This is a pretty decent read, but it is a product of its time and that's where the problem is for me. It's a Holmes & Watson clone with a smart professor and a young/naïve man as its duo. My mind kept thinking it was a Victorian era book when it was actually written the 1920's. The reason I'm scoring this one low is because THE MALTESE FALCON was written around the same time and that book is such a crisp and sharp read, even now, that it highlights the shortcomings of books from this era.6 s Lise106 2

This book will only be of interest to people who to see how a genre evolved. Apparently, Rhode or John Street to use his real name was a very successful writer in his time. However, based on this novel and the short story included in this book, he was very much a man of his time and his prose has not aged well. The plot of the Paddington Mystery is extremely thin, with the characters so sketchy that they become caricatural. The two women who appear in the story follow the saint/whore dichotomy (one of each) while his Jewish villain conforms to the antisemitic tropes of the day. That Rhode/Street had neither knowledge nor understanding of this particular character is illustrated by the fact that he claims that his nephew was Christian because his father was a Christian while you need a Jewish mother to be Jewish. The thinness of the plot is not help by the fact that it takes more than 50 pages (in a novel of just 150p.!) to elucidate the so-called mystery that is not even particularly mysterious. I suppose Rhode/Street was the Dan Brown of his time.5 s Jan C1,042 119

I thought it kind of dragged at times but found it somewhat interesting in the end. So it picked up for me.

Harold comes home, slightly inebriated I think, and finds a dead body in his bed. Doesn't think he knows him. But his reputation had taken a bit of a trashing of late. He hopes to appeal to his old friend Dr. Priestly, despite having had a falling out with his daughter April. And his old rival Denby is still hanging around.

I'd no idea.

But I look forward to future books in the series. This was not Rhode's (Cecil John Charles Street) first book, but the first in the Dr. Priestley series. I've been reading The Golden Age of Murder by Martin Edwards and it is noted there that when his daughter IRL died so did April disappear from the books.2022 mystery2 s ShanDizzy 1,151

A very verbose story that I listened to as background while ironing and later playing mahjong.2 s CB767 2

Good mystery and I how it was solved but a little too much telling and hardly any showing. audiobooks mystery1 Puzzle Doctor508 44

A distinctly sub-par opener for Dr Priestley.Full review at classicmystery.wordpress.com1 Jay Maxfield146 5

I am very glad that The Detective Club has re-issued this book as it is one of the few Rhode titles that I haven't been able to purchase as it is a rare book being Rhode's first Detective story - it was published in 1925 by Geoffrey Bles.
The Story itself was placed in the 1948 Haycraft-Queen 100 list of Murder/Detective Fiction books to read - why this book was chosen over his later ones (Tragedy on the Line) which in many cases were better as by then he had had more experience, it is not known - but it is probable that Howard Haycraft & the Ellery Queen cousins just hadn't read many of his works.
In this novel we get an introduction to Doctor/Professor Priestley who we learn is called Lancelot and his assistant and son-in-law to be Harold Merefield (pronounced Merryfield) as well as the friendship that exists between Inspector Hanslett & Professor Priestley - all of which feature in many of the subsequent stories. The story starts with an interesting scenario - a young Merefield who is a layabout and has an immoral lifestyle (for the times) comes home blind drunk to find a dead man in his bed who he has never met before. This leads to the police investigating his dissolute lifestyle which becomes public knowledge after the coroner's court hearing - as well as a sullied reputation because the police think that he knew more about the dead man than he admitted. Disgraced and ashamed he turns to Priestley his late fathers friend in his bid to regain his reputation and find out why the dead man had died or was placed in his bed.
As an avid reader of classical crime this book will interest you as John Rhode's first book and the background information given about his series characters. Although I enjoy reading some of Rhode's books they do tend to follow a recipe which dampens the enjoyment of some of his lesser stories - this one included. I think for many readers they will be able to guess why the crime was committed and whodunit around the 60-70% mark into the book. I would give this book 6.5 out of 10. This book also contains one of only three short stories published under the pseudonym John Rhode - entitled The Purple Line.classic-crime1 Robin101 32

The Paddington Mystery is a reprint of a Golden Age detective novel featuring Dr. Priestley. Dr. Priestley appears in 72 books published from 1925 to 1961. John Rhode (Cecil John Street) also published another 50+ series mystery novels under the pen name of Miles Burton. Both the Rhode and the Burton novels are being republished by the British Library, Poisoned Pen Press or Collins Crime Club.

I won't rehash the plot here, but this is classic Golden Age fare. Dr. Priestley is a mathematics professor who applies his specialty to many of life's problems. He is a detective who uses his brains to analyze the situation, theorizing and rejecting scenarios that don't fit the facts until he comes up with the solution to the mystery. In this story, others come to him with the clues/facts. Priestley is very likable and doesn't seem too full of himself as some other detectives do. I also d his daughter, April, and the main character, Harold Merefield, and am hoping to see more of them in future novels. As with most Golden Age detective novels, the focus of the story is the mystery and not the characters, so those looking for well-developed characters may be disappointed.

I found the mystery to be original, although I must confess that I had a good idea about what was going on right at the beginning and kept thinking that there would be a plot twist that would prove me wrong. Even though I guessed the solution, I still enjoyed the book, as it was interesting to see how it all played out. The story and the clues played out little by little, and it was easy to follow Priestley's solution. Classically, Priestley brings everyone together at the end to resolve the mystery.

If you enjoy Golden Age detective fiction, I think you will enjoy this novel. I'm looking forward to reading more of Rhode's Dr. Priestley mysteries.20181 Mary1,464 4

Clever mystery, all done by deductive reasoning to solve a puzzling mystery.1 Christine324 42

Although he has fallen from public consciousness now, John Rhode was extremely popular in his day (1925 - 1961) with his series detective Dr Lancelot Priestly. The Paddington Mystery is the first of these, so perhaps the author can be forgiven for making a rather stumbling start.

When Harold Merefield returned home in the early hours of a winter morning, he was startled by a gruesome discovery. On his bed was a corpse. There was nothing to show the identity of the dead man or the cause of his death. At the inquest, the jury found a verdict of ‘Death from Natural Causes’ – perhaps they were right, but . . . ?
Harold determined to investigate the matter for himself and sought the help of Professor Priestley, who, by the simple but unusual method of logical reasoning, succeeded in throwing light upon what proved to be a very curious affair indeed.

This sounds an interesting proposition but it is not really very well executed. Priestly does not come across as particularly logical or even insightful; he is no Holmes. Rhodes follows the usual practice of the time in not permitting Priestley to pass any pertinent information to the puzzled and worried Merefield, even although there is no reason that he shouldn't. Priestley's daughter, April, is annoying beyond belief and does nothing of any use even though she provides a motive of sorts. There is also the rather discouraging fact that the mystery is nothing of the sort, it is clear almost from the start who is doing what and why, although I have to say the denoument does not make the why completely clear.

Added to all this is the fact that the book is entirely typical of its time in attitudes, with the usual casual insults doled out to the usual minorities, the working class treated as idiots and, as someone has already pointed out, just two women - the Madonna and the whore, who don't have a brain cell between them. However, it is typical of attitudes prevailing then and I have read worse.

As an added bonus, The Purple Line, a short story has been included at the end of the main title. It is not a Dr Priestley story (Rhode wrote only two featuring his main detective); it is apparently the last story Rhodes wrote so I guess it seemed appropriate as a rider to his first detective novel; the editor implies it was chosen because it has been less anthologised than the two Priestley offerings but in fact I have read it many times before, as will anyone have who enjoys crime based short stories as much as I do. golden-age library-loan rc-2023 Subodh Garg165

4/5

Ok, so I finished The Paddington Mystery written by John Rhode. It was quite a pleasant read. An epitome of a cozy afternoon read. This is the beginning of the Dr. Priestley Mysteries, a series which spans about 70 novels. Highly recommended for fans of the mystery genre.

Ok, so with my general thoughts out of the way, let's review this book we usually do:

The Detective and the Method of Detection : 5/5
The Criminal : 3/5
The Method of Crime : 3/5

The Detective of this story is Dr. Priestley, a retired Maths professor, who uses his logical and analytical mind to deduce the course of events from the different facts that he has gathered. In his temperament and attitude, he is most similar to Dr. Richard Thorndyke from the Thorndyke Mysteries. He employs almost similar methods to that of Dr. Thorndyke. He gathers facts by himself and then follows them through to a logical end. The only dissimilitude is in the exact forensic methods that they use. Dr. Thorndyke focuses almost exclusively on the microscopic examination of evidence and then uses the data extracted from there to catch the criminal. Dr. Priestley on the other hand, is more of an armchair detective (more in the vein of Poirot than Marple). Someone who doesn't exercise his legs that often but uses other's legs to run his brain. All in all, armchair detectives these are my favorite. I'm quite excited in reading more of his adventures.

The Criminal & the Method of the Crime are not worth writing about. It's not they are the worst that I've ever read. But, they are also not the best that I've ever read. The main focus of the story is not on the Criminal and his ingenious schemes but on the Detective and his reasoning capable of catching him. The Crime is quite well-planned and the execution is even better. But, they are not the epitome of Criminal inventiveness that they can be, nor are they required to be. The story is about introducing the detective and his methods to the readers, which it accomplishes with sufficient efficiency.

In conclusion, this is terrific book for a lazy afternoon. It accomplishes everything it set out to do. It presents a complicated mystery, has an interesting cast of characters and introduces the detective with a fervor that is not easily forgotten. I highly recommend this book to anyone that claims to be a fan of the mystery genre. novels FangirlNation684 134

In The Paddington Mystery published in 1925 by John Rhode, Harold Merefield comes home drunk one night after spending the evening at the trendy nightclub the Naxos. As he takes off his jacket, he finds a strange man in his bed. But then he is alarmed to find that the person is dead, and both the man and the need are soaked with water. The evidence suggests that the man jumped into the canal next to Harold’s room, swimming across it in order to pry open the window of Harold, a man he doesn’t know, and then die in Harold’s bed. No one steps forward to identify this body either. Even though the inquest jury returns a verdict of natural death, Harold falls under suspicion by everyone around him, so he decides to turn to an old friend math professor, Dr. Priestley, for help.

Read the rest of this review and other fun, geeky articles at Fangirl Nation Alan M607 30

Written in 1925, and the first of many (very many!) books to feature Lancelot Priestley, this is a welcome re-release of a Golden Age detective novel. Yes, it feels a bit dated and some of the stereotypes are perhaps a little questionable for a modern audience, but it was an interesting entry into the genre and I am looking forward to getting hold of more to see how the character develops. Rhode (who wrote under various pseudonyms) was a member of the Detection Club, and his creation Priestley, as an academic and mathematician, is interested in the facts, the logic, and working out the puzzles - justice is a vague thing that may or may not happen (at least going by this first novel). If you want to delve further into the 1920s detective genre, this is a nice little treat. Eric1,451 38

Given that this was an early foray into the genre, it was not nearly as bad as I had been led to believe.
It is very short and the characterisation is fairly sketchy. The plot is not too difficult to work out but the insights into Priestley's methods are interesting, as this book lays down a basic pattern which would be used for years to come.

The book is very much of its time-the mid 1920s-and it is unpleasant to find the casual anti-semitism and stereotyping of Jews which was a feature of society and books of this era.Interestingly, the main female characters come over strongly, in their different ways, although Harold's attitude to Vere is appalling.

The "extra" short story is slight and a tad predictable.

Jeff Lewis539 4

John Rhode is another crime fiction author I discovered via Pinterest pin and didn't really get off to a good to start. Young Harold Merefield has slipped off the straight and narrow where he found the delights of the Naxos Club. His life suddenly changes for the worse when a dead body is found at his home. His only option is to ask for help from the father of his fiancee April, Dr Priestly. There is no real detection from Priestly other than sending Merefield off to track down clues which lacked any real suspense. Once everybody is gathered together the ending is telegraphed leaving the reader slightly disappointed. Gillian293 2

Normally, this would be 3 stars but I'm basing it on 1925 standards, the year it was published. The writing is beautiful and the dialog quite natural as long as you can stand to hear someone say "daddy dear" 500 times. The mystery was intricate and satisfying even though I saw it all coming. Also there were a few very matter of fact statements such as "so and so was a Jew," which did startle my 2020 ear, but were more informational than insulting. Dr. Priestly is actually a pretty open-minded guy for his time but still... Anyway, overall d it. It reminded me a little of Sherlock Holmes without Holmes' really annoying parts. Liselotte1,045 12

I really wanted to be the one that gave this one more than three stars, but it really doesn't deserve it! Don't get me wrong, this is a really fun book and I'm glad I read it. It's really ridiculous, and really far fetched, but it was FUN, which is important in a book to me! Was the story amazing? No. Was the story something new? No. Is it a MUST READ? No. The characters aren't really well developed and it isn't something amazing. But it was enjoyable. Really enjoyable. Which I find most important of all (Ok, I did say that all ready but I just want to prove a point!). Will I read more by John Rhode? Perhaps, but not anytime soon! classics detectives owned Norma Laming72 7

As others have said, this is one that you read if you’re interested in the history of golden age detective novels. More a “set text” than a novel to read for enjoyment. In fairness it shows how detective novels have progressed since their early days. A fairly conservative outlook on the world with undoubted undertones of anti-semitism that are interesting if only to show what used to be thought acceptable and normal. A substantial part of the latter half of this book, is the unutterable old bore that is Dr Priestly, prosing on and on about what is logical and his tedious deductive reasoning. ShirleyAuthor 2 books10

This author is new to me. I found the first chapter of this book (written in the 1920s) a bit hard to slog through because of the writing style and structure. I gave thought to putting it aside, but I always feel a bit guilty doing so, as every author puts time, heart and soul into their work. I am glad I continued reading, as I found the story quite entertaining. I certainly would consider reading another by this author. Wendy793 3

This was my first Dr. Priestly mystery and I was not greatly impressed. I to be surprised and I figured out the big reveal before it was actually revealed. And it was a scant 150 pages. I don't know if the series gets better - sometimes the first book is not the best one to judge a series on, but I was disappointed. Unly I will read more in this series.golden-age-mysteries Paul Carter7

Listened to as a well performed Audiobook.
A good example of a Golden Age detective novel with a neat variation on the locked room theme.
Slightly lacking in number of characters, but that makes it easy to follow.
Would recommend to anyone interested in Golden Age detection. Ellen1,024 9

Of its time. Guessed the plot but still fun. Reminded me of Dorothy L Sayers’ ‘Whose Body’. Isabella172

Als Hörbuch gehört.

Ein Werk seiner Zeit voller Stereotype, aber durchaus unterhaltsam. Joe305 5

Excellent! recommended Heidi280 14

Great premise, wrap up goes on forever. It was his first book, though. Amanda Bie Wojcik9

a lot of dragging of useless details which is annoying in a murder mystery - you would want every detail to be of use in your deductions. but the ending was worth it! Stefanie St. John14 1 follower

Fun read

Well written classic mystery. I figured out most of it halfway through, but it was still entertaining and worth the read since there were a couple aspects I did not catch. Phyllis203 1 follower

A little tedious at times but still a good story. I’d to read more. mystery Harry578

Maybe more 3.5 stars but better than average. Some reveals seemed obvious early on but the major twist held up till near the end. Primarily a dark atmosphere throughout but still enjoyable. Kim1,407

Autor del comentario:
=================================