Gaslight Digest Wednesday, December 9 1998 Volume 01 : Number 027


In this issue:


   Re: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   Re: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   Re: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply
   The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

-----------------------------THE POSTS-----------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 19:18:30 -0500 (EST)
From: Robert Champ <rchamp(at)polaris.umuc.edu>
Subject: Re: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

I have never known Sam to be so repetitive!

Bob C.

_________________________________________________
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Robert L. Champ
rchamp(at)polaris.umuc.edu
Editor, teacher, anglophile, human curiosity

Those who are alive receive a mandate from those
who are silent forever.  They can fulfill their
duties only by trying to reconstruct precisely
things as they were and by wresting the past
from fictions and legends.
                         --Czeslaw Milosz

rchamp7927(at)aol.com       robertchamp(at)netscape.net
_________________________________________________
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:55:13 -0500
From: Sam Karnick <SAMK(at)hudson.org>
Subject: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Richard's comments on "The Knightsbridge Mystery" are very astute. I would add 
that I thought the perpetrator's reaction upon hearing of the robbery and 
murder -- to express moderate but not overstated concern, and to assist in the 
defense of the suspect -- was very wise. "Cox! No doubt he is a knave," says 
the murderer; "but murder!--I should never have suspected him of that." Just 
the right reaction, I think.

(One thing that often bothers me in COLUMBO is that the suspects typically try 
too hard to deflect suspicion from themselves. One would like to see a suspect 
just play it truly cool and not try to ply the detective with alternative 
explanations to the sutbly-damning statements Columbo typically makes to them, 
which is when they slip up worst. Far better it would be to say, "That's a 
tough one, Lieutenant. I'm sure glad I don't have your job.") The perpetrator 
of this crime plays it just right but is caught anyway.

A nice moment: early on, an unidentified man says, "I like not--a man--who 
wears--a mask," a statement that proves wise in both its literal and figurative 
applications. I found it striking at the time, and enjoyed the way the author 
elaborated on its implications later without restating it explicitly.

Yes, the Captain does seem to have spoiled Jack a bit -- if Gardiner's 
assessment in Chapter 1 is correct. But note that once Jack gets away from his 
father, he turns out to be quite praiseworthy: his college tutor almost 
immediately commends "his ability, good conduct, devotion to study." Later, 
"his tutors also spoke very highly of him." Jack's one fault appears to be a 
certain laxity regarding money, but whereas he is ignorant of his father's 
financial troubles -- which only the father's pride keeps him from knowing -- 
he can certainly be forgiven for asking his father for money.

I found most interesting the illustration of a criminal's typical response to 
being caught: he wasn't doing wrong, really, because it was for the right 
reasons; he had been robbed himself and only wanted the money to help someone 
else. Reade sees through that pretense, noting that the thief had stolen a 
horse at Ipswich many years before, and had escaped prison by use of a file 
brought him by a female admirer. That is to say, his end was evident in his 
beginning.

Best w's,

S.T. Karnick

>>> "Richard L. King" <rking(at)INDIAN.VINU.EDU> 12/08/98 09:01am >>>
I read "The Knightsbridge Mystery" (which I believe we are to discuss
starting today) last night and was very taken with it (a detective
story!), even though it is a sad, sordid little tale of greed and
treachery. I won't mention anything that might spoil it for anyone, but
I will note that this story contains a good example of a dogged
detective who admirably succeeds through determination and the use of
good police methods: interviewing witnesses, putting together facts,
making intelligent deductions, and undertaking a tenacious stakeout and
includes undercover work. We don't see much of the personality of the
detective, Bradbury, who is a professional and behaves professionally in
his handling of the case (whose original solution just didn't smell
right to him).

We get a much more human look, though, at boardinghouse life (or how
Victorian Charles Reade viewed it anyway) during the reign of George I.
Reade unfolds society's daily drama as it impacts people in their
different stations of life as they scrabble and scrap their way. Perhaps
a deeper meaning here is how one's position in life acts as a trap, as
definining walls one cannot break out of. For instance, even the police
detective finds it extremely difficult to get an audience over a
life-and-death matter with the minister who has the power to stop an
execution. Cold, hard cash is all important, and while some people will
do anything to obtain it or keep it, others, like the housekeeper, don't
seem to desire it much (maybe she realizes she has no hope of ever
obtaining any money and is willing to live her life simply as a
boardinghouse servant). Despite a tendency to gossip for entertainment
during this television-deficient time, people generally behave well
toward one another (except for those willing to murder, of course), and
the boardinghouse is a refuge in a town surrounded by dangerous
"footpads" who will rob and kill. When murder takes place in their midst
(almost twice), it is a most horrible violation, since there are
employees (plus a formidable landlady) and locks and keys to keep people
feeling safe from the highwaymen.

As for the dynamics of the main story concerning the Captain, his son,
and the impact of money upon them, well, it might be a good idea to let
other Gaslight readers catch up on their reading before mentioning this.
I will say that I was expecting to learn more about the son and his
possible involvement with the crimes, and I can't quite figure out the
significance of the captain impersonating the parson in another town.
Also remarkable was the extent to which the legal bureaucrats were
willing to help falsify appearances so everything would look well on the
surface. A good story, even though a sad one in many ways.


Richard King
rking(at)indian.vinu.edu

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 16:39:08 -0800
From: Patricia Teter <PTeter(at)getty.edu>
Subject: Re: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Bob writes: <<I have never known Sam to be so repetitive!>>

 [laughing...]
I am glad to see Bob also received the fifty odd copies of
Sam's response.  Sam, are you testing our apathy today?
Or, is this all part of the Knightsbridge Mystery?

Patricia   (I'm still here, but I've not had any time to read the
recent stories.)

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 19:54:40 -0500
From: lpv1(at)is2.nyu.edu
Subject: Re: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply


I've been so busy deleting the posts -- but I promise to read it next time
it comes around --- LOL

  LuciePaula


===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:55:13 -0500
From: Sam Karnick <SAMK(at)hudson.org>
Subject: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Richard's comments on "The Knightsbridge Mystery" are very astute. I would add 
that I thought the perpetrator's reaction upon hearing of the robbery and 
murder -- to express moderate but not overstated concern, and to assist in the 
defense of the suspect -- was very wise. "Cox! No doubt he is a knave," says 
the murderer; "but murder!--I should never have suspected him of that." Just 
the right reaction, I think.

(One thing that often bothers me in COLUMBO is that the suspects typically try 
too hard to deflect suspicion from themselves. One would like to see a suspect 
just play it truly cool and not try to ply the detective with alternative 
explanations to the sutbly-damning statements Columbo typically makes to them, 
which is when they slip up worst. Far better it would be to say, "That's a 
tough one, Lieutenant. I'm sure glad I don't have your job.") The perpetrator 
of this crime plays it just right but is caught anyway.

A nice moment: early on, an unidentified man says, "I like not--a man--who 
wears--a mask," a statement that proves wise in both its literal and figurative 
applications. I found it striking at the time, and enjoyed the way the author 
elaborated on its implications later without restating it explicitly.

Yes, the Captain does seem to have spoiled Jack a bit -- if Gardiner's 
assessment in Chapter 1 is correct. But note that once Jack gets away from his 
father, he turns out to be quite praiseworthy: his college tutor almost 
immediately commends "his ability, good conduct, devotion to study." Later, 
"his tutors also spoke very highly of him." Jack's one fault appears to be a 
certain laxity regarding money, but whereas he is ignorant of his father's 
financial troubles -- which only the father's pride keeps him from knowing -- 
he can certainly be forgiven for asking his father for money.

I found most interesting the illustration of a criminal's typical response to 
being caught: he wasn't doing wrong, really, because it was for the right 
reasons; he had been robbed himself and only wanted the money to help someone 
else. Reade sees through that pretense, noting that the thief had stolen a 
horse at Ipswich many years before, and had escaped prison by use of a file 
brought him by a female admirer. That is to say, his end was evident in his 
beginning.

Best w's,

S.T. Karnick

>>> "Richard L. King" <rking(at)INDIAN.VINU.EDU> 12/08/98 09:01am >>>
I read "The Knightsbridge Mystery" (which I believe we are to discuss
starting today) last night and was very taken with it (a detective
story!), even though it is a sad, sordid little tale of greed and
treachery. I won't mention anything that might spoil it for anyone, but
I will note that this story contains a good example of a dogged
detective who admirably succeeds through determination and the use of
good police methods: interviewing witnesses, putting together facts,
making intelligent deductions, and undertaking a tenacious stakeout and
includes undercover work. We don't see much of the personality of the
detective, Bradbury, who is a professional and behaves professionally in
his handling of the case (whose original solution just didn't smell
right to him).

We get a much more human look, though, at boardinghouse life (or how
Victorian Charles Reade viewed it anyway) during the reign of George I.
Reade unfolds society's daily drama as it impacts people in their
different stations of life as they scrabble and scrap their way. Perhaps
a deeper meaning here is how one's position in life acts as a trap, as
definining walls one cannot break out of. For instance, even the police
detective finds it extremely difficult to get an audience over a
life-and-death matter with the minister who has the power to stop an
execution. Cold, hard cash is all important, and while some people will
do anything to obtain it or keep it, others, like the housekeeper, don't
seem to desire it much (maybe she realizes she has no hope of ever
obtaining any money and is willing to live her life simply as a
boardinghouse servant). Despite a tendency to gossip for entertainment
during this television-deficient time, people generally behave well
toward one another (except for those willing to murder, of course), and
the boardinghouse is a refuge in a town surrounded by dangerous
"footpads" who will rob and kill. When murder takes place in their midst
(almost twice), it is a most horrible violation, since there are
employees (plus a formidable landlady) and locks and keys to keep people
feeling safe from the highwaymen.

As for the dynamics of the main story concerning the Captain, his son,
and the impact of money upon them, well, it might be a good idea to let
other Gaslight readers catch up on their reading before mentioning this.
I will say that I was expecting to learn more about the son and his
possible involvement with the crimes, and I can't quite figure out the
significance of the captain impersonating the parson in another town.
Also remarkable was the extent to which the legal bureaucrats were
willing to help falsify appearances so everything would look well on the
surface. A good story, even though a sad one in many ways.


Richard King
rking(at)indian.vinu.edu

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:55:13 -0500
From: Sam Karnick <SAMK(at)hudson.org>
Subject: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Richard's comments on "The Knightsbridge Mystery" are very astute. I would add 
that I thought the perpetrator's reaction upon hearing of the robbery and 
murder -- to express moderate but not overstated concern, and to assist in the 
defense of the suspect -- was very wise. "Cox! No doubt he is a knave," says 
the murderer; "but murder!--I should never have suspected him of that." Just 
the right reaction, I think.

(One thing that often bothers me in COLUMBO is that the suspects typically try 
too hard to deflect suspicion from themselves. One would like to see a suspect 
just play it truly cool and not try to ply the detective with alternative 
explanations to the sutbly-damning statements Columbo typically makes to them, 
which is when they slip up worst. Far better it would be to say, "That's a 
tough one, Lieutenant. I'm sure glad I don't have your job.") The perpetrator 
of this crime plays it just right but is caught anyway.

A nice moment: early on, an unidentified man says, "I like not--a man--who 
wears--a mask," a statement that proves wise in both its literal and figurative 
applications. I found it striking at the time, and enjoyed the way the author 
elaborated on its implications later without restating it explicitly.

Yes, the Captain does seem to have spoiled Jack a bit -- if Gardiner's 
assessment in Chapter 1 is correct. But note that once Jack gets away from his 
father, he turns out to be quite praiseworthy: his college tutor almost 
immediately commends "his ability, good conduct, devotion to study." Later, 
"his tutors also spoke very highly of him." Jack's one fault appears to be a 
certain laxity regarding money, but whereas he is ignorant of his father's 
financial troubles -- which only the father's pride keeps him from knowing -- 
he can certainly be forgiven for asking his father for money.

I found most interesting the illustration of a criminal's typical response to 
being caught: he wasn't doing wrong, really, because it was for the right 
reasons; he had been robbed himself and only wanted the money to help someone 
else. Reade sees through that pretense, noting that the thief had stolen a 
horse at Ipswich many years before, and had escaped prison by use of a file 
brought him by a female admirer. That is to say, his end was evident in his 
beginning.

Best w's,

S.T. Karnick

>>> "Richard L. King" <rking(at)INDIAN.VINU.EDU> 12/08/98 09:01am >>>
I read "The Knightsbridge Mystery" (which I believe we are to discuss
starting today) last night and was very taken with it (a detective
story!), even though it is a sad, sordid little tale of greed and
treachery. I won't mention anything that might spoil it for anyone, but
I will note that this story contains a good example of a dogged
detective who admirably succeeds through determination and the use of
good police methods: interviewing witnesses, putting together facts,
making intelligent deductions, and undertaking a tenacious stakeout and
includes undercover work. We don't see much of the personality of the
detective, Bradbury, who is a professional and behaves professionally in
his handling of the case (whose original solution just didn't smell
right to him).

We get a much more human look, though, at boardinghouse life (or how
Victorian Charles Reade viewed it anyway) during the reign of George I.
Reade unfolds society's daily drama as it impacts people in their
different stations of life as they scrabble and scrap their way. Perhaps
a deeper meaning here is how one's position in life acts as a trap, as
definining walls one cannot break out of. For instance, even the police
detective finds it extremely difficult to get an audience over a
life-and-death matter with the minister who has the power to stop an
execution. Cold, hard cash is all important, and while some people will
do anything to obtain it or keep it, others, like the housekeeper, don't
seem to desire it much (maybe she realizes she has no hope of ever
obtaining any money and is willing to live her life simply as a
boardinghouse servant). Despite a tendency to gossip for entertainment
during this television-deficient time, people generally behave well
toward one another (except for those willing to murder, of course), and
the boardinghouse is a refuge in a town surrounded by dangerous
"footpads" who will rob and kill. When murder takes place in their midst
(almost twice), it is a most horrible violation, since there are
employees (plus a formidable landlady) and locks and keys to keep people
feeling safe from the highwaymen.

As for the dynamics of the main story concerning the Captain, his son,
and the impact of money upon them, well, it might be a good idea to let
other Gaslight readers catch up on their reading before mentioning this.
I will say that I was expecting to learn more about the son and his
possible involvement with the crimes, and I can't quite figure out the
significance of the captain impersonating the parson in another town.
Also remarkable was the extent to which the legal bureaucrats were
willing to help falsify appearances so everything would look well on the
surface. A good story, even though a sad one in many ways.


Richard King
rking(at)indian.vinu.edu

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:55:13 -0500
From: Sam Karnick <SAMK(at)hudson.org>
Subject: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Richard's comments on "The Knightsbridge Mystery" are very astute. I would add 
that I thought the perpetrator's reaction upon hearing of the robbery and 
murder -- to express moderate but not overstated concern, and to assist in the 
defense of the suspect -- was very wise. "Cox! No doubt he is a knave," says 
the murderer; "but murder!--I should never have suspected him of that." Just 
the right reaction, I think.

(One thing that often bothers me in COLUMBO is that the suspects typically try 
too hard to deflect suspicion from themselves. One would like to see a suspect 
just play it truly cool and not try to ply the detective with alternative 
explanations to the sutbly-damning statements Columbo typically makes to them, 
which is when they slip up worst. Far better it would be to say, "That's a 
tough one, Lieutenant. I'm sure glad I don't have your job.") The perpetrator 
of this crime plays it just right but is caught anyway.

A nice moment: early on, an unidentified man says, "I like not--a man--who 
wears--a mask," a statement that proves wise in both its literal and figurative 
applications. I found it striking at the time, and enjoyed the way the author 
elaborated on its implications later without restating it explicitly.

Yes, the Captain does seem to have spoiled Jack a bit -- if Gardiner's 
assessment in Chapter 1 is correct. But note that once Jack gets away from his 
father, he turns out to be quite praiseworthy: his college tutor almost 
immediately commends "his ability, good conduct, devotion to study." Later, 
"his tutors also spoke very highly of him." Jack's one fault appears to be a 
certain laxity regarding money, but whereas he is ignorant of his father's 
financial troubles -- which only the father's pride keeps him from knowing -- 
he can certainly be forgiven for asking his father for money.

I found most interesting the illustration of a criminal's typical response to 
being caught: he wasn't doing wrong, really, because it was for the right 
reasons; he had been robbed himself and only wanted the money to help someone 
else. Reade sees through that pretense, noting that the thief had stolen a 
horse at Ipswich many years before, and had escaped prison by use of a file 
brought him by a female admirer. That is to say, his end was evident in his 
beginning.

Best w's,

S.T. Karnick

>>> "Richard L. King" <rking(at)INDIAN.VINU.EDU> 12/08/98 09:01am >>>
I read "The Knightsbridge Mystery" (which I believe we are to discuss
starting today) last night and was very taken with it (a detective
story!), even though it is a sad, sordid little tale of greed and
treachery. I won't mention anything that might spoil it for anyone, but
I will note that this story contains a good example of a dogged
detective who admirably succeeds through determination and the use of
good police methods: interviewing witnesses, putting together facts,
making intelligent deductions, and undertaking a tenacious stakeout and
includes undercover work. We don't see much of the personality of the
detective, Bradbury, who is a professional and behaves professionally in
his handling of the case (whose original solution just didn't smell
right to him).

We get a much more human look, though, at boardinghouse life (or how
Victorian Charles Reade viewed it anyway) during the reign of George I.
Reade unfolds society's daily drama as it impacts people in their
different stations of life as they scrabble and scrap their way. Perhaps
a deeper meaning here is how one's position in life acts as a trap, as
definining walls one cannot break out of. For instance, even the police
detective finds it extremely difficult to get an audience over a
life-and-death matter with the minister who has the power to stop an
execution. Cold, hard cash is all important, and while some people will
do anything to obtain it or keep it, others, like the housekeeper, don't
seem to desire it much (maybe she realizes she has no hope of ever
obtaining any money and is willing to live her life simply as a
boardinghouse servant). Despite a tendency to gossip for entertainment
during this television-deficient time, people generally behave well
toward one another (except for those willing to murder, of course), and
the boardinghouse is a refuge in a town surrounded by dangerous
"footpads" who will rob and kill. When murder takes place in their midst
(almost twice), it is a most horrible violation, since there are
employees (plus a formidable landlady) and locks and keys to keep people
feeling safe from the highwaymen.

As for the dynamics of the main story concerning the Captain, his son,
and the impact of money upon them, well, it might be a good idea to let
other Gaslight readers catch up on their reading before mentioning this.
I will say that I was expecting to learn more about the son and his
possible involvement with the crimes, and I can't quite figure out the
significance of the captain impersonating the parson in another town.
Also remarkable was the extent to which the legal bureaucrats were
willing to help falsify appearances so everything would look well on the
surface. A good story, even though a sad one in many ways.


Richard King
rking(at)indian.vinu.edu

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:55:13 -0500
From: Sam Karnick <SAMK(at)hudson.org>
Subject: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Richard's comments on "The Knightsbridge Mystery" are very astute. I would add 
that I thought the perpetrator's reaction upon hearing of the robbery and 
murder -- to express moderate but not overstated concern, and to assist in the 
defense of the suspect -- was very wise. "Cox! No doubt he is a knave," says 
the murderer; "but murder!--I should never have suspected him of that." Just 
the right reaction, I think.

(One thing that often bothers me in COLUMBO is that the suspects typically try 
too hard to deflect suspicion from themselves. One would like to see a suspect 
just play it truly cool and not try to ply the detective with alternative 
explanations to the sutbly-damning statements Columbo typically makes to them, 
which is when they slip up worst. Far better it would be to say, "That's a 
tough one, Lieutenant. I'm sure glad I don't have your job.") The perpetrator 
of this crime plays it just right but is caught anyway.

A nice moment: early on, an unidentified man says, "I like not--a man--who 
wears--a mask," a statement that proves wise in both its literal and figurative 
applications. I found it striking at the time, and enjoyed the way the author 
elaborated on its implications later without restating it explicitly.

Yes, the Captain does seem to have spoiled Jack a bit -- if Gardiner's 
assessment in Chapter 1 is correct. But note that once Jack gets away from his 
father, he turns out to be quite praiseworthy: his college tutor almost 
immediately commends "his ability, good conduct, devotion to study." Later, 
"his tutors also spoke very highly of him." Jack's one fault appears to be a 
certain laxity regarding money, but whereas he is ignorant of his father's 
financial troubles -- which only the father's pride keeps him from knowing -- 
he can certainly be forgiven for asking his father for money.

I found most interesting the illustration of a criminal's typical response to 
being caught: he wasn't doing wrong, really, because it was for the right 
reasons; he had been robbed himself and only wanted the money to help someone 
else. Reade sees through that pretense, noting that the thief had stolen a 
horse at Ipswich many years before, and had escaped prison by use of a file 
brought him by a female admirer. That is to say, his end was evident in his 
beginning.

Best w's,

S.T. Karnick

>>> "Richard L. King" <rking(at)INDIAN.VINU.EDU> 12/08/98 09:01am >>>
I read "The Knightsbridge Mystery" (which I believe we are to discuss
starting today) last night and was very taken with it (a detective
story!), even though it is a sad, sordid little tale of greed and
treachery. I won't mention anything that might spoil it for anyone, but
I will note that this story contains a good example of a dogged
detective who admirably succeeds through determination and the use of
good police methods: interviewing witnesses, putting together facts,
making intelligent deductions, and undertaking a tenacious stakeout and
includes undercover work. We don't see much of the personality of the
detective, Bradbury, who is a professional and behaves professionally in
his handling of the case (whose original solution just didn't smell
right to him).

We get a much more human look, though, at boardinghouse life (or how
Victorian Charles Reade viewed it anyway) during the reign of George I.
Reade unfolds society's daily drama as it impacts people in their
different stations of life as they scrabble and scrap their way. Perhaps
a deeper meaning here is how one's position in life acts as a trap, as
definining walls one cannot break out of. For instance, even the police
detective finds it extremely difficult to get an audience over a
life-and-death matter with the minister who has the power to stop an
execution. Cold, hard cash is all important, and while some people will
do anything to obtain it or keep it, others, like the housekeeper, don't
seem to desire it much (maybe she realizes she has no hope of ever
obtaining any money and is willing to live her life simply as a
boardinghouse servant). Despite a tendency to gossip for entertainment
during this television-deficient time, people generally behave well
toward one another (except for those willing to murder, of course), and
the boardinghouse is a refuge in a town surrounded by dangerous
"footpads" who will rob and kill. When murder takes place in their midst
(almost twice), it is a most horrible violation, since there are
employees (plus a formidable landlady) and locks and keys to keep people
feeling safe from the highwaymen.

As for the dynamics of the main story concerning the Captain, his son,
and the impact of money upon them, well, it might be a good idea to let
other Gaslight readers catch up on their reading before mentioning this.
I will say that I was expecting to learn more about the son and his
possible involvement with the crimes, and I can't quite figure out the
significance of the captain impersonating the parson in another town.
Also remarkable was the extent to which the legal bureaucrats were
willing to help falsify appearances so everything would look well on the
surface. A good story, even though a sad one in many ways.


Richard King
rking(at)indian.vinu.edu

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:55:13 -0500
From: Sam Karnick <SAMK(at)hudson.org>
Subject: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Richard's comments on "The Knightsbridge Mystery" are very astute. I would add 
that I thought the perpetrator's reaction upon hearing of the robbery and 
murder -- to express moderate but not overstated concern, and to assist in the 
defense of the suspect -- was very wise. "Cox! No doubt he is a knave," says 
the murderer; "but murder!--I should never have suspected him of that." Just 
the right reaction, I think.

(One thing that often bothers me in COLUMBO is that the suspects typically try 
too hard to deflect suspicion from themselves. One would like to see a suspect 
just play it truly cool and not try to ply the detective with alternative 
explanations to the sutbly-damning statements Columbo typically makes to them, 
which is when they slip up worst. Far better it would be to say, "That's a 
tough one, Lieutenant. I'm sure glad I don't have your job.") The perpetrator 
of this crime plays it just right but is caught anyway.

A nice moment: early on, an unidentified man says, "I like not--a man--who 
wears--a mask," a statement that proves wise in both its literal and figurative 
applications. I found it striking at the time, and enjoyed the way the author 
elaborated on its implications later without restating it explicitly.

Yes, the Captain does seem to have spoiled Jack a bit -- if Gardiner's 
assessment in Chapter 1 is correct. But note that once Jack gets away from his 
father, he turns out to be quite praiseworthy: his college tutor almost 
immediately commends "his ability, good conduct, devotion to study." Later, 
"his tutors also spoke very highly of him." Jack's one fault appears to be a 
certain laxity regarding money, but whereas he is ignorant of his father's 
financial troubles -- which only the father's pride keeps him from knowing -- 
he can certainly be forgiven for asking his father for money.

I found most interesting the illustration of a criminal's typical response to 
being caught: he wasn't doing wrong, really, because it was for the right 
reasons; he had been robbed himself and only wanted the money to help someone 
else. Reade sees through that pretense, noting that the thief had stolen a 
horse at Ipswich many years before, and had escaped prison by use of a file 
brought him by a female admirer. That is to say, his end was evident in his 
beginning.

Best w's,

S.T. Karnick

>>> "Richard L. King" <rking(at)INDIAN.VINU.EDU> 12/08/98 09:01am >>>
I read "The Knightsbridge Mystery" (which I believe we are to discuss
starting today) last night and was very taken with it (a detective
story!), even though it is a sad, sordid little tale of greed and
treachery. I won't mention anything that might spoil it for anyone, but
I will note that this story contains a good example of a dogged
detective who admirably succeeds through determination and the use of
good police methods: interviewing witnesses, putting together facts,
making intelligent deductions, and undertaking a tenacious stakeout and
includes undercover work. We don't see much of the personality of the
detective, Bradbury, who is a professional and behaves professionally in
his handling of the case (whose original solution just didn't smell
right to him).

We get a much more human look, though, at boardinghouse life (or how
Victorian Charles Reade viewed it anyway) during the reign of George I.
Reade unfolds society's daily drama as it impacts people in their
different stations of life as they scrabble and scrap their way. Perhaps
a deeper meaning here is how one's position in life acts as a trap, as
definining walls one cannot break out of. For instance, even the police
detective finds it extremely difficult to get an audience over a
life-and-death matter with the minister who has the power to stop an
execution. Cold, hard cash is all important, and while some people will
do anything to obtain it or keep it, others, like the housekeeper, don't
seem to desire it much (maybe she realizes she has no hope of ever
obtaining any money and is willing to live her life simply as a
boardinghouse servant). Despite a tendency to gossip for entertainment
during this television-deficient time, people generally behave well
toward one another (except for those willing to murder, of course), and
the boardinghouse is a refuge in a town surrounded by dangerous
"footpads" who will rob and kill. When murder takes place in their midst
(almost twice), it is a most horrible violation, since there are
employees (plus a formidable landlady) and locks and keys to keep people
feeling safe from the highwaymen.

As for the dynamics of the main story concerning the Captain, his son,
and the impact of money upon them, well, it might be a good idea to let
other Gaslight readers catch up on their reading before mentioning this.
I will say that I was expecting to learn more about the son and his
possible involvement with the crimes, and I can't quite figure out the
significance of the captain impersonating the parson in another town.
Also remarkable was the extent to which the legal bureaucrats were
willing to help falsify appearances so everything would look well on the
surface. A good story, even though a sad one in many ways.


Richard King
rking(at)indian.vinu.edu

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:55:13 -0500
From: Sam Karnick <SAMK(at)hudson.org>
Subject: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Richard's comments on "The Knightsbridge Mystery" are very astute. I would add 
that I thought the perpetrator's reaction upon hearing of the robbery and 
murder -- to express moderate but not overstated concern, and to assist in the 
defense of the suspect -- was very wise. "Cox! No doubt he is a knave," says 
the murderer; "but murder!--I should never have suspected him of that." Just 
the right reaction, I think.

(One thing that often bothers me in COLUMBO is that the suspects typically try 
too hard to deflect suspicion from themselves. One would like to see a suspect 
just play it truly cool and not try to ply the detective with alternative 
explanations to the sutbly-damning statements Columbo typically makes to them, 
which is when they slip up worst. Far better it would be to say, "That's a 
tough one, Lieutenant. I'm sure glad I don't have your job.") The perpetrator 
of this crime plays it just right but is caught anyway.

A nice moment: early on, an unidentified man says, "I like not--a man--who 
wears--a mask," a statement that proves wise in both its literal and figurative 
applications. I found it striking at the time, and enjoyed the way the author 
elaborated on its implications later without restating it explicitly.

Yes, the Captain does seem to have spoiled Jack a bit -- if Gardiner's 
assessment in Chapter 1 is correct. But note that once Jack gets away from his 
father, he turns out to be quite praiseworthy: his college tutor almost 
immediately commends "his ability, good conduct, devotion to study." Later, 
"his tutors also spoke very highly of him." Jack's one fault appears to be a 
certain laxity regarding money, but whereas he is ignorant of his father's 
financial troubles -- which only the father's pride keeps him from knowing -- 
he can certainly be forgiven for asking his father for money.

I found most interesting the illustration of a criminal's typical response to 
being caught: he wasn't doing wrong, really, because it was for the right 
reasons; he had been robbed himself and only wanted the money to help someone 
else. Reade sees through that pretense, noting that the thief had stolen a 
horse at Ipswich many years before, and had escaped prison by use of a file 
brought him by a female admirer. That is to say, his end was evident in his 
beginning.

Best w's,

S.T. Karnick

>>> "Richard L. King" <rking(at)INDIAN.VINU.EDU> 12/08/98 09:01am >>>
I read "The Knightsbridge Mystery" (which I believe we are to discuss
starting today) last night and was very taken with it (a detective
story!), even though it is a sad, sordid little tale of greed and
treachery. I won't mention anything that might spoil it for anyone, but
I will note that this story contains a good example of a dogged
detective who admirably succeeds through determination and the use of
good police methods: interviewing witnesses, putting together facts,
making intelligent deductions, and undertaking a tenacious stakeout and
includes undercover work. We don't see much of the personality of the
detective, Bradbury, who is a professional and behaves professionally in
his handling of the case (whose original solution just didn't smell
right to him).

We get a much more human look, though, at boardinghouse life (or how
Victorian Charles Reade viewed it anyway) during the reign of George I.
Reade unfolds society's daily drama as it impacts people in their
different stations of life as they scrabble and scrap their way. Perhaps
a deeper meaning here is how one's position in life acts as a trap, as
definining walls one cannot break out of. For instance, even the police
detective finds it extremely difficult to get an audience over a
life-and-death matter with the minister who has the power to stop an
execution. Cold, hard cash is all important, and while some people will
do anything to obtain it or keep it, others, like the housekeeper, don't
seem to desire it much (maybe she realizes she has no hope of ever
obtaining any money and is willing to live her life simply as a
boardinghouse servant). Despite a tendency to gossip for entertainment
during this television-deficient time, people generally behave well
toward one another (except for those willing to murder, of course), and
the boardinghouse is a refuge in a town surrounded by dangerous
"footpads" who will rob and kill. When murder takes place in their midst
(almost twice), it is a most horrible violation, since there are
employees (plus a formidable landlady) and locks and keys to keep people
feeling safe from the highwaymen.

As for the dynamics of the main story concerning the Captain, his son,
and the impact of money upon them, well, it might be a good idea to let
other Gaslight readers catch up on their reading before mentioning this.
I will say that I was expecting to learn more about the son and his
possible involvement with the crimes, and I can't quite figure out the
significance of the captain impersonating the parson in another town.
Also remarkable was the extent to which the legal bureaucrats were
willing to help falsify appearances so everything would look well on the
surface. A good story, even though a sad one in many ways.


Richard King
rking(at)indian.vinu.edu

===0===



Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:55:13 -0500
From: Sam Karnick <SAMK(at)hudson.org>
Subject: The Knightsbridge Mystery -Reply

Richard's comments on "The Knightsbridge Mystery" are very astute. I would add 
that I thought the perpetrator's reaction upon hearing of the robbery and 
murder -- to express moderate but not overstated concern, and to assist in the 
defense of the suspect -- was very wise. "Cox! No doubt he is a knave," says 
the murderer; "but murder!--I should never have suspected him of that." Just 
the right reaction, I think.

(One thing that often bothers me in COLUMBO is that the suspects typically try 
too hard to deflect suspicion from themselves. One would like to see a suspect 
just play it truly cool and not try to ply the detective with alternative 
explanations to the sutbly-damning statements Columbo typically makes to them, 
which is when they slip up worst. Far better it would be to say, "That's a 
tough one, Lieutenant. I'm sure glad I don't have your job.") The perpetrator 
of this crime plays it just right but is caught anyway.

A nice moment: early on, an unidentified man says, "I like not--a man--who 
wears--a mask," a statement that proves wise in both its literal and figurative 
applications. I found it striking at the time, and enjoyed the way the author 
elaborated on its implications later without restating it explicitly.

Yes, the Captain does seem to have spoiled Jack a bit -- if Gardiner's 
assessment in Chapter 1 is correct. But note that once Jack gets away from his 
father, he turns out to be quite praiseworthy: his college tutor almost 
immediately commends "his ability, good conduct, devotion to study." Later, 
"his tutors also spoke very highly of him." Jack's one fault appears to be a 
certain laxity regarding money, but whereas he is ignorant of his father's 
financial troubles -- which only the father's pride keeps him from knowing -- 
he can certainly be forgiven for asking his father for money.

I found most interesting the illustration of a criminal's typical response to 
being caught: he wasn't doing wrong, really, because it was for the right 
reasons; he had been robbed himself and only wanted the money to help someone 
else. Reade sees through that pretense, noting that the thief had stolen a 
horse at Ipswich many years before, and had escaped prison by use of a file 
brought him by a female admirer. That is to say, his end was evident in his 
beginning.

Best w's,

S.T. Karnick

>>> "Richard L. King" <rking(at)INDIAN.VINU.EDU> 12/08/98 09:01am >>>
I read "The Knightsbridge Mystery" (which I believe we are to discuss
starting today) last night and was very taken with it (a detective
story!), even though it is a sad, sordid little tale of greed and
treachery. I won't mention anything that might spoil it for anyone, but
I will note that this story contains a good example of a dogged
detective who admirably succeeds through determination and the use of
good police methods: interviewing witnesses, putting together facts,
making intelligent deductions, and undertaking a tenacious stakeout and
includes undercover work. We don't see much of the personality of the
detective, Bradbury, who is a professional and behaves professionally in
his handling of the case (whose original solution just didn't smell
right to him).

We get a much more human look, though, at boardinghouse life (or how
Victorian Charles Reade viewed it anyway) during the reign of George I.
Reade unfolds society's daily drama as it impacts people in their
different stations of life as they scrabble and scrap their way. Perhaps
a deeper meaning here is how one's position in life acts as a trap, as
definining walls one cannot break out of. For instance, even the police
detective finds it extremely difficult to get an audience over a
life-and-death matter with the minister who has the power to stop an
execution. Cold, hard cash is all important, and while some people will
do anything to obtain it or keep it, others, like the housekeeper, don't
seem to desire it much (maybe she realizes she has no hope of ever
obtaining any money and is willing to live her life simply as a
boardinghouse servant). Despite a tendency to gossip for entertainment
during this television-deficient time, people generally behave well
toward one another (except for those willing to murder, of course), and
the boardinghouse is a refuge in a town surrounded by dangerous
"footpads" who will rob and kill. When murder takes place in their midst
(almost twice), it is a most horrible violation, since there are
employees (plus a formidable landlady) and locks and keys to keep people
feeling safe from the highwaymen.

As for the dynamics of the main story concerning the Captain, his son,
and the impact of money upon them, well, it might be a good idea to let
other Gaslight readers catch up on their reading before mentioning this.
I will say that I was expecting to learn more about the son and his
possible involvement with the crimes, and I can't quite figure out the
significance of the captain impersonating the parson in another town.
Also remarkable was the extent to which the legal bureaucrats were
willing to help falsify appearances so everything would look well on the
surface. A good story, even though a sad one in many ways.


Richard King
rking(at)indian.vinu.edu

------------------------------

End of Gaslight Digest V1 #27
*****************************