The Tragedy of Z (1933) by Ellery Queen

This is the third third book in a series I’ve read this month. I didn’t plan it this way!

I read The Tragedy of Z in The XYZ Murders omnibus, and the introduction to this book says that, in-universe, it was a decade between The Tragedy of Y and the current work, although in-real life only a year passed. Why we established this, I don’t know. And seeing as this intro was written by Ellery Queen, I’m guessing that it was now common knowledge in 1933 that “Barnaby Ross” and “Ellery Queen” were the same people? Any Queen fans want to fill me in on any of this?

Anyway, it’s been a decade. District Attorney Bruno is now Governor Bruno, and Inspector Thumm has retired from the force and become a PI. Joining him is his daughter, Patience, fresh off spending her education in Europe. She’s the narrator of our tale. Now, I don’t know about you but hearing that the Queen cousins were going to write from the point of view of a woman filled me with dread and terror. Thankfully, Patience isn’t actually too bad, barring some bits that I’m inclined to think were just the Queen cousins trying to emulate romance stories of the time.

When our book begins, Thumm has picked up a new client. Elihu Clay is an honest businessman, but he’s worried that his partner, Dr. Ira Fawcett, is using his company as a shield for shady doings. These are wise suspicions, seeing as the good doctor’s brother, Joel, is the corrupt senator of Tilden County…and the doctor is suspected of being the power behind the throne. So the Thumms set out to dig around for some evidence against the doctor (and Patience to dodge Elihu’s son’s amorous charms), but their investigation is soon derailed…by murder!

Joel Fawcett is found stabbed to death inside his home. There’s no shortage of people, personal or political, who might have thought he was better off silenced forever. He’s clutching part of a wooden chest with the letters “HA” carved into it. Contra what you would expect from a Queen novel, this isn’t a dying message, but some sort of threat, with accompanying blackmail letter from Aaron Dow. Dow has spent the past twelve years in the nearby Algonquin Prison for manslaughter, so what could he have had on the senator? Dow was released the day of the murder, making him suspect number one, but Patience is sure, based on her analysis of the scene, that he’s totally innocent. Of course, mere logic won’t convince the ambitious local DA, especially not from a woman, meaning her and her father have to turn to another authority: Drury Lane.

I gotta admit, I see the DA’s point. Patience’s logic is interesting, but I don’t quite buy the science behind it myself. Oh well. The central idea of getting an innocent man off the hook is a good one that gives the book some forward momentum and (for me at least) automatically leads to some investment as we see the noose tighten around Dow’s neck. Interesting to note that Queen did the same thing in Tragedy of X. Like X though, it has the same problem of there not really being anything else to sink your teeth into after the first murder. There’s more incident, yes, and some good cluing, but I could see readers getting bored after the trial. Also, while there’s some promising nods in the direction of pork, graft, and small-town corruption, none of that goes anywhere.

One thing that makes this book interesting and gives it a little more heft is the Queen cousins’ obvious criticism of the death penalty, and the prison system in general. We get an actual execution halfway through and it’s portrayed as grotesque and horrifying. I’d be curious to know how common anti-death penalty attitudes were in 1933. I’m not saying the Queens’ were taking some bold stance or anything but compare this to some British Golden Age novels that are much more cavalier about this. We’re three years off from Halfway House, the Queen cousins’ “first” stab at social commentary under their own name, so it’s interesting to see them trying to address social issues in an earlier book. Sadly, I don’t know if that really makes the book “good,” in light of the issues I mentioned about.

Ho-Ling praised Z for its logic chain at the end and, okay, that final sequence is great. Drury Lane interrupts another execution to demonstrate who the actual culprit is, and the logic is probably the most solid of these first three books. Less pedantic waffling about height and instead brutal and efficient elimination of all the suspects. It’s great. I like the final point that knocks the candidates for killer down to one. I don’t like how Lane’s starting point is a detail that it easy to skip over and only gets mentioned once, but the Queens would probably just tell me to pay closer attention. But I’d argue that the Queens shot themselves in the foot a bit here. (ROT13: Fb, gur xvyyre vf pbaarpgrq gb gur cevfba orpnhfr ur bcraf gur yrggre nobhg cevfba cebzbgvbaf. Bxnl, snve. Ohg gura Ynar’f rkcynangvba vf gung gur xvyyre znqr n jvyq nffhzcgvba nobhg jung vg pbagnvarq. Vg qvqa’g fvg evtug.) And the motive falls short for me. (ROT13: Nyy gur ohvyq-hc gb gur gvghyne gentrql gung tnir Qbj fb zhpu cbjre, naq vg unf fb yvggyr gb qb jvgu gur pevzr.)

So, in the end, it’s hard for me to really recommend this book, especially to those who aren’t already sold on Queen. I enjoyed it, but you might not, and I can see good reasons why someone wouldn’t enjoy it. I guess I’ll say that if “The detective interrupts an execution to lecture on how he solved the crime for ten pages” makes you sit up and pay attention, this is the book for you. If not, skip it. Recommended, with Caveats.

Other Reviews: Ah, Sweet Mystery, The Case Files of Ho-Ling, Dead Yesterday, Reading Ellery Queen.