A question about the end of the Nero Wolfe story: Over My Dead Body [Spoilers]

I don’t want to get into a spoiler battle in what has turned into a “guide the newb through Nero Wolfe legendaria”, but

I would argue that it doesn’t so much spoil the character as complete the picture. The character in question has always been a bit of an arrogant creep, only tolerated in the Wolfe “family” because he’s good at the limited skill set he has. I never liked him much even before A Family Affair, to tell the truth. I was shocked but not terribly surprised that it turned out to be him, if that makes any sense.

Yep, I concur with you. Not that my memory is as flawless as Archie’s, of course, but I can’t remember Wolfe being touted as a better cook than Fritz. Maybe on certain dishes, like saucisse minuit, scrambled eggs, and corned beef hash (the secret’s in the chitlins!), but I don’t think his abilities surpass Fritz’s overall.

Of course, Fritz is supposed to be a wonderful chef but not superlative. Wolfe once makes some flattering comments to a chef, possibly in Too Many Cooks in which case the chef is Jerome Berin), that he knows the difference between capable cooks, very good chefs like Fritz, and outstanding chefs such as Berin and the others who make up Les Quinze Maitres. (I’m always a little disappointed to read Fritz described as wanting in any way. He’s a charming character.) My point is, Wolfe doesn’t describe himself as being better than Fritz.

As far as reading the books chronologically: I think it’s a good idea, though not mandatory. There are some small, barely detectable character arcs, such as Archie’s changing sensibilities and his relationship with various women. Plus it’s fun to see the gang living through the war period and then the ‘Man in the Gray Flannel Suit’ era and eventually the swinging '60s and Watergate. Despite not, um, aging.

The thing is, continuity wasn’t Stout’s strong suit, so he didn’t bother with it much, which is why the books can mostly be read in any order you wish. His attention to character-background details was, shall we say, lacking (Are Archie’s parents alive or dead? Is Saul married or single? Is Wolfe a native-born US citizen or was he born in Montenegro? What’s the Brownstone’s address?) and the series’ timeline is flat-out impossible assuming Wolfe and Archie stay the same age. One of the few times Stout made a nod to continuity by re-using a character from an early book, he ended up creating a real mess, timelinewise.

Very minor spoilers for Too Many Cooks and A Right to Die:

For example, a small character who appears in TMC as a college-age kid (in 1938) returns in ARTD, published nearly thirty years later, now the middle-aged father of a college-graduate son. But while he’s aged appropriately, Archie and Wolfe are basically the same ages as they were in TMC. (Archie’s described as being a ‘young man’ throughout the series and is usually considered early- to mid-30s at most.) If they’d ignored the earlier appearance this wouldn’t be so bad, but Archie, Wolfe and the father all refer to the events from TMC, including the fact that he was just a kid at the time. The only explanation is that there’s some kinda stasis bubble around the Brownstone that affects only its inhabitants and frequent visitors (like Saul, Orrie, Fred, Cramer, etc.).

But these are just some of the quirks in this decades-long book series. Such trivial goofs really don’t matter in the long run and certainly don’t affect most people’s enjoyment of the corpus. The Wolfe series is as idiosyncratic as its star detective – and we wouldn’t have it any other way. :slight_smile:

I absolutely agree with choie about timeline oddities. Just ignore them…they mean nothing. Although it does get ridiculous when you come to the Goldsborough additions…they don’t “suck”, as such (okay, some of them do). They’re just not really the Wolfe characters, and it’s not the real brownstone. Stout brought the characters and milieu into the just-barely-pre-computer era…they work in the pre-computer era. Goldsborough has things like Archie keeping the orchid records on a PC…that doesn’t work. It just doesn’t.

Thanks for the additional comments everyone. I’m going to try to read the books in sequence, but I realize that with so many volumes published over several decades some may be hard to find.

For what it’s worth, the chronology of my reading so far is:

1. Where There’s a Will
2. Too Many Cooks
3. Champagne for One
4. Fer-de-Lance
5. The League of Frightened Men

And perhaps I should clear up what I meant when I referred to Chaykin’s more animated portrayal of Wolfe vs. the literary version. I didn’t mean to imply that Wolfe as written could scarcely move a muscle…only that he didn’t. The Wolfe of the books is far, far less expressive than in Chaykin’s portrayal. He was also in complete control of what he wanted to say and how he wanted to say it. Chaykin’s Wolfe sometimes seems visably to be searching for the right words when he’s on a rant. Chaykin is a very good actor and can handle lots of dialog at a time (including Montenegran or Bosnian or whatever Wolfe’s native language was), so I’m thinking his delivery was perhaps intentional on the part of the producers in order to imply that mental gymnastics were going on inside Wolfe’s head. This for the benefit of audience members not familiar with the books.

And thanks for the heads up on A Family Affair, Rocketeer. I just ruined my enjoyment of Dexter after only one season by reading synopses on IMDB of coming years’ episodes and finding out about the death of a key character in season five. I hadn’t thought IMDB would give away spoilers like that.

And I agree, the idea of Archie entering orchid records on a PC just doesn’t fit the Wolfe…“oeuvre” (for want of a better word).

And not to come off as too much of a newbie Wolfe fanboy, but I don’t have any problem buying Archie’s being able to handle himself well. In the days when those books were written, men could acquit themselves well based on nothing but their experience and natual physicality. James Bond, for example, didn’t work out. Neither did the hard-boiled private eye types of the noir era. (Here’s a pretty cool illustration of Archie from 1958. He not only looks like he could take care of himself to me, but a lot like Sean Connery too. :)) IIRC from Jack Lalanne’s obit, he opened the first health and weight-training gym in the U.S. in 1938, so it’s not like literary heroes of the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s could normally be expected to be working out. Besides, as jayjay implied with regard to Archie’s entering orchid data via PC, Archie hitting the weight bench and running on a treadmill just wouldn’t fit the atmosphere of the Wolfe novels. Plus the necessary regimentation of working out would interfere with his more or less on-call-24-hours-a-day job with Wolfe.

At this point I must again mention that I believe the perfect Nero Wolfe and Archie Goodwin for films would have been Sidney Greenstreet and Humphrey Bogart.
:slight_smile:

I don’t know if you’re aware, but Greenstreet actually did play Wolfe in one of the radio incarnations…the 1950 version, I think.

Different strokes, of course, but I’m thinking Orson Wells or maybe Raymond Burr for Wolfe (I think this guy looks a lot like Burr only with a much bigger paunch), but to me this guy most closely fits my idea of Wolfe as described in the books. He’s a handsome guy even with all the fat, and to me that’s central to the way people react to Wolfe in the books. His handsome, dignified appearance would create respect among old-money types despite his size, and he looks like a man who may have chosen to disdain women because of what he percieves as their character faults rather than because he had a hard time finding romance in the first place, which is an impression I’ve gotten from most of the guys who’ve played him in the movies or on television. In other words, I don’t think people would be reacting negatively to his looks at all, and I think that’s an important aspect to the way the various characters react to him in the books.

So, my first pick would be the guy in the illustration. But since he doesn’t exist in real life, I’d go with Orson Wells first and then Raymond Burr.

As for Archie, I think the A&E episodes have pretty much permanently imprinted Timothy Hutton’s version on me. To me he owns that role every bit as much as Sean Connery does James Bond and Raymond Burr did Perry Mason.