Ellery Queen: 12 Questions to Edward D.Hoch

TO OTHER PAGES: 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12

12 Questions for Edward D.Hoch Throughout the years I've been on the web I had several e-mail contacts spanning the globe. I've always found these contacts to be generous and contradictory to the bad 'press' the net receives. I have to admit that for most people in the U.S. it must seem odd a website on "Ellery Queen" made by a Belgian fan. Maigret would have been a more likely choice or even Poirot. Mostly I understand the apprehension but it was most definitely not the case when I received a short email from Edward Hoch. It corrected his date of birth and stated he enjoyed the site. I gathered all my courage and dared to ask him if he'd agree answering a few questions I'd prepare. A prompt "no problem" followed. Ed has written an impressive oeuvre which in itself is worth acclaim, attention, a website,... given the subject of this site I did focus on his collaboration with regards to the Queen partnership.... Crippen & Landru publish high quality mystery books. For the record I am not affiliated in any way with them so I'm recommending this freely. You have to stand in admiration of the quality of bookbinding, design and story selection they offer. So it comes as no surprise you'll find Edward Hoch's work amongst their current books in print - click here -

`Q:`	It is quiet striking to notice that many mystery writers often have more than a keen eye for the work their peers produce. Immediately Frederic Dannay comes to mind with both his large collection of Detective Fiction and subsequently massive knowledge on the subject. He wasn't the only writer who had more than a special interest in the stories others produced. Examples of this admiration can be found throughout the Queen-canon and attest to this fact. It has become common, to put this knowledge to good use: more than often we find writers becoming editors and/or anthologists. As is the case for actors who want to be director some editors have tried their hand at novels too. How important is it for a mystery writer to stay up-to-date with what fellow writers produce? Is this knowledge imperative? Is this always 'helpful' or just the opposite?
A:	I believe it is essential for writers in a particular genre to be aware of what has gone before. Sadly, I find that a surprising number of our newer mystery writers lack this knowledge.

`Q:`	Jon L.Breen has written a very good article in Tragedy of Errors in which he states: "The multi-faceted Queen has been viewed as a brand name rather than an author" I found the phenomenal contribution they made is to keep the mystery story "alive and well" in various fields of media without losing their own special distinctive trademark. But in the beginning I got hooked on Queen by means of their mystery novels which should count for something. In your opinion did they ever consider leaving the "franchise" to someone else? In such a way that someone could take over the writing 'per se' of Ellery Queen stories? Would this have been a good option?
A:	In the years following Manny Lee's death, Fred Dannay twice approached me about continuing the stories, and said he'd send me his outline of Tragedy of Errors, but he never did. I think he couldn't quite bring himself to take on a new partner. After Fred's death his sons contacted a number of writers about completing the novel but no agreement was reached. That was why the outline was finally published as Fred wrote it.

`Q:`	Several Great Detectives have stories in which they die. Sherlock Holmes, Poirot, Inspector Morse and (even) Barnaby Ross, ... Would there be a specific reason why Ellery Queen is missing such a book? Is there an ultimate pastiche left, a "death by deduction" ?
A:	Sherlock Holmes and Drury Lane died because their creators wanted to devote their time to other more rewarding (to them) writing projects. Doyle wanted to devote himself to historical novels and Queen to the better-selling EQ novels. Christie saved Poirot's death till the end, after she's stopped writing, and that may have been the case with Morse too. Most writers may "retire" a character (as Ed McBain has done with Matthew Hope) but they keep him/her alive just in case they're needed. I don't think anyone would want a book in which EQ died. After all, the authors did it with Drury Lane.

`Q:`	Fred Dannay had somewhat of a legendary reputation as a strict editor, as described by Janet Hutchings 'Editors' changes are not always so kindly interpreted as 'suggestions' You evidently had no trouble considering them as suggestions and took them to heart. It seemed to me that that it seemed well known whatever name one found for a story sent to EQMM Fred would find a better name for it. I often wondered what would happen if one didn't agree with the changes made. (Apart from the descriptions of the modus operandi Lee/Dannay had.) Several authors mentioned corrections being made to their works and refer to discussions they had (phone, letters, personal,...) with Fred. However they never told us how these decisions were made. Was it always one way traffic?
A:	Pretty much so. I would sometimes give my opinion, but if Fred insisted on a change I wouldn't argue too much. I doubt if other authors did, either. One of my most reprinted stories, "The Leopold Locked Room" was originally titled "The Vengeance Room." I still think that's a good title, but Fred had convincing reasons for changing it to tie in more closely with the Leopold series, and I finally agreed.

`Q:`	It still strikes me as odd to hear that both partners were haunted by self-doubt. Several incidents have been described in which both Dannay and Lee undervalued their importance as writers or anything else. Surely they must have been aware of what they accomplished? E.g. Manfred's role in the equation has been downplayed a lot, surely his role in the 'franchise' is equally important?
A:	I think the self-doubt was stronger on Manny Lee's part. He wanted to write more serious fiction. But he did contribute a great deal to the series, including (I believe) a final surprise for Fred. (Warning: Solution revealed.) In the last novel, A Fine and Private Place, EQ topped The French Powder Mystery in which the killer's name is the final two words of the novel, by having the killer's name appear only twice in the entire book, as its opening words and closing words. The killer appears in several scenes, but is always referred to in other ways. Manny died a few weeks before the book was published, and when I mentioned to Fred how clever this was, he didn't seem to know what I meant. I believe this gimmick, unique in detective fiction, was Manny's final surprise for Fred.

`Q:`	I still found it strange there is so much controversy on the subject of the ghost ownership. Jack Vance, e.g., has been noted to say his prose was stolen. You took it upon yourself to write The Blue Movies Murders. By that time the farming out of the paperbacks was well known. Were there in your agreement with Lee/Dannay clauses with regard to signing the book, or even admitting you wrote it?
A:	My agreement was not with Dannay/Lee but with Scott Meredith, their literary agent at the time. I was not to reveal that I had written it, but after a few years that information started appearing to print, in fan publications and in Hubin's Crime Fiction, so I felt I was no longer under any obligation to remain silent. Fred never objected to the authors' identities being made known.