The Bat

The Bat by Mary Roberts Rinehart was originally published in 1926. Unfortunately I found the story quite dated. The mystery was alright, but presented in a melodramatic style that quickly became too much. The background details, the settings, styles and manners of the time period were of more interest to me. There were some definite racial slurs, mostly aimed at a Japanese Butler that I found quite distasteful. But she also made sure the overwrought ghost-believing maid, Lizzie, was identified as Irish many times.

An older woman leaves New York City to take a house in the country for the summer. She brings along her maid and her niece. The rural area is the haunt of a master criminal called the Bat. Before too long the residents of the show more house are experiencing nightly noises and strange sights. Add to this a dead man who isn’t quite as dead as everyone thinks and a bank robbery where the cash is missing, mix with some very stereotypical characters and the end result is The Bat.

I prefer my older mysteries to be low-keyed and to use humor and/or wry observations to advance the plot. The Bat, on the other hand is presented in an over-blown, clichéd style that just didn’t hold up or keep my attention. show less

I could see the Murder by Death crowd acting out this farce. It had every cliche in the book. In fact, this probably WAS the book that all the cliches came from. Locked rooms, Japanese inscrutable butlers, mysterious murders, an old lady sleuth, a forbidden love affair, a bank robbery, a faked death, a country house, and lots of lights going on and off with thunder and rain. And that was in the first three chapters.

The Bat began its life as a Broadway play in 1920, based on author Mary Roberts Rinehart’s 1908 hit novel The Circular Staircase. If I hadn’t known that, I would not have made the connection until very deep into the story, as Rinehart made the two different enough. Poet Stephen Vincent Benét novelized the play The Bat although only Rinehart and playwright Avery Hopwood, who collaborated on the play, got the credit. (The Bat was among four Hopwood plays running on Broadway at the same time in 1920.) The Bat spawned several film adaptations, with the 1930 version inspiring Bob Kane’s Batman.

With that history out of the way, let’s get to the crux: How good is The Bat? Rinehart is usually reliable, and she doesn’t disappoint show more here, either; however, it’s not as good as The Circular Staircase, The Window at the White Cat, The Man in Lower Ten, The Album, or The Yellow Room. The novel begins with New York City’s Finest bedeviled by a criminal dubbed The Bat, who has left a string of murders, jewel robberies and more in his wake. He earned his moniker by always leaving a bat behind, be it an actual dead bat, a scrawled bat or other bat calling card. Meanwhile, crusty spinster Cornelia Van Gorder rents a Long Island mansion, whose owner, banker Courtleigh Fleming, recently died. It doesn’t take a Sherlock (to use the novel’s slang) to predict that Van Gorder’s going to get more than she bargained for, and that she and The Bat are bound to cross paths. But it’s fun to see the novel unfurl. The Bat is a bit over the top, and the same plot was better executed in The Circular Staircase. Still, an OK read. show less

Book group chose this 1920 work.

It was a good little mystery with the feeling of masterpiece theater
throughout.
No need for multiple settings.
I marveled at some of the word choices....such as sepulchrally and terrorization
and sauvitity...

The butler (Japanese) was addressed frequently in a manner with which I was uncomfortable.

Smoking was rampant throughout.
It was a "drug the doctor (Wells) forbade his patients but prescribes for himself"
I can't see that flying today.

And........It was a story with an actual plot and no sexual overtones needed...

All in all...

It was an interesting look into the world of suspense circa 1920.

I read this because I heard it may have had something to do with the genesis of Batman. Comic-book creator Bob Kane said in his 1989 autobiography Batman and Me that the villain of the 1930 film "The Bat Whispers" was an inspiration for his character Batman. If there is a thread of connection to this book, it is frail and gossamer indeed. this bat is inept and gun-slinging while being a criminal and not crime fighter. still an amusing read of a plucky and aged socialite cum crime fighter if you set aside racist and classist stereotypes. It obviously would make an entertaining movie if done like a Clue. and, what is the "evil's four hundred" she speaks of?

This 1926 book is actually a novelization of Rinehart's successful 1920 pay of the show more story. It feels amplified too much from a small idea. Three films were made based on the original Broadway play.

The first film, also called "The Bat", was released as a silent film on March 14, 1926 by United Artists, was produced and directed by Roland West, and written by West and Julien Josephson. Director Roland West remade his film with sound four years later in 1930 as "The Bat Whispers", also by United Artists, and starring Chester Morris and Una Merkel. A third film by Crane Wilbur was released by Allied Artists in 1959 as "The Bat", starring Vincent Price and Agnes Moorehead. There are also a few TV adaptations. I first remember seeing the Vincent Price version as part of Wolfman Mac's Chiller Drive-In in a spoof that included speeded up parts and skits. Re-watching the original film now I can see how the third movie is furthest from the book and surely the play. This is a case where the movie is better than the book, IMO. The elitism and racist stereotypes of the book are dispensed giving us two plucky, determined women as well as a villain that is more advanced and threatening. The book's Bat is actually a crude, blunt instrument and a rather minor, ineffectual characters. Where the book Bat has only a mask and relies on a gun and breaks windows, the 1959 Bat had deadly talons and a glass cutter. If anything, the 1959 fusion of science and technology into an alter ego has some kinship with Batman. In the book, Rinehart seems to awkwardly advance the plot by interjecting a God's eye view rather than clues for the reader to decipher. In the 1959 movie, this is done in an effective cut-to-the-chase move and the whole thing is really an effective, well-structured, well-paced period film that I recommend over the book.

So, the 1926 version apparently is a better source for the Batman inspiration. Online researchers have noted Kane himself seems to refer to the 1926 film when he thinks he is talking about the sound remake of 1930. I can definitely see the source for both the book and superhero in the 1926 film. Being a silent film based on a stage production, it is visually more stunning and crafted for effect than the dialog- and actor-driven Price film later. This 1926 Bat comes across as an evil twin to the combi book icon. He has the ear, makes his mark to have only his eyes dramatically lit in their black mask, rappels around and uses grappling hooks and the movies uses a shadow of a bat in a circle of light. From The Bat (1926) The Bat in his flowing, cape-like costume and eared mask looks down through a window after choosing a grappling hook:

The 1926 film also has the caricatures and campy blend of comedy and drama that came out in the book.

The has obvious inspiration from the book and reshoots scenes from the silent film while giving us a less bat-like bat. I don't have a firm opinion on Bob Kane's honesty on if he came up with batman and if so, how, but if you go back in time before Rinehart's novel to Avery Hopwood's mystery play The Bat done with Mary Roberts Rinehart and throw in crime-fighting vigilante and "wealthy, young man about town" The Shadow, you just about have it.

Rinehart's novel is more interesting as a period gothic, pot boiler drawing room mystery already a step away from any germ of Batman. show less

Meh... If you've seen the silent movie version from the 1920's, it's a pretty faithful rendition of the book. The book itself reads like a silent movie scenario: an improbable master villian (in a black mask and cape!), a hidden room, the dead man who isn't quite as dead as he should be, an amnesia victim, a doughty old lady, etc. Maybe these things weren't quite so cliched when the book was written.

Another experiment in Golden Age authors. The main characters were enjoyable in this mystery, especially the Irish housekeeper. The mystery was sound, a bit too easy for me. Am I getting better at this because I've read so many? The villain lacked something. The author built him up to be a "super" villain, but I saw through him easily. She just didn't give him the attention he deserved when he finally entered the story. At least I can say she played fair with the clues, I caught every one of them. Perhaps too obvious? An enjoyable one-night read.