Aristotle Detective [Paperback]

This is the author's first mystery, and it was originally going to be the first in a proposed historical mystery series. (I believe only two volumes in the proposed series have been published as of 2002.) Set in Athens in 332 B.C., it is a cute blend of history and philosophy.

Our protagonist is Stephanos, a young student of Aristotle. As a student of rhetoric and the closest male relative of the accused, our hero defends his cousin against his accusers in the Athenian court.

As he builds his case, he looks to his former teacher for guidance in both articulating a tenable defense and substantiating it as well. While the premise of the plot is a fascinating one with a great deal of potential (especially for a mystery series), I must admit that the writing was a bit too flat, and finishing some of the more ponderous sections was difficult.

Doody casts Aristotle with traits that students of The Philosopher will readily recognize as Aristotelian virtues. There are also some charming liberties taken with this thinker's personal habits and quirks that seem well adapted to that of an eccentric genius who has achieved some celebrity as the teacher of Alexander, then-current ruler of Greece (and much more). There is also an ingenuity and cleverness to Doody's Aristotle that, while not nearly as well crafted, remind us of fictional masters of deduction like Sherlock Holmes and Nero Wolfe-especially the latter, in his cerebral methodology, preference for not sharing all of his deductions until the end of the caper, and for directing (rather than participating directly in) investigative machinations.

Along with the quirks and lucid reasoning, however, is a clear passion to see justice served. This will be perhaps my lasting memory of Doody's casting of Aristotle. Overall, this was a fun jaunt, but I do think that it could have been much more in the hands of a more capable fiction writer.

Both this opening effort and the second `Aristotle Poetics' caught my eye whilst browsing the mystery section one day so I thought I'd give them a try. `Detective' is written in a somewhat languid style, aiming to achieve murder sleuthing through peripatetic analysis. Indeed, from the point Stephanos (nephew to the exiled major suspect Philemon, as denounced by Boutades nephew, Polygnotos) goes to his old mentor for assistance we are given a drilling in sleuthing based on logical thought, rather than physical fact. From the opening reluctance, but required first step, to prove Philemon's innocence using the Aunt Eudoxia principal (proof of a negative) to the pinpointing of the crucial evidence in the dead of night we are stepped through the murder.
The year is 332 BC, Alexander has just destroyed Tyre and is marching on Egypt. The premise of the novel concerns one of the Athenian triachs - Boutos, by name - who is found murdered in a most unusual way (for an Athenian) in that he was killed by an arrow fired into his study. Fairly quickly we are presented with some people with a motive, from his abused wife, to the apparently insane Arkhimenos as we seek to find the real character of Boutades underneath the carefully crafted veneer that was presented to Athenian society. Stephanos spends the opening sections of the novel between the first and second prodikasia attempting to find proof that Philemon was not present in Athens, spending time disguised at the Peiraieus as a countryman in order to glean from sailors and local people snippets of information about Philemon's movements after his departure from Athens. On the trail of his cousin we locate a hidden wife complete with surpise nephew for Stephanos, undergo several clandestine trips in the dark where our hero gets attacked twice and undergo social ostracism from the higher echelons of Athenian society. Eventually, Philemon turns up to provide some necessary information about the events of the night and in a classically Ciceronian manner Stephanos declaims the true murderer at the trial, after some coaching in his oratorical delivery by Aristotle.
This is not a bad stab at a first murder mystery though it appears that the attempt to provide a classically accurate picture of Athenian law is detrimental to the actual plot. The eventual denouement is weak, based on little evidence, more a case of shocking the culprit(s) into an admission of guilt. You get the feeling a brazen person might yet have got away with it. Nevertheless it was sufficiently thought provoking and the development of Aristotle entertaining enough to ensure that `Poetics' and the new `Secrets of Life' is read. I suspect it will only improve as our characters develop.

My greatest surprise with this book is not the mystery itself, it is to discover Aristotle as a good guy. I always thought poorly of Aristotle: Much of his philosophy has been proven wrong (like the separation between "mind" and "heart") and was treated as part of the faith by the Catholic church for centuries. This endangered the progress of science and created plenty of religious conflicts. Although he is not responsible for the bad use made of his writings, I would not use him as a good guy in a novel. As a result, I found this series of Aristotle novels very entertaining. I was not surprised to discover later that the author was a professor at the University of Notre-Dame. We cannot escape our roots! Excellent read, maybe lacking a bit of historical details. Now in real life, was Aristotle a good guy? Between you and me, I doubt it. More admirable than amiable, said one of his translators. But who knows?

› Go to Amazon.com to see all 6 reviews  4.2 out of 5 stars