Reg Wexford and Mike Burden, the two top cops of Kingsmarkham, have a very cunningly conceived plan to unravel in their ninth case, which has always been one of my favourites. Angela Hathall is found strangled in the home she shares with her beloved husband Robert, who discovers the body on his return from collecting his (absolutely awful) mother from London for a visit. Actually, its his mother who discovers the body, and in a way she is quite pleased as she much preferred his first wife …
I submit this review for Bev’s 2015 Silver Age Vintage Mystery Challenge; and Friday’s Forgotten Books meme run by Patti Abbott at her fab Pattinase blog.
She paused and smiled. “People make such a mess of their lives, don’t they?”
After fifteen years of marriage Robert left his wife after meeting Angela, leading to a bitter feud including his teenage daughter and his mother. Ultimately the divorce settlement was made, leaving Robert and Angela virtually penniless, so they moved to their current little house, owned by her distant cousin. The two had no friends and no social life, apparently disdainful of others and happiest in their own company. And now she has been found dead. There is virtually no physical evidence to speak of – the house had been thoroughly and meticulously cleaned for the arrival of Hathall’s exacting mother (a doomed attempt at a rapprochement) so there are practically no fingerprints, no evidence of a break-in and because the house is so isolated, there are no witnesses. The one piece of evidence is the hand print of a woman found inside the bath – it has an L-shaped scar on the forefinger and when Wexford asks Hathall about it, he is sure the man is lying when he says he doesn’t know who it could belong to. Reg becomes convinced Hathall is guilty of the murder, despite the fact that he has an unbreakable alibi (he was in London at work all day before meeting his mother at the strain station) and no apparent motive as everyone said he loved Angela.
“I’ve never come across a family so nourished on hatred”
Having just re-read The Pledge (which I reviewed just the other day), I was surprised by the similarities of these two novels. In both at the halfway mark the detective is told the investigation is closed but decides to go it alone having become obsessed with solving the murder. In Wexford’s case it takes him 15 months to find the solution, going so far as to hire a man to watch Hathall after he moves back to London. He even involves his nephew Howard, also in the police, to carry on the investigation unofficially. But is Reg right, or is he letting the fact that he, like everybody else, has taken an instant dislike to Hathall, mar his judgement? And how is the alluring Nancy Lake, who briefly met Angela that day, involved? Will Reg succumb to her charms? What is she hiding ..? And what about that book on Gaelic?
I recommended this one to my blogging buddy the Puzzle Doctor but, as you can see from his review at In Search of the Classic Mystery Novel, he was very far from impressed. Bev’s impressions of it over at My Reader’s Block however chimed in much more with my own. I still think the central idea a very clever one and liked the way that Rendell handled Reg’s obsession and the apparently pointless manhunt.
Following on from the success of his Adam Dalgliesh TV serials, producer John Goldsmith decided to give the Wexford books the same treatment, starting with Wolf to the Slaughter. The results were a bit mixed (the music was execrable, later replaced by a much more memorable Brian Bennett score) but he definitely got the casting right with the late George Baker perfect as Wexford and Christopher Ravenscroft perhaps even better as his often hard-to-like sidekick, Burden; Louie Ramsay co-starred as the Inspector’s wife, Dora (she and Baker later married in real life) while from Some Lie and Some Die onwards, Diane Keen joined the cast as Jenny, Burden’s second wife. The 1988 TV adaptation of Shake Hands Forever is in three one-hour episodes and quite remarkably faithful, following the original structure precisely and keeping pretty much all the characters, situation and dialogue with a minimum of alteration or embellishment. Shot on video tape but out of the studio and on location, it privileges dialogue at all times and so this can make it a bit slow-moving (and a bit pointless if you’ve actually read the book) but along with the stars the supporting cast is truly first-rate, with Tom Wilkinson incredibly good as the disagreeable Hathall.
The Wexford TV series
- Wolf to the Slaughter (1987) – 4 parter
- A Guilty Thing Surprised (1988) – 3 parter
- Shake Hands Forever (1988) – 3 parter
- No Crying He Makes (1988) – TV Movie
- No More Dying Then (1989) – 3 parter
- A Sleeping Life (1989) – 3 parter
- The Veiled One (1989) – TV Movie
- Some Lie and Some Die (1990) – 3 parter
- The Best Man to Die (1990) – 3 parter
- An Unkindness of Ravens (1990) – 2 parter
- Put on by Cunning (1990) – TV Movie
- A New Lease of Death (1991) – 3 parter
- Murder Being Once Done (1991) – 3 parter
- From Doon with Death (1991) – 2 parter
- Means of Evil (1991) – 2 parter
- Achilles’ Heel (1991) – TV Movie
- The Speaker of Mandarin (1992) – 3 parter
- The Mouse in the Corner (1992) – 2 parter
- An Unwanted Woman (1992) – 2 parter
- Kissing the Gunner’s Daughter (1992) – 4 parter
- Simisola (1996) – 3 parter
- Road Rage (1998) – 2 parter
- Harm Done (2000) – TV Movie
DVD Availability: Although released in the good old days of VHS, this has not, to my knowledge, yet been released on DVD in the UK though you can get it in Germany.
Shake Hands Forever (1988)
Director: Don Leaver
Producer: Neil Zeiger
Screenplay: Clive Exton
Cinematography:
Art Direction: Christine Ruscoe
Music: Brian Bennett
Cast: George Baker, Christopher Ravenscroft, Louie Ramsay, Tom Wilkinson, Margery Mason, Michael Byrne, Bernard Holley, June Ritchie, Geoffrey Beevers
I submit this review for Bev’s 2015 Silver Age Vintage Mystery Challenge bingo in the ‘detective team’ category:
Sergio – This is a nice little puzzle, isn’t it? I think the puzzle itself is one of the better aspects of this novel, to be frank. I admit I’ve not seen the TV adaptation, but it’s good to hear that it stays close to the book.
Thanks Margot – the puzzle for me was a really good one – I admit, without it, this would lose so ,much impact. The TV version is sadly hard to get.
I remember enjoying this one quite a lot . . . but virtually nothing else about it: unsurprising, since it must be at least 30 years since I read it. Your excellent account has resolved me to give it a re-read: many thanks.
Now, is it lurking somewhere on the shelves, or . . .?
Thanks John – the Rendell books from the 70s were the ones that Julian Symons singled out and I am tempted to agree
Whenever I read a review like this one I again wish I liked Rendell/Wexford more than I do. Apart from Road Rage (which I am inordinately fond of) they’re not really my thing but you’ve made me want them to be.
Thanks very much Bernadette – I dare say one appreciated Rendell more than one likes 🙂 But having said that, I always really liked the ingenious central conceit here.
Thanks for the mention, Sergio! I was a huge Rendell fan back in my twenties. When I read her now it’s more hit and miss–fortunately this one was a hit for me. I tried to re-read A Judgement in Stone last year and just couldn’t manage it.
That one is a toughie, very much a pre-Barbara Vine excursion as I recall. Thanks Bev.
” I was surprised by the similarities of these two novels.”
However, the ending is so dissimilar. One leads to success and the other to failure and frustration.
Definitely Santosh – Durrenmatt was deliberately eschewing the conventional solution (though he did provide one) but as it was a coincidence that I re-read them both it struck how, until that point, as you say, they really do share a lot of similarities.
Well, I said my piece over in my review, but the cast of the TV version makes me vaguely inclined to watch it. Vaguely…
I feel like I let you down there buddy – Wilkinson is just superb in it. On the other hand, particularly those aspects of the B plot involving Wexford personal life, are exactly as in the book so would probably just piss you off all over again 🙂
Don’t let it worry you. Generally I haven’t been impressed by Rendell in general – but others do. I imagine more people will prefer this to books with chef detectives and their pigs (unfortunately).
All a bit porcine when it comes to cops these days … 🙂
Truth be told, Wilkinson is superb in most things – but it is weird now that he’s in Hollywood that he tends to put on an American accent (eg Batman Begins). Just sounds… wrong. Not a bad accent, just a voice in your head saying… “but he’s English”
I agree, especially as I still think of him as being the perfect incarnation of Charlie Resnick in the few BBC adaptations made decades ago from John Harvey’s books. Did you ever see IN THE BEDROOM, with Wilkinson starring opposite Sissy Spaceck? Gloomy but brilliant.
Didn’t realise he was Resnick. And no to In The Bedroom. Very rarely go for the gloomy genre… Hence my general avoidance of Scandi-noir or whatever they’re calling it these days…
Fair enough – yes, he was a fine Resnick, but only a couple of the books were filmed back in 1992 and he never returned – coming out on DVD in the US: http://www.amazon.com/Inspector-Resnick-Lonely-Hearts-Treatment/dp/B00BVMX96I
I bought (over several years) all the Wexford’s to re-read them (except for a few around the 90’s that I never read). This one definitely seems worth a re-read. I don’t remember much about any of them except I enjoyed them. Interesting about the TV series. I did not even know it existed until recently.
Not all the TV adaptations were as slavishly faithful as this one (especially those based on the short stories, predictably) – actually, George Baker (Wexford) even wrote some of the scripts later on – worth a look Tracy if you are ever inclined to!
Sounds like it might be of interest. I never got into Rendell – so many books I was never sure where to start – the psychological stuff didn’t seem like my cup of tea, and I remember the Wexford stories on TV didn’t grab me, although I only ever watched snippets.
Ah, well, the TV versions were a bit slow but are a very fair indicator of what you will find – I always recommend the Wexfords from the 1970s but not for everyone, clearly. This one is damn clever though!.
A slower pace can sometimes work better on paper – I like the fact you say this one’s clever. One for the future.
In terms of plot, I was always particularly partial to this one as well as A Sleeping Life and A Guilty Thing Surprised.
OK, noted. 🙂
🙂
I watched many (probably most and possibly all) of the TV adaptations, and in general enjoyed them hugely. I rewatched one recently (found on YouTube, as I recall) and, yes, it had dated a bit and seemed somewhat clunky, but it was still well worth the time it took.
George Baker makes a splendid Wexford — a definitive one, I’d say.
I agree completely John – it’s a shame that the earlier ones, shot on tape like the initial Adam Dalgliesh serials, have not been deemed worthy of commercial DVD release. I am a huge fan of the somewhat theatrical style, but many feels it is too old fashioned in lacking in dynamism – shame.
I had a chance to talk with Ruth Rendell at a BOUCHERCON in Philadelphia years ago. Rendell was very gracious. I told her I loved her books especially her darker “Barbara Vine” novels. When I asked Rendell who her favorite writer was, she answered, “Henry James.”
Thanks for that George – and of course James makes total sense as a choice for her.
Ah, I really remember this book. It’s the bread and butter of my teenage reading. And I can really remember the plot. I must go back and read some old Ruth Rendell. I’ve forgotten how wonderful she was.
Isn’t that funny – I found myself remembering the main plot and end twist from 2 decades a go (or whatever it was) but little else!
I enjoyed both the book and the TV version, but my favourite Wexfords are the under-estimated Put on by Cunning (very clever solution) and A Sleeping Life. On the whole, I prefer her non-Wexfords, written up to the end of the Nineties under her own name and as Barbara Vine, which I think include some of the best crime novels ever published.
On the whole, I prefer her non-Wexfords . . . under her own name and as Barbara Vine, which I think include some of the best crime novels ever published.
I’d go along with that. Her The Chimney-Sweeper’s Boy (1998, as Vine) isn’t even recognizably a crime novel yet it’s still magnificent. In fact, now that you’ve mentioned it, her The Birthday Present (2008, as Vine) has just made the migration from the bookcase to the nightstand . . .
now that you’ve mentioned it
Or not, as the case may be . . .
Should have, clearly … :P)
Have yet to read either of those – thanks for the prompt John.
Thanks Martin – I would definitely agree with regard to the Wexfords – and I suspect you are right, it’s the non-series and especially the Vine books she’ll be best remembered for.
I can remember reading this back in the day, and ultimately being puzzled by one thing: Hathall’s reaction to the finding of the handprint. I couldn’t make sense of it, even after finishing the book. I can’t remember much else about the plot, so I don’t know if that was me being slow or not! I’m going to have to get it down again and work out why that one moment in the book made such an impression on me….
Well, you’ve got me a bit puzzled Moira! Surely, it’s just that the hand print was left by mistake as it belongs to the wrong woman, right?
Yes, but his reaction seems completely OTT – they surely must have considered this possibility? And does it actually make that much difference? And if you are going to have an L-shaped scar isn’t it going to have to mean a bit more than that? When I first read it, I assumed that this discovery must mean that Hathall had not realized until that moment who had done the murder, and suddenly was horrified. And if I had been writing it I would have made that the case 😉
Well, it’s a gigantic cock up though – and it does completely screw his plan, be fair 🙂 Without that Wexford would have had nothing to go on at all
Man, atop all else, one of my last tasks at my now former job was straightening out a US import package of Rendell adaptations…
You mentioned moving on -to something better I hope?
We can hope!
Excellent 🙂
Sergio, hopefully, Ruth Rendell will be one of the major female authors for me to read this year. Like Colin, I never got into her books.
Very interested to see what you make of her – certainly a major author in the genre.
Pingback: Top 25 TV Detectives | Tipping My Fedora
Pingback: Shake Hands for Ever (Ruth Rendell) – The Grandest Game in the World