Scan barcode
A review by beaconatnight
The Four Just Men by Edgar Wallace
3.0
There are many terrible men and women in positions of power. By their greed and unscrupulousness they ruin the lives of people who cannot protect themselves. Wouldn't it be fair if they got a taste of their own medicine? Might it even serve justice to remove them from the face of the Earth?
The Four Just Men claim for themselves the divine right of superior judgment. Not only do they decide what's right and what's wrong, they resort to callous acts of murder like God might punish a wrongdoer. At the beginning of the novel, the three core members of the group – George Manfred, Leon Gonsalez, and Raymond Poiccart – have killed sixteen people. Their newest target is the Foreign Secretary Sir Philip Ramon whom they judge to-be-guilty for his Aliens Extradition Bill.
The content of the Bill is never explained in detail, but there was the Aliens Act 1905 at around the time of the book's publication. The Act very strictly limited immigration into the United Kingdom and prevented many asylum-seekers from a safe place to live. Caused by the horrors of war in Syria, the Ukraine, and elsewhere the numbers of immigrants who seek refuge are currently at an all-time high. Yet, there are those who would prefer to simply close the doors and let them deal with their own problems. Depending on where you stand, it's difficult to avoid strongly negative sentiments towards such blunt egoism.
The Four Just Men is an intriguingly sinister story for indulging those anti-democratic fantasies. The already interesting premise is further strengthened by bringing in the general public and by introducing an additional motivation seemingly less "noble". Baffled by the criminals' wit, the police puts a high reward on their head (well, on information that leads to their arrest). While the villains attempt to control politics guided by moral principles and by the threat of violence, the good guys are motivated by personal profit.
The unusual structure of how the story is narrated makes it more difficult still to decide who you should root for. The events are recounted somewhat distantly with some chapters presenting the media reception of what was going on. Between and within chapters the people in focus change and we see what both sides are up to. Neither the Four Just Men nor police commissioner Falmouth are clear protagonists in the usual sense.
I think Wallace mainly intents to instill admiration for the four vigilantes because of how easy it is for them to do what they do. I think the unfathomably superior villain almost defines a subgenre of crime fiction. For example, early in the story they place a bomb in the Parliament, and it's never explained how they accomplish this extraordinary feat. A couple of months ago I saw Deadlier Than the Male, which I thought was a good example why the easy superiority takes out all the tension. Later on there are some references to chemistry proficiency of one of the four men as superficial explanation of how it is they do what they do, though.
There are surprising tensions within the group. The newly recruited fourth member, the Spaniard Thery, is actually imprisoned to prevent him from consulting the papers. He is reluctant to go on with their plot and there is discussion on what to do with him. However, to my mind the subplot was rather confused and should have been more streamlined for further impact. There was also the other subplot with the pickpocket and the back-and-forth in his attempts to identify the man they now know was one of those they are looking for. But here too I thought the whole event doesn't really go anywhere.
Of course I'm familiar with many of the German Edgar Wallace movie adaptations, but it was only recently that I've learned you could take the novels seriously. For the most part it's a very undemanding read, and it also shares the silly humor with the movies. It's not screamingly funny, but there are some amusing remarks and twists. So, while I was surprised by its unexpected reflections on justice, in other respects my first Edgar Wallace novel was exactly what I asked for.
Rating: 3.5/5
The Four Just Men claim for themselves the divine right of superior judgment. Not only do they decide what's right and what's wrong, they resort to callous acts of murder like God might punish a wrongdoer. At the beginning of the novel, the three core members of the group – George Manfred, Leon Gonsalez, and Raymond Poiccart – have killed sixteen people. Their newest target is the Foreign Secretary Sir Philip Ramon whom they judge to-be-guilty for his Aliens Extradition Bill.
The content of the Bill is never explained in detail, but there was the Aliens Act 1905 at around the time of the book's publication. The Act very strictly limited immigration into the United Kingdom and prevented many asylum-seekers from a safe place to live. Caused by the horrors of war in Syria, the Ukraine, and elsewhere the numbers of immigrants who seek refuge are currently at an all-time high. Yet, there are those who would prefer to simply close the doors and let them deal with their own problems. Depending on where you stand, it's difficult to avoid strongly negative sentiments towards such blunt egoism.
The Four Just Men is an intriguingly sinister story for indulging those anti-democratic fantasies. The already interesting premise is further strengthened by bringing in the general public and by introducing an additional motivation seemingly less "noble". Baffled by the criminals' wit, the police puts a high reward on their head (well, on information that leads to their arrest). While the villains attempt to control politics guided by moral principles and by the threat of violence, the good guys are motivated by personal profit.
The unusual structure of how the story is narrated makes it more difficult still to decide who you should root for. The events are recounted somewhat distantly with some chapters presenting the media reception of what was going on. Between and within chapters the people in focus change and we see what both sides are up to. Neither the Four Just Men nor police commissioner Falmouth are clear protagonists in the usual sense.
I think Wallace mainly intents to instill admiration for the four vigilantes because of how easy it is for them to do what they do. I think the unfathomably superior villain almost defines a subgenre of crime fiction. For example, early in the story they place a bomb in the Parliament, and it's never explained how they accomplish this extraordinary feat. A couple of months ago I saw Deadlier Than the Male, which I thought was a good example why the easy superiority takes out all the tension. Later on there are some references to chemistry proficiency of one of the four men as superficial explanation of how it is they do what they do, though.
There are surprising tensions within the group. The newly recruited fourth member, the Spaniard Thery, is actually imprisoned to prevent him from consulting the papers. He is reluctant to go on with their plot and there is discussion on what to do with him. However, to my mind the subplot was rather confused and should have been more streamlined for further impact. There was also the other subplot with the pickpocket and the back-and-forth in his attempts to identify the man they now know was one of those they are looking for. But here too I thought the whole event doesn't really go anywhere.
Of course I'm familiar with many of the German Edgar Wallace movie adaptations, but it was only recently that I've learned you could take the novels seriously. For the most part it's a very undemanding read, and it also shares the silly humor with the movies. It's not screamingly funny, but there are some amusing remarks and twists. So, while I was surprised by its unexpected reflections on justice, in other respects my first Edgar Wallace novel was exactly what I asked for.
Rating: 3.5/5