When a major publisher, Wiley, first approached E.J. Wagner to write a book, she was already a noted crime historian and lecturer and an expert on the real forensic history behind the adventures of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s master detective.
Clews was very impressed with her book, The Science of Sherlock Holmes, and added to the pile of great reviews with these remarks. Meanwhile, I managed to sweet-talk the author into a bit of Q & A. (Clews questions are in bold, and the patient and kind Ms. Wagner responds in regular type.)
You begin your book with the charming story of a teacher who introduced you to Sherlock Holmes. How did you get interested in true crime and forensic science?
I began my working life in the theater, and most great theater is about crime. I was also, in my misspent youth, a ghost writer, and wrote presentations for people in the medical and scientific world. In the process of researching background I prevailed upon my pathologist cousin, Theodore Ehrenreich, to give me a tour of the New York Medical Examiner's facility. (Teddy, at the time, was a consultant in clinical path there, as well as director of Laboratories at Lutheran Medical Center in NY.) I found the work at the ME's office fascinating, and kept going back. (My long suffering husband has never let me forget that he spent his 35th birthday at the New York morgue, watching seven autopsies in progress.)
In 1982, I was hired by the Museum of Long Island Natural Sciences, an outreach facility of Stony Brook University, to present entertaining programs of scientific interest to the general public. I did a program on witchcraft and herbal medicine, one on werewolves and wildlife, etc. Finally I was allowed to do a program on forensic science. It was called "The Subject is Murder". This was before the current craze, and my choice was considered peculiar.
Dr. Leo Dal Cortivo, then head of toxicology at the Suffolk County Office of the Medical Examiner, read about it in a local paper, and came to hear the program, along with a number of other folks from the ME's office. He liked it and invited me to do more research at his office. Crime pays!
You briefly tell the stories of dozens of famous murder cases, which is dangerous to many writers who lack your absolute command of the facts. How long did it take you to write the book?
It depends on how you count. It took one year of hard writing and vigorous fact checking and about thirty years of more leisurely reading and researching. I had presented most of the cases in the book before in lectures, so I wasn't starting from scratch. I try to have at least two independent sources on controversial points, and to get back to primary sources whenever possible. This leads to surprises. Such as the discovery that, in spite of what has been printed in peer reviewed journals, Paul Topinard, the 19th century anthropologist, did NOT develop a good method for determining height from footprints.
What kind of response have you had to the book?
The response have been warmly appreciative, particularly from people in the forensic world which makes me very happy. I've also been delighted to meet many extraordinary and knowledgeable Sherlockians who have had kind things to say.
In Science of Sherlock Holmes, you neatly highlight the forensic failings of the medical examiner in the Lizzie Borden case. I noticed you cited Victoria Lincoln's book about the case in your bibliography. So you think Lizzie did it?
Oh yes -- I believe Lizzie was seriously lethal. Even if one overlooks the many discrepancies in Lizzie's account of events, it is telling that Lizzie's response to finding her father's battered body was to inform the maid "Someone's come in and killed father" and then send the maid out of the house while Lizzie remained inside. What made Lizzie sure that the "someone" was no longer in the house, ready to re-use the axe? What made her certain that the maid was not the assailant?
In spite of all this, I gloomily suspect that someone, somewhere, will write a book "proving" that Mr. Borden killed his wife for serving mutton soup at breakfast, and committed suicide in a fit of guilt. Lizzie then hid the weapon to protect her father's reputation. A perky title and we're all set.
The ears will perk up on every Harry Potter fan who reads the book; you touch on the mythology of Britain, mentioning, for example, Padfoot, the great Black Dog. What does mythology have to do with the scientific investigation of murders?
Like medicine, forensic science developed by slowly struggling out of the carapace of superstition and grim folklore. Centuries ago crimes were "solved" and guilt determined by magic. A suspected witch was dropped in water, thumbs tied to toes. If she floated, she was guilty. If she drowned, she was innocent. Careful observation and scientific analysis of crime scenes eventually allowed us to achieve a more realistic view. But there are still places where myth prevails and colors the way crime is investigated.
Sherlock Holmes was, as you point out, a passionate collector of true crime accounts. What does your private library hold, and what's the pride of your book collection?
It holds much of what is in the bibliography, as well as others. My books are reading copies -- much used and battered, rather than the fine specimens fancied by collectors. I am particularly fond of The Trial of John Webster, battered though it is and the 1795 Anatomy of John Bell. The dissection pictures in SSH are from my copy of the latter.
Which crime writers (living or dead) do you most admire? Besides Conan Doyle of course.
Edmund Pearson, William Roughead, and Sir Sidney Smith, the pathologist.
Do you follow current crime news? Are there any recent murder cases that have captured your attention? And when the criminal history of our time is recorded, which cases do you think will endure?
I read the papers diligently and prowl the net. OJ Simpson will be written about for decades as an example of how not to try a case. Parkman Webster will last, not only because the idea of one Harvard physician killing another is so intriguing, but because it established our rules of circumstantial evidence. I predict many many "crimes of the century".
You've been lecturing to medical and general audiences for years about the folklore and history of crime. Since I'm nowhere near New York, I'd like to download the podcast!
So would I. I'll have to convince my tech support (AKA my husband Bill) to figure out how it’s done.
Alright, I'll settle for hardcover. Will you write another book?
Absolutely. I have to do something with the reams of material I gathered that didn't fit in this one for one reason or another.
# # #
For more on E.J.'s book, The Science of Sherlock Holmes (John Wiley & Sons) click on http://www.forensic.to/webhome/ejwagner/SSHbook01.html. For E.J.'s Web site, click on http://www.forensic.to/webhome/ejwagner/.
Comments