The Affair of the Avalanche Bicycle and Tyre Co. Ltd

I’ve watched an entry in ‘The Rivals of Sherlock Holmes’ series, this time based on a short story by Arthur Morrison. Morrison was a significant figure in the early days of the detective story. He is probably best known as the creator of Martin Hewitt, a detective who contrasted with Sherlock Holmes mainly because of his relentless ordinariness. Hewitt may have lacked charisma, but Morrison was an interesting writer, and a more fascinating creation, to my mind, was the protagonist of this episode – Horace Dorrington.

What is interesting about Dorrington is that he is not a good guy. It’s quite clear from the outset that he is cunning and manipulative. He is a private eye who has retrieved embarrassing letters for a wealthy woman, but although he claims to have paid for them, and is amply recompensed, in fact he freely admits to his secretary that he stole them. He takes an interest in the forthcoming flotation of a bicycle company, only to find that a financial scam is afoot. Dorrington being Dorrington, he determines to turn matters to his advantage, and does so effectively and indeed murderously.

Dorrington strikes me as almost a Victorian precursor of Tom Ripley (I realise there are differences, but it’s not a completely misleading comparison, I think.) Certainly, the affable sociopath strikes me as a rather modern figure in some ways, and this is a tribute to Morrison’s concept. The story came from a collection called The Dorrington Deed Box.

In the tv show, Dorrington is played by Peter Vaughan. This is an excellent piece of casting, for few actors do gleeful menace as well as Vaughan. The supporting cast is good, too – and Dorrington’s secretary is played by Petronella Barker, who apparently was the first wife of Sir Anthony (‘Hannibal the Cannibal’) Hopkins. . An entertaining tale that I was glad to watch.

Ripley and Gorse

The first book in the Patrick Hamilton’s Gorse trilogy, part of which sourced the excellent tv series The Charmer, was The West Pier. Graham Greene generously described it as ‘the best book written about Brighton’. It was published in 1951, and was followed by Mr Stimpson and Mr Gorse (1953) and Unknown Assailant (1955). The series was actually meant to be a quartet, but the fourth book never appeared.

These were the last books written by Hamilton, who is better known as the playwright who wrote Gaslight and the Hitchcock-filmed Rope. He remains a cult favourite as a novelist, with many prominent admirers, though his life ended in 1962 (when he was only 58) in misery and alcoholism. The sourness with which he viewed life when he wrote the books is reflected in the character of Gorse, a man wholly without consicence.

I wonder if Patricia Highsmith read Hamilton before she created Tom Ripley – whose first appearance was in 1955. Of course, there are many differences between the two men, but there are also similarities. They are superficially charming, and can behave in an attractive manner, but their only real concern is themselves.

The fact that both characters first appeared within four years of each other is fascinating, regardless of whether Highsmith knew of Hamilton’s work (he isn’t mentioned in her exhaustive biography). It’s quite common for two different writers to come up with ideas that seem similar, independently of each other. Something in the ethos of the times, perhaps. There are suggestions, for instance, that Hamilton was influenced by the crimes of Neville Heath in his creation of Gorse, and I think that is possible (gorse, heath, get it?) although some have suggested that the fact that the stories are set before Heath started his crime spree means that a likelier inspiration for Gorse was Smith, the Brides in the Bath murderer.

I’m not aware of any critic of the genre who has made any sort of a connection between Gorse and Ripley – perhaps it might be said that there isn’t much of a connection to be made. But I can’t think off-hand of any series protagonists before this odd couple who display so clearly the grim conscienceless of the sociopath, however apparently affable, that has proved such fertile ground for modern writers such as Ruth Rendell.

Ripley Under Water

The fifth and final CD in the Ripley Mysteries series was probably the most enjoyable as all. Ripley Under Water begins splendidly, with Tom receiving a phone call, supposedly from Dickie Greenleaf – the first person he murdered, years ago.

It soon becomes apparent that someone is obsessed with Tom – and it proves to be a new neighbour, a fellow American called Pritchard, who has moved in to the village with his brittle wife. Pritchard, it seems, is a sadist who beats up his wife every now and then. He has found out about Tom’s murky past, and is determined to subject him to mental torture.

Tom is, of course, not a good man to cross, and before long he is pitting his wits against Pritchard. It becomes increasingly clear that both men cannot survive. But who will be victor, and who the vanquished? And how many other people will suffer collateral damage?

I thought this story was beautifully done. The ending wasn’t entirely satisfactory, to my mind, but it was elegant and certainly in keeping with Highsmith’s eccentric yet fascinating style of story-telling

The five CDs in this set make for great, off-beat listening. Even if you are not an ardent Highsmith fan, I think you will probably enjoy them.

The Boy Who Followed Ripley

The Boy who Followed Ripley, fourth in Patricia Highsmith’s series, makes for very good CD listening. I felt it was a distinct improvement on Ripley’s Game. In this story, a young American lad who claims to be 18 but looks a couple of years younger approaches Ripley, and it soon becomes clear both that he has (for some mysterious reason) sought Ripley out, and also that the pair are very much on the same wavelength, psychologically and emotionally (because Ripley, for all his conscience deficit, can certainly be an emotional chap in certain circumstances.)

The truth about the boy’s identity, and his past, soon emerges. Despite the terrible nature of the boy’s revelations, Ripley is strongly attracted to him, and installs him in the house he shares with his rich and glamorous wife, nominally to help with the gardening.

The gay subtext of the earlier Ripley stories is much closer to the surface of this one, and plays a more important part in the development of the plot. There is extensive discussion of Highsmith's gay writing in Andrew Wilson's important biography of her, Beautiful Shadow, which will be the subject of a future post.

Ripley's Game

As I listened to the third CD of the Ripley Mysteries – this time it was Ripley’s Game – I found myself admiring the intensity that Ian Hart brings to the role of Tom Ripley. I’m not familiar with Hart as an actor, but judging by these performances, he is truly a class act. He captures Tom’s ambiguous nature and handles the American accent (to my ear at least) flawlessly. It’s a very convincing portrayal.

I haven’t read the novel on which Ripley’s Game is based, and this may be a disadvantage. The story sees Tom becoming involved with an Englishman called Jonathan, who is induced by one of Tom’s dodgy chums, Reeves, to commit a murder. Soon a second commission is forthcoming, and Tom helps Jonathan out. Before long, the two men become quite attached to each other – with potentially disastrous results.

One of the off-putting features of Highsmith’s work to some readers is its heavy reliance on coincidence and on behaviour that seems irrational on the part of the leading characters. At her best, Highsmith(like the wonderful Ruth Rendell,whom she surely influenced) overcomes these difficulties triumphantly, and manages to say something of real interest about human relationships.

In this particular case, though, I wasn’t entirely convinced. Why would Tom pit himself not only against the forces of law and order, but also against the Mafia? He is impulsive and somewhat lacking in conscience, yes, but he isn’t stupid. I think I’ll have to read the novel to see if it seems more credible.

My own feeling is that Rendell is, overall, an even more successful and gifted writer than Highsmith. But that is to judge by the highest standard. Highsmith, for all her irritating quirks, is fascinating, and she played a crucial part in the development of the novel of psychological suspense.