Kate Summerscale – The Suspicions of Mr Whicher
In one of those ‘brain, you are barking up the wrong tree’ moments, I have had Stevie Wonder’s ‘Superstitious’ in my head since finishing this book. Brain, wouldn’t ‘Suspicious Minds’ be more appropriate? Mr Whicher isn’t even superstitious: he is a man of Science and Deduction and Logic, though he is not averse to a Good Old Fashioned Hunch either.
This book is yet another reminder of the fact that my own hunches are very often wide of the mark. I can’t remember why I didn’t read this book a couple of years ago when everyone else was reading it – I think some combination of the fact that everyone else was reading it (stupid) I wasn’t a big fan of detection, crime or suspense (stupid) and the fact that I entirely failed to understand what it was about (stupid, stupid, stupid). I also think I thought it was a fictionalised version of a true crime and I like my genres straight up, no mixer. Preconceptions and prejudices, you have stopped me from reading The Suspicions of Mr Whicher for far too long. Will you please just go away?
So here we are in mid-19th century England, where Englishmen are proudly surveying their dominion and twiddling their whiskers; so you know All Unholy Manner of Sin is lurking just below. Cue gruesome murder of innocent child.
This is also the moment in which the science of detection is being invented, and detective fiction fever is sweeping the nation.
Mr Whicher mixes up these two worlds: he’s a highly respected and very successful investigator who influences Wilkie Collins (The Woman in White is this years big hit) and Charles Dickens (Inspector Bucket being the first fictional detective). He goes off to investigate said gruesome murder and uncovers a hotbed of sordidness and a blank-eyed army of creepy children.
What I found most interesting was what the book had to say about women at this time and place: more specifically, how society couldn’t make up it’s bloody mind about them. Are they angels in the house? Are they demons, likely be driven mad at any point by their sexy thoughts? Are they pure-hearted victims, likely to be locked away and exploited by doctors, detectives and other authoritative men? Or are they able to exploit their respectability to manipulate the innocent darling men? One of the most ridiculous moments comes when the police are too embarrassed to look at or even talk about, ladies underwear, incase they go blind or something, and so crucial evidence is lost. Also, there were many moments of hollow laughter. I’m glad we’ve learned so much since the 1850s that we no longer experience vigilante justice, or rumours turning up in the press as gospel, or police incompetance and corruption. Ho ho ho.
As you would expect, the TV adaptation boiled Mr Whicher down to its essence – so it was much more a straightforward whodunnit, less about the meaning of the murder than the murder itself. In many ways, this worked really well, because all the spare children and surplus servants were cut out (Victorians, did you really have to name ALL your daughters Mary?) and the narrative was much more straightforward – there was a lot of finicketing around a nightdress which was a lot easier to follow on TV than in the book. It was much more a battle of wills between your standard, brilliant but flawed TV detective, and creepy, intense anti-heroine. Fewer hidden depths and layers, but very enjoyable, nonetheless.
The appearance of Malcolm Tucker as Mr Kent was a disconcerting at first, as I kept expecting him to start screaming the f-word down the phone at Mr Whicher, a la The Thick of It. But in fact, this turned out to be an inspired bit of casting. Mr Whicher was much less an all-round super-detective and Mr Kent was much more of a quivering lipped, emotions thinly hidden, sympathetic gent; making this a much more nuanced duel of the Victorian gentlemen than in the book. Greater emotional complexity on TV than in a book? Who’d have thought it. Well done, ITV. Keep this up, and I might lose my prejudices against you too.
Posted on April 26, 2011, in Uncategorized and tagged book reviews, books, kate summerscale, non-fiction, reading, the suspicions of mr whicher, true-crime, tv, tv reviews. Bookmark the permalink. 17 Comments.
your entire paragraph re: societies views on women at the time had me wishing I could underline my computer screen! So funny, I may have to copy it into my journal just to re-read it whenever I wish.
J
ps i will give you full and clear credit, if that’s okay
Sure, why not!
my group read this and when i finished it my initial thought was “wow..a kid dies a gruesome death and i don’t even care”! we all found it long, drawn out and we didn’t like the combo of mystery/the dawn of detectives
evidently we are in the minority! interesting review
I can see what you mean about it being drawn out – I did feel it could have been a bit shorter and neater, but on the other hand I was enjoying it so I didn’t especially mind!
I didn’t know this had been made into a TV version!
But I too was impressed with it when I read it a few years ago. Fascinating how much class-based resistance there was to the very idea of a police detective in the first place. Whicher’s description of the French pioneering the police-detective profession and the resulting British suspicion of it was fascinating, in addition to all the stuff you rightly point out about ridiculous gender roles.
Yes, that was also a really interesting aspect – the dirty, unwashed, detective getting his mucky paws all over the elegant gentleman and his family. It’s a hard thing to convey sociology without spoiling the story and I’ve not read anything quite like this before.
I am so glad I read this review! I listened to a podcast awhile ago by the woman who wrote it and found it absolutely fascinating. But ever since, I have forgotten the name of the boko and which podcast I listened to – and now hear it is!! Can’t wait to read this one.
I hate it when that happens, so am very glad I’ve been able to jog your memory!
What a marvellous double-review. I enjoyed the adaptation, I must say – though I didn’t watch right to the end, I was getting too sleepy! – and I’m even further behind in the Mr. Whicher stakes than you because I haven’t read it yet either. It’s been on my shelf since it first came out and naturally, got lost amongst all the other hundreds of unread tomes. I wish I’d realised the adaptation was coming out so soon – I would have made an effort to read it, prontissimo!
P.S. Was I the only one who found that girl PROPERLY creepy?? Like, Village of the Damned creepy?
Oh yes, she was definitely super creepy. One of the connections made in the book is the links with Henry James and influence on Turn of the Screw…that definitely came across on TV.
I loved the book and programm too they did a great job on the show the book is so fact filled they did manage to get some of that accross ,also well cast paddy consatine so good as wicher he had right accent and look to be him as he came accross in the book ,all the best stu
AND he had excellent facial hair – those sideburns were spot on!
I thoroughly enjoyed this post, being greatly entertained by your comments as much as by the review. I missed out on reading this one too so I may just have to look it up. No prejudices involved here, just ignorance. Didn’t even know this book existed!
Well thank you Shirley! It was a big summer hit in the UK a couple of years ago.
I thought both the book and tv adaptation were brilliant. But I do have to confess that it took me while to get into the book because of all the detail. And the ending left me with lots of questions.
Pingback: The Suspicions of Mr. Whicher by Kate Summerscale « chasing bawa