What do you think?
Rate this book
Hercule Poirot #25
П'ятеро поросят
Ш?стнадцять рок?в тому Керолайн Крейл засудили за вбивство ?? чолов?ка, художника Ем?аса Крейла. Та донька Керолайн, Карла Лемаршан, не в?рить у винуват?сть матер?. Прагнучи в?дновити ?? добре ?м’я, д?вчина зверта?ться по допомогу до славетного Еркюля Пуаро.
Невдовз? детектив д?зна?ться, що на час убивства в дом? Крейл?в перебували ще п’ятеро ос?б: Ем?ас?в друг, який при?хав у гост? до художника разом з? старшим братом, д?вчина-натурниця, а також названа сестра Керолайн та ?? гувернантка.
Пуаро певен, що вбивця — хтось ?з ц??? п’ят?рки. Але хто саме? Щоб знайти винного, детективу доведеться зд?йснити мандр?вку у минуле...
Невдовз? детектив д?зна?ться, що на час убивства в дом? Крейл?в перебували ще п’ятеро ос?б: Ем?ас?в друг, який при?хав у гост? до художника разом з? старшим братом, д?вчина-натурниця, а також названа сестра Керолайн та ?? гувернантка.
Пуаро певен, що вбивця — хтось ?з ц??? п’ят?рки. Але хто саме? Щоб знайти винного, детективу доведеться зд?йснити мандр?вку у минуле...
320 pages, Hardcover
First published May 1, 1942
3,168 people are currently reading
46.8k people want to read
About the author
Agatha Christie
5,181?books71.4k?followersAgatha Christie also wrote romance novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott, and was occasionally published under the name Agatha Christie Mallowan.
Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie, Lady Mallowan, DBE (née Miller) was an English writer known for her 66 detective novels and 14 short story collections, particularly those revolving around fictional detectives Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple. She also wrote the world's longest-running play, the murder mystery The Mousetrap, which has been performed in the West End of London since 1952. A writer during the "Golden Age of Detective Fiction", Christie has been called the "Queen of Crime". She also wrote six novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott. In 1971, she was made a Dame (DBE) by Queen Elizabeth II for her contributions to literature. Guinness World Records lists Christie as the best-selling fiction writer of all time, her novels having sold more than two billion copies.
This best-selling author of all time wrote 66 crime novels and story collections, fourteen plays, and six novels under a pseudonym in romance. Her books sold more than a billion copies in the English language and a billion in translation. According to Index Translationum, people translated her works into 103 languages at least, the most for an individual author. Of the most enduring figures in crime literature, she created Hercule Poirot and Miss Jane Marple. She atuhored The Mousetrap, the longest-running play in the history of modern theater.
Associated Names:
Agata Christie
Agata Kristi
Агата Кристи (Russian)
Агата Кр?ст? (Ukrainian)
Αγκ?θα Κρ?στι (Greek)
アガサ クリスティ (Japanese)
阿嘉莎·克莉丝蒂 (Chinese)
Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie, Lady Mallowan, DBE (née Miller) was an English writer known for her 66 detective novels and 14 short story collections, particularly those revolving around fictional detectives Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple. She also wrote the world's longest-running play, the murder mystery The Mousetrap, which has been performed in the West End of London since 1952. A writer during the "Golden Age of Detective Fiction", Christie has been called the "Queen of Crime". She also wrote six novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott. In 1971, she was made a Dame (DBE) by Queen Elizabeth II for her contributions to literature. Guinness World Records lists Christie as the best-selling fiction writer of all time, her novels having sold more than two billion copies.
This best-selling author of all time wrote 66 crime novels and story collections, fourteen plays, and six novels under a pseudonym in romance. Her books sold more than a billion copies in the English language and a billion in translation. According to Index Translationum, people translated her works into 103 languages at least, the most for an individual author. Of the most enduring figures in crime literature, she created Hercule Poirot and Miss Jane Marple. She atuhored The Mousetrap, the longest-running play in the history of modern theater.
Associated Names:
Agata Christie
Agata Kristi
Агата Кристи (Russian)
Агата Кр?ст? (Ukrainian)
Αγκ?θα Κρ?στι (Greek)
アガサ クリスティ (Japanese)
阿嘉莎·克莉丝蒂 (Chinese)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 6,954 reviews
February 4, 2025
Poirot re-opens a murder case that everyone assumes has been solved.
And solves it for real.
Because of course he does!
But don't let the title get your hopes up, there are no pigs in this story.
Years ago, a famous and talented artist had an affair with the beautiful subject of one of his paintings. Then decided to leave his wife and child for her. This was not his first affair, but it was the first time he said he would divorce his wife. A few days later he died suddenly. Everyone assumed his wife, consumed by jealousy, poisoned him and not very convincingly claimed he committed suicide.
She was immediately arrested, tried, found guilty, and sentenced to life in prison.
Now, at the request of her grown daughter, Poirot sets out to find out if everything was really as cut and dried as it seemed.
I thought this was a really good one. I did manage to figure it out, but I was kept second-guessing the whole time. There was a great cast of characters in this, and they all had interesting secrets hidden away that Poirot was able to ferret out and bring to light in his funny little way.
Recommended!
And solves it for real.
Because of course he does!
But don't let the title get your hopes up, there are no pigs in this story.
Years ago, a famous and talented artist had an affair with the beautiful subject of one of his paintings. Then decided to leave his wife and child for her. This was not his first affair, but it was the first time he said he would divorce his wife. A few days later he died suddenly. Everyone assumed his wife, consumed by jealousy, poisoned him and not very convincingly claimed he committed suicide.
She was immediately arrested, tried, found guilty, and sentenced to life in prison.
Now, at the request of her grown daughter, Poirot sets out to find out if everything was really as cut and dried as it seemed.
I thought this was a really good one. I did manage to figure it out, but I was kept second-guessing the whole time. There was a great cast of characters in this, and they all had interesting secrets hidden away that Poirot was able to ferret out and bring to light in his funny little way.
Recommended!
July 26, 2017
The best thing that can be said about this book is that you get a lot of Poirot. He is present in almost every page where there are no notes that had been written by the characters. We are privy to his thoughts.
Not only that, but the Poirot we see is almost human. He is normal, foreign, but normal. He isn't the eccentric walking bag of tics that a few generations of fans have grown to laugh at/deride. Despite that, I gave the book 3 stars.
Oh, the story is cleverly written. But we get the same multiple accounts of the one event, that of murder of Amyas Crale. It quickly becomes grating and tiring until numbness takes over the mind. The murderer for once looks to have escaped the law. That's a first. Otherwise, I can only shrug.
Not only that, but the Poirot we see is almost human. He is normal, foreign, but normal. He isn't the eccentric walking bag of tics that a few generations of fans have grown to laugh at/deride. Despite that, I gave the book 3 stars.
Oh, the story is cleverly written. But we get the same multiple accounts of the one event, that of murder of Amyas Crale. It quickly becomes grating and tiring until numbness takes over the mind. The murderer for once looks to have escaped the law. That's a first. Otherwise, I can only shrug.
June 17, 2021
Some Christies are very absorbing, but Five Little Pigs (alternate American title: "Murder in Retrospect") left an emotional gap that was never was quite bridged. Perhaps because this was the last book in her "prolific Poirot period" (try saying that three times fast) and she was stretching plotting boundaries, this feels more constructed, a more deliberate challenge to Poirot.
Poirot's famous 'little grey cells' are put to the test when a young woman comes to him begging him to solve the murder of her father, Amyas, a famous painter. Although her mother, Caroline, was tried and convicted, she left her daughter a note claiming she didn't do it, but it was in her best interest that her mom went to jail and the child sent away to relatives. Luckily, seventeen years later, the five principles are still alive and intrigued enough by the 'foreign gentleman' to share their account of that time.
There is the best friend of the murdered man, Phillip Blake, now somewhat corpulent ("This little pig went to the market") and his brother, Meredith Blake ("stayed at home") who loved his hobbies of herbal medicines and accidentally prepared the poison that killed Amyas. There is Elsa Greer, the young woman who the murdered man was having an affair with, ("had roast beef"), and who is now on her third marriage and a Lady. The remaining piggies are Cecilia Williams, the economizing governess ("had none") and Angela Warren, Caroline’s wild younger half-sister ("went 'Wee! Wee! Wee!' all the way home").
Despite being part of the nursery rhyme titles--a catch if I ever heard one--I do not recall ever reading this book, and after this read, I can see why it wouldn't stick. Although the construction of the plot and story is academically clever, it just didn't seem all that interesting. Perhaps because we didn't get to know Caroline or her daughter quite as well, and they should be the emotional center of the story, since they are the hook that draws Poirot in? Poirot first spends a great deal of time with the former detective, then visits the piggies, and then reads their accounts of the day, and then pieces it all together. As an intellectual exercise, intriguing, but as a story, it just failed to capture more than mild curiosity.
As a writing aside, though I often love Christie's economy of words, there are far too many '--' in the dialogue here to make me a happy reader. Perhaps she was thinking then of dialogue as performance, but for me it ended up feeling choppy. Here's a bit from page three:
"You've got to understand--exactly--where I come in. I was five years old at the time it--happened. Too young to know anything about it. I remember my mother and my father, of course, and I remember leaving home suddenly--being taken to the country. I remember the pigs and a nice fat farmer's wife--and everybody being very kind--and I remember, quite clearly, the funny way they used to look at me--everybody--a sort of furtive look."
I hear your thoughts, and sadly, no; that is not just the one character's voice. That's occurs in most of the dialogue, and even internal ones, whether it's Meredith thinking to himself or Poirot.?
So, a serviceable enough book, but for me, an emotional miss. Not one I'd be seeking to add to my personal Christie collection for re-read.
Two and a half pigs, rounding up because Poirot.
Poirot's famous 'little grey cells' are put to the test when a young woman comes to him begging him to solve the murder of her father, Amyas, a famous painter. Although her mother, Caroline, was tried and convicted, she left her daughter a note claiming she didn't do it, but it was in her best interest that her mom went to jail and the child sent away to relatives. Luckily, seventeen years later, the five principles are still alive and intrigued enough by the 'foreign gentleman' to share their account of that time.
There is the best friend of the murdered man, Phillip Blake, now somewhat corpulent ("This little pig went to the market") and his brother, Meredith Blake ("stayed at home") who loved his hobbies of herbal medicines and accidentally prepared the poison that killed Amyas. There is Elsa Greer, the young woman who the murdered man was having an affair with, ("had roast beef"), and who is now on her third marriage and a Lady. The remaining piggies are Cecilia Williams, the economizing governess ("had none") and Angela Warren, Caroline’s wild younger half-sister ("went 'Wee! Wee! Wee!' all the way home").
Despite being part of the nursery rhyme titles--a catch if I ever heard one--I do not recall ever reading this book, and after this read, I can see why it wouldn't stick. Although the construction of the plot and story is academically clever, it just didn't seem all that interesting. Perhaps because we didn't get to know Caroline or her daughter quite as well, and they should be the emotional center of the story, since they are the hook that draws Poirot in? Poirot first spends a great deal of time with the former detective, then visits the piggies, and then reads their accounts of the day, and then pieces it all together. As an intellectual exercise, intriguing, but as a story, it just failed to capture more than mild curiosity.
As a writing aside, though I often love Christie's economy of words, there are far too many '--' in the dialogue here to make me a happy reader. Perhaps she was thinking then of dialogue as performance, but for me it ended up feeling choppy. Here's a bit from page three:
"You've got to understand--exactly--where I come in. I was five years old at the time it--happened. Too young to know anything about it. I remember my mother and my father, of course, and I remember leaving home suddenly--being taken to the country. I remember the pigs and a nice fat farmer's wife--and everybody being very kind--and I remember, quite clearly, the funny way they used to look at me--everybody--a sort of furtive look."
I hear your thoughts, and sadly, no; that is not just the one character's voice. That's occurs in most of the dialogue, and even internal ones, whether it's Meredith thinking to himself or Poirot.?
So, a serviceable enough book, but for me, an emotional miss. Not one I'd be seeking to add to my personal Christie collection for re-read.
Two and a half pigs, rounding up because Poirot.
March 25, 2025
‘What are you going to do?’
‘I am going to visit these five people-and from each one I am going to get his or her own story.’
Superintendent Hale sighed with a deep melancholy.
He said: ‘Man, you’re nuts! None of their stories are going to agree! Don’t you grasp that elementary fact? No two people remember a thing in the same order anyway. And after all this time! Why, you’ll hear five accounts of five separate murders!’
‘That,’ said Poirot, ‘is what I am counting upon. It will be very instructive.’
On the umpteenth re-read, still my favourite Agatha Christie book.
It is hard to tell why even though there are some obvious reasons. It is a classic mystery with a love-triangle, the solution hidden in plain sight and surrounded by cleverly built-up and well-laid red-herrings and yet there is something in it that touches me deeply. I am probably as fascinated by the "problem of personality" as Poirot seems to be. In this novel AC reaches new perfections in subtle and intricate characterisation and plotting, which never ceases to amaze me.
Hercule Poirot (...) was fascinated by the problem of personality. (...)
Each person had seen her differently. Montague Depleach had despised her as a defeatist-a quitter. To young Fogg she had represented Romance. Edmunds saw her simply as a ‘lady’. Mr Jonathan had called her a stormy, turbulent creature.
How would he, Hercule Poirot, have seen her?
On the answer to that question depended, he felt, the success of his quest.
So far, not one of the people he had seen had doubted that whatever else she was, Caroline Crale was also a murderess.”
A young woman visits Poirot & requests him to investigate an intriguing and challenging murder case: her mother was convicted of poisoning her father 16 years ago, but on her deathbed she wrote her daughter a letter, claiming she was innocent.
Everyone else involved - apart from Caroline's sister- is deeply convinced of Caroline Crale's guilt, so it seems a hopeless case. And if Caroline Crale did not kill her husband, who did?
Who are the five little pigs (witnesses) concerned and could/would they have done it? Five people with totally different personalities and background, but seemingly without motive for the murder. Poirot visits all five of them and asks them to write down how they remember the events of the past. Through the filter of their memories, we learn more about the "murderer" Caroline & the "victim" Amyas Crale (wonder if his having the same initials as Agatha's cheating first husband is a coincidence?), but also about everyone else concerned. Everyone sees the others just a bit differently and layers and layers are added to all characters, some obvious, others surprising. Long-forgotten, seemingly inconsequential, but surprising bits and pieces of information resurface and together with Poirot we put the jigsaw puzzle together. And when the last piece falls into place, we are stunned again by Dame Agatha's brilliancy, her understanding of human nature as we learn the identity of the real murderer.
‘I am going to visit these five people-and from each one I am going to get his or her own story.’
Superintendent Hale sighed with a deep melancholy.
He said: ‘Man, you’re nuts! None of their stories are going to agree! Don’t you grasp that elementary fact? No two people remember a thing in the same order anyway. And after all this time! Why, you’ll hear five accounts of five separate murders!’
‘That,’ said Poirot, ‘is what I am counting upon. It will be very instructive.’
On the umpteenth re-read, still my favourite Agatha Christie book.
It is hard to tell why even though there are some obvious reasons. It is a classic mystery with a love-triangle, the solution hidden in plain sight and surrounded by cleverly built-up and well-laid red-herrings and yet there is something in it that touches me deeply. I am probably as fascinated by the "problem of personality" as Poirot seems to be. In this novel AC reaches new perfections in subtle and intricate characterisation and plotting, which never ceases to amaze me.
Hercule Poirot (...) was fascinated by the problem of personality. (...)
Each person had seen her differently. Montague Depleach had despised her as a defeatist-a quitter. To young Fogg she had represented Romance. Edmunds saw her simply as a ‘lady’. Mr Jonathan had called her a stormy, turbulent creature.
How would he, Hercule Poirot, have seen her?
On the answer to that question depended, he felt, the success of his quest.
So far, not one of the people he had seen had doubted that whatever else she was, Caroline Crale was also a murderess.”
A young woman visits Poirot & requests him to investigate an intriguing and challenging murder case: her mother was convicted of poisoning her father 16 years ago, but on her deathbed she wrote her daughter a letter, claiming she was innocent.
Everyone else involved - apart from Caroline's sister- is deeply convinced of Caroline Crale's guilt, so it seems a hopeless case. And if Caroline Crale did not kill her husband, who did?
Who are the five little pigs (witnesses) concerned and could/would they have done it? Five people with totally different personalities and background, but seemingly without motive for the murder. Poirot visits all five of them and asks them to write down how they remember the events of the past. Through the filter of their memories, we learn more about the "murderer" Caroline & the "victim" Amyas Crale (wonder if his having the same initials as Agatha's cheating first husband is a coincidence?), but also about everyone else concerned. Everyone sees the others just a bit differently and layers and layers are added to all characters, some obvious, others surprising. Long-forgotten, seemingly inconsequential, but surprising bits and pieces of information resurface and together with Poirot we put the jigsaw puzzle together. And when the last piece falls into place, we are stunned again by Dame Agatha's brilliancy, her understanding of human nature as we learn the identity of the real murderer.
July 7, 2019
I thought, for once, I had figured out an Agatha whodunnit, and I was like, dang this one was predictable. But she steered me in wrong direction, presumably on purpose, and that is why she is the QUEEN.
August 29, 2024
I can't believe that I finally finished this book, you guys! I mean, don't get me wrong, it was a solid read – probably one of my favorite Poirot novels so far, really – but I have been horrible about listening to audiobooks lately so reaching the end of this one was a long, slow process.
But anyway, Five Little Pigs is another fantastic mystery by Dame Agatha. Poirot is as brilliant as ever, and it has all of the twists and turns (and rich people behaving badly) that you'd expect from a Christie novel. I particularly enjoyed the epistolary bits in the second half, and I found all of the characters to be interesting and well-written (although not particularly likeable). Caroline Crale was convicted of her husband's murder sixteen years prior, and Poirot is hired by her daughter in order to clear the family name. Of course, suspects abound and everything is not as it initially seems.
Hugh Fraser does a wonderful job as the narrator, as always. Although he played Arthur Hastings in the television series, his Poirot accent is really on point.
Also, I just have to tell everyone that I actually guessed the culprit of this one before the big reveal. Well, technically I had two guesses and one of them was right and one of them was right-adjacent, but it's the closest I've ever come to figuring out the murderer of a Poirot novel before his final monologue* so I'll take it as a win.
4.55 stars, rounded up. Five Little Pigs is a particularly outstanding installment of an already delightful series.
*Not including The Murder of Roger Ackroyd which was spoiled for me by an over-enthusiastic intro writer – I actually guessed that one before I read it. Seriously, Louise Penny, WTF??
But anyway, Five Little Pigs is another fantastic mystery by Dame Agatha. Poirot is as brilliant as ever, and it has all of the twists and turns (and rich people behaving badly) that you'd expect from a Christie novel. I particularly enjoyed the epistolary bits in the second half, and I found all of the characters to be interesting and well-written (although not particularly likeable). Caroline Crale was convicted of her husband's murder sixteen years prior, and Poirot is hired by her daughter in order to clear the family name. Of course, suspects abound and everything is not as it initially seems.
Hugh Fraser does a wonderful job as the narrator, as always. Although he played Arthur Hastings in the television series, his Poirot accent is really on point.
Also, I just have to tell everyone that I actually guessed the culprit of this one before the big reveal. Well, technically I had two guesses and one of them was right and one of them was right-adjacent, but it's the closest I've ever come to figuring out the murderer of a Poirot novel before his final monologue* so I'll take it as a win.
4.55 stars, rounded up. Five Little Pigs is a particularly outstanding installment of an already delightful series.
*Not including The Murder of Roger Ackroyd which was spoiled for me by an over-enthusiastic intro writer – I actually guessed that one before I read it. Seriously, Louise Penny, WTF??
April 19, 2025
[3.4?] ????? ???????? es una novela detectivesca escrita por Agatha Christie y publicada en 1942. En esta historia nos encontramos con un caso singular que rompe con el patrón habitual de los crímenes en tiempo presente: Hércules Poirot es contactado por Carla Lemarchant, una joven que busca limpiar el nombre de su madre, Caroline Crale, quien fue condenada por el asesinato de su esposo, el pintor Amyas Crale, dieciséis a?os atrás.?
Lo que más me gustó de esta novela fue ver cómo Poirot enfrenta un caso en el que no puede observar el lenguaje corporal de los sospechosos ni visitar la escena del crimen como tal, porque todo ya ocurrió hace dieciséis a?os atrás. Es interesante ver cómo, a través de los recuerdos, el detective se sumerge en la psicología de los personajes, valiéndose únicamente de los relatos de cada uno. Me pareció brillante la estructura de las declaraciones: primero orales y luego escritas, lo que permite contrastar sutilezas, omisiones y contradicciones. A pesar de la distancia temporal, Christie logra que el crimen se sienta vívido, como si uno también hubiese estado allí.
Sin embargo, y aquí viene mi conflicto con el libro, sentí que la historia se volvía repetitiva en ciertos momentos. Escuchar (o leer) el mismo episodio narrado una y otra vez desde distintas perspectivas puede ser útil para entrar en las mentes de los personajes, pero también se vuelve un poco tedioso, especialmente si no logras conectar del todo con ellos. Y eso me pasó: no simpatizaba con ninguno, ni siquiera con la víctima, Amyas, que me pareció insoportable, tal vez por eso no me involucré emocionalmente con el misterio.
Además, tenía las expectativas altísimas porque mucha gente me dijo que este era uno de los mejores libros de Christie y creo que eso jugó en contra. Iba esperando un final sorprendente, un asesino absolutamente inesperado y, cuando llegué a la resolución, me sentí decepcionada. No porque estuviera mal resuelto (de hecho, está todo muy bien armado), sino porque no me sorprendió ni me generó el efecto impactante que buscaba. Supongo que la promesa de un gran giro me preparó para algo mucho más impactante.
Finalmente, aunque ????? ???????? no se convirtió en una de mis novelas favoritas de Christie, reconozco su mérito al proponer un caso inusual y más cargado de introspección que de acción. La forma en que va hilando las versiones de los testigos y guiando al lector los recuerdos es admirable. Es una novela que exige paciencia y atención, más para dejarse llevar por el análisis que por el suspenso.?
Lo que más me gustó de esta novela fue ver cómo Poirot enfrenta un caso en el que no puede observar el lenguaje corporal de los sospechosos ni visitar la escena del crimen como tal, porque todo ya ocurrió hace dieciséis a?os atrás. Es interesante ver cómo, a través de los recuerdos, el detective se sumerge en la psicología de los personajes, valiéndose únicamente de los relatos de cada uno. Me pareció brillante la estructura de las declaraciones: primero orales y luego escritas, lo que permite contrastar sutilezas, omisiones y contradicciones. A pesar de la distancia temporal, Christie logra que el crimen se sienta vívido, como si uno también hubiese estado allí.
Sin embargo, y aquí viene mi conflicto con el libro, sentí que la historia se volvía repetitiva en ciertos momentos. Escuchar (o leer) el mismo episodio narrado una y otra vez desde distintas perspectivas puede ser útil para entrar en las mentes de los personajes, pero también se vuelve un poco tedioso, especialmente si no logras conectar del todo con ellos. Y eso me pasó: no simpatizaba con ninguno, ni siquiera con la víctima, Amyas, que me pareció insoportable, tal vez por eso no me involucré emocionalmente con el misterio.
Además, tenía las expectativas altísimas porque mucha gente me dijo que este era uno de los mejores libros de Christie y creo que eso jugó en contra. Iba esperando un final sorprendente, un asesino absolutamente inesperado y, cuando llegué a la resolución, me sentí decepcionada. No porque estuviera mal resuelto (de hecho, está todo muy bien armado), sino porque no me sorprendió ni me generó el efecto impactante que buscaba. Supongo que la promesa de un gran giro me preparó para algo mucho más impactante.
Finalmente, aunque ????? ???????? no se convirtió en una de mis novelas favoritas de Christie, reconozco su mérito al proponer un caso inusual y más cargado de introspección que de acción. La forma en que va hilando las versiones de los testigos y guiando al lector los recuerdos es admirable. Es una novela que exige paciencia y atención, más para dejarse llevar por el análisis que por el suspenso.?
January 17, 2020
Review hopefully later ???
So, although I am sure I have said this before, “I really don’t remember this story at all, either reading it or watching the Suchet TV version”. How I really don’t know, but there it is.
This is quite a lot different to other Poirot novels, but maybe thats what I needed, to re-invigorate my Poirot challenge. This book focusses on a many years-old murder that Poirot is asked to investigate. The story is good, well crafted, the characters, well despicable in some cases but believable, Poirot’s little grey cells on top form, and the intrigue at maximum. This is one well written crime/mystery drama novel.
Sometimes all you need to get your reading mojo back is a good novel that sucks you in, and to me this was one of those.
As I head into the final third of this Poirot challenge this was as good as some of the early novels and was very welcome, thanks Agatha.
So, although I am sure I have said this before, “I really don’t remember this story at all, either reading it or watching the Suchet TV version”. How I really don’t know, but there it is.
This is quite a lot different to other Poirot novels, but maybe thats what I needed, to re-invigorate my Poirot challenge. This book focusses on a many years-old murder that Poirot is asked to investigate. The story is good, well crafted, the characters, well despicable in some cases but believable, Poirot’s little grey cells on top form, and the intrigue at maximum. This is one well written crime/mystery drama novel.
Sometimes all you need to get your reading mojo back is a good novel that sucks you in, and to me this was one of those.
As I head into the final third of this Poirot challenge this was as good as some of the early novels and was very welcome, thanks Agatha.
February 20, 2022
Maldita sea Agatha! Deja de hacerme sentir tan tonto ?
Es innegable el talento de Agatha Christie, con casa novela recuerdo lo original que es para traer casos a las páginas. Hercules Poirot se va encaminando a ser uno de mis personajes favoritos por lo increíble que es.
Uno creería que la gran cantidad de detalles puede hacer tediosa la lectura, pero en lo absoluto. Te hace comprender cada perspectiva y hacerte parte del conflicto.
Un 60% del audiolibro estaba seguro de saber quién era el asesino. Me sentía muy confiado y feliz porque por fin adivinaría la solución a un caso de la autora.
Y nuevamente quedé ?
Es innegable el talento de Agatha Christie, con casa novela recuerdo lo original que es para traer casos a las páginas. Hercules Poirot se va encaminando a ser uno de mis personajes favoritos por lo increíble que es.
Uno creería que la gran cantidad de detalles puede hacer tediosa la lectura, pero en lo absoluto. Te hace comprender cada perspectiva y hacerte parte del conflicto.
Un 60% del audiolibro estaba seguro de saber quién era el asesino. Me sentía muy confiado y feliz porque por fin adivinaría la solución a un caso de la autora.
Y nuevamente quedé ?
September 17, 2019
Five Little Pigs is the 25th book in the Hercule Poirot series by Dame Agatha Christie. My friend Medhat reminded me that Christie's birthday was this month, so we agreed to read a few of her books together. I've probably finished at least 50% of her novels and usually read them out of order (a rarity for me). First up was Five Little Pigs, and it was quite a fun story. Let's dive into my review.
Caroline Crale went to prison for killing her husband. The jury felt sorry for her and rather than sentence her to death, she was kept in jail for life. Sixteen years later, she passed away. Her young daughter receives a letter, just as she turns 21, from her mother, who basically says... "I promise, I didn't kill your father." The daughter tracks down Hercule Poirot and hires him to investigate the past. Poirot is intrigued, quickly agreeing and meeting with the lawyers and police detectives who'd been involved in the case. By the time he's finished, he learns there were 5 other people at the house the day of the death. Poirot conducts his inquiries, and in the end discovers the true killer.
The book is divided into three parts: (1) Introduction & discussion with the cops and lawyers, (2) Meetings with each of the 5 people who'd been at the house, and (c) Bringing everyone together for Poirot to reveal what he's learned. It's classic Agatha Christie format, and I adore it. The setup might be frequently used, but it's a perfectly logical approach to solving the crime. It can, at times, create a bit of redundancy and duplication, but that helps keep the main points in your mind. Or prevents you from thinking about the strange things you learned along the path, usually the biggest clues to the truth.
The mystery was simple. I guessed it this time. It took a little while, but it hit me as soon as all the interviews were completed. My reasoning was mostly accurate, but Christie tossed in a little surprise that changed the exact root cause. Still, it was clever and intriguing. The backdrop for the story was pleasant and engaging. The victim was an artist who'd been having an affair (known by his wife and others) with his subject. The subject was onsite when he was murdered, as were the victim's much younger sister-in-law, the girl's governess, and two neighbors / friends. A few secrets come to light, highlighting what really happened on that crazy day nearly sixteen years ago.
For me, Christie's books are always easy and immersive reads. She knows how to craft a story. The plots are usually methodical and direct, even when there are red herrings and side stories. There is an intelligence in the design of her phrasing and structure, not like the stories we see today. I like both approaches, but there has never been a Christie tale I didn't like or devour quickly. I ended up at around 4 stars because I compared it to other classics of hers that I adore. This one was good, but it could've tied together the three different sections more tightly. I also would've liked to get more in the end, specifically reactions from everybody when they learned the truth about who killed the man. The ending was slightly different, as it wasn't about convicting the true killer but simply getting the answer so the daughter knew the truth: Her mom was or was not innocent.
I can't wait to start our next buddy read in the coming days - The Thirteen Problems.
Caroline Crale went to prison for killing her husband. The jury felt sorry for her and rather than sentence her to death, she was kept in jail for life. Sixteen years later, she passed away. Her young daughter receives a letter, just as she turns 21, from her mother, who basically says... "I promise, I didn't kill your father." The daughter tracks down Hercule Poirot and hires him to investigate the past. Poirot is intrigued, quickly agreeing and meeting with the lawyers and police detectives who'd been involved in the case. By the time he's finished, he learns there were 5 other people at the house the day of the death. Poirot conducts his inquiries, and in the end discovers the true killer.
The book is divided into three parts: (1) Introduction & discussion with the cops and lawyers, (2) Meetings with each of the 5 people who'd been at the house, and (c) Bringing everyone together for Poirot to reveal what he's learned. It's classic Agatha Christie format, and I adore it. The setup might be frequently used, but it's a perfectly logical approach to solving the crime. It can, at times, create a bit of redundancy and duplication, but that helps keep the main points in your mind. Or prevents you from thinking about the strange things you learned along the path, usually the biggest clues to the truth.
The mystery was simple. I guessed it this time. It took a little while, but it hit me as soon as all the interviews were completed. My reasoning was mostly accurate, but Christie tossed in a little surprise that changed the exact root cause. Still, it was clever and intriguing. The backdrop for the story was pleasant and engaging. The victim was an artist who'd been having an affair (known by his wife and others) with his subject. The subject was onsite when he was murdered, as were the victim's much younger sister-in-law, the girl's governess, and two neighbors / friends. A few secrets come to light, highlighting what really happened on that crazy day nearly sixteen years ago.
For me, Christie's books are always easy and immersive reads. She knows how to craft a story. The plots are usually methodical and direct, even when there are red herrings and side stories. There is an intelligence in the design of her phrasing and structure, not like the stories we see today. I like both approaches, but there has never been a Christie tale I didn't like or devour quickly. I ended up at around 4 stars because I compared it to other classics of hers that I adore. This one was good, but it could've tied together the three different sections more tightly. I also would've liked to get more in the end, specifically reactions from everybody when they learned the truth about who killed the man. The ending was slightly different, as it wasn't about convicting the true killer but simply getting the answer so the daughter knew the truth: Her mom was or was not innocent.
I can't wait to start our next buddy read in the coming days - The Thirteen Problems.
September 30, 2016
Deceived again! Well played, Christie. Well played.
January 5, 2019
This review and other non-spoilery reviews can be found
“Ah, but my dear sir, the why must never be obvious. That is the whole point.”
It is no secret that I am a fan of Agatha! The idea of a lady writing mystery/ murder novels almost a decade ago and they are so smart and good is just mind-blowing! I was in the mood to read something by the queen of mystery in the second half of 2018 and I finally did this only days away from 2019.
I only picked this because I bought the book on sales and not for any particular reason!
This is by Poirot which may be the most unique detective ever!
“Rest assured,” said Hercule Poirot. “I am the best!”
As usual, the story is interesting, kind of hard to guess because Agatha likes to keep some clues hidden till the big reveal. I also like the format of Agatha’s books, the chapters are kind of short and makes sense.
I don’t have much to say about this one, I was fascinated by the reveal although it was a little bit over the top but at the end Poirot mentions that he doesn’t have a proof and that it is all just his dedications which saves the day!
Summary: While this is not Agatha’s best book, it was so enjoyable and easy to read. Poirot is as queer and funny as always! I think it is a good place to start for those who never read anything by Agatha and a good read for all of Poirot’s fans.
“Ah, but my dear sir, the why must never be obvious. That is the whole point.”
It is no secret that I am a fan of Agatha! The idea of a lady writing mystery/ murder novels almost a decade ago and they are so smart and good is just mind-blowing! I was in the mood to read something by the queen of mystery in the second half of 2018 and I finally did this only days away from 2019.
I only picked this because I bought the book on sales and not for any particular reason!
This is by Poirot which may be the most unique detective ever!
“Rest assured,” said Hercule Poirot. “I am the best!”
As usual, the story is interesting, kind of hard to guess because Agatha likes to keep some clues hidden till the big reveal. I also like the format of Agatha’s books, the chapters are kind of short and makes sense.
I don’t have much to say about this one, I was fascinated by the reveal although it was a little bit over the top but at the end Poirot mentions that he doesn’t have a proof and that it is all just his dedications which saves the day!
Summary: While this is not Agatha’s best book, it was so enjoyable and easy to read. Poirot is as queer and funny as always! I think it is a good place to start for those who never read anything by Agatha and a good read for all of Poirot’s fans.
February 18, 2022
This book was originally published as and I cannot imagine why anyone thought it necessary to change the title. However the edition available to me was titled Murder in Retrospect.
I always enjoy a good Christie and I thought this was one of her best. Poirot is in top form as he reinvestigates a sixteen year old murder. His purpose is to prove that his client's mother, who died in prison after being convicted of murder, did not in fact do it. His research is methodical and purposeful as he interviews the five people who were present on the day of the murder.
As Poirot takes the reader through all the details it seems to be quite clear who must have been the real murderer but of course this is writing the book so do not be fooled. A remarkable twist occurs at the end which finishes the story on a high note. When Hercule is at his best he is enormously readable!
I always enjoy a good Christie and I thought this was one of her best. Poirot is in top form as he reinvestigates a sixteen year old murder. His purpose is to prove that his client's mother, who died in prison after being convicted of murder, did not in fact do it. His research is methodical and purposeful as he interviews the five people who were present on the day of the murder.
As Poirot takes the reader through all the details it seems to be quite clear who must have been the real murderer but of course this is writing the book so do not be fooled. A remarkable twist occurs at the end which finishes the story on a high note. When Hercule is at his best he is enormously readable!
July 27, 2024
Originally titled Murder in Retrospect (ugh!), Five Little Pigs is one of several books where Christie used nursery rhymes for titles/concepts, such as Ten Little Indians/Then There Were None. In this one, Carla Lemarchant comes to Poirot with a letter her mother had written to her when she died, but had only recently come into her possession. Her mother, Caroline Crale, was 16 years ago convicted of the murder of her husband, accomplished artist Amyas Crale, and she died in prison a couple years later. In the letter Caroline claims she was innocent, a claim not shared by anyone who was actually closely connected to the crime, but one that Carla wants Poirot to help refute.
Poirot agrees to investigate, not promising anything, of course, and finds five “little piggies” that might be suspects and/or might shed light on the case: Philip Blake, the “little” [and yes, he’s fat] piggy who went to market, in this case the stock market; his brother Meredith Blake, the piggy who “stayed home” to play with herbs and poisons, one of which may have killed Crale; Elsa Greer is the piggy who “ate roast beef” (she’s gluttonously sexy, voracious); Miss Williams is the piggy who “had none,” the straight-laced governess, and finally Caroline’s sister, Angela, the little pig who cried wee-wee-wee, all the way home, presumably because she’s a teenager with a disfigured face [i.e., disabled] who might feel sorry for herself?
Amyas causes his wife some distress by inviting a young woman, Elsa Greer, into the house so he can paint her portrait (and apparently, have an affair with). Amyas and Caroline basically have an open relationship, but this one might just be different. The painting goes on throughout the book and figures in the mystery in a pretty interesting way. Caroline tells her hubby she will kill him for this affair, and there is plenty of evidence to prove she did. But, oh, did she?
One interesting angle in the book (in addition to the important painting) is that the case is 16 years old. Poirot (improbably) gets all five of these folks to write their memories of the case, so of course they are all different, and all flawed, because of their various investments in the situation and limitations on their perspectives. What do they recall after all that time? Do we trust their memories? Why should they all agree to write?! But once we accept this premise, the stories are pretty interesting. Of course most mysteries have witnesses or interested parties recount what they know of the case. This is different in that it is in writing and 16 years after the fact. So that does create some emotional distance in the telling, as the crime occurred so long ago.
Okay, so it’s not that different as an angle for a book, but the resolution of this one still manages to be terrific, innovative and, yep (to me) surprising. I bump up my 3.5 rating to 4 just for the ending. The books--after reading 25 of them now--tend to be a bit long for me, sluggish in the middle, as I know much of the information is just leading me to dead ends, but the Dame knows how to wind up a mystery!
Poirot agrees to investigate, not promising anything, of course, and finds five “little piggies” that might be suspects and/or might shed light on the case: Philip Blake, the “little” [and yes, he’s fat] piggy who went to market, in this case the stock market; his brother Meredith Blake, the piggy who “stayed home” to play with herbs and poisons, one of which may have killed Crale; Elsa Greer is the piggy who “ate roast beef” (she’s gluttonously sexy, voracious); Miss Williams is the piggy who “had none,” the straight-laced governess, and finally Caroline’s sister, Angela, the little pig who cried wee-wee-wee, all the way home, presumably because she’s a teenager with a disfigured face [i.e., disabled] who might feel sorry for herself?
Amyas causes his wife some distress by inviting a young woman, Elsa Greer, into the house so he can paint her portrait (and apparently, have an affair with). Amyas and Caroline basically have an open relationship, but this one might just be different. The painting goes on throughout the book and figures in the mystery in a pretty interesting way. Caroline tells her hubby she will kill him for this affair, and there is plenty of evidence to prove she did. But, oh, did she?
One interesting angle in the book (in addition to the important painting) is that the case is 16 years old. Poirot (improbably) gets all five of these folks to write their memories of the case, so of course they are all different, and all flawed, because of their various investments in the situation and limitations on their perspectives. What do they recall after all that time? Do we trust their memories? Why should they all agree to write?! But once we accept this premise, the stories are pretty interesting. Of course most mysteries have witnesses or interested parties recount what they know of the case. This is different in that it is in writing and 16 years after the fact. So that does create some emotional distance in the telling, as the crime occurred so long ago.
Okay, so it’s not that different as an angle for a book, but the resolution of this one still manages to be terrific, innovative and, yep (to me) surprising. I bump up my 3.5 rating to 4 just for the ending. The books--after reading 25 of them now--tend to be a bit long for me, sluggish in the middle, as I know much of the information is just leading me to dead ends, but the Dame knows how to wind up a mystery!
January 8, 2022
Agatha Christie Book Reading Challenge
BOOK 8 :- JULY 2019
4.25 STARS
BOOK 8 :- JULY 2019
4.25 STARS
December 11, 2020
??? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ?? ????? :))
??? ???? ?????????? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????!
? ????? ?? ?? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?????????? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ????? :)
??? ???? ?????????? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????!
? ????? ?? ?? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?????????? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ????? :)
January 17, 2025
Otra gran actuación de nuestro querido Poirot.
En este caso es un poco distinto el libro, ya que el supuesto caso a resolver, ocurrió nada mas y nada menos, que hace 16 a?os!!! con juicio y sentencia ya resuelta.
Tuve la ilusión efímera de que iba a acertar con la resolución del caso, pero mi querida Agatha destrozó mis ilusiones con un giro final...
Valoración: 8/10
Sinopsis: Una joven acude a Hércules Poirot en busca de ayuda. Su padre, Amyas Crale, un famoso pintor, fue envenenado hace muchos a?os, y su madre, juzgada y condenada por este crimen murió en la cárcel. La muchacha fue enviada entonces a Canadá con unos parientes, quienes la educaron y cambiaron el nombre.
# 34. Un libro escrito por un autor neurodivergente. Reto Popsugar 2025.
En este caso es un poco distinto el libro, ya que el supuesto caso a resolver, ocurrió nada mas y nada menos, que hace 16 a?os!!! con juicio y sentencia ya resuelta.
Tuve la ilusión efímera de que iba a acertar con la resolución del caso, pero mi querida Agatha destrozó mis ilusiones con un giro final...
Valoración: 8/10
Sinopsis: Una joven acude a Hércules Poirot en busca de ayuda. Su padre, Amyas Crale, un famoso pintor, fue envenenado hace muchos a?os, y su madre, juzgada y condenada por este crimen murió en la cárcel. La muchacha fue enviada entonces a Canadá con unos parientes, quienes la educaron y cambiaron el nombre.
# 34. Un libro escrito por un autor neurodivergente. Reto Popsugar 2025.
May 12, 2022
Five Little Pigs is a tidy, little murder mystery with Poirot gleaning the truth of a cold case. A series of misunderstandings and presumptions lead to the incarceration of a wife for the murder of her husband, a well-known painter. The artist was a bit of a gobshite and philanderer who had brought his mistress in to sit for a portrait. The wife didn't care for it and supposedly poisoned him. She died in prison and now their daughter wants the truth.
Poirot likes the daughter and agrees to delve back into the facts of the case, interviewing the five people who were in the house the day the murder took place. I thought I had it figured out, but alas and alack, I was wrong.
Poirot likes the daughter and agrees to delve back into the facts of the case, interviewing the five people who were in the house the day the murder took place. I thought I had it figured out, but alas and alack, I was wrong.
January 30, 2022
In Agatha Christie’s timeless classic, 'The Five Little Pigs', the adored detective Hercule Poirot has been asked to solve a murder committed sixteen years ago, by the daughter of the victim and the woman found guilty of his murder, her mother Caroline Crale. After receiving a post humous letter from her mother professing her innocence, Carla seeks the help from Poirot.
Caroline Crale was convicted of murdering her husband, after a disappointing and poor defence but just as the nursery rhyme says, there were “five little pigs” who could also have done it, each with motive, opportunity and means. We have:
Philip, the stockbroker that plays the markets with little recent success, was the little pig that went to market;
Meredith Blake - the herb doctor, and also in love with the convicted woman, was the little pig that stayed at home.
Elsa Greer – the serial divorcée, who had her roast beef and plenty of it. Elsa has an affair with Amyas and confesses her desire to marry him. As everyone knows Elsa gets what she wants.
Cecilia Williams – the governess, was the little pig who had none; and remained loyal to her friend Caroline Crale.
Angela Warren (the half sister of Caroline), who cried all the way home. I don’t think this was a fitting title for her character, who I felt was an unfortunate but strong individual.
Now on the case, Poirot wants to “… genuinely recreate the past, to feel and see the events, to see behind the obvious and to visualise the thoughts and feelings of the actors in the drama.”
Poirot starts by interviewing each of the 5 suspects and requests that they write a detailed account of everything related to the case. He also questions the prosecution and the defence attorneys of the court case and learns that Caroline Crale didn’t put up much of a fight and accepted the judgement - but why?. However, in true Poirot fashion, he seeks to uncover the motive, opportunity and means of all 5 little pigs !!!.
I experienced a bit of nostalgia in reading this Agatha Christie book that was written years ago and despite not possessing all the terminology and technology of the modern crime novels, there is so much intelligence in the plots and the structure. Agatha Christie’s novels rarely disappoint. I love how Christie builds the characters and makes everyone the suspect, giving them motive, opportunity and means. It brings out the armchair detective in me as I find myself following the trail of crumbs, the clues, red herrings, subtle observations, and inklings as I pit myself against Poirot to solve the murder first!!! Few detectives are as methodical and forensic as Poirot, and few possess his attention to detail, so I am a huge fan of the character not necessarily the televised characterisation of Poirot.
If I have one criticism then it would be the connection to the nursery rhyme from which the novel takes its title. The book had such a great plot and offered so much promise but despite possessing all the ingredients, the connection to the five little pigs nursery rhyme was weak. I would really like to see authors make better use of themes like the Five Little Pigs, or The Magpie rhyme. Putting that aside this is a superb read.
A little bit of Trivia: The “victim” of Five Little Pigs, Amyas Crale bears the same initials as Agatha Christie’s first husband, Archibald Christie, a serial cheater. After discovering another one of her husband’s flings, Agatha Christie vanishes for days to come to terms with her marital breakdown and stays in a hotel under the name of Mrs.Tressa Neele” (the surname of her husband’s lover).
Caroline Crale was convicted of murdering her husband, after a disappointing and poor defence but just as the nursery rhyme says, there were “five little pigs” who could also have done it, each with motive, opportunity and means. We have:
Philip, the stockbroker that plays the markets with little recent success, was the little pig that went to market;
Meredith Blake - the herb doctor, and also in love with the convicted woman, was the little pig that stayed at home.
Elsa Greer – the serial divorcée, who had her roast beef and plenty of it. Elsa has an affair with Amyas and confesses her desire to marry him. As everyone knows Elsa gets what she wants.
Cecilia Williams – the governess, was the little pig who had none; and remained loyal to her friend Caroline Crale.
Angela Warren (the half sister of Caroline), who cried all the way home. I don’t think this was a fitting title for her character, who I felt was an unfortunate but strong individual.
Now on the case, Poirot wants to “… genuinely recreate the past, to feel and see the events, to see behind the obvious and to visualise the thoughts and feelings of the actors in the drama.”
Poirot starts by interviewing each of the 5 suspects and requests that they write a detailed account of everything related to the case. He also questions the prosecution and the defence attorneys of the court case and learns that Caroline Crale didn’t put up much of a fight and accepted the judgement - but why?. However, in true Poirot fashion, he seeks to uncover the motive, opportunity and means of all 5 little pigs !!!.
I experienced a bit of nostalgia in reading this Agatha Christie book that was written years ago and despite not possessing all the terminology and technology of the modern crime novels, there is so much intelligence in the plots and the structure. Agatha Christie’s novels rarely disappoint. I love how Christie builds the characters and makes everyone the suspect, giving them motive, opportunity and means. It brings out the armchair detective in me as I find myself following the trail of crumbs, the clues, red herrings, subtle observations, and inklings as I pit myself against Poirot to solve the murder first!!! Few detectives are as methodical and forensic as Poirot, and few possess his attention to detail, so I am a huge fan of the character not necessarily the televised characterisation of Poirot.
If I have one criticism then it would be the connection to the nursery rhyme from which the novel takes its title. The book had such a great plot and offered so much promise but despite possessing all the ingredients, the connection to the five little pigs nursery rhyme was weak. I would really like to see authors make better use of themes like the Five Little Pigs, or The Magpie rhyme. Putting that aside this is a superb read.
A little bit of Trivia: The “victim” of Five Little Pigs, Amyas Crale bears the same initials as Agatha Christie’s first husband, Archibald Christie, a serial cheater. After discovering another one of her husband’s flings, Agatha Christie vanishes for days to come to terms with her marital breakdown and stays in a hotel under the name of Mrs.Tressa Neele” (the surname of her husband’s lover).
August 25, 2019
Como pasa siempre con Agatha Christie, me he leído este libro de un tirón. Devorando las páginas. La historia de "Cinco cerditos" va a plantearnos una escenario diferente a lo que nos tiene acostumbrados Christie. Normalmente ocurre una asesinato, alrededor de un conjunto de personas y Poirot (o Miss Marple, o cualquier otro) investiga a los diferentes personajes, hasta dar con cual de los personajes ha sido el culpable. En este caso, Poirot va a intentar descubrir una asesinato que ocurrió hace 16 a?os, a través de entrevistas a las personas relacionadas con el caso, los "cinco cerditos".
Como digo ha sido bastante interesante ver otro tipo de estructura en las tramas de la autora. Conforme me acercaba al final, e incluso cuando ya solo quedaban unas 10 páginas, me hipótesis, la primera que tuvé durante las primeras páginas, tomaba forma y se hacía realidad. Y sentí ese regusto agridulce. Por una parte, esa alegría por haber vencido a la gran genia de la novela negra, y haber conseguido descubrir sus pistas. Pero por otra parte, me gusta la sorpresa y que me pille desprevenido. Así que, vaya cara de cuadro que se me ha quedado, cuando a 5 o 6 páginas del final descubro, que una vez más estaba equivocado, y que la pista que creí descubrir, era, nuevamente, la pista falsa jajaja. Genia indiscutible.
Además, creo que tiene uno de los finales más redondos e interesantes de los que le he leído por ahora. Me ha encantado ese desenlace <3.
Como digo ha sido bastante interesante ver otro tipo de estructura en las tramas de la autora. Conforme me acercaba al final, e incluso cuando ya solo quedaban unas 10 páginas, me hipótesis, la primera que tuvé durante las primeras páginas, tomaba forma y se hacía realidad. Y sentí ese regusto agridulce. Por una parte, esa alegría por haber vencido a la gran genia de la novela negra, y haber conseguido descubrir sus pistas. Pero por otra parte, me gusta la sorpresa y que me pille desprevenido. Así que, vaya cara de cuadro que se me ha quedado, cuando a 5 o 6 páginas del final descubro, que una vez más estaba equivocado, y que la pista que creí descubrir, era, nuevamente, la pista falsa jajaja. Genia indiscutible.
Además, creo que tiene uno de los finales más redondos e interesantes de los que le he leído por ahora. Me ha encantado ese desenlace <3.
September 24, 2017
Also known as “Five Little Pigs”
One of the best Christie's I've read, sorry to see it's not mentioned more. Christie changed it up a bit by having Poirot having to take apart a crime that happened decades ago. Digging into the past and focusing on interviews instead of actual occurrence and eye witness details. A lot has been forgotten in the small details, and some of it has been skewed by memory and deceit. Like some of her other novels, the bulk of this one is interviews. In between that is the written accounts Poirot asked suspects to write, and when he compares them at the end it starts making sense.
One thing that did bug me was the flatness of the daughter who is seeking answers. I figured she’d….care more on a personal level. I know she doesn’t remember much, but still. What I found the most interesting was the villain and everyone who was in love with everyone – it was like a soap opera or mysteries and most people wore fake faces. Interesting reveal and impossible for me to guess the actual villain since clues could have pointed in multiple directions.
This is one of those mysteries where the crime is solved more by studying the psychological of the characters and what turns out plausible because of that, instead of following actual evidence and “clues”. There are some of those that help point the sign in the right direction, but it comes down to understanding and studying people in the end, as Poirot often says.
I know she uses staple characters but I found the governess hatred of men to be taken to an even higher level than usual. The daughter came across as flat, but the other characters were convincing in their hatred or loyalty. There wasn’t as much humor in this one as some of Poirot’s books – it felt like a somber casting over the entire thing – but it fit the story. What impressed me the most with the psychology of the characters was Christie showing how demented romantic pairings can actually make some couples happy, even if they seem miserable to the outside world.
One of the best Christie's I've read, sorry to see it's not mentioned more. Christie changed it up a bit by having Poirot having to take apart a crime that happened decades ago. Digging into the past and focusing on interviews instead of actual occurrence and eye witness details. A lot has been forgotten in the small details, and some of it has been skewed by memory and deceit. Like some of her other novels, the bulk of this one is interviews. In between that is the written accounts Poirot asked suspects to write, and when he compares them at the end it starts making sense.
One thing that did bug me was the flatness of the daughter who is seeking answers. I figured she’d….care more on a personal level. I know she doesn’t remember much, but still. What I found the most interesting was the villain and everyone who was in love with everyone – it was like a soap opera or mysteries and most people wore fake faces. Interesting reveal and impossible for me to guess the actual villain since clues could have pointed in multiple directions.
This is one of those mysteries where the crime is solved more by studying the psychological of the characters and what turns out plausible because of that, instead of following actual evidence and “clues”. There are some of those that help point the sign in the right direction, but it comes down to understanding and studying people in the end, as Poirot often says.
I know she uses staple characters but I found the governess hatred of men to be taken to an even higher level than usual. The daughter came across as flat, but the other characters were convincing in their hatred or loyalty. There wasn’t as much humor in this one as some of Poirot’s books – it felt like a somber casting over the entire thing – but it fit the story. What impressed me the most with the psychology of the characters was Christie showing how demented romantic pairings can actually make some couples happy, even if they seem miserable to the outside world.
Read
February 22, 2024?Creer que sé quién es el asesino, presumir sobre ello, y después fallar estrepitosamente? Mi pasión.
Voy a ser sincero: cada vez que leo una novela de Christie intento no tener mis expectativas altas porque, a medida que la voy leyendo más, siento que ya no podría sorprenderme o que la calidad de sus resoluciones ya no serían tan ingeniosas como sus principales obras. Sin embargo, como un golpe en la cara venido del más allá, aquí estoy, completamente atónito por el desenlace de los hechos. Y sí, lo hizo otra vez.
Cinco Cerditos es, fácilmente, una de las obras destacadas de la autora, en primer lugar, porque su premisa es diferente: su característico detective, Poirot, tiene un verdadero desafío ya que deberá investigar un crimen cometido 16 a?os atrás. Ya se imaginaran como altera esto a la clásica trama, todas las pruebas se basan en recuerdos y reconstrucción de hechos incomprobables claramente influenciados por el testimonio subjetivo de los involucrados. Y, hablando de involucrados, otra particularidad de la novela es que se nos presenta desde el principio a los sospechosos, limitando las sospechas a estas cinco personas, o mejor dicho, cinco cerditos. No se preocupen, esto no lo hace más sencillo, Christie logra que todos parezcan lo suficientemente sospechosos e inocentes al mismo tiempo.
"Este cerdito fue al mercado
Este cerdito se quedó en casa
Este cerdito comió《rosbif》
Este cerdito no comió nada
Y este cerdito lloró 'uy, uy, uy' "
No sé si soy el único que lo notó PERO a partir de esa canción infantil usan esta moraleja de hacer una comparación de cada sospechoso con un cerdito, cosa que, si leyeron "Diez Negritos", sabrán que también hace lo mismo. De hecho, no solo eso, sino que además tanto "Cinco Cerditos" como "Diez Negritos" tienen un título que se compone de un número y un diminutivo. ?Y a qué viene todo esto? A absolutamente nada, observaciones de un lector sumamente inteligente… ajá sí, mejor ignoren todo este párrafo.
Mi consejo final es DUDEN EN TODO MOMENTO y NO CONFIEN EN NADIE. En este libro en particular pareció que me tiraron un anzuelo (en el que obviamente caí) para luego enterarte que no era más que un fondo falso, nunca me sentí tan estafado, shockeado y entretenido al mismo tiempo. Como siempre, la complejidad de los crímenes y sus modos operandi son los que me dejan una gran sensación de satisfacción y, más que nada, admiración ante toda esa creatividad compleja con la que contaba esta autora. No será mi última novela de Agatha.
Voy a ser sincero: cada vez que leo una novela de Christie intento no tener mis expectativas altas porque, a medida que la voy leyendo más, siento que ya no podría sorprenderme o que la calidad de sus resoluciones ya no serían tan ingeniosas como sus principales obras. Sin embargo, como un golpe en la cara venido del más allá, aquí estoy, completamente atónito por el desenlace de los hechos. Y sí, lo hizo otra vez.
Cinco Cerditos es, fácilmente, una de las obras destacadas de la autora, en primer lugar, porque su premisa es diferente: su característico detective, Poirot, tiene un verdadero desafío ya que deberá investigar un crimen cometido 16 a?os atrás. Ya se imaginaran como altera esto a la clásica trama, todas las pruebas se basan en recuerdos y reconstrucción de hechos incomprobables claramente influenciados por el testimonio subjetivo de los involucrados. Y, hablando de involucrados, otra particularidad de la novela es que se nos presenta desde el principio a los sospechosos, limitando las sospechas a estas cinco personas, o mejor dicho, cinco cerditos. No se preocupen, esto no lo hace más sencillo, Christie logra que todos parezcan lo suficientemente sospechosos e inocentes al mismo tiempo.
"Este cerdito fue al mercado
Este cerdito se quedó en casa
Este cerdito comió《rosbif》
Este cerdito no comió nada
Y este cerdito lloró 'uy, uy, uy' "
No sé si soy el único que lo notó PERO a partir de esa canción infantil usan esta moraleja de hacer una comparación de cada sospechoso con un cerdito, cosa que, si leyeron "Diez Negritos", sabrán que también hace lo mismo. De hecho, no solo eso, sino que además tanto "Cinco Cerditos" como "Diez Negritos" tienen un título que se compone de un número y un diminutivo. ?Y a qué viene todo esto? A absolutamente nada, observaciones de un lector sumamente inteligente… ajá sí, mejor ignoren todo este párrafo.
Mi consejo final es DUDEN EN TODO MOMENTO y NO CONFIEN EN NADIE. En este libro en particular pareció que me tiraron un anzuelo (en el que obviamente caí) para luego enterarte que no era más que un fondo falso, nunca me sentí tan estafado, shockeado y entretenido al mismo tiempo. Como siempre, la complejidad de los crímenes y sus modos operandi son los que me dejan una gran sensación de satisfacción y, más que nada, admiración ante toda esa creatividad compleja con la que contaba esta autora. No será mi última novela de Agatha.
April 10, 2025
An excellent Poirot.
November 9, 2017
4.5/5 stars (rounded up)
I am genuinely surprised that this novel of Christie's is not talked about more. This is one of my personal favorites and this time it was actually a re-read for me.
I've read Five Little Pigs for the first time about 7 years ago, and now that I have picked it up for the second time all I could remember was that I liked it a lot. I didn't remember who the murderer was, or how the book played out - so in a sense, my experience was like reading it for the first time.
“One does not, you know, employ merely the muscles. I do not need to bend and measure the footprints and pick up the cigarette ends and examine the bent blades of grass. It is enough for me to sit back in my chair and think."
This novel is quite different from all others from Christie. To start of - there's no crime scene and no looking for fresh clues, this is a murder from the past. Poirot takes on a task of uncovering the truth of a murder that happened 16 years ago. Such interesting premise makes for a completely different novel structure - and I think that it was because of this that I enjoyed it so much.
“What do most people mean when they say that ? So young. Something innocent, something appealing, something helpless. But youth is not that ! Youth is crude, youth is strong, youth is powerful-yes, and cruel ! And one thing more-youth is vulnerable."
Poirot himself is not very prominent in this book, although he is in every scene, he takes a background and lets the story weave itself, just occasionally butting in and asking questions. It's very uncharacteristic of him, as he is normally very pompous and quite weird little man. The whole book is comprised of him talking to people who were present at a murder scene - trying to get to the truth of what really happened that day.
Boring? You'd think so, but believe me it is not.
Agatha Christie did a great job on this novel - weaving a story of hints and small details, leading the reader on and on, until the very end. I kept suspecting different people at different times, and in the end it wasn't the person who I thought it was. And I loved that!
“With women, love always comes first.”
Another great mystery to the collection. I highly recommend this one.
My
My
My
I am genuinely surprised that this novel of Christie's is not talked about more. This is one of my personal favorites and this time it was actually a re-read for me.
I've read Five Little Pigs for the first time about 7 years ago, and now that I have picked it up for the second time all I could remember was that I liked it a lot. I didn't remember who the murderer was, or how the book played out - so in a sense, my experience was like reading it for the first time.
“One does not, you know, employ merely the muscles. I do not need to bend and measure the footprints and pick up the cigarette ends and examine the bent blades of grass. It is enough for me to sit back in my chair and think."
This novel is quite different from all others from Christie. To start of - there's no crime scene and no looking for fresh clues, this is a murder from the past. Poirot takes on a task of uncovering the truth of a murder that happened 16 years ago. Such interesting premise makes for a completely different novel structure - and I think that it was because of this that I enjoyed it so much.
“What do most people mean when they say that ? So young. Something innocent, something appealing, something helpless. But youth is not that ! Youth is crude, youth is strong, youth is powerful-yes, and cruel ! And one thing more-youth is vulnerable."
Poirot himself is not very prominent in this book, although he is in every scene, he takes a background and lets the story weave itself, just occasionally butting in and asking questions. It's very uncharacteristic of him, as he is normally very pompous and quite weird little man. The whole book is comprised of him talking to people who were present at a murder scene - trying to get to the truth of what really happened that day.
Boring? You'd think so, but believe me it is not.
Agatha Christie did a great job on this novel - weaving a story of hints and small details, leading the reader on and on, until the very end. I kept suspecting different people at different times, and in the end it wasn't the person who I thought it was. And I loved that!
“With women, love always comes first.”
Another great mystery to the collection. I highly recommend this one.
My
My
My
June 1, 2019
Five Little Pigs = Murder in Retrospect (Hercule Poirot #25), Agatha Christie
Five Little Pigs is a work of detective fiction by British writer Agatha Christie. The UK first edition carries a copyright date of 1942. The book features Hercule Poirot. Five Little Pigs is unusual in the way that the same events are retold from the viewpoints of five people present on the day of the murder sixteen years earlier. Sixteen years after Caroline Crale is convicted for the murder of her husband Amyas, her daughter Carla Lemarchant approaches Hercule Poirot. In the meeting, Carla claims her mother was innocent, and told her so in the letter she received at age 21, from her mother. She fears that her fiancé will leave her if the truth behind the murder is not found. Poirot agrees to her request and begins researching the case. He learns that on the day of the murder, there were five other people at the Crales' home, whom he dubs "the five little pigs" — Meredith Blake, an amateur chemist; Phillip Blake, Meredith's brother; Angela Warren, Caroline's younger half-sister; Cecilia Williams, Angela's governess, and Elsa Greer, a young woman who is the subject of Amyas's latest painting, now Lady Dittisham. The police investigation discovered that Amyas was poisoned by coniine, found in a glass from which he had drunk cold beer. The poison had been stolen from Meredith's lab by Caroline, who confessed to stealing it because she planned to use it to commit suicide.
???????: ????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??? ????? ???????: ????? ?????? (????)? ????? ?????? ?????: ??? 1994 ??????
?????: ????? ??? ?? ????? ???????: ????? ?????? (????)? ?????: ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? 1372? ?? 244 ?? ??? ????: ?????? ??????? 1390? ?? 290 ?? ????: 9789649915227? ?????: ????????? ???????? ?? ????????? ??????? - ??? 20 ?
?????: ??? ??? ????? ???????: ????? ?????? (????)? ?????: ??????? ?????? ?????? ????? ???????? 1390? ?? ?? ? 290 ?? ????: 9789643636920? ??? ??? 1392?
?????: ??? ??? ????? ???????: ????? ?????? (????)? ?????: ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ?????????? 1395? ?? 45 ?? ????: 9786008299264?
??? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????: ????????: ????? ???????: ????? ????? ?? ????? ? ????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ???? ???? ???????? ?? ???? ???. ???? ?? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ???. ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???. ????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ????. ???? ? ????? ???. ??? ?? ???? ? ???? ???? ????? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???. ? ???? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ????? ???. ??? ??????? ????? ?????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ?????. ?? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???. ????? ????? ??? ???: ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ? ????? ?????. ?? ? ????? ???? ?? ??????? ?????? ???? ? ???? ????? ? ??? ?????. ????? ?????? ? ??? ?? ??? ?? ????. ????? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ??. ??? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ? ????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???! ???? ??? ?? ????? ???? ????????? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ??????? ?????. ? ???? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?????. ??? ???? ? ???? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ??. ????? ????? ???: ?? ???? ???? ????? ??????. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ? ?????: ?? ??????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ? ?? ???? ??????? ????? ???. ????? ???: ?? ??? ????? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ????? ? ?? ?????? ?????. ???? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ? ???: ?? ???? ???. ?? ???? ????. ??????? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ???????. ?? ??? ????. ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ??? ???????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ???: ?? ???? ??? ?? ???. ???????? ?? ??? ?? ? ????? ????. ?????? ??? ?? ???????? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ????. ????? ????? ???: ?? ??????? ???. ?? ?????? ????! ????? ???: ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ??????... ??? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?????. ????? ?? ???? ???? ???: ?? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ??????? ??????. ???? ??????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ???. ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ???? ? ? ??? ? ???. ??? ??????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ???: ?? ??? ??? ???????. ??? ???? ??? ???! ????? ??????? ???: ?? ???? ??????. ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ??. ???????? ??????? ?????? ????! ????? ???: ?? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????. ? ?? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ??. ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ? ???: ?? ??? ?? ????? ????. ??????? ???. ??? ?????. ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ???. ? ??? ??? ??? ? ???: ?? ????? ????? ?? ?? ??????? ???????. ???? ?????? ??? ????????? ???? ???. ????? ????? ???? ?? ??????? ?????? ? ????? ???: ?? ????... ????? ?? ???? ?????... ????? ???: ?? ??? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????. ?????? ??????? ?? ???? ????? ???. ?? ??? ?? ?? ???. ????? ?????: ?? ????? ????? ?? ???. ??? ??? ??? ? ????? ???: ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??! ????? ????? ???: ?? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ????. ?? ?? ???? ???? ????. ???? ??? ??? ???. ???? ???: ?? ?????? ??? ???. ?? ?? ??? ???? ??? ????? ? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ????? ?? ??? ??????. ?? ?? ????? ??? ? ???: ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ? ????? ??... ????? ????? ???. ??? ??? ??????? ????? ?????? ???? ????. ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ??. ???? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ??. ???????? ??? ??? ???? ???. ???? ???? ???? ?????. ????? ??? ???... ????? ????? ???: ?? ? ????????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???. ????? ? ????? ????? ??? ????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??? ? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?????. ?? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ??? ????? ???. ??? ???? ???? ?? ??? ????? ?????. ?? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ?? ????. ????? ??? ? ????? ?? ???? ?????. ? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ???. ????? ? ?? ??? ? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?????. ?? ?? ????? ?????? ????? ? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???????? ????? ??????? ??? ???. ????? ?? ????????? ???? ??? ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ????. ???? ????????? ?? ??????... ??? ???? ?? ???? ???. ???? ???? ???. ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ? ??? ????? ??? ???. ?? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???? ???? ??????? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ?????? ???. ? ???... ? ??? ?? ????? ????????? ????. ??? ????????? ???????? ???? ???? ???. ???? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???????. ???? ?????? ????. ??? ????? ? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?????? ?????. ?? ????? ?????? ? ?????? ????? ?????. ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??????? ??? ????? ?? ????. ???????? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????????. ?? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ????? ???. ?? ??? ??? ???????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??. ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ?? ??? ??????? ????? ???: ?? ???? ????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ??????? ?????! ???????? ??? ? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ? ??????? ????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ????. ? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ????. ?? ????? ??????? ???????? ?????? ??? ? ????? ????? ??? ???. ???? ?? ????? ? ?? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ????????? ? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?????. ???? ???? ?? ???? ? ?? ???? ???. ?????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???????. ??? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? ??. ? ??? ?? ?? ????. ???? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ???.
??? ???? ???? ??? ??. ???? ??. ?????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ????????. ?? ?? ????? ???: ?? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ????? ?? ????. ?????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ???. ????? ?? ?????? ?? ??????? ???. ??? ??? ??? ??? ? ???: ?? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?????. ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??????. ???? ?? ??????????? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ???? ? ?? ????? ????. ?????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ???. ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????. ??? ????? ???? ?????. ??? ?? ????? ???? ? ?? ???. ????? ??? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ???: ?? ?? ???? ?? ?? ?? ????? ?????. ???? ???????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?????. ???? ?? ??? ?????. ???? ??? ?? ??? ?????... ????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ????? ???. ??? ??????? ?? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ????? ???: ?? ???????? ?? ???????? ??? ????? ?????. ?? ?? ????????. ? ???? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ?????? ? ????? ?????.
????? ???: ?? ??? ?? ???????? ??? ?????????? ??? ????????? ? ????????? ???? ????? ???. ?? ??? ???? ??????. ?????? ???? ???????. ???? ?? ????? ???. ???? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ???? ?? ??? ?????. ??? ???? ?? ?? ????? ???. ???? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ???? ? ??? ?????? ????. ? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????? ?... ????? ???. ????? ????? ?????: ?? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ? ???? ???: ?? ????? ??. ????? ????? ???: ?? ????? ????? ???. ??? ???? ?????? ??. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ? ???? ???: ?? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ? ????? ????? ????? ?? ???. ??? ??????? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ?????. ????? ???: ?? ???? ??? ????? ???. ???? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ?? ????????. ????? ??????? ???? ???? ???: ?? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ?????? ???. ??????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ????. ??????? ????? ???? ???? ? ???? ??? ????? ????. ? ???? ??????? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????? ????! ?? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ???????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??????? ???. ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????. ? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????????. ??? ????? ?? ?????. ?? ??? ????? ???? ?????. ???? ???? ?????. ?? ??????? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ????. ?? ???? ???????? ??????...? ?? ???. ???? ???????. ??? ??? ???. ?? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ? ?? ?????? ??? ???. ?? ???? ???? ???... ?? ??????? ???? ?????. ?? ???? ??? ?? ??????? ????? ??. ?? ????? ???? ??? ?????. ?? ???. ???? ????? ??????? ???: ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???. ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ? ????? ???: ?? ???? ????? ???... ?? ??? ?? ??? ?????. ?? ????? ?? ??? ??????? ???????. ?? ???? ???? ????. ????? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??????? ???????. ?? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ???????: ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ????. ????? ????? ???????? ????? ?? ????? ????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ? ????? ???: ?? ?? ???? ???... ????? ?? ???? ???: ?? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?????! ??? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?? ??? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ?? ???? ??? ???: ?? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ??????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??????. ?? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ???. ???? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???. ?????? ????. ????? ???? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?????. ????? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?????????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?????. ??? ???????? ?? ??????? ????? ?? ???. ?? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ?? ??????? ??????? ?????. ???? ?? ????. ??? ?????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ?? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??????? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ????? ? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ????? ????? ???: ?? ?? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ??? ?????? ???. ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?????. ???? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??????. ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ???. ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????. ? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?????! ????? ????? ????? ???: ?? ?? ??? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???? ????? ????????. ?????? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??????. ????? ??????? ???: ?? ?????? ??? ????? ???! ????? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ????????. ?????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ? ???: ?? ???? ??????? ??? ???? ???????? ???? ????? ???: ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ????? ??. ?????? ??????? ?? ???? ???. ??????? ?? ?? ??? ??????. ??? ?? ??????? ???? ? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ??? ???? ???. ??? ????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??????. ????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ????????? ????? ??? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ???????? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????... ?? ????? ???? ??? ???? ?????... ? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ? ??? ???? ?? ?? ????? ?? ?????. ? ?? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???... ????? ????? ?? ?? ?????? ? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ???: ?? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ????????. ????? ???? ????????? ?? ???? ???. ?????? ? ???? ?? ???? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ?? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ???. ????? ?? ?? ??????. ??????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ???: ?? ??? ???. ????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?? ???? ????? ? ???? ????? ???: ?? ?? ????? ??? ????. ?? ???? ????? ?? ??? ?????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ???????. ????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ???. ??? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ? ???: ?? ?? ???? ?? ????. ??????? ????? ???? ???. ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ???. ???? ????? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???...?. ????? ???. ?. ???????
Five Little Pigs is a work of detective fiction by British writer Agatha Christie. The UK first edition carries a copyright date of 1942. The book features Hercule Poirot. Five Little Pigs is unusual in the way that the same events are retold from the viewpoints of five people present on the day of the murder sixteen years earlier. Sixteen years after Caroline Crale is convicted for the murder of her husband Amyas, her daughter Carla Lemarchant approaches Hercule Poirot. In the meeting, Carla claims her mother was innocent, and told her so in the letter she received at age 21, from her mother. She fears that her fiancé will leave her if the truth behind the murder is not found. Poirot agrees to her request and begins researching the case. He learns that on the day of the murder, there were five other people at the Crales' home, whom he dubs "the five little pigs" — Meredith Blake, an amateur chemist; Phillip Blake, Meredith's brother; Angela Warren, Caroline's younger half-sister; Cecilia Williams, Angela's governess, and Elsa Greer, a young woman who is the subject of Amyas's latest painting, now Lady Dittisham. The police investigation discovered that Amyas was poisoned by coniine, found in a glass from which he had drunk cold beer. The poison had been stolen from Meredith's lab by Caroline, who confessed to stealing it because she planned to use it to commit suicide.
???????: ????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??? ????? ???????: ????? ?????? (????)? ????? ?????? ?????: ??? 1994 ??????
?????: ????? ??? ?? ????? ???????: ????? ?????? (????)? ?????: ????? ?????????? ?????? ???? 1372? ?? 244 ?? ??? ????: ?????? ??????? 1390? ?? 290 ?? ????: 9789649915227? ?????: ????????? ???????? ?? ????????? ??????? - ??? 20 ?
?????: ??? ??? ????? ???????: ????? ?????? (????)? ?????: ??????? ?????? ?????? ????? ???????? 1390? ?? ?? ? 290 ?? ????: 9789643636920? ??? ??? 1392?
?????: ??? ??? ????? ???????: ????? ?????? (????)? ?????: ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ?????????? 1395? ?? 45 ?? ????: 9786008299264?
??? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????: ????????: ????? ???????: ????? ????? ?? ????? ? ????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ???? ???? ???????? ?? ???? ???. ???? ?? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ???. ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???. ????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ????. ???? ? ????? ???. ??? ?? ???? ? ???? ???? ????? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???. ? ???? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ????? ???. ??? ??????? ????? ?????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ?????. ?? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???. ????? ????? ??? ???: ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ? ????? ?????. ?? ? ????? ???? ?? ??????? ?????? ???? ? ???? ????? ? ??? ?????. ????? ?????? ? ??? ?? ??? ?? ????. ????? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ??. ??? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ? ????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???! ???? ??? ?? ????? ???? ????????? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ??????? ?????. ? ???? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?????. ??? ???? ? ???? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ? ???? ?? ??????? ???? ??. ????? ????? ???: ?? ???? ???? ????? ??????. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ? ?????: ?? ??????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ? ?? ???? ??????? ????? ???. ????? ???: ?? ??? ????? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ????? ? ?? ?????? ?????. ???? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ? ???: ?? ???? ???. ?? ???? ????. ??????? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ???????. ?? ??? ????. ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ??? ???????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ???: ?? ???? ??? ?? ???. ???????? ?? ??? ?? ? ????? ????. ?????? ??? ?? ???????? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ????. ????? ????? ???: ?? ??????? ???. ?? ?????? ????! ????? ???: ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ??????... ??? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?????. ????? ?? ???? ???? ???: ?? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ???? ??????? ??????. ???? ??????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ???. ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ???? ? ? ??? ? ???. ??? ??????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ???: ?? ??? ??? ???????. ??? ???? ??? ???! ????? ??????? ???: ?? ???? ??????. ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ??. ???????? ??????? ?????? ????! ????? ???: ?? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????. ? ?? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ??. ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ? ???: ?? ??? ?? ????? ????. ??????? ???. ??? ?????. ??? ?? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ???. ? ??? ??? ??? ? ???: ?? ????? ????? ?? ?? ??????? ???????. ???? ?????? ??? ????????? ???? ???. ????? ????? ???? ?? ??????? ?????? ? ????? ???: ?? ????... ????? ?? ???? ?????... ????? ???: ?? ??? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????. ?????? ??????? ?? ???? ????? ???. ?? ??? ?? ?? ???. ????? ?????: ?? ????? ????? ?? ???. ??? ??? ??? ? ????? ???: ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??! ????? ????? ???: ?? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ????. ?? ?? ???? ???? ????. ???? ??? ??? ???. ???? ???: ?? ?????? ??? ???. ?? ?? ??? ???? ??? ????? ? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ????? ?? ??? ??????. ?? ?? ????? ??? ? ???: ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ? ????? ??... ????? ????? ???. ??? ??? ??????? ????? ?????? ???? ????. ? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ??. ???? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ??. ???????? ??? ??? ???? ???. ???? ???? ???? ?????. ????? ??? ???... ????? ????? ???: ?? ? ????????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???. ????? ? ????? ????? ??? ????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??? ? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?????. ?? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ??? ????? ???. ??? ???? ???? ?? ??? ????? ?????. ?? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ?? ????. ????? ??? ? ????? ?? ???? ?????. ? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ???. ????? ? ?? ??? ? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?????. ?? ?? ????? ?????? ????? ? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???????? ????? ??????? ??? ???. ????? ?? ????????? ???? ??? ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ????. ???? ????????? ?? ??????... ??? ???? ?? ???? ???. ???? ???? ???. ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ? ??? ????? ??? ???. ?? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???? ???? ??????? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ?????? ???. ? ???... ? ??? ?? ????? ????????? ????. ??? ????????? ???????? ???? ???? ???. ???? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???????. ???? ?????? ????. ??? ????? ? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?????? ?????. ?? ????? ?????? ? ?????? ????? ?????. ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??????? ??? ????? ?? ????. ???????? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????????. ?? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ????? ???. ?? ??? ??? ???????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??. ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ?? ??? ??????? ????? ???: ?? ???? ????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ??????? ?????! ???????? ??? ? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ? ??????? ????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ????. ? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ????. ?? ????? ??????? ???????? ?????? ??? ? ????? ????? ??? ???. ???? ?? ????? ? ?? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ????????? ? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?????. ???? ???? ?? ???? ? ?? ???? ???. ?????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???????. ??? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? ??. ? ??? ?? ?? ????. ???? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ???.
??? ???? ???? ??? ??. ???? ??. ?????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ????????. ?? ?? ????? ???: ?? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ????? ?? ????. ?????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ???. ????? ?? ?????? ?? ??????? ???. ??? ??? ??? ??? ? ???: ?? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?????. ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??????. ???? ?? ??????????? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ???? ? ?? ????? ????. ?????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ???. ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????. ??? ????? ???? ?????. ??? ?? ????? ???? ? ?? ???. ????? ??? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ???: ?? ?? ???? ?? ?? ?? ????? ?????. ???? ???????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?????. ???? ?? ??? ?????. ???? ??? ?? ??? ?????... ????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ????? ???. ??? ??????? ?? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ????? ???: ?? ???????? ?? ???????? ??? ????? ?????. ?? ?? ????????. ? ???? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ?????? ? ????? ?????.
????? ???: ?? ??? ?? ???????? ??? ?????????? ??? ????????? ? ????????? ???? ????? ???. ?? ??? ???? ??????. ?????? ???? ???????. ???? ?? ????? ???. ???? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ???? ?? ??? ?????. ??? ???? ?? ?? ????? ???. ???? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?????? ???? ? ??? ?????? ????. ? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????? ?... ????? ???. ????? ????? ?????: ?? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ? ???? ???: ?? ????? ??. ????? ????? ???: ?? ????? ????? ???. ??? ???? ?????? ??. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ? ???? ???: ?? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ????? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ? ????? ????? ????? ?? ???. ??? ??????? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ?????. ????? ???: ?? ???? ??? ????? ???. ???? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ?? ????????. ????? ??????? ???? ???? ???: ?? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ?????? ???. ??????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ????. ??????? ????? ???? ???? ? ???? ??? ????? ????. ? ???? ??????? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????? ????! ?? ???? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ???????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??????? ???. ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????. ? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????????. ??? ????? ?? ?????. ?? ??? ????? ???? ?????. ???? ???? ?????. ?? ??????? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ????. ?? ???? ???????? ??????...? ?? ???. ???? ???????. ??? ??? ???. ?? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ? ?? ?????? ??? ???. ?? ???? ???? ???... ?? ??????? ???? ?????. ?? ???? ??? ?? ??????? ????? ??. ?? ????? ???? ??? ?????. ?? ???. ???? ????? ??????? ???: ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???. ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ? ????? ???: ?? ???? ????? ???... ?? ??? ?? ??? ?????. ?? ????? ?? ??? ??????? ???????. ?? ???? ???? ????. ????? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??????? ???????. ?? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ???????: ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ????. ????? ????? ???????? ????? ?? ????? ????? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ? ????? ???: ?? ?? ???? ???... ????? ?? ???? ???: ?? ??? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?????! ??? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?? ??? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ?? ???? ??? ???: ?? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ??????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??????. ?? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ???. ???? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???. ?????? ????. ????? ???? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?????. ????? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?????????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?????. ??? ???????? ?? ??????? ????? ?? ???. ?? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ?? ??????? ??????? ?????. ???? ?? ????. ??? ?????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ?? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??????? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ????? ? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ????? ????? ???: ?? ?? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ??? ?????? ???. ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?????. ???? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??????. ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ???. ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????. ? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?????! ????? ????? ????? ???: ?? ?? ??? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???? ????? ????????. ?????? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??????. ????? ??????? ???: ?? ?????? ??? ????? ???! ????? ?? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ????????. ?????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ? ???: ?? ???? ??????? ??? ???? ???????? ???? ????? ???: ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ????? ??. ?????? ??????? ?? ???? ???. ??????? ?? ?? ??? ??????. ??? ?? ??????? ???? ? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ??? ???? ???. ??? ????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??????. ????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ????????? ????? ??? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ???????? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????... ?? ????? ???? ??? ???? ?????... ? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ? ??? ???? ?? ?? ????? ?? ?????. ? ?? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ???... ????? ????? ?? ?? ?????? ? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ???: ?? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ????????. ????? ???? ????????? ?? ???? ???. ?????? ? ???? ?? ???? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ?? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ???. ????? ?? ?? ??????. ??????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ???: ?? ??? ???. ????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?? ???? ????? ? ???? ????? ???: ?? ?? ????? ??? ????. ?? ???? ????? ?? ??? ?????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ???????. ????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ???. ??? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ? ???: ?? ?? ???? ?? ????. ??????? ????? ???? ???. ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ???. ???? ????? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???...?. ????? ???. ?. ???????
June 10, 2021
"Hercule Poirot said with a shrug of the shoulders, 'It is human nature. You and I, Mr. Blake, who know the world, have no illusions about our fellow human beings. Not bad people, most of them, but certainly not to be idealized.'" (PAGE 59)
This is how I feel about humanity. Not in a negative way but in a way I will always be watchful and protective of myself and my kids. You never know one's past or what one is capable of.
M. Poirot is tasked with a murder that happened sixteen years ago. The five main characters in the case are still alive and willing to repeat what happened in the days leading up to the murder. There are many secrets and many different angles to the story. It looked like plain murder from the murderess. Even through her trial she didn't try to defend herself and was heard saying she could kill her husband until she leaves a note for her daughter saying she didn't do it......
I noticed this title wasn't as popular a Christie novel as her others but I really enjoyed it although it did get a bit repetitive with the recounting of the murder day. I thought I had the killer and then I didn't. I was wrong the whole way through. It is never the obvious one because like in real life there are many perceptions and lies coming out of the mouth. I don't know if the ending was justified but when you read it I'd like to know your thoughts..... Was it just too long of time to persecute someone or are they miserable people and their misery takes care of justice in a way the system would never satisfy?
This is how I feel about humanity. Not in a negative way but in a way I will always be watchful and protective of myself and my kids. You never know one's past or what one is capable of.
M. Poirot is tasked with a murder that happened sixteen years ago. The five main characters in the case are still alive and willing to repeat what happened in the days leading up to the murder. There are many secrets and many different angles to the story. It looked like plain murder from the murderess. Even through her trial she didn't try to defend herself and was heard saying she could kill her husband until she leaves a note for her daughter saying she didn't do it......
I noticed this title wasn't as popular a Christie novel as her others but I really enjoyed it although it did get a bit repetitive with the recounting of the murder day. I thought I had the killer and then I didn't. I was wrong the whole way through. It is never the obvious one because like in real life there are many perceptions and lies coming out of the mouth. I don't know if the ending was justified but when you read it I'd like to know your thoughts..... Was it just too long of time to persecute someone or are they miserable people and their misery takes care of justice in a way the system would never satisfy?
August 2, 2017
A really terrific story. Carla Lemarchant gets a letter from her mother Caroline, who has died in prison while serving her sentence for murdering her husband, the philandering artist Amyas Crale- a letter professing her innocence. So young Carla has to go back in time to find the real murderer - and who to employ, other than Hercule Poirot?
There are five suspects (the five little pigs of the title) - Philip and Meredith Blake, Amyas's neighbours; Elsa Greer, the young girl Amyas is painting (and making love to); Angela Warren, Caroline's disfigured teenage stepsister; and her governess. All of them seems to have had the opportunity - but only Caroline had the motive, as her husband was planning to ditch her for Elsa. But are things as straightforward as they seem? Apparently not...
This novel shows Poirot at his ingenious best. From the five people's imperfect recollections, he manages to reconstruct the past: and a couple of sentences puts him on the correct trail. The story is extremely plausible and the plot is really tight. My one special reason for liking this book - I actually solved the mystery by interpreting a statement from a person the same way Poirot did! Shows that my little grey cells aren't that bad, hey?
There are five suspects (the five little pigs of the title) - Philip and Meredith Blake, Amyas's neighbours; Elsa Greer, the young girl Amyas is painting (and making love to); Angela Warren, Caroline's disfigured teenage stepsister; and her governess. All of them seems to have had the opportunity - but only Caroline had the motive, as her husband was planning to ditch her for Elsa. But are things as straightforward as they seem? Apparently not...
This novel shows Poirot at his ingenious best. From the five people's imperfect recollections, he manages to reconstruct the past: and a couple of sentences puts him on the correct trail. The story is extremely plausible and the plot is really tight. My one special reason for liking this book - I actually solved the mystery by interpreting a statement from a person the same way Poirot did! Shows that my little grey cells aren't that bad, hey?
July 24, 2020
She got me. I went for the red herring set up person as the murderer in this one and thought I was soooooooo clever for guessing it. I was feeling a little superior, even! But no, in the end, Christie wins again. It's always simpler than we think it is- and probably nastier. And maybe it’s just me being a teacher but this novel is a great example of solving problems through close reading of documents- see! Your history and English teachers are giving you a skill that's good for something! When you too set up your own private eye practice, remember them!
April 6, 2021
In modern detective novels, it would be called a “cold case”
Sixteen years ago, Caroline Crale was convicted of poisoning her husband in what all agreed was a slam-dunk open-and-shut case. Nobody had the least doubt about Ms Crale’s guilt. But when her daughter received a letter just before her mother’s death that proclaimed her innocence, she engaged Hercule Poirot to, once and for all, prove the truth or the lie of her mother’s conviction.
If Ms Crale wasn’t guilty, there were five possible suspects. Agatha Christie sets up FIVE LITTLE PIGS as a purely cerebral exercise for monsieur Poirot in which he interviews the prosecuting and defending lawyers in the trial, the investigating detectives and each of the five suspects in turn. In addition, each of the suspects agrees to provide a written commentary of their understanding and perception of the events surrounding the murder. Poirot is left with only the application of the little gray cells to determine the ultimate truth. FIVE LITTLE PIGS might also be seen as a cheeky challenge to readers to compare their own sleuthing skills and the quality of their own gray cells to Poirot’s. The reader is given all of the information and nothing is held back.
It’s an interesting (and, most assuredly, entertaining, provocative and quite successful) way of presenting a good old-fashioned character based cozy murder mystery. Definitely recommended as a worthy addition to the Hercule Poirot canon.
Paul Weiss
Sixteen years ago, Caroline Crale was convicted of poisoning her husband in what all agreed was a slam-dunk open-and-shut case. Nobody had the least doubt about Ms Crale’s guilt. But when her daughter received a letter just before her mother’s death that proclaimed her innocence, she engaged Hercule Poirot to, once and for all, prove the truth or the lie of her mother’s conviction.
If Ms Crale wasn’t guilty, there were five possible suspects. Agatha Christie sets up FIVE LITTLE PIGS as a purely cerebral exercise for monsieur Poirot in which he interviews the prosecuting and defending lawyers in the trial, the investigating detectives and each of the five suspects in turn. In addition, each of the suspects agrees to provide a written commentary of their understanding and perception of the events surrounding the murder. Poirot is left with only the application of the little gray cells to determine the ultimate truth. FIVE LITTLE PIGS might also be seen as a cheeky challenge to readers to compare their own sleuthing skills and the quality of their own gray cells to Poirot’s. The reader is given all of the information and nothing is held back.
It’s an interesting (and, most assuredly, entertaining, provocative and quite successful) way of presenting a good old-fashioned character based cozy murder mystery. Definitely recommended as a worthy addition to the Hercule Poirot canon.
Paul Weiss
Displaying 1 - 30 of 6,954 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.