Copyright 2019 by Gary L. Pullman
I can't say whether Erle
Stanley Gardner used alliteration as a way of prompting plots, but
some of the titles of his Perry Mason novels sure did—as did even
more—most, in fact—of the CBS television series' episodes—could
have suggested story lines.
Gardner himself created
such alliterative titles as
The Case of the Lucky
Legs
The Case of the
Caretaker's Cat
The Case of the
Dangerous Dowager
The Case of the
Shoplifter's Show
The Case of the
Perjured Parrot
The Case of the Haunted
Husband
The Case of the
Drowning Duck
The Case of the Crooked
Candle
The Case of the
Black-eyed Blonde
The Case of the
Borrowed Brunette
The Case of the
Cautious Coquette
The Case of the
Negligent Nymph
The Case of the Fiery
Fingers
The Case of the
Moth-eaten Mink
The Case of the
Grinning Gorilla
The Case of the
Hesitant Hostess
The Case of the
Restless Redhead
The Case of the
Glamorous Ghost
The Case of the
Terrified Typist
The Case of the Demure
Defendant
The Case of the Lucky
Loser
The Case of the Daring
Decoy
The Case of the
Mythical Monkeys
The Case of the Singing
Skirt
The Case of the Waylaid
Wolf
The Case of the
Duplicate Daughter
The Case of the Shapely
Shadow
The Case of the
Spurious Spinster
The Case of the Blonde
Bonanza
The Case of the
Stepdaughter's Secret
The Case of the Amorous
Aunt
The Case of the Daring
Divorcee
The Case of the Phantom
Fortune
The Case of the
Horrified Heirs
The Case of the
Troubled Trustee
The Case of the
Beautiful Beggar
The Case of the Worried
Waitress
The Case of the
Careless Cupid
The Case of the
Fabulous Fake
The
titles also often invoke mystery or suspense or both. Why are the
legs lucky? Why is the loser lucky? What is the stepdaughter's
secret? Why is the waitress worried?
Most
of these titles also contain adjectives that characterize specific
types of fictional character, many of them women: blonde, brunette,
coquette, nymph, redhead, typist, daughter, spinster, aunt, divorcee,
waitress. Often, in the television series, at least, the character
identified in the title became Mason's client and the defendant in a
murder trial.
While
identifying a type of character, each of the titles also suggest
several questions. The answers to these questions may imply still
other questions, or, at times, they may hint at plot twists or even a
resolution.
The
Case of the Haunted Husband: Who
is the husband? Who is his wife? Why is he haunted? In what way is he
haunted? Has h done something that frightens him or haunts him with
guilt? Maybe he murdered someone. Maybe he had an affair with
someone? Maybe he murdered another woman with whom he had an affair.
If so, who is this other woman? Where did they meet? What attracted
them to one another? Did they break off their relationship? Did the
wife know about the affair or find out about it? Lieutenant Tragg
might consider such knowledge a motivation for the wife to have
killed the mistress. Perhaps the husband didn't kill the other woman,
after all. Maybe she was killed by the wife of a previous husband
with whom she had had an affair, a wife who's tracked her down to
kill her. Was the husband or his current wife the killer's fall guy?
(Since Gardner was writing Perry Mason novels, Gardner also had to
answer the question, How is Perry going to prove his client is
innocent of the charges that the police will lodge against her?)
The
Case of the Borrowed Brunette:
Who is the brunette? Who borrowed her? How was she borrowed? For what
purpose was she borrowed? Was she returned? If so, to whom? An
intriguing title, the name of this story conjures up all kinds of
possibilities. Did the woman look like another woman? Was she
borrowed to impersonate another brunette? Was she, perhaps, killed so
the other brunette could disappear and start a new life or escape a
prison sentence? Did her boyfriend or her husband plan to kill the
other woman and run away with the borrowed brunette? Was the borrowed
brunette a model, a call girl, a wealthy businesswoman, a woman from
a man's past? (Remember, too, that because Gardner was writing Perry
Mason novels, Gardner also had to answer the question, How is Perry
going to prove his client is innocent of the charges that the police
will lodge against her?)
The
Case of the Worried Waitress:
Who is the waitress? Who or what worries her? Why is she worried?
What, if anything, does she do to eliminate the cause of her
worries—or what do the police believe she has done? Is she a
victim? A witness to a murder? Did someone she served as a waitress
leave incriminating evidence behind? Did she see or hear something
she shouldn't have while serving a diner? (As always, since Gardner
was writing Perry Mason novels, Gardner also had to answer the
question, How is Perry going to prove his client is innocent of the
charges that the police will lodge against her?)
Although
the plots of the episodes of the television series may differ from
those of the novels, the episodes provide at least one way writers
answered such questions, generated a plot, and solved the cases.
Summaries of the episodes on the Perry
Mason TV Series wiki
indicate that, in The
Case of the Haunted Husband,
the series' writers came up with this approach:
Hitchhiker
Claire Olger is charged with grand theft auto and manslaughter when
the driver of the car she's riding in hits a truck, killing the truck
driver, then flees the scene, leaving Claire to take the blame.
Perry agrees to help
Claire and eventually does locate the missing driver. Trouble is,
he's dead. Burger drops the previous charges against Claire and files
a new one: first degree murder. A second murder only complicates
things more.
Eva
Martell gets a part, not on stage but impersonating Helen Reynolds, a
woman she has never met. She is paid extremely well and given a
beautiful apartment to live in with her Aunt Agnes as long as she
continues the charade. Still, Eva suspects foul play in paradise, and
seeks the advice of a good lawyer.
Perry steps in and meets
with the real Helen Reynolds, who swears she is not doing anything
illegal, but cannot reveal her motives. That’s fine until they find
that dead body in her apartment. . . [.]
The
Case of the Worried Waitress [sic],
by Erle Stanley Gardner[,] 'The 'Foreword' [sic]
is dedicated to Marshall Houts, who gave up a lucrative law practice
to become an investigator for the Court of Last Resort. Houts
investigated several murder cases in which innocent men had been
wrongfully convicted, and brought about a satisfactory conclusion.
Houts created 'Trauma', [sic]
a publication that deals with the field of legal medicine. Forensic
medicine applies to many cases, from accidents to the more publicized
murders. Perry Mason and Della Street have lunch at a restaurant, and
are served by a new waitress Katherine Ellis. The next morning Kit
Ellis visits Mason for a consultation about her Aunt Sophia. Kit's
parents were killed in an automobile accident, she was left
penniless, and moved in with Aunt Sophia (who met a divorced man, and
turned over her money to him). After he died of heat stroke, his
first wife took everything (their divorce wasn't final). Perry Mason
said this could be a partnership, and Sophia could claim half of the
property. Kit says Aunt Sophia has a hatbox filled with cash, and she
is afraid of burglars. Perry advises her to move out for her own
safety. Soon Perry gets a phone call from Kit Ellis; she is being
accused of theft by a Stuart Baxley. Baxley hired a private detective
to get fingerprints from the hatbox. Paul Drake said this is
difficult. But Perry Mason knows that Macdonell Associates of Corning
NY have invented a method to do this with magnetic dust (Chapter 4).
They learn that Aunt Sophia Atwood is in the hospital, someone hit
her on the head with a five-cell flashlight. Kit Ellis had gone back
to the house by taxi at night to retrieve her shoes and clothing. Lt.
Tragg arrests Kit Ellis at Perry's office (Chapter 9). Mason and Paul
Drake visit another person who knows Sophia Atwood (Chapter 10).
Perry bait a trap with a seemingly missing will (Chapter 11). Does
golf get blamed for things that are the result of human carelessness,
stupidity , and foolishness (Chapter 12)? Perry assigns an
investigation to Paul Drake: put a female operative at the Gillco
Company who can pose as a blind woman (Chapter 14). The Preliminary
Hearing begins with Stuart Baxley. Perry destroys his credibility in
his cross-examination. The judge expresses doubt as well (Chapter
15). Then Stuart Baxley changes his story again! In Chapter 16 Perry
thinks of a theory that can explain the strange events at that house.
Perry and Paul find a cache of money, and are found out by Lt. Tragg
(Chapter 17). In Chapter 18 Perry brings in a surprise witness who
reveals shocking secrets! Lt. Tragg admits fingerprints on the
flashlight do not match Perry's client, and do match fingerprints on
the water cooler, but are from an unknown person. Perry later hands
Lt. Tragg some fingerprints to analyze. Kit Ellis is freed to rejoin
her Aunt Sophia (Chapter 19).
Gardner's technique—and, let's admit it, his use of alliteration is fun—can work for any genre, horror included. Let's make up a couple of alliterative horror titles (since Chillers and Thrillers is a blog about The Theory and Practice of Writing Horror Fiction, after all):
The Case of the
Ravenous Rats: Why are the rats
ravenous? Where do they live? Are they captives? If so, who has them?
Why are they being kept? Are they to be used in a mass attack on
someone? When? Where? Why? If the rats are not ravenous, where did
they come from? A research laboratory? The site of an nuclear
reactor's failure? The military? (Maybe the rodents are living
weapons?) Are they genetic mutants? How are they stopped? By whom?
(Another way to approach plotting from alliterative titles is to consider stories that actually involve ravenous rats, such as Edgar Allan Poe's "The Pit and the Pendulum"; Bram Stoker's "Burial of the Rats" and "The Judge's House"; or my own "A Job Well Done.")
The Case of the
Grotesque Gallery: What's
grotesque about the gallery? What exhibits are shown in it? Is it a
private or a public gallery? Does it exhibit corpses as sculptures,
paintings made with body fluids for paint? Do tableaux depict
perverted acts? Are the owners insane artists? Failed artists? Are
their models alive? If so, are they held against their will? Do the
same ones appear in multiple works of art? Do the paintings or
sculptures that include them show them as victims (or perpetrators)
progressive acts of torture? Do the artworks depict past—or
future—catastrophes? Why does the grotesque gallery exist?
The Case of the
Screaming Skull: Part of this
title actually includes the title of a 1958 indie horror film, The
Screaming Skull, giving us an
example of how an alliterative title might have suggested a plot; the
synopsis is courtesy of Wikipedia:
Over
a scene [sic]
of an opening coffin, a narrator explains that the film's climax is
so terrifying that it may kill the viewer, while reassuring the
audience that should they die of fright they will receive a free
burial service. Inside the coffin is a card that reads "Reserved
for You". [sic]
Newlyweds Jenni . . . and
Eric . . . move into Eric's palatial country home. Jenni is Eric's
second wife; his first wife Marion died when she accidentally slipped
and hit her head on the edge of a decorative pond on the estate. At
the home they meet Eric's friends, the Reverend Snow . . . and his
wife . . . , as well as Mickey . . . , the developmentally disabled
gardener. Eric privately mentions to the Snows that Jenni spent time
in an asylum following the sudden death of both her parents, and Mrs.
Snow reveals that Jenni is very wealthy.
Jenni is disturbed both
by Mickey's belief that Marion's ghost wanders the estate and by
Marion's self-portrait inside the house, which Jenni believes
resembles her mother. When she begins to hear unexplained screaming
noises and see skulls around her house, she believes that Marion is
haunting her. Though Eric speculates to Jenni that Mickey, who was a
childhood friend of Marion and thus dislikes Jenni, may be behind the
trickery, Jenni worries that she is going insane. Eric suggests to
remove Marion's self-portrait from the home. Eric and Jenni take the
painting outside and burn it, later uncovering a skull from the
ashes. Jenni panics at the sight of the skull, but Eric denies that
the skull is there. Jenni faints and Eric withdraws the skull and
hides it, revealing that he has been gaslighting her all along.
Believing she has finally
lost her sanity, Jenni resolves to be committed. She tells Eric that
the entire property will be meticulously searched for the skull as a
last resort. Mickey secretly steals the skull and brings it to Snow
before Eric can retrieve it. That night, Eric prepares to murder
Jenni and stage it as a suicide. Jenni sees Marion's ghost in
Mickey's greenhouse and flees back to the house, where Eric begins
throttling her. The ghost appears and chases Eric outside, corners
and attacks him, drowning him in the decorative pond.
After Jenni regains
consciousness, the Snows arrive. Mrs. Snow comforts a hysterical
Jenni and the Reverend discovers Eric's body in the pond. Some
undisclosed time later, Jenni and the Snows depart from the house.
Reverend Snow declares whether or not Marion's death was an accident
will remain a mystery.
No comments:
Post a Comment