just happened. Perhaps the authors thought (or the authors thought that the audience thought) that that was the way “really educated” people talked--certainly S. S. Van Dine’s Philo Vance also falls prey to the same tendency to speak too long and too repetitively. Perhaps the authors were getting paid by the word or the page. Or perhaps without the repetition it would have been clear that the authors had chosen to write a novel length short story.
Why were the "regular police" so painfully inadequate at even the most routine aspects of their job?
Authorial laziness? Ellery brilliance is established by his ability to outperform those around him. The more inadequate those around him are the more brilliant Ellery will appear to me. One might also suspect that the authors were themselves rather unaware of routine police procedures and may even have depended on other authors (all of whom also tended to show the police as inadequate) for their information as to how the police function. The inability of the police also makes Inspector Queen’s dependence on his son look less like unacceptable.
Why was Ellery, a complete outsider to the police, allowed such privileged access to crime scenes and witnesses often without any official oversight at all?
The only “in universe” explanation I can think of is nepotism. The “our world” answer is that it is the authors response to the problem faced by every writer who has as their detective someone who is not a member of the police force. Some authors, notably Conan Doyle, have their detectives either hired by people who are involved as victims, witnesses or suspects or asked to consult by the police themselves. Others, such as Rex Stout and Dashiell Hammett, had their detectives work, professionally, as private investigators. Every author needs to find a reason to have their detective on the scene of the crime. Ellery Queen, the writers, choose to have Ellery Queen, their detective, given as much access to the crime and witnesses as would a police officer without being limited by the rule of law as to what they can do and say.
The fact that all of these questions arose in my mind while reading this book, as indeed did the answers I have suggested, indicates the weakness of this particular mystery. So far neither the first nor the second Ellery Queen outing have done much to indicate why this particular fictional detective was so popular other than to highlight the nature of the audience they appealed to at the time they were first published.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ricardob
The French Powder Mystery is the second in the Ellery Queen series. The narrated events are all in a small time frame and are nothing but the investigation of Ellery and inspector Queen on the crime. There are no big twists or events that make the reader wonder, shift and go from one character to
As oposed to the "Finishing Stroke" which I previously read, this book fails to engage the reader in the search. But, somehow, it still manages to be an interesting enough book.
I especially advise Ellery queen's books to anyone looking for a fun but overall easy read.
Show More
the other in search of the assassin.As oposed to the "Finishing Stroke" which I previously read, this book fails to engage the reader in the search. But, somehow, it still manages to be an interesting enough book.
I especially advise Ellery queen's books to anyone looking for a fun but overall easy read.
Show Less
LibraryThing member JeffreyMarks
A wonder of deduction!
LibraryThing member Jiraiya
The title is misleading. There are two different powders present on the crime scene, but the case cannot be summed up in this title. I like this book. In the past perhaps it would have earned a perfect five stars. Just a friction in the reading experience which denied this fine book a perfect
This is the second Ellery Queen book of my reading. The first, "The Roman Hat Mystery" was inferior to this one. The murderer for both books aren't colorfully and audaciously painted. Unlike other great mystery writers, the two writers of this book don't take pains in depicting characters that may be guilty. That's not how they operate. The paucity of detail for the murderer in hindsight reminds me of lesser, downright cozy mysteries. But make no mistake; this story is crafted in a masterful hand.
In the timeline of this work of fiction, the unveiling of the criminal takes 60 hours, counting from the murder itself. Due to this, there aren't any bloated side stories to take care of. There's no fat in the telling. Curiously, no evidence was available for nailing the culprit. That does occur sometimes, but in my naivety I thought the logical process in knowing the criminal would be proof itself even in court. But in all appearances that was not true. I'm happy having read this book and look forward to more from Ellery Queen.
Show More
score. The story ends right where the identity of the murderer is revealed. The end is abrupt, so that one gasps. But I like it.This is the second Ellery Queen book of my reading. The first, "The Roman Hat Mystery" was inferior to this one. The murderer for both books aren't colorfully and audaciously painted. Unlike other great mystery writers, the two writers of this book don't take pains in depicting characters that may be guilty. That's not how they operate. The paucity of detail for the murderer in hindsight reminds me of lesser, downright cozy mysteries. But make no mistake; this story is crafted in a masterful hand.
In the timeline of this work of fiction, the unveiling of the criminal takes 60 hours, counting from the murder itself. Due to this, there aren't any bloated side stories to take care of. There's no fat in the telling. Curiously, no evidence was available for nailing the culprit. That does occur sometimes, but in my naivety I thought the logical process in knowing the criminal would be proof itself even in court. But in all appearances that was not true. I'm happy having read this book and look forward to more from Ellery Queen.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ChazziFrazz
This is one of Queen's earliest ones. I liked that he had the cast of characters in the front and a couple of drawings of the locations involved.
With lots to draw from it kept your mind going on figuing out who was the guilty party. Lots of red herrings and twists and turns, but not too many that
With lots to draw from it kept your mind going on figuing out who was the guilty party. Lots of red herrings and twists and turns, but not too many that
Show More
you got too lost. Show Less
LibraryThing member EricCostello
Not entirely satisfactory mystery, which revolves around the discovery of a body in the display window of a fashionable Fifth Avenue, New York City department store. The body turns out to be the wife of the owner of the establishment, and in the course of the next few days, Ellery Queen, assisting
Show More
his father, Inspector Richard Queen, cracks the case. I didn't cotton to the book very much, since the driving motive of the story didn't get developed until late in the book. Modern readers (the original book came out in 1930) may also quail at the casual fashion in which the evidence is handled. One of the key elements of the story -- what happened to the blood of the victim -- would be a farce by today's standards, with today's detection methods. Even by 1930s standards, it stretches a point. I also wasn't terribly satisfied by the casual nature in which the guilty party seemed to have been "allowed" to commit the crime. Early in the series, but not very satisfactory. This edition (at least my copy) had a serious flaw, in that the first few pages of the first chapter were omitted. Can't say I recommend. Show Less
Subjects
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
1930
Physical description
285 p.; 6.75 inches
Other editions
The French Powder Mystery: A Problem in Deduction by Ellery Queen (Paper Book)