Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Welcome to our buddy read of A Tangled Web .

Having finished the Nigel Strangeways series, we are now turning our attention to the stand-alone mysteries by Nicholas Blake/Cecil Day Lewis.

A Tangled Web aka Death and Daisy Bland was published in 1956.

Hugo Chesterman is on trial for murdering a policeman. Why did he do it? Or could he be innocent?

Daisy Bland is young, beautiful and naive, and her testimony threatens to send her husband to the gallows.

For Daisy, it all started when she literally bumped into Hugo and fell madly in love. She gave up everything for him: her job, her friends, her independence. Blinded by love, she asks no questions about his vague profession as a 'commission agent', his suspicious associates and his reckless financial decisions.

When Hugo is arrested for the murder of a policeman in a burglary gone wrong, Daisy doesn't know what to believe. Her husband's life is now in her hands.

Apparently, this case was based on a real-life crime - in anyone knows which one, I would be interested to hear.

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

I have finished this now and enjoyed it overall because of the quality of Blake/Day-Lewis's writing.

I have to say though that I don't find Daisy at all believable - she is surely too wide-eyed and gullible for someone who has lived with a criminal for a couple of years, and there is such a lot about her amazing beauty! I find Hugo far more convincing. A pity since we know Blake could draw great female characters, such as Georgia and Clare in the Strangeways books.

Odd that the Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ blurb says they are married when it's such a feature of the plot that they aren't and she can therefore give evidence against him.

I'm not sure why Hugo isn't willing to marry her earlier - I had the impression there was some secret, and was waiting for a revelation that he was married already! But maybe he is just reluctant to be tied.

I agree with you about Daisy - she was not believable. I also wondered why Hugo didn't marry her, unless he thought he was not worthy? An interesting read though and it reminded me a little of Wimsey, in that there was a question of the reality of arrest and of what could lead to it during a time when England still had the death penalty. This was published in 1956 and Ruth Ellis was hung in 1955, so this was obviously a big talking point at the time.

Susan wrote: "Apparently, this case was based on a real-life crime - in anyone knows which one, I would be interested to hear...."

I've just searched for the answer to this - I found a book called The Encyclopedia of Murder and Mystery by Bruce F. Murphy at Google Books, which says "A Tangled Web was based on a real case, that of the murderer John Williams."

A bit more searching showed this was a case from 1912 known as " the Case of the Hooded Man" and "the Eastbourne Murder" - there is a Wikipedia page about it here:


I haven't read all through this page yet but it looks as if there are a lot of similarities with the book, including the involvement of a doctor friend who helped the police and a theft from a foreign countess (rather than a princess).

I've now read the whole page and it looks as if the novel follows the facts of the case quite closely. I couldn't find any photos of anyone involved.

Oh, well done, Judy. Good detective work yourself!

He really did take a lot from the case, didn't he? The plot follows the crime really closely.

Thank you Susan! It does follow the case closely - but I would think the real characters were quite different from the fictional ones.I suppose he chose a case from decades earlier so that readers wouldn't know what was going to happen next.

I found a photo of the policeman who was killed.

This contains a newspaper picture of John Williams, plus the Countess.

Odd that they veiled him going into Court, then took a picture of him in the dock!

Sadly, couldn't find a photo of Florence...

Thank you Susan for the site with the photo of the policeman. That's also an interesting account, with some differences from the Wikipedia version.

I think it's important that Blake did include a chapter about how devastated the police are at the loss of their fellow officer and mentions of his family, to make sure readers remember the victim. Even so, I felt the book is perhaps too sympathetic to Hugo, suggesting he is somehow better than Jacko.

Oh wow, thank you for the newspaper front page. As you say, odd that he was veiled on the way there and then photographed in the dock. It would not be allowed to take photos of anyone during a court case in the UK today, so I wonder when the law changed.

Yes, I suppose that the author had to take sides to make his point, but I agree with you.

The poor policeman had a good send off though - there is a photo of his funeral in the first site. Not that it helped him, but still...

As well as the Ruth Ellis case being in the headlines at the time, as you say, Susan, I was interested to see that one of the police officers mentions the Craig/Bentley "Let them have it" case, another 1950s cause celebre.

Yes, true. Although Hugo did admit to shooting the policeman. As you say, evoking that case did suggest more sympathy for Hugo than he warranted.

This turned out to be a very interesting read, though not one I really enjoyed. I was definitely sympathetic to Daisy and Hugo even while knowing they (Hugo particularly) didn't deserve it. I knew how it had to end, if not with this case then with a later one.

I agree that Blake did a good job of reminding us of the victim and the pain caused by his death. I couldn't rout for Hugo to escape punishment and life in prison might have been even worse for him. The ending with Hugo and his son was touching and I'm glad Hugo confessed to Daisy.

I think I will remember this book more that I do the Strangeway's.

Regarding Hugo's reluctance to marry, I think not wanting to be tied down or having commitments, dislike of all authority figures and concern for Daisy all played a part.

Also, could his name change have been a concern? Would he have had to use his real name for it to be legal, or show documents such as a birth certificate?

Sandy wrote: "This turned out to be a very interesting read, though not one I really enjoyed. I was definitely sympathetic to Daisy and Hugo even while knowing they (Hugo particularly) didn't deserve it. I knew ..."

I think I know what you mean, Sandy - I found it interesting but a bit out of my comfort zone in terms of crime books, although it is so beautifully written that I did enjoy it.

I was sympathetic to Daisy at first, but less so when she is so happy to go along with Hugo's life of crime and just shuts her eyes to what is happening.

Sandy, your suggestions for why Hugo didn't want to marry are quite convincing - I thought there was some additional dark secret, but I suppose the fact that he is living under a false name is reason enough. Interesting though that he does want to marry when it would mean Daisy wouldn't be able to give evidence against him.

What does either of you think of Jacko? He's a very unappealing character and I kept wondering if he might make some sort of creepy pass at Daisy. Although he is still right to help the police catch Hugo, he must be the least appealing character in the book, I think.

I didn't like Jacko at all. I agree that he was creepy and a very false friend.

Daisy might have been more convincing had she been a friendless orphan, or something, but it was clear that she had a family and friends.

This short blog review has some interesting snippets from contemporary reviews at the end:



The blog reviewer has also picked out what I must agree is a pretty bad passage of purple prose about a sexual encounter between Daisy and Hugo - fortunately I don't think this type of writing was very typical of the book overall!

We know that Cecil Day-Lewis tended to the rather old fashioned in his writing, regarding the sexes... When I was reading, 'The Man in the Brown Suit,' (admittedly written much earlier than this, in the 1920's) I was thinking how much attitudes had changed - thank goodness!

I've just finished The Man in the Brown Suit and was thinking the same, Susan!

Yes - treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen, school of romance!

This was a fine read with the doubts and uncertainties about Hugo's guilt maintained right to the end.

I thought Daisy was an interesting character and I wasn't bothered by the naivety; there are many enormously naive people and the capacity for almost boundless self-delusion when it comes to those we love deeply is hardly all that uncommon.

Jacko was an out and out malignancy, one of the most venal and soulless creatures I've discovered slinking across the pages of a book in a long time.

Colin wrote: "This was a fine read with the doubts and uncertainties about Hugo's guilt maintained right to the end.

I thought Daisy was an interesting character and I wasn't bothered by the naivety; there are..."

I entirely agree with all of your post.

Colin wrote: "Jacko was an out and out malignancy, one of the most venal and soulless creatures I've discovered slinking across the pages of a book in a long time...."

I agree he is appalling, and the way his visual appearance seems to express his character makes him even more memorable. I think it's a pity this wasn't filmed - it would have made a powerful British noir film.

I saw some of the reviews on the Grandest Game website mentioned Jacko being impotent - I think I somehow missed that.

It really would have been a good film, Judy. Black and white, the end scene would have worked well. I love those old films - I was fascinated to see Diana Dors played Ruth Ellis (or a character based very much upon her) when Ellis actually had a bit part in a film she starred in.

I watched the adaptation of this book as an episode of The Alfred Hitchcock Hour last night. It's what I'd term a pretty free adaptation with Robert Redford and Barry Morse in the roles of Hugo and Jacko (renamed David and Karl),but I quite enjoyed it.

Thank you for saying it was turned into an episode of The Alfred Hitchcock Hour, Colin, I had no idea, though I had tried to check whether it was filmed! Surprising to hear that Robert Redford was in it - I hadn't realised he did so much TV early in his career. I'd like to see this one. I see it kept the title A Tangled Web.