Academic Setting?

An interesting similarity between this book and the last is that, unlike other mystery books I have read, both main characters call in outside help—Harriet calls Wimsey and Kate brings in her detective friend to help solve the case. However, Kate also calls a distant relative (her niece’s fiancé whom she doesn’t know well) to help assist her in the matter as well so that he may act as outside objective help in clearing Emanuel’s name—asking questions of others that she may not be able to. She cannot—will not—believe Emanuel is guilty and will do everything in her power in order to see that his name is cleared. (She doesn’t talk of clearing Nicola’s name (Emanuel’s wife). (I wonder why? Perhaps it’s because he’s the primary suspect, but at the same time, Nicola is second to him…) Kate’s confidence in his innocence convinces the reader that there is no possible way that he could be the murderer (and then watch at the end of the book that it turns out to be him in some twisted scheme!). However, even Emanuel believes his story “sounds crazy when you say it” because he claims to have been briskly walking around the reservoir during the time the crime was committed—like he did in his younger days (that’s certainly suspicious). The strange thing is that Nicola, his wife, claimed to be in the park during the time of the murder when she was supposed to be at her analysis appointment (with another doctor of course). To me, this puts a big target on her back, but Kate seems determined to find man X who was connected with Janet Harrison in some way and knew of her psychoanalyst sessions. She is overly confident in this respect because there is no real evidence in his existence except a picture of a male in his thirties found in Janet’s purse (he looks to be around Janet’s age; she was in grad school). Still, Kate is blind to the possibility of it actually being one of her friends, even though I’ll admit it seem absurd that they’d commit murder in their own apartment (or maybe that’s what they want you to think??).

Having read all of this information, the novel still hasn’t been set in the college (academic setting). I’m beginning to think that for a book to be classified under the academic mystery genre, it just has to involve an academic setting in some way. In this case, the victim, Janet, was a student at a college in which an English professor, Kate, recommended her to a psychoanalyst whose office she was murdered in. So far, there have been no other connections to school though and the suspect list is very limited. Still perhaps the investigation will lead Kate to interrogate some of the students at the school in order to know more about Janet’s whereabouts because she is still a big mystery thus far. This could possibly lead to a great deal more suspects…

Redefining the Academic Mystery Genre

This book, In the Last Analysis, began in the traditional Dan Brown style, presenting key information at the beginning of the novel in a prologue. (For this reason, unlike “Gaudy Night,” I could tell this would be a mystery.) However, instead of presenting a murder at the beginning, Cross decides to introduce the reader to the key characters, their relationships and occupations. The main character Kate Fansler is an English professor. (Like in Gaudy Night, a female is the main character. Surely there must be some male leads in this genre…) Her friend Emanuel Bauer is a psychoanalyst whose office is located in his apartment, which is home to him, his wife Nicola, and their three boys.

After this introduction, Kate is visited by Captain Stern, a detective, and after an interrogation about her whereabouts and one of her students, he tells her that the student she recommended to her friend Emanuel has been murdered—stabbed in the back while lying on the couch in Emanuel’s office. This is a complete shock to Kate and she decides to take it upon herself to find the murderer in this matter because she knows that Emanuel couldn’t have murdered his patient (it’s bad for business and she’s knows him personally) and because she feels guilty about the girl’s death since she recommended her. However, Emanuel’s the police’s prime suspect because he has no alibi for the time the patient/student, Janet Harrison, was murdered with one of his kitchen knives (in his office) during their scheduled 11:00 session. Of course, Emanuel denies all accusations, claiming both his eleven and twelve o’clock patients cancelled (coincidence?), so he went for a brisk walk around the reservoir. For some reason, I believe him.

Already there are huge differences between this book and the last (Gaudy Night). First off, there is a murder in this book. Second, it doesn’t seem to fall into the academic mystery genre because the murder, and ultimately the plot so far, haven’t taken place in an academic setting. It has taken place in Emanuel’s apartment/office. The only thing academic about it is the fact that Kate’s a college professor and that there is a great deal of interrogation and analyzing of the evidence and the scenario. As a result, there aren’t a wide range of possible suspects like in an academic setting since there are significantly less people involved. Suspects include Kate (since she’s a close friend and knows the Bauers’ routine), Emanuel, his wife Nicola, the neighboring doctor (Dr. Michael Barrister), one of his patients, the apartment butler, or man X who knew Kate’s whereabouts and wanted her dead (Kate’s theory).

However, like in Gaudy Night, motive is unknown. A large part of this is due to the fact that nobody seems to know a lot about Janet Harrison—not even the police—and Emanuel isn’t speaking about their sessions because it’s against the psychoanalyst code. Plus, similar to Harriet, Kate takes it upon herself to solve the case.

This book seems to be moving a lot faster than Gaudy Night and I can say that I like this adrenaline rush. It keeps the reader interested. Kate attempts to get right to the point, interrogating both Emanuel and Nicola, and calling in an old friend for help. She’s eager to find the murderer as well as probably to solve the case like her beloved Lord Peter Wimsey whom she mentions only pages into novel, comparing his personality to the dry Captain Stern. It will be interesting to see Gaudy Night’s influence on this book, since Wimsey seems to be the quintessential detective…at least to Kate.

In the Last Analysis by Amanda Cross

This is the second book I have chosen to read in my quest to understand the academic mystery genre. The feminist author Amanda Cross, pseudonym for Carolyn Gold Heilbrun, is considered to have dominated this genre. She published this book in 1964. For more information on her, you can read the obituary about her at http://www.guardian.co.uk/obituaries/story/0,3604,1073806,00.html.

She committed suicide on October 9, 2003 claiming to be "at the end of [her] sixties 'half in love with easeful death'." This seems odd to me…how about anyone else? Is there another story? Through all my research, I have yet to find another reason for her suicide, but perhaps from reading her book, I’ll be able to make an assumption since it involves death and a female English professor (which she herself was).

Wait—Gaudy Night’s Not Done Yet

Before moving to the next book, I forgot to update you all on the romance between Harriet and Lord Peter. (Sorry the other post ran a little long.) Annie’s outburst involved Harriet and Peter when she pointed out that Harriet was stringing Peter along, calling him to help solve the case when she had no intentions of being with him. In my opinion, this is very true. She didn’t want to commit to a relationship in fear of losing her independence, although she admitted that Peter wouldn’t let her do this. So after the case was concluded, Harriet had time to think and felt very sorry for the way she acted towards Peter. In the end, Peter asks Harriet one last time to marry him. After thinking a bit, she answers “Placet,” which I assume the reader is supposed to infer means “yes” since the novel ends with them “closely and passionately embracing.” I think it’s customary for books in this genre to make up of cryptic texts and different languages because it makes the text appear more scholarly and academic, especially since one must analyze it to discover its meaning, as I discovered in this book. Having said this, I looked up “placet” and found that it means petition in French. This thoroughly confuses me…perhaps in the past, it meant yes in French.

By having Harriet accept the proposal, (assuming she said yes) Sayers is making the statement that a woman can be a wife as well as be educated, as opposed to the view Annie advocated: woman should not receive an education, but instead should take care of a family and perform hard, honest work. Sayers’s feminist view fits the times, 1920s, at least in America since by this time women had won the right to vote and many traditions were changing—not to mention that the flapper image was becoming very popular. I’m not sure about England at the time and am inclined to believe that women still didn’t have a great deal of freedom during this era, which could be why Sayers’s reason for writing the novel.