Tuesday, January 27, 2026

Perry Mason 115: TCOT Cautious Coquette

Note: Break out the thinking caps, kids - Gardner cranks complexity up to DefCon 5. You’ll either love the brain-bending or throw the book across the room.

The Case of the Cautious Coquette – Erle Stanley Gardner

Mike Grost, tireless cataloger of detective fiction, observes that Gardner possessed “seemingly inexhaustible ability to generate complex plots.” TCOT Cautious Coquette, Mason’s thirty-fourth outing from 1949, is a case in point. Gardner’s ingenuity here is not merely technical; it reflects a worldview in which contingency rules so your practical wisdom - your mother-wit - had better be sharp.

Perry Mason, personal injury lawyer. Sounds not only wrong but like you got a hair in your mouth, doesn’t it? Eee-yew. Like Celine Dion singing Gimme a Pigfoot and a Bottle of Beer.  But here he is, chasing a hit-and-run for a college kid with a busted hip and a mother who’s got nothing but grief and a mortgage. Mason’s usual gig is saving the innocent from the criminal justice meat grinder, so why not take on Big Insurance?

The plan is simple: find the driver, squeeze the insurer, collect the check. Mason runs an ad, and simplicity is trumped by contingency. Two drivers show up, two cars, two settlements. Then a chauffeur named Hartwell L. Pitkin turns up dead in a garage, and the garage belongs to Lucille Barton - a woman who wants Mason for an alimony case. He said no. He doesn’t do family law - too much bad behavior bad actors can't help. He does criminal defense.

Lucille didn’t call the cops like Mason told her. A neighbor saw her, maybe saw Mason, and now the cops want answers. Mason gives them attorney-client privilege instead. It’s legal, it’s clever, and it’s the reason he’s stuck with a client he doesn’t trust. Lucille’s beautiful, cunning, and about as reliable as sarcasm.

Enter Lt. Tragg, homicide detective, smart enough to know Sgt. Holcomb - his rival - is a bull in a china shop. Holcomb wants headlines, Mason wants daylight, and Tragg wants to keep his job. So Mason and Tragg team up, sort of. Mason feeds Tragg a tip, then makes Holcomb look like a fool in court. There’s even a car chase. Yes, a car chase in a Perry Mason story. Gardner must’ve been feeling frolics were in order.

The plot’s a pretzel. Gardner builds it with his usual tricks - false leads, courtroom fireworks, and names that sound like they came from a Dickens fan club. Willard Allison Barton? Roscoe R. Hansom? Really?

Language? Well, let’s just say “well-upholstered woman” isn’t aging like fine wine. But the bones of the thing hold up. For the faithful, it’s Gardner in full convoluted mode. For newcomers, it’s a crash course in a world where motives collide, ethics bend and gaaaw-lee those clients sure are economical with the truth.

Saturday, January 24, 2026

Perry Mason 114: Novels versus TeeVee

Note: From Ken Kesey’s novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, "The Combine" is a term Chief Bromden uses in his "delusions" to represent a vast, oppressive, and mechanical force that controls society, with the psychiatric hospital acting as a "factory" to "fix" people into conformist, machine-like workers. Chief Bromden, a tall Native American patient who pretends to be deaf and mute, sees Nurse Ratched and the orderlies as agents of The Combine.

Perry Mason: Novels versus TeeVee

Erle Stanley Gardner’s Perry Mason novels are precision machines, engineered to deliver models of legal suspense with the efficiency of a pulp assembly line. Each begins with a client in extremis - bewildered, imperiled, and anxious - wandering into Mason’s office like a refugee from a film noir backlot. What follows is a procedural ballet: murder, investigation, confrontation, and the inevitable courtroom climax, where Mason’s logic pins the culprit and the innocent walks free. Gardner, a lawyer turned pulp impresario, revels in evidentiary reversals and clipped dialogue, trusting readers to navigate a maze of legal minutiae and fill in exposition and business as they like. These are not whodunits but howdunits, their pleasures rooted in the mechanics of fraud and the thrill of watching The Combine outfoxed.

Television, from 1957 adapting the novels, streamlines this intricate machinery for the small screen. The hour-long format demands compression: subplots vanish, pacing accelerates, and the narrative arc - client, killing, investigation, trial - becomes a metronome. Gardner’s labyrinthine plotting gives way to clarity; crimes are staged early, investigations truncated, and courtroom theatrics foregrounded, with the mute defendant wedged between Perry and Della like a prop. The result is sleek reassurance, calibrated for mid-century living rooms. Accessibility triumphs over complexity. Where Gardner traffics in nuance, the series offers closure - a world where truth emerges on cue. No wonder Neil Postman and every smart-aleck sophomore in the Seventies (like me!) called teevee The Boob Tube.

Characterization undergoes similar sanding-down. Gardner’s Mason is a trickster in pinstripes, a gambler who thrives in gray zones. His moral compass points toward justice, but the route is circuitous, and the novels occasionally wink at his appetite for risky misdemeanors. Della Street, far from a stenographic ornament, is Mason’s co-conspirator - breaking and entering, impersonating gold diggers, and piloting getaway cars with pulp élan. Paul Drake, amiable and perpetually harried, rounds out a trio that calls to mind Nervous Overheated Ron, Brainy Cool Hermoine, and Wise Mind Harry.

Television domesticates this trio. Raymond Burr’s Mason radiates gravitas and ethical rectitude, a figure of calm authority in a universe of moral certainties. Della becomes a note-taker; Paul morphs into comic relief. Hamilton Burger, Gardner’s snarling prosecutor, is softened into genial foil, his vendetta ritualized into courtroom banter. The novels’ simmering antagonisms – graceless Burger stamping off as cross as a frog in a sock - are replaced by post-verdict bonhomie. Gardner approved the scripts, but one suspects he muttered “like hell” under his breath.

Tone is the final transmutation. Gardner writes in a brisk, not-quite-hard-boiled register, his dialogue clipped, his atmosphere tense with disquiet. Wartime shadows and cultural tremors haunt the margins, and the novels inhabit a world where the policeman is not your friend.

The TV series bathes Mason in the glow of Eisenhower-era optimism. Courtrooms gleam with California sheen; decorum reigns; law becomes sanctuary. Gardner’s recurring cautionary motif - never talk to the authorities without your lawyer - vanishes, along with his warnings about improper police procedures, misidentifications by witnesses and misconstrued circumstantial evidence. The show offers reassurance; the books, a lingering unease that instead of presuming innocence, The Combine thinks "horses" when it hears hooves, given circumstantial evidence, a plausible motive, and a lack of an airtight alibi.

In short: Gardner’s Mason prowls a morally ambiguous landscape, improvising justice in a flawed system. The televised Mason presides over a universe of order, where truth is punctual and the good guys always win. One is pulp with a purpose; the other, prime-time anesthesia.

Wednesday, January 21, 2026

Perry Mason 113: TCOT Silent Partner

Note: I grew up with Raymond Burr’s Perry Mason lodged in my brain like a battleship in dry dock - piercing stare, commanding voice, and enough bulk to block out the sun. So imagine my adolescent shock when I cracked open the original novels and discovered that Mason was not, in fact, Raymond Burr in a snappy suit, but a tall, lanky fellow who often moonlighted as a hard-boiled private eye. The written Mason speeds through traffic, slugs bad guys, outfoxes cops, and even scolds his own clients. Meanwhile, Burr’s courtroom stoicism sat in my head like bedrock. Naturally, I prefer the books (of course I do; I’m that sort of person), but every so often Burr’s unflappable Mason and Gardner’s fedora-wearing Mason square off in my psyche like two heavyweight champs. Half Burr, half Mason, all Gardner.

Perryism to Live by RE Empathy: You don't need to see a man, look in his face, shake his hand, and hear him talk, in order to know him. You can watch the things he does. You can see him through the eyes of others. You make allowances for [ ] prejudice when you know the others. You can then judge the extent of their distortion. That's the only way you can solve cases, Della. You must learn to know the characters involved. You must learn to see things through their eyes, and that means you must have sympathy and tolerance for crime.

The Case of the Silent Partner – Erle Stanley Gardner

Seventeenth Mason novel, 1940. TCOT Silent Partner. You want it straight? This one matters. Tragg walks in for the first time - cool, sharp, same age as Mason. Forget Ray Collins on TV; Gardner envisioned Tragg about the same age as Mason and educated enough to be embarrassed about the wielders of rubber hoses.

The story starts with a flower shop, a woman tough enough to run it and still play nurse to a disabled patient. She’s got grit, but grit doesn’t stop trouble. Trouble comes fast, out of nowhere. A partner with sticky fingers, a deal that smells wrong, and then murder. The cops want her for it. They’ve got motive, means, everything but the truth.

Tragg works the angles. He’s no Holcomb - he knows psychology. Gets a suspect talking with a word-association trick while Mason’s out of the room. That’s new. Usually Perry’s in every scene, pulling strings. Not here. Gardner lets Tragg steal the spotlight.

Paul Drake? Late entrance about half down the road, small part. Della Street? She’s in deep, moving pieces, not just answering phones. That’s why the books beat the TV show cold - Della’s a player, not a prop.

The climax? Not your usual Mason blowout in criminal court. It’s civil. No fireworks, but Perry still makes the other lawyer look like a sap. Gardner keeps it tight, no fat, no frills. Just moves and counter-moves.

And under it all, Gardner’s old tune: respect for women who fight their way through a man’s world. He doesn’t make saints, but he doesn’t make fools either. Maybe he was playing to female readers. Maybe he just liked women who drove fast and ate like fieldhands. Doesn’t matter. It works.

TCOT Silent Partner isn’t just a case. It’s a turning point. Tragg’s here to stay. And Mason? He’s still the guy who walks into court when the evidence screams, ‘Start polishing the gas chamber seat for Mason’s client,’ and somehow walks out with the jury asking for his autograph.

Sunday, January 18, 2026

Perry Mason 112: Crows Can't Count

Note: I’m not fond of comparisons, but here goes: Cool and Lam versus Perry Mason. The A.A. Fair novels are shorter, faster-paced, and full of funny situations between Donald Lam - a former lawyer with a knack for trouble - and Bertha Cool, a brassy, no-nonsense detective. Their contrasting styles make them entertaining: he’s quiet and insightful; she’s as sensitive as a fire hydrant. These stories lean into the seedier side of life, focusing on family problems and the vagaries of human behavior rather than courtroom drama. 

Crows Can’t Count – Erle Stanley Gardner writing as A. A. Fair

This 1946 outing is Gardner in his “let’s see how many plot threads I can tangle before the snarl weighs as much as a bowling ball” mode. We’ve got emerald mines in Colombia, a trust fund with middle-aged trustees who can’t keep their male gazes off the young heiress, a crow with kleptomania, and at least one corpus. If you came here for the usual mix of comedy from Bertha Cool and deduction by Donald Lam, disappointment awaits. The first-person narration is by Donald Lam: pure deduction, minimal action, and dialogue that often lacks Gardner’s typical snap, crackle, and fizz.

The setup: fifty-ish Harry Sharples hires Cool and Lam to trace an emerald necklace that shouldn’t be in a local dealer’s hands. Sharples and Robert Cameron co-manage the estate of Cora Hendricks, late owner of a Colombian gold mine. The heirs? Shirley Bruce, a knockout who kisses like a teenage boy’s dreamboat, and Robert Hockley, a gambler with issues like unstable emotions and impulsivity. Before Lam can get a line on the players, Cameron turns up dead, his crow missing, and a necklace minus emeralds sitting on the table. Cue the parade of suspects: young Shirley, a mysterious Juanita Grafton, her artist daughter Dona (currently crow-sitting), and assorted main-chancers.

What follows is a marathon of meetings, phone calls, and enigmatic conversations that make you nostalgic for the days when detective fiction maybe didn’t involve so much talk talk talk. Eventually, everyone decamps to Colombia for an “exotic idyll,” which Gardner renders with the genuine sympathy and respect he brought to Mexico - though Bertha Cool’s culture shock is milked for humor that feels past its expiration date by about 50 years. The crow subplot? Cute and welcome, but not enough of a diversion.

The mystery itself is a ball of yarn untangled by Lam in a multi-multi-page monologue that reads like the reveal in a whodunnit from the Twenties. The solution makes sense – when the hard-core reader squints - but getting there is like jogging with shoes on the wrong feet. Gardner’s usual sparkle? We fans gaze the horizon in vain, from our crow’s nest. Bertha, once a comically profane bulldozer, is reduced to a cartoon homebody out of her element. Lam fares better because we fans are used to his never being forthcoming but his deductions feel like the physics theory that depends on the step “Then a Miracle Happens.”

Bottom line: Crows Can’t Count isn’t terrible, but it’s Gardner seemingly distracted which is weird in a year when he was not his usual hyper-productive self, publishing only TCOT Borrowed Brunette and The D.A. Breaks a Seal, a D.A. Doug Selby novel. Maybe he finally gave himself some well-deserved vacations.

Thursday, January 15, 2026

Perry Mason 111: His Kind of Woman

Note: The producer of Perry Mason, Gail Patrick Jackson, said she had always believed Raymond Burr was perfect for the role of Perry Mason, as long as he shed enough pounds. In 1956 Erle Stanley Gardner, in a memo to Gail Patrick, praised her choice of Burr, “You saw possibilities in Raymond Burr which no one else saw." Because he played so many villains in the decade after World War II, Burr may have been anchored in casting producer’s minds as the brute, the psycho.

His Kind of Woman
1951 / 1:57
Tagline: “They were Two of a Kind”
[internet archive]

Raymond Burr is in the picture just long enough to make you wonder why he isn’t in it more. He plays an American gangster deported to Italy, a man who still runs his Jersey rackets from across the Atlantic and clears two million a year doing it. He’s thirty-two, thirty-three, and Naples isn’t his idea of a retirement plan. He wants back in the USA, and the way he sees it, Mexico is the door. The plan needs a fall guy, and that’s Robert Mitchum - a gambler with no fixed address and no one to miss him. The plan also brushes up against Jane Russell, who is the only thing Mitchum seems to care about.

Burr looks good here. He’s heavier in other pictures, but in this one the suits fit and the shoulders are right. The makeup man has gone heavy on the darkener, so Burr looks less Mediterranean than varnished. His eyes do the work: feverish, unfocused, the kind of eyes that tell you he’s half sadist. He talks about honor like he invented it, and then he threatens Mitchum for not keeping his word.

Mitchum drinks milk. Says liquor makes him forget what he’s doing. He doesn’t like swing music, which tells you something. He looks like a choir boy who doesn't want his friends over to meet his family. His face at rest is a gambler’s face - flat, unreadable. Then you catch him in a moment and there’s a kind of hurt there.

Jane Russell wants a man who can keep her in mink, but she’ll settle for love. Vincent Price plays an actor tired of pretending, and Jim Backus plays a gambler who cheats honeymooners out of their stake. Mitchum wins it back for them because he’s decent that way. 

The picture runs just under two hours. It starts slow, then turns noir, then turns something else. There are long stretches where nothing happens except Mitchum and Russell looking at each other, which is the best part of the movie. Burr comes second. By the last reel, it’s a gangster thriller again, with Burr threatening needles and Nazi drugs. Mitchum disappears, Price stages a rescue like Tom Sawyer planning a jailbreak, and Russell turns up at the end to watch Mitchum ironing a shirt.

It’s too long. It doesn’t know what it wants to be. But a movie-goer watches it anyway, because Mitchum and Russell have chemistry, Burr has menace, and Price has fun. Sometimes that’s enough.

Pre-Mason Raymond Burr
Please Murder Me (1956) [internet archive] [my review]
I Love Trouble (1948) [internet archive] [my review]
Sleep My Love (1948) [internet archive] [my review]
Ruthless (1948) [internet archive] [my review]
Pitfall (1948) [internet archive] [my review]
Walk a Crooked Mile (1948) [internet archive] [my review]
Raw Deal (1948) [internet archive] [my review]
Station West (1948) [my review]
Red Light (1949) [internet archive] [my review]
Abandoned (1949) [internet archive] [my review]
Borderline (1950) [internet archive] [my review]
Unmasked (1950) [internet archive] [my review]
The Whip Hand (1951) [internet archive] [my review]
Bride of the Gorilla (1951) [internet archive] [my review]
M (1951) [internet archive] [my review]

Tuesday, January 13, 2026

The Ides of Anna May Wong: Island of Lost Men

Note: This month we examined three Anna May Wong movies to give Perry Mason reviews a little break. I liked the overall look of this B-picture (the IA print is surprisingly nice) though some stock footage of drumming natives seemed out of place.

Island of Lost Men
1939 / 1:03
Tagline: “Madman Emperor of a Savage Jungle World beyond Civilization's Last Outpost”
[internet archive]

This picture is less about jungle melodrama and more about the pathology of power. Prin, the river despot, is a case study in the old maxim that absolute power doesn’t just corrupt – it’s both fuel and exhaust of anger, stupidity, and greed. Lost like Mr. Kurtz in Heart of Darkness, Prin builds his empire on fear and poisonous bathtub gin, and then wonders why the local people want him dead. His tyranny is theatrical, his unpredictability a management style, and his contempt for flowers a neat metaphor for his oily work rag of a soul.

The film’s moral stance is clear: Prin’s corporate org chart is a hierarchy of scoundrels, each ready to sell him out for a handful of coins or a chance at survival. His insistence on precedence and obedience is laughable because the whole system is held together with narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism. When your lieutenants are philosophical renegades and gin-peddling thugs, you don’t need to run ads for an enemy - they’re already on the payroll.

J. Carroll Naish plays Prin like a man auditioning for the role of “Worst Dinner Guest Alive.” His performance oscillates between greasy charm and full hambone, and when he tips into the latter, we movie-goers can only hope the director calls “cut” before the scenery collapses under the chewing. Anna May Wong, by contrast, is all watchful restraint - her silences speak louder than Prin’s tirades. Nobody does the slow burn of contempt like Wong, and here she makes it look effortless. And scalding. Wong was great and Hollywood didn’t have a clue what to do with her.

Anthony Quinn, in regrettable yellowface makeup, brings a pulse to the proceedings, and Broderick Crawford swaggers through like a young’un who knows he’s in a B-picture and intends to enjoy it. The set design is a triumph of atmosphere - Karl Struss shoots Prin’s compound with a conviction that the script only intermittently earns. Sadly, this is namby-pamby Post-Code, so when the philo professor delivers the severed head of his colleague Ernest Truex to Prin, the scene is not nearly as grisly as it should have been.

What impresses isn’t the plot but the texture: the sense of a world where gorgeous orchids bloom and little men rot, where tyranny is a performance and loyalty for suckers. It’s a jungle noir with philosophical pretensions, and if it doesn’t quite deliver on its ambitions, it still offers a pungent whiff of moral decay.

Sunday, January 11, 2026

Perry Mason 110: Bethel Leslie

Note: Bethel Leslie (1929 - 1999) had a distinguished career, marked by success in theater, television, and film, and was recognized with both Emmy and Tony Award nominations. Her career, which spanned over 50 years, included numerous roles in classic TV dramas like Playhouse 90 and the greatest courtroom drama in the history of Creation, and later she worked as the head writer for the soap opera The Secret Storm. She received a Tony nomination in 1986, when she was 57, for her performance as the addict mother in Long Day's Journey into Night.

A Tribute to Bethel Leslie

Entertainers often come from families that resemble Hieronymus Bosch more than Norman Rockwell paintings, so we movie-goers, not without melancholy, wonder: what was nine-year-old Bethel Leslie thinking in 1938 when her parents split? Was acting her coping mechanism? Did joining a cast feel like joining a family - or at least a tribe of people who understood the thrill of greasepaint and applause? And were those older actors the kind of role models an upper-crust mother would want for her teenage girl? (Spoiler: probably not.) Or maybe it was simpler: acting rang a creative bell.

Whatever the psychology, history thanks producer George Abbott for spotting her. By 15, Leslie was on Broadway, in 1944, and she stayed there through the mid-Fifties, earning respect in a string of productions. She was the kind of actress who made critics reach for words like “poised” and “intelligent,” which is code for the Spockian observation “It is far easier for civilized people to act like barbarians than it is for barbarians to act like civilized people.”

On the classic Perry Mason TV series, Leslie played variations on a theme: the nice woman married to a brute who might as well wear a sign reading “Murder Me!” It’s a role that could slide into autopilot, but Leslie never mailed in being the pretty defendant. Like Raymond Burr, who could brood with the best of them, she treated the material seriously. Even when the script parked her silently at the defense table for half an episode, wedged between Della Street and Our Favorite Lawyer, Leslie radiated conviction. She understood that nuance matters - even when your only line is a rueful look.

Janet Morris in TCOT Fugitive Nurse 2/15/58
Janet insists she doesn’t want a divorce. She says it with the kind of conviction that makes you wonder if she’s lying to herself. Her husband, a doctor with a taste for cash and secrecy, has been stashing money like a squirrel in winter, neglecting to tell the IRS about his little nest egg. He’s also cheating - of course he is.

Janet, in a gesture of wounded dignity, pleads with the other woman to leave him alone. But the tax men are circling, and it’s Janet who seems to be holding the sack. Her behavior is a study in contradictions. Even Della Street, whose instincts are as sharp as a stiletto, can’t decide: Is Janet protecting the man she claims to love, or angling for the missing $92,000 - a sum that would make her a millionaire in 2026?

There’s a whiff of history here. Janet sends hubby off on a solo flight to Salt Lake City with hot coffee and a smile, then asks where he’ll be staying so Mason can reach him about the divorce. He’s startled, suspicious. So are we. Is this a bait-and-switch from a woman who once believed in happily-ever-after?

And then there’s Leslie - society to her fingertips. She opens the episode in a mink that suggests it’s all she’s wearing, like a JohnO’Hara heroine sprung to life. Janet, by contrast, wears privilege like a tired perfume. She thought life with her med student would be champagne and roses. Instead, it’s subpoenas and despair.

Evelyn Girard in TCOT Purple Woman 11/22/58
Evelyn had that Yankee polish - quiet grit, loyalty stitched into every gesture. Her father’s pulpit loomed behind her like a cathedral shadow, and she guarded his name as if it were Meissen porcelain. Yet here she was, in Perry Mason’s office, voice brittle as old glass. Her husband, an art dealer with a taste for fraud, had passed off a counterfeit canvas. Was she exposed? Mason, calm as winter light, assured her she was clean. Still, her words sagged with fatigue: “He’ll cheat whenever cheating’s possible.” Della Street caught the look - disillusion, stark and cold.

But Evelyn’s virtue had hairline cracks. She’d been writing love letters with the Chronicle’s art critic - letters her husband now clutched like a mace. When he confronted her, his cruelty was surgical. “How did he ever get a job on a newspaper?” he sneered, savoring the sting. He promised her father would read every sordid syllable in divorce court. Evelyn, trembling, threatened him with scissors - an outburst witnessed by the secretary he bedded. Later, to that same woman, he spat a line no woman should hear: “You’re too intellectual to understand my wife’s emotionality.”

And so the story turned. Evelyn in jail, eyes wide with disbelief. Mason, patient, laying out motive and opportunity like cards on green felt. She could see the picture any DA would paint for twelve folks too dumb to get out of jury duty - but still, lips sealed, she refused to name her lover. Burr gave Leslie space, as he always did for guest stars in the jail cell interview scene. The scene was a high note of drama, second only to the confession yet to come.

Sylvia Sutton in TCOT Wayward Wife 1/23/60
Sylvia was running on fumes when she swept into Perry Mason’s office, all nerves and strained poise. Her husband, Ben - a man with the soul of a loan shark - had already squeezed $14,000 out of her and now wanted ten grand more from her brother Gil. The price of silence? A car crash Gil allegedly caused, leaving a woman paralyzed and the police none the wiser. Mason, cool as a martini, advised her to skip the payoff and tell the cops everything.

But fear makes fools of us all. Convinced Gil had killed Ben, Sylvia purloined a cleaning woman’s cloth coat and babushka – Harper’s Bazaar would call that “peasant chic” - and dashed to her ransacked house, where Ben lay sprawled, skull cracked by a fireplace poker. The cleaning woman spotted the theft, and soon Sylvia was in custody, her mug shot destined for the society pages she once skimmed over breakfast.

In court, Sylvia spoke no lines, yet her face told volumes. Irony flickered in her eyes as witnesses paraded by - was this really her life? Stealing a maid’s clothes, shrieking at cabbies like a fishwife? She mourned her blindness: not seeing Ben for the cad he was from the get-go, not foreseeing the sister-in-law’s affair with Ben, not imagining the car crash that set this domino run in motion. Still, she held her head high. Yankee grit, laced with rue. Life had thrown her curveballs, and Sylvia - tragic, stylish Sylvia - was determined to look her best swinging.