Talk:Black Orchids

Cast of characters

I really like that as a section header. Is there consensus to use that, rather than "Characters in ["title"]" (which is preferred by the novels project) across the board for the Wolfe books? It's the heading for the character lists in the old magazine printings, and much more in keeping with the spirit of the stories. It's truly a minor point, but it does depart from the consensus elsewhere. — WFinch 14:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I like it too (but I didn't do it purposely -- it got there via copy-and-paste. I suppose the usage was originated by someone contributing material on another Wolfe book, quite some time ago.) As to the choice between the preference of the novels project and the spirit of the stories, I guess that's a cousin of the form vs. function issue. In this case, I'd vote for function and hope that we keep the "Cast of characters" header.TurnerHodges 16:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

That's two votes, and maybe the idea will catch on. I'll use that section header, and make changes as I come across them. — WFinch 02:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Continuity

Robomaster notes that Berin disclosed the saucisse minuit recipe on the condition that it would be prepared only by Wolfe, implying that it's inconsistent for Fritz to prepare it in "Black Orchids." But that's not all there is to the story. In The Nero Wolfe Cookbook, the recipe's introductory material states that "When Berin died in 1938, the victim of a Fascist bomb in Barcelona, where he had gone to fight for the Loyalists and the freedom of the Spanish people, Wolfe was released from his vow and has permitted its disclosure here."

Now: as to continuity, there are a couple of problems with that. One is that the cookbook was first published in 1973, long after Fritz apparently violates intellectual property laws in "Black Orchids." So that after-the-fact rationale in the cookbook smacks of Stout covering his tracks. Another problem is that we can't be sure who wrote that introduction: the cookbook's authorship is given as "Rex Stout and the Editors of The Viking Press" (but the introduction sure sounds like Stout). And I'm not sure it's fair to use a cookbook, no matter who wrote it, to explain away an apparent inconsistency that's internal to the series.

At any rate, I've deleted the notation, so that it can be discussed here first. If people feel strongly about it, by all means put it back, but then let's include the airbrushing in the cookbook. If Stout went to the trouble of making up a rationale, complete with a bomb in Barcelona, more than 30 years later, then we should recognize it. TurnerHodges 13:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the notation should be deleted, but not exactly for the reason cited: Both Wolfe and Stout are clean because the rationale for giving up the saucisse minuit recipe that Fritz would use in a story four years later was actually in place before the fact; the recipe and the, um, background information, about Jerome Berin appear in the back of the FE and the hardcover reprints of "Too Many Cooks" itself, and I assume are also included in the prized limited edition prized Recipe Box, although I can't verify that because I don't have one.

BTW, Berin's deal with Wolfe made it into in a 1991 Cardozo Law Review (!) article entitled, "Intellectual Property Protection for the Creative Chef, or How to Copyright a Cake: A Modest Proposal" It's on Page 25:

[1]  RRRRowcliff 18:35, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, that sounds pretty definitive. Given that, it seems to me that the Bantam editors could have made a better choice than the War Writers Board reprint for the back matter of Cooks -- specifically, the material you cite might have held more interest. (I understand those recipe boxes are pricey. A literary agent in California tells me that one recently sold for around $1000.) And "(!)" is right! Not only showing up in a law review, but in an intellectual property article that steals part of its own title, even if Swift's work is PD. TurnerHodges 19:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)