R. Austin Freeman’s The Mystery of Angelina Frood (1924), which celebrates its centenary this month, is a playful homage to one
of the greatest mysteries of English literature as well as an atmospheric and ingenious
thriller.
As I have suggested before, Freeman has a good claim to be
the perennial vice-captain to Conan Doyle in the Victorian and Edwardian
detective story. His main investigator, Dr John Thorndyke, is both a doctor and
a barrister, useful attributes in the crime field. He is assisted by his own
Watson, Jervis, and by a factotum, Mr Polton, who is a dab hand in the
laboratory with forensic experiments.
Like Arthur Machen, Freeman seems to have known the byways
and backwaters of London well and these often feature in his fiction. And like
Conan Doyle, he sometimes seems to be enjoying stretching the reader’s
credulity with high-spirited plots, which, however, may be enjoyed for their
audacity and verve.
I have discussed in a note on the ‘Strange Case of JohnJasper’ the numerous attempts to solve Charles Dickens’ famously unfinished The Mystery of Edwin Drood (1870), including both literary discussion
and fictional continuations, and at least one example of a conclusion said to
have been received from Dickens’ spirit: alas, the great writer’s faculties
appear to have deteriorated somewhat on the astral plane.
M. R. James was also
a keen Droodian and was part of an informal group, The Drood Syndicate, who went on an
excursion to the scene of the story, the Kent cathedral city of Rochester,
where Freeman’s story is also mostly set. Freeman also has scenes in the
neighbouring coastal town of Chatham, evoking its many dim narrow passages down
to the wharves.
Freeman evidently
enjoyed the Drood Game, and in The
Mystery of Angelina Frood, he
devised a lively and mischievous pastiche. The names Drood and Frood no doubt
derive from Strood, a a town adjacent to the cathedral city. There are many sly
allusions throughout to the Dickens novel. One of the plot elements in Dickens’
book involves the action of quicklime upon an interred body, where the science
has in fact moved on since his time. Thorndike, of course, who is well-informed
about the latest forensic advances, and also adept at methodical experiments,
is able to demonstrate that the results cannot quite be as they are often
assumed to be in speculations about Dickens’ book.
Freeman’s tribute is an excellent if somewhat far-fetched
tale of a night-time summons to the doctor, a shifty-looking stranger, a missing
person and a concealed identity, told with the brazen gusto often found in this
author – as I’ve remarked before, I sometimes think he concocted some of his
more bizarre plots for a bet, if only with himself.
Among the theories explored by Drood savants are some
involving shadowy figures, apparent conspiracies, impersonation, and
cross-dressing, and it would be fair to say, without giving too much away, that
Freeman makes use of all of these possibilities. And although in this case he
is evidently relishing recasting Dickens’ Drood, playing with its
themes, refashioning some of its characters in a more modern dress,
nevertheless this is still his tale, with his own inventiveness, and I think
the book still works on its own account, even for any reader unfamiliar with
the Drood aspects.
My copy is an October 1936 reprint: five earlier reprints
are listed after the first printing. It contains the remains of a Sunday School
presentation sticker to a recipient whose name is scribbled out ‘For regular
attendance during the year 194[?]’. I must say this was a more imaginative, and
unusual, gift than the pious and improving tales usually offered.
Freeman’s tale
also led me, incidentally, to an interesting byway. There is a reference in the
book to ‘sermon paper’: the protagonist buys it at a stationer to write a long
report to Dr Thorndyke. I wondered what exactly it was. I found someone else had asked the same
question because of an allusion to it by George Orwell in Keep the Aspidistra Flying. The answer, from the British
Association of Paper Historians, was: ‘Sermon paper is actually Foolscap
Quarto, nominally 8 x 6 1/2 inches (but there were slight variations between
batches). The paper was sold 'ruled feint', i.e. lined with the thinnest line a
nib could produce. In the 19th century these were produced by lining machines
with adjustable nibs. During the 20th century the lines were printed using
lithography.’
An old advertisement of Partridge and Cooper, Manufacturing
Stationers, of 192 Fleet Street (Corner of Chancery Lane) offers it plain 4s a
ream, ruled 4s 6d. One can imagine Victorian churchgoers groaning inwardly as
the parson flourished in the pulpit a closely-written sheaf of the
ecclesiastical foolscap. Does anyone produce—or use— sermon paper today?
(Mark Valentine)