What do you think?
Rate this book
Hercule Poirot #12
???? ?? ???????
???? ????? ?????? ????????? ?? ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ????????? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????? ???? ??????? ?? ??? ???? ??????? ????????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?????. ??? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ???????? ??????? ????? ??????????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???????? ????????? ????????.
324 pages, Kindle Edition
First published March 10, 1935
1,869 people are currently reading
27.2k people want to read
About the author
Agatha Christie
5,190?books71.2k?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 (n¨¦e 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
§¡§Ô§Ñ§ä§Ñ §¬§â§Ú§ã§ä§Ú (Russian)
§¡§Ô§Ñ§ä§Ñ §¬§â?§ã§ä? (Ukrainian)
¦¡¦Ã¦Ê?¦È¦Á ¦ª¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ó¦É (Greek)
¥¢¥¬¥µ ¥¯¥ê¥¹¥Æ¥£ (Japanese)
°¢¼Îɯ¡¤¿ËÀòË¿µÙ (Chinese)
Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie, Lady Mallowan, DBE (n¨¦e 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
§¡§Ô§Ñ§ä§Ñ §¬§â§Ú§ã§ä§Ú (Russian)
§¡§Ô§Ñ§ä§Ñ §¬§â?§ã§ä? (Ukrainian)
¦¡¦Ã¦Ê?¦È¦Á ¦ª¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ó¦É (Greek)
¥¢¥¬¥µ ¥¯¥ê¥¹¥Æ¥£ (Japanese)
°¢¼Îɯ¡¤¿ËÀòË¿µÙ (Chinese)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 3,991 reviews
July 5, 2013
Not the best of Christie's mysteries, and some truly appalling casual racism that threw me out of the story as a modern reader. Blah blah context, I know, but the characters themselves were detestable. I quote this as an example as the two romantic protagonists get to know each other over dinner:
These people are meant to be the heroes of the text. It's bad enough to dislike cats and Katharine Hepburn. That would strike these people off my list of friends anyway. But to be so openly prejudiced against 'fat women' and 'negroes'? Yeah, not really the protagonists I like.
The whole bloody plane should have gone down in the ocean.
They liked dogs and disliked cats. They both hated oysters and loved smoked salmon. They liked Greta Garbo and disliked Katherine Hepburn. They didn't like fat women and admired really jet-black hair. They disliked very red nails. They disliked loud voices, noisy restaurants and negroes. They preferred buses to tubes.
These people are meant to be the heroes of the text. It's bad enough to dislike cats and Katharine Hepburn. That would strike these people off my list of friends anyway. But to be so openly prejudiced against 'fat women' and 'negroes'? Yeah, not really the protagonists I like.
The whole bloody plane should have gone down in the ocean.
June 29, 2024
DEATH BY BLOW DART!
A crusty old moneylender known for keeping blackmail on all of her high profile and aristocratic clients gets taken out by a snake poison while traveling through the air.
I choose to believe this means Death in the Clouds was the original inspiration for Snakes on a Plane.
I like locked-room mysteries, so I absolutely appreciated the use of murder on a plane to spice up that trope. And I also love the snake poison dart as the weapon of choice.
Keepin it wacky, Agatha!
Now because Poirot is on the plane, he becomes a suspect in the court of public opinion and takes on the case to defend his good name.
And of course, he solves it.
This may not be the most well-known Poirot mystery, but it has an interesting setting, a good cast of characters, and a lot of twisty shenanigans to keep you interested.
Recommended.
A crusty old moneylender known for keeping blackmail on all of her high profile and aristocratic clients gets taken out by a snake poison while traveling through the air.
I choose to believe this means Death in the Clouds was the original inspiration for Snakes on a Plane.
I like locked-room mysteries, so I absolutely appreciated the use of murder on a plane to spice up that trope. And I also love the snake poison dart as the weapon of choice.
Keepin it wacky, Agatha!
Now because Poirot is on the plane, he becomes a suspect in the court of public opinion and takes on the case to defend his good name.
And of course, he solves it.
This may not be the most well-known Poirot mystery, but it has an interesting setting, a good cast of characters, and a lot of twisty shenanigans to keep you interested.
Recommended.
January 17, 2020
AUDIOBOOK LISTENED TO IN 2020
Firstly let's say it's a shame that this does not have a separate entry as it is the audiobook of the novel read by Hugh Fraser and its good !!
My wife and I listened to this audiobook whilst decorating over the last few days and at 6 hours its a jolly good listen. Hugh Fraser does have a penchant for narrating, and for the various voices he uses without it sounding too contrived.
I would say the audiobook is a solid 5 stars as is the book itself.
POIROT BUDDY READ FROM 2019
Almost 5 ?but just fell short, not for any failing on Poirot¡¯s part, but just because for some reason, that maybe I need to think about, it just wasn¡¯t 5 ?? (see below as I have changed my views slightly)
Review to follow tomorrow, Monday.
So here we are on Monday, and I'm still thinking its about a 4.4 rounded down to 4 stars ?? The story is an excellent one, with a uniquely limited cast of characters (suspects). I know in the past I have seen the David Suchet version of this, but I don't remember reading it at all, and I certainly didn't work out (guess) who was the perpetrator.
Poirot weaves his marvellous magic, travelling to and from between France and England to dig out clues, discard red-herrings and ultimately unmask the murderer. As I said an excellent story that kept me enthralled, not just entertained, for 2 nights, hmm so why am I not giving it 5 stars. I will have to ponder that one
And here we are almost a week later and I've rounded up my marking as the more I think about it, the more I am convinced this is over 4 .5 and therefore rounded up to 5.
This rounding up has nothing to do with the flak I have received at only giving it 4 stars, honest ?
In reality it is an excellent book, Ms Christie is as ever so wonderfully descriptive and so I have no hesitation in upping it to a 5 ?? book.
May 22, 2013
Every time Poirot travels anywhere, one of his fellow travelers/passengers is murdered. The man is a walking jinx, I tell you.
January 6, 2025
Well, Hercule Poirot has once again proven his little grey cells to be vastly superior to mine, as my guesses concerning the identity of the murderer were so very, very wrong. In my defense, Christie packed a lot of red herrings into this one.
Anyway, this is another enjoyable installment of the Hercule Poirot series. If you've read any previous Poirot novels, you already have a pretty good idea of how it'll play out, except for this murder takes place in an airplane somewhere over the English Channel (and perhaps involves a most unusual weapon?). No Hastings this time, but Inspector Japp is involved and makes his usual attempt at actually solving a case on his own. Poirot is as egotistical as ever, and his moustache magnificent as always. There is the occasional problematic comment ¨C two characters bond over disliking ¡°fat women and ¡ negroes,¡± and there's some disparaging talk about ¡°ugly¡± women, but that's an Agatha Christie novel for you, I suppose?
I originally slated this novel for the ¡°a book where the main character is an immigrant or refugee¡± slot in my 2025 Popsugar Reading Challenge, but I was delighted to find out that someone changes careers near the end. Now it can go in the ¡°a book where an adult character changes careers¡± slot, and I can put another Poirot novel in the ¡°immigrant or refugee¡± category. At this rate (I have nine other Poirot novels lined up to be read for the Popsugar challenge, as well), I just might finish this series this year. Yay!
3.95 stars, rounded up.
Anyway, this is another enjoyable installment of the Hercule Poirot series. If you've read any previous Poirot novels, you already have a pretty good idea of how it'll play out, except for this murder takes place in an airplane somewhere over the English Channel (and perhaps involves a most unusual weapon?). No Hastings this time, but Inspector Japp is involved and makes his usual attempt at actually solving a case on his own. Poirot is as egotistical as ever, and his moustache magnificent as always. There is the occasional problematic comment ¨C two characters bond over disliking ¡°fat women and ¡ negroes,¡± and there's some disparaging talk about ¡°ugly¡± women, but that's an Agatha Christie novel for you, I suppose?
I originally slated this novel for the ¡°a book where the main character is an immigrant or refugee¡± slot in my 2025 Popsugar Reading Challenge, but I was delighted to find out that someone changes careers near the end. Now it can go in the ¡°a book where an adult character changes careers¡± slot, and I can put another Poirot novel in the ¡°immigrant or refugee¡± category. At this rate (I have nine other Poirot novels lined up to be read for the Popsugar challenge, as well), I just might finish this series this year. Yay!
3.95 stars, rounded up.
October 6, 2024
[4.0?] ?????? ?? ??? ????? es una novela detectivesca escrita por Agatha Christie en 1935. La historia transcurre en un avi¨®n que realiza un vuelo de Par¨ªs a Croydon. Durante el trayecto, una pasajera llamada Madame Giselle, una prestamista rica y conocida, es encontrada muerta en su asiento. H¨¦rcules Poirot, el famoso detective belga, tambi¨¦n es pasajero en el vuelo, as¨ª que se dedicar¨¢ de inmediato a la resoluci¨®n de este caso.
Me gustan especialmente las novelas de Christie en las que los asesinatos se cometen en un entorno cerrado ya que esto reduce la lista de sospechosos y crea un ambiente de tensi¨®n constante. En este caso, el contexto del avi¨®n se explota al m¨¢ximo, porque cada pasajero y miembro de la tripulaci¨®n se convierte instant¨¢neamente en un posible culpable. Con un grupo diverso de personajes a bordo, que incluyen desde arque¨®logos famosos hasta un escritor de novela policial, Christie construye con maestr¨ªa un rompecabezas lleno de pistas, secretos ocultos y momentos de incertidumbre. Me atrevo a decir que esta es la cl¨¢sica novela detectivesca de Agatha Christie.
Una vez m¨¢s, la autora desaf¨ªa la l¨®gica convencional y mantiene la intriga hasta el final. Como es habitual en sus obras, el desenlace es sorprendente, aunque tal vez no tan impactante como en otras de sus historias m¨¢s emblem¨¢ticas (como ????????? ?? ?? ??????? ?? ??????? o ?? ????????? ?? ????? ???????). Poirot, fiel a su estilo, emplea su famosa "materia gris" para desenredar el misterio a trav¨¦s de un meticuloso an¨¢lisis de los hechos y una brillante deducci¨®n de las motivaciones de los personajes. Lo interesante de este caso es que Poirot se convierte en uno de los principales sospechosos del crimen, lo que a?ade una capa extra de complejidad a la historia ya que deber¨¢ usar todo su ingenio no solo para resolver el asesinato, sino para evitar que las sospechas recaigan sobre ¨¦l.
En esta ocasi¨®n, no logr¨¦ dar con el asesino ni anticipar los giros de la trama. Me encanta que Christie contin¨²e sorprendi¨¦ndome y no se haya vuelto predecible, algo que valoro enormemente. Como he mencionado en otras rese?as, mi objetivo es llegar a leerme todas sus obras.
Finalmente, ?????? ?? ??? ????? es una lectura entretenida y gratificante, aunque no alcanza la brillantez de otras novelas de Poirot. A pesar de esto, es una excelente opci¨®n para quienes quieran iniciarse en la obra de Christie ya que presenta muchos de los elementos que la hicieron famosa: una estructura cerrada de misterio (en este caso, el avi¨®n), un grupo de sospechosos bien delineado y el ingenioso uso de la l¨®gica deductiva de Poirot. Adem¨¢s, cumple el objetivo de intrigar, sorprender y entretener.
Me gustan especialmente las novelas de Christie en las que los asesinatos se cometen en un entorno cerrado ya que esto reduce la lista de sospechosos y crea un ambiente de tensi¨®n constante. En este caso, el contexto del avi¨®n se explota al m¨¢ximo, porque cada pasajero y miembro de la tripulaci¨®n se convierte instant¨¢neamente en un posible culpable. Con un grupo diverso de personajes a bordo, que incluyen desde arque¨®logos famosos hasta un escritor de novela policial, Christie construye con maestr¨ªa un rompecabezas lleno de pistas, secretos ocultos y momentos de incertidumbre. Me atrevo a decir que esta es la cl¨¢sica novela detectivesca de Agatha Christie.
Una vez m¨¢s, la autora desaf¨ªa la l¨®gica convencional y mantiene la intriga hasta el final. Como es habitual en sus obras, el desenlace es sorprendente, aunque tal vez no tan impactante como en otras de sus historias m¨¢s emblem¨¢ticas (como ????????? ?? ?? ??????? ?? ??????? o ?? ????????? ?? ????? ???????). Poirot, fiel a su estilo, emplea su famosa "materia gris" para desenredar el misterio a trav¨¦s de un meticuloso an¨¢lisis de los hechos y una brillante deducci¨®n de las motivaciones de los personajes. Lo interesante de este caso es que Poirot se convierte en uno de los principales sospechosos del crimen, lo que a?ade una capa extra de complejidad a la historia ya que deber¨¢ usar todo su ingenio no solo para resolver el asesinato, sino para evitar que las sospechas recaigan sobre ¨¦l.
En esta ocasi¨®n, no logr¨¦ dar con el asesino ni anticipar los giros de la trama. Me encanta que Christie contin¨²e sorprendi¨¦ndome y no se haya vuelto predecible, algo que valoro enormemente. Como he mencionado en otras rese?as, mi objetivo es llegar a leerme todas sus obras.
Finalmente, ?????? ?? ??? ????? es una lectura entretenida y gratificante, aunque no alcanza la brillantez de otras novelas de Poirot. A pesar de esto, es una excelente opci¨®n para quienes quieran iniciarse en la obra de Christie ya que presenta muchos de los elementos que la hicieron famosa: una estructura cerrada de misterio (en este caso, el avi¨®n), un grupo de sospechosos bien delineado y el ingenioso uso de la l¨®gica deductiva de Poirot. Adem¨¢s, cumple el objetivo de intrigar, sorprender y entretener.
August 29, 2021
Estoy seguro que cuando necesite como refugio una historia sin tantas ambiciones pero entretenida y adictiva hasta el final regresar¨¦ a las letras de la reina del crimen.
El caso de una mujer asesinada con un dardo envenenado en medio de un vuelo no me ha sorprendido nada en cuanto al autor/a del crimen pues sospechaba de esa persona y efectivamente as¨ª ha sido. Compruebo que hay ciertas cosas que ya se hacen un poco repetitivas con esta autora y por eso ya se me est¨¢ haciendo f¨¢cil saber qui¨¦n cometi¨® el asesinato aunque no sepa exactamente porqu¨¦. As¨ª que lo ¨²nico que espero es que en los casos que me restan por leer haya alg¨²n giro de tuerca m¨¢s sorprendente, un ambiente m¨¢s diverso y menos mon¨®tono y como no puede ser de otra forma; razones diferentes. No s¨¦, alg¨²n cambio peque?o que le de algo de diversidad y notoriedad a historias que est¨¢n siendo moldeadas por el mismo patr¨®n.
Ahora, solo ha sido ese ¨²nico elemento lo que me ha decepcionado porque de resto me sigue gustando much¨ªsimo que Agatha Christie construya libros ligeros y adictivos; donde a veces lo importante no es descubrir la identidad del perpetrador del crimen sino el porqu¨¦ y c¨®mo lo hizo. En eso, est¨¢ m¨¢s que asegurado s¨ª o s¨ª que siempre te trae una que otra sorpresa la reina del crimen; por lo que es un deleite leer lo cap¨ªtulos finales, donde al fin nuestro detective belga suelta toda la sopa punto por punto.
El caso de una mujer asesinada con un dardo envenenado en medio de un vuelo no me ha sorprendido nada en cuanto al autor/a del crimen pues sospechaba de esa persona y efectivamente as¨ª ha sido. Compruebo que hay ciertas cosas que ya se hacen un poco repetitivas con esta autora y por eso ya se me est¨¢ haciendo f¨¢cil saber qui¨¦n cometi¨® el asesinato aunque no sepa exactamente porqu¨¦. As¨ª que lo ¨²nico que espero es que en los casos que me restan por leer haya alg¨²n giro de tuerca m¨¢s sorprendente, un ambiente m¨¢s diverso y menos mon¨®tono y como no puede ser de otra forma; razones diferentes. No s¨¦, alg¨²n cambio peque?o que le de algo de diversidad y notoriedad a historias que est¨¢n siendo moldeadas por el mismo patr¨®n.
Ahora, solo ha sido ese ¨²nico elemento lo que me ha decepcionado porque de resto me sigue gustando much¨ªsimo que Agatha Christie construya libros ligeros y adictivos; donde a veces lo importante no es descubrir la identidad del perpetrador del crimen sino el porqu¨¦ y c¨®mo lo hizo. En eso, est¨¢ m¨¢s que asegurado s¨ª o s¨ª que siempre te trae una que otra sorpresa la reina del crimen; por lo que es un deleite leer lo cap¨ªtulos finales, donde al fin nuestro detective belga suelta toda la sopa punto por punto.
December 21, 2024
Death in the Clouds is the twelfth book by Agatha Christie to feature perhaps our favourite retired detective, Monsieur Hercule Poirot. His great friend Inspector Japp is also in this novel, and along with a French policeman, Monsieur Fournier, they make an effective trio. The novel was actually first published in the United States in March 1935, under the different title of ¡°Death in the Air¡±. Perhaps it was thought that this was more evocative of the exciting new mode of travel, via the air. However, it was a hasty decision, since there was already an American short story with the same name. So a few months later in July, when it was published in the UK, the publishers Collins decided to stick with Agatha Christie¡¯s original title, and this is the one by which it is largely known nowadays.
By now, readers of the time knew what to expect of the little Belgian detective, and neither they nor we would be disappointed with this story. It is a variant on a country house ¡°closed room¡± murder, the twist being that the murder takes place mid-flight ¨C or ¡°in the clouds¡± ¨C where all the suspects are present, in a confined space, with no chance to escape. What¡¯s more, it is a delight to find that yet again Poirot finds that he himself is the main suspect for the murder!
I was amused to note again Agatha Christie¡¯s slight preoccupation with superstition. Just as in other novels, she makes a point of selecting the number thirteen. Is this perhaps to put her readers on edge? An earlier novel, ¡°Lord Edgware Dies¡± had also been alternatively titled ¡°Thirteen at Dinner¡±. Her previous novel ¡°Three-Act Tragedy¡± also featured 13 guests at dinner, and this theme would be visited again in ¡°And Then There Were None¡±. In the present novel, Death in the Clouds, thirteen is the number of passengers on the plane. How many passengers would you expect? To be sure, there are fifteen people aboard the Prometheus aeroplane, but this comprises thirteen passengers and two stewards. Thirteen again: bad luck. Or is it perhaps that Agatha Christie, astutely adjudges that the details and possible motives of thirteen characters, is slightly more than we can keep in our minds at once ¨C but not too many for us to try?
And she is right, or at least in my case. There are so many red herrings. What with blackmail, fraud, duplicity, impersonation, revenge, drug addiction, insolvency and corruption, I was completely at sea. So many people here are not what they seem. Greed, hypocrisy, and lies abound. Is anyone actually telling the whole truth?
¡°In every case of a criminal nature one comes across the same phenomena when questioning witnesses. Everyone keeps something back. Sometimes ¨C often indeed ¨C it is something quite harmless, something, perhaps, quite unconnected with the crime; but ¨C I say it again ¨C there is always ²õ´Ç³¾±ð³Ù³ó¾±²Ô²µ.¡±
At any rate, we have the speaker of these words, Monsieur Hercule Poirot himself, whom surely we can trust. He just happens to be one of eleven passengers in the rear compartment of the plane. In addition to himself and the unfortunate victim, , there are quite an assortment of characters. There is the pleasant and very ordinary Jane Grey, who is a junior hairdresser, Norman Gale, a dentist, and Daniel Clancy, an amusingly absent-minded mystery writer. There is a doctor, Doctor Bryant, a businessman, James Ryder, the Countess Cicely Horbury and her friend Venetia Kerr, and lastly two French archaeologists, Armand Dupont and his son Jean. All seem to be exactly as they appear: amusingly comic, selfish, a jumped-up snob, a shy academic, a reliable professional, and so on.
Also in this novel, we meet the person who found the body, Henry Mitchell, the senior steward on the Prometheus, and Albert Davies, the junior steward. There is Madame Giselle¡¯s loyal servant, Elise Grandier, and the policemen addressing the crime are Inspector Japp of Scotland Yard, and Monsieur Fournier of the S?ret¨¦, (which is France¡¯s equivalent to Scotland Yard).
¡°No one notices a steward particularly.¡±
None are free from suspicion, and at some point every single character looks likely to be the murderer, although we know in our own minds that it will not be the police who solve the case, but Monsieur Hercule Poirot. And he is relentless. Who was sitting where? Who went past the victim? How many times? And so on. He even recreates the incident, repeating the same the flight to Paris n the same plane later on, with Inspector Fournier, to reenact the crime.
Not only is the idea of a murder on an aeroplane intriguing, but we need to remember that air flight itself was brand new, when this novel was first published. A regular London to Paris air service began in 1935, and the aeroplanes were converted bombers! There were eight models, all named after mythological figures, so Agatha Christie invented a name on the same theme: ¡°±Ê°ù´Ç³¾±ð³Ù³ó±ð³Ü²õ¡±. Sadly, by 1940, all the original Imperial Airways planes had either crashed or been irreparably damaged and destroyed. Thus the aeroplane that Agatha Christie describes here, feels very authentic; moreover it feels specific to the 1930s.
Agatha Christie had quickly become a huge fan of air travel. Having taken her first flight in 1911, she described the experience as ¡°±ð³æ³Ù°ù²¹´Ç°ù»å¾±²Ô²¹°ù²â¡±. Air travel was however, an expensive luxury still far beyond the financial reach of the ordinary person. A single flight from London to Paris cost ?8, which was a huge amount of money in 1935 (?1 was worth roughly ?70.53 in today¡¯s money.) Yet not all the passengers are wealthy, and this is explained in the novel. Is this a typical flight? Is there anything which has brought them together? We wonder vaguely about another novel earlier in the Poirot series, the audacious . These passengers do not appear to be connected in any way. It must surely then be a random flight ¨C which oddly happens to have Hercule Poirot as a passenger.
It is certainly more interesting for us to have such a wide selection of suspects, varying from an ordinary shop girl to an aristocrat, and a businessman to archaeologists. Agatha Christie displays her skill at humour, in making each character have their own little quirk, and for the main part these are necessary clues to the plot, as well as being most entertaining.
The motive for deliberate murder is usually simple: love or money. Here we learn of several characters who have financial difficulties, and more than one who are unhappy in their marriages or relationships. But the method employed here seems so extreme as to be absurd. Was the victim stabbed repeatedly in the chest? Were they strangled? Or bludgeoned to death? In fact we learn of the murder at the end of chapter one, and it frustrated all the detectives for a long time after. Inspector Japp expostulates:
¡°If anyone had told me a week ago that I should be investigating a crime where a woman was killed with a poison dart with snake venom on it ¨C well, I¡¯d have laughed in his face! It¡¯s an insult ¨C that¡¯s what this murder is ¨C an insult.¡±
But is the method used as simple as that? What of the wasp flying around? And why didn¡¯t anyone see a passenger putting a flute to their mouth? And which flute would it have been: we learn of several. Take note too of the details; the tiny clues which Poirot spots. The two coffee spoons. The nail clippers. The hypodermic syringe. A long cigarette holder. An empty matchbox. A blowpipe found pushed down the side of Poirot¡¯s seat. The fact that Poirot offered his seat to someone so that she could sit and chat with her friend. Are any of these noteworthy?
For most of the novel we know neither the motive, nor the method. We know that Poirot cannot be guilty of this dastardly crime, as that would be Agatha Christie letting us down big time. But the circumstantial evidence seems damning enough. Is this a deliberate attempt to frame our favourite detective? We need to take his advice:
¡°Close your eyes, my friend instead of opening them wide. Use the eyes of the brain, not of the body. Let the little grey cells of the mind function ¡ Let it be their task to show you what actually happened.
¡ Because you are deducing from things that you have seen. Nothing can be so misleading as observation.¡±
So what actually happened on the flight from Le Bourget to Croydon, and why? When the steward tried to wake a sleeping passenger sitting at the back, five minutes before the ¡°±Ê°ù´Ç³¾±ð³Ù³ó±ð³Ü²õ¡± was due to touch down, he was dismayed to find that it was impossible. No amount of shaking could waken the slumped body in the seat.
And so the trail of red herrings begins.
Interestingly, Agatha Christie seems heavily critical of media intrusion in one chapter, suggesting that she herself was slightly irritated by it. Did she have a love/hate relationship with the press? Agatha Christie was already a household name in the thirties, and just a few years ago in 1926, the press reports on her eleven days¡¯ disappearance as a ¡°nine-days wonder¡±. To this very day, her whereabouts and movements at that time are shrouded in mystery. Surely she must at some stage have been offered a handsome sum of money to reveal all? Perhaps she genuinely could not remember ¨C or perhaps this amusing episode, describing their ¡°nosing¡± about a murder case with a Countess as a suspect, was a light hearted but pointed dig. Maybe this mirrored an actual event in her own life.
She also included a joke at the expense of her archaeologist husband. Inspector Japp is certain that a couple of men are ¡°³¦³Ü³Ù-³Ù³ó°ù´Ç²¹³Ù²õ¡±, but they turn out to be distinguished archaeologists. However a little later, the joke turns sour. The two French archaeologists tell a story about an Englishman who left his sick wife alone in a small hotel in Syria, because of his work. They agreed that this was something which a Frenchman could never have done. But this was a true story ¡ and the ¡°wife¡± was Agatha Christie herself. Clearly the incident rankled so much that she used it in her fiction.
The most enjoyable joke is the least barbed, and at her own expense; the creation of a detective thriller writer Daniel Clancy, whom she sends up enormously. A most entertaining part is the d¨¦nouement, in which Poirot gleefully allows the novelist Daniel Clancy to see how a real-life detective solves a case, to both men¡¯s great enjoyment. Agatha Christie seems to love including these parodies of her craft; another is the character of the writer Ariadne Oliver, in other novels. Finally, we see the soft-hearted romantic side of Agatha Christie. Poirot has kept an eye on the young Jane Grey, who is really the heroine of this story,
Sometimes Agatha Christie seems to be telling us more than the actual story. Is this her own view of life too, when Poirot grandly says:
¡°There are more important things than finding the murderer. And justice is a fine word, but it is sometimes difficult to say exactly what one means by it. In my opinion the important thing is to clear the innocent.¡±
But when all is said, this is a most enjoyable novel, with not only Poirot gleefully explaining how the crime was committed to a writer of the genre, but another, seemingly inexplicable secondary murder, towards the end of the book.?A reviewer of the time in ¡°The Guardian¡± newspaper said:
¡°Very few authors achieve the ideal blend of puzzle and entertainment as often does Agatha Christie ... Death in the Clouds may not rank with her greatest achievements, but it is far above the average detective story ... Mrs Christie provides a little gallery of thumb-nail sketches of plausible characters; she gives us all the clues and even tells us where to look for them; we ought to find the murderer by reason, but are not likely to succeed except by guesswork.¡±
Precisely.
By now, readers of the time knew what to expect of the little Belgian detective, and neither they nor we would be disappointed with this story. It is a variant on a country house ¡°closed room¡± murder, the twist being that the murder takes place mid-flight ¨C or ¡°in the clouds¡± ¨C where all the suspects are present, in a confined space, with no chance to escape. What¡¯s more, it is a delight to find that yet again Poirot finds that he himself is the main suspect for the murder!
I was amused to note again Agatha Christie¡¯s slight preoccupation with superstition. Just as in other novels, she makes a point of selecting the number thirteen. Is this perhaps to put her readers on edge? An earlier novel, ¡°Lord Edgware Dies¡± had also been alternatively titled ¡°Thirteen at Dinner¡±. Her previous novel ¡°Three-Act Tragedy¡± also featured 13 guests at dinner, and this theme would be visited again in ¡°And Then There Were None¡±. In the present novel, Death in the Clouds, thirteen is the number of passengers on the plane. How many passengers would you expect? To be sure, there are fifteen people aboard the Prometheus aeroplane, but this comprises thirteen passengers and two stewards. Thirteen again: bad luck. Or is it perhaps that Agatha Christie, astutely adjudges that the details and possible motives of thirteen characters, is slightly more than we can keep in our minds at once ¨C but not too many for us to try?
And she is right, or at least in my case. There are so many red herrings. What with blackmail, fraud, duplicity, impersonation, revenge, drug addiction, insolvency and corruption, I was completely at sea. So many people here are not what they seem. Greed, hypocrisy, and lies abound. Is anyone actually telling the whole truth?
¡°In every case of a criminal nature one comes across the same phenomena when questioning witnesses. Everyone keeps something back. Sometimes ¨C often indeed ¨C it is something quite harmless, something, perhaps, quite unconnected with the crime; but ¨C I say it again ¨C there is always ²õ´Ç³¾±ð³Ù³ó¾±²Ô²µ.¡±
At any rate, we have the speaker of these words, Monsieur Hercule Poirot himself, whom surely we can trust. He just happens to be one of eleven passengers in the rear compartment of the plane. In addition to himself and the unfortunate victim, , there are quite an assortment of characters. There is the pleasant and very ordinary Jane Grey, who is a junior hairdresser, Norman Gale, a dentist, and Daniel Clancy, an amusingly absent-minded mystery writer. There is a doctor, Doctor Bryant, a businessman, James Ryder, the Countess Cicely Horbury and her friend Venetia Kerr, and lastly two French archaeologists, Armand Dupont and his son Jean. All seem to be exactly as they appear: amusingly comic, selfish, a jumped-up snob, a shy academic, a reliable professional, and so on.
Also in this novel, we meet the person who found the body, Henry Mitchell, the senior steward on the Prometheus, and Albert Davies, the junior steward. There is Madame Giselle¡¯s loyal servant, Elise Grandier, and the policemen addressing the crime are Inspector Japp of Scotland Yard, and Monsieur Fournier of the S?ret¨¦, (which is France¡¯s equivalent to Scotland Yard).
¡°No one notices a steward particularly.¡±
None are free from suspicion, and at some point every single character looks likely to be the murderer, although we know in our own minds that it will not be the police who solve the case, but Monsieur Hercule Poirot. And he is relentless. Who was sitting where? Who went past the victim? How many times? And so on. He even recreates the incident, repeating the same the flight to Paris n the same plane later on, with Inspector Fournier, to reenact the crime.
Not only is the idea of a murder on an aeroplane intriguing, but we need to remember that air flight itself was brand new, when this novel was first published. A regular London to Paris air service began in 1935, and the aeroplanes were converted bombers! There were eight models, all named after mythological figures, so Agatha Christie invented a name on the same theme: ¡°±Ê°ù´Ç³¾±ð³Ù³ó±ð³Ü²õ¡±. Sadly, by 1940, all the original Imperial Airways planes had either crashed or been irreparably damaged and destroyed. Thus the aeroplane that Agatha Christie describes here, feels very authentic; moreover it feels specific to the 1930s.
Agatha Christie had quickly become a huge fan of air travel. Having taken her first flight in 1911, she described the experience as ¡°±ð³æ³Ù°ù²¹´Ç°ù»å¾±²Ô²¹°ù²â¡±. Air travel was however, an expensive luxury still far beyond the financial reach of the ordinary person. A single flight from London to Paris cost ?8, which was a huge amount of money in 1935 (?1 was worth roughly ?70.53 in today¡¯s money.) Yet not all the passengers are wealthy, and this is explained in the novel. Is this a typical flight? Is there anything which has brought them together? We wonder vaguely about another novel earlier in the Poirot series, the audacious . These passengers do not appear to be connected in any way. It must surely then be a random flight ¨C which oddly happens to have Hercule Poirot as a passenger.
It is certainly more interesting for us to have such a wide selection of suspects, varying from an ordinary shop girl to an aristocrat, and a businessman to archaeologists. Agatha Christie displays her skill at humour, in making each character have their own little quirk, and for the main part these are necessary clues to the plot, as well as being most entertaining.
The motive for deliberate murder is usually simple: love or money. Here we learn of several characters who have financial difficulties, and more than one who are unhappy in their marriages or relationships. But the method employed here seems so extreme as to be absurd. Was the victim stabbed repeatedly in the chest? Were they strangled? Or bludgeoned to death? In fact we learn of the murder at the end of chapter one, and it frustrated all the detectives for a long time after. Inspector Japp expostulates:
¡°If anyone had told me a week ago that I should be investigating a crime where a woman was killed with a poison dart with snake venom on it ¨C well, I¡¯d have laughed in his face! It¡¯s an insult ¨C that¡¯s what this murder is ¨C an insult.¡±
But is the method used as simple as that? What of the wasp flying around? And why didn¡¯t anyone see a passenger putting a flute to their mouth? And which flute would it have been: we learn of several. Take note too of the details; the tiny clues which Poirot spots. The two coffee spoons. The nail clippers. The hypodermic syringe. A long cigarette holder. An empty matchbox. A blowpipe found pushed down the side of Poirot¡¯s seat. The fact that Poirot offered his seat to someone so that she could sit and chat with her friend. Are any of these noteworthy?
For most of the novel we know neither the motive, nor the method. We know that Poirot cannot be guilty of this dastardly crime, as that would be Agatha Christie letting us down big time. But the circumstantial evidence seems damning enough. Is this a deliberate attempt to frame our favourite detective? We need to take his advice:
¡°Close your eyes, my friend instead of opening them wide. Use the eyes of the brain, not of the body. Let the little grey cells of the mind function ¡ Let it be their task to show you what actually happened.
¡ Because you are deducing from things that you have seen. Nothing can be so misleading as observation.¡±
So what actually happened on the flight from Le Bourget to Croydon, and why? When the steward tried to wake a sleeping passenger sitting at the back, five minutes before the ¡°±Ê°ù´Ç³¾±ð³Ù³ó±ð³Ü²õ¡± was due to touch down, he was dismayed to find that it was impossible. No amount of shaking could waken the slumped body in the seat.
And so the trail of red herrings begins.
Interestingly, Agatha Christie seems heavily critical of media intrusion in one chapter, suggesting that she herself was slightly irritated by it. Did she have a love/hate relationship with the press? Agatha Christie was already a household name in the thirties, and just a few years ago in 1926, the press reports on her eleven days¡¯ disappearance as a ¡°nine-days wonder¡±. To this very day, her whereabouts and movements at that time are shrouded in mystery. Surely she must at some stage have been offered a handsome sum of money to reveal all? Perhaps she genuinely could not remember ¨C or perhaps this amusing episode, describing their ¡°nosing¡± about a murder case with a Countess as a suspect, was a light hearted but pointed dig. Maybe this mirrored an actual event in her own life.
She also included a joke at the expense of her archaeologist husband. Inspector Japp is certain that a couple of men are ¡°³¦³Ü³Ù-³Ù³ó°ù´Ç²¹³Ù²õ¡±, but they turn out to be distinguished archaeologists. However a little later, the joke turns sour. The two French archaeologists tell a story about an Englishman who left his sick wife alone in a small hotel in Syria, because of his work. They agreed that this was something which a Frenchman could never have done. But this was a true story ¡ and the ¡°wife¡± was Agatha Christie herself. Clearly the incident rankled so much that she used it in her fiction.
The most enjoyable joke is the least barbed, and at her own expense; the creation of a detective thriller writer Daniel Clancy, whom she sends up enormously. A most entertaining part is the d¨¦nouement, in which Poirot gleefully allows the novelist Daniel Clancy to see how a real-life detective solves a case, to both men¡¯s great enjoyment. Agatha Christie seems to love including these parodies of her craft; another is the character of the writer Ariadne Oliver, in other novels. Finally, we see the soft-hearted romantic side of Agatha Christie. Poirot has kept an eye on the young Jane Grey, who is really the heroine of this story,
Sometimes Agatha Christie seems to be telling us more than the actual story. Is this her own view of life too, when Poirot grandly says:
¡°There are more important things than finding the murderer. And justice is a fine word, but it is sometimes difficult to say exactly what one means by it. In my opinion the important thing is to clear the innocent.¡±
But when all is said, this is a most enjoyable novel, with not only Poirot gleefully explaining how the crime was committed to a writer of the genre, but another, seemingly inexplicable secondary murder, towards the end of the book.?A reviewer of the time in ¡°The Guardian¡± newspaper said:
¡°Very few authors achieve the ideal blend of puzzle and entertainment as often does Agatha Christie ... Death in the Clouds may not rank with her greatest achievements, but it is far above the average detective story ... Mrs Christie provides a little gallery of thumb-nail sketches of plausible characters; she gives us all the clues and even tells us where to look for them; we ought to find the murderer by reason, but are not likely to succeed except by guesswork.¡±
Precisely.
October 13, 2020
The year has mercifully reached its final quarter. My holidays are finally behind me and I can go back to the grind of everyday living for the next six months. Yet, the news is as bitter as ever, and, other than an occasional sports book, I have not opened anything nonfiction in months. In a year that is topsy turvy, I have craved escapism. Whether it¡¯s revisiting childhood favorites or discovering new timeless stories, this year has been about rekindling my love of fiction reading. One thing has remained constant; however, and that has been my propensity to read mysteries in between other books to keep my brain sharp. The year has been stressful enough, and I can only fathom that it would have been worse for me if I did not make a decision early on to read a case by the Queen of Crime every two weeks or so. With so many uncertainties in life, at least I know that Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple have been there to guide me through the worst of times. As I navigate each new day, I know that only a fortnight remains until I spend time with the Belgian mustachioed sleuth.
It is 1935. Air travel has arrived in England, even for commuters. Hercule Poirot is returning to Croydon from Paris on the air train Prometheus. Always prone to motion sickness, the greatest of detectives sleeps through the entire journey to hide his jumpy stomach. With the sleuth oblivious to his surroundings, one Lady Giselle, a money lender from Paris, is found murdered in her seat. Like another case of Poirot¡¯s that I recently read, the murderer had the audacity to commit the crime right under Poirot¡¯s nose. Whoever wanted Giselle dead used a blowpipe to emit a thorn laced with snake venom. The thorn hit the victim in the jugular, and she was dead instantaneously. An upscale lady on a flight with primarily upper class passengers, it appeared that the criminal wanted Giselle out of the way for her money. It would be up to Poirot to figure out whodunit and what motive.
This death in the clouds reintroduces readers to Scotland Yard Inspector Japp and Parisian chief inspector Giraud. Japp employs diametrically opposed methods than Poirot, focusing on concrete evidence to eliminate possible suspects. Poirot delves into the psychological reasons for committing a crime, interviewing each possible suspect in turn. He researches back stories in order to create a clearer picture of a criminal, focusing on recurring themes or events in one¡¯s life. From this he pieces together the psychological motive for one to commit murder, and usually Poirot¡¯s hunches are right. Both Japp and other inspectors who Poirot have worked with over the years have questioned his methods, but Poirot has never known to be wrong. Utilizing his little gray cells, Poirot has his hunch about who the murderer is before the other inspectors have even pieced two clues together.
While all of Christie¡¯s cases can be read as stand alone books, she does evoke past and future events in each story. When these were written in real time, fans waited for each successive book and knew the back story behind it. Here, Poirot encourages peripheral character Jane Grey to work on an archeological dig in the Middle East. This is an area that was personal to Christie as this was the area of expertise of her husband Max Mallowan. The dig in question here occurs two books hence when Poirot crosses path with a dig in Mesopotamia, which he had contributed to financially in this case. Christie does rip some cases from the headlines, noting that Americans were hard up for cash during a downturn and being ever prolific in uses of poisons, which had always been a personal area of interest. Although there are many methods of committing murder, poisoning seems to be a favorite of Christie¡¯s, with snake venom doing the job just time around. Yet, Poirot had his hunches, and it would only be a matter of time until his little gray cells would do their job.
I do not know where I would be this year if I did not have Agatha Christie to help me through this mess that has been 2020. Her books, some of nearly one hundred years old, have allowed my own grey cells to work but not too hard, still permitting me to travel to another time and place. Between Miss Marple and Hercule Poirot, I have kept thinking whodunit, allowing for my brain to get exercise. This year I have opted for escape reads, forgoing the news around me. Thankfully, Poirot has been there time and time again to help me through these times, solving case after case, keeping my brain sharp. If only the Queen of Crime knew how relevant her creations would be one hundred years later.
? 4 stars ???¡á?
It is 1935. Air travel has arrived in England, even for commuters. Hercule Poirot is returning to Croydon from Paris on the air train Prometheus. Always prone to motion sickness, the greatest of detectives sleeps through the entire journey to hide his jumpy stomach. With the sleuth oblivious to his surroundings, one Lady Giselle, a money lender from Paris, is found murdered in her seat. Like another case of Poirot¡¯s that I recently read, the murderer had the audacity to commit the crime right under Poirot¡¯s nose. Whoever wanted Giselle dead used a blowpipe to emit a thorn laced with snake venom. The thorn hit the victim in the jugular, and she was dead instantaneously. An upscale lady on a flight with primarily upper class passengers, it appeared that the criminal wanted Giselle out of the way for her money. It would be up to Poirot to figure out whodunit and what motive.
This death in the clouds reintroduces readers to Scotland Yard Inspector Japp and Parisian chief inspector Giraud. Japp employs diametrically opposed methods than Poirot, focusing on concrete evidence to eliminate possible suspects. Poirot delves into the psychological reasons for committing a crime, interviewing each possible suspect in turn. He researches back stories in order to create a clearer picture of a criminal, focusing on recurring themes or events in one¡¯s life. From this he pieces together the psychological motive for one to commit murder, and usually Poirot¡¯s hunches are right. Both Japp and other inspectors who Poirot have worked with over the years have questioned his methods, but Poirot has never known to be wrong. Utilizing his little gray cells, Poirot has his hunch about who the murderer is before the other inspectors have even pieced two clues together.
While all of Christie¡¯s cases can be read as stand alone books, she does evoke past and future events in each story. When these were written in real time, fans waited for each successive book and knew the back story behind it. Here, Poirot encourages peripheral character Jane Grey to work on an archeological dig in the Middle East. This is an area that was personal to Christie as this was the area of expertise of her husband Max Mallowan. The dig in question here occurs two books hence when Poirot crosses path with a dig in Mesopotamia, which he had contributed to financially in this case. Christie does rip some cases from the headlines, noting that Americans were hard up for cash during a downturn and being ever prolific in uses of poisons, which had always been a personal area of interest. Although there are many methods of committing murder, poisoning seems to be a favorite of Christie¡¯s, with snake venom doing the job just time around. Yet, Poirot had his hunches, and it would only be a matter of time until his little gray cells would do their job.
I do not know where I would be this year if I did not have Agatha Christie to help me through this mess that has been 2020. Her books, some of nearly one hundred years old, have allowed my own grey cells to work but not too hard, still permitting me to travel to another time and place. Between Miss Marple and Hercule Poirot, I have kept thinking whodunit, allowing for my brain to get exercise. This year I have opted for escape reads, forgoing the news around me. Thankfully, Poirot has been there time and time again to help me through these times, solving case after case, keeping my brain sharp. If only the Queen of Crime knew how relevant her creations would be one hundred years later.
? 4 stars ???¡á?
September 1, 2020
Death in the Clouds (formerly Death in the Air) (vast title improvement, Agatha!?)
A flight from Paris to Croydon. Poirot on the flight, asleep for most of it. A woman, Giselle, is murdered on the way. What ensues is a closed set mystery, including a scorecard with a short list of suspects and a map for us to peruse, illustrating where all were seated. Death, we learn at the Croydon inquest, was by Boomslang (South African tree snake) venom from the tip of a thorn found near the murder victim (Cool murder weapon, eh? And Boomslang is a better title than Death in the Clouds, maybe, Agatha?!).
When the egg-head-shaped Belgian awakes, an African blowgun is found wedged into his seat. Poirot: Suspect! Whoa! Shocking!
A wasp appears on the Harper Collins reprint cover. So the wasp must be very important, too, right?
Interesting suspects include a gambling coke addict (in 1935, yes; you thought you invented this life?), a detective novel writer and a dentist.
In the last book, Christie has Poirot pontificate about the importance of observation: We don¡¯t do enough of it, and surely, we have not observed what he has observed, to prove his point. Observe harder, look more closely, come on. Mysteries teach us to pay attention. So we set that goal.
In this book, however, Poirot pulls that particular rug from under us and insists that observation is not what it is cracked up to be, as perception is often deeply flawed. And besides, he says, it is often what we do NOT see that is key to a crime, and what didn¡¯t happen. Stop messing with us, Agatha/Hercule! You keep making us look at one thing and then another! Then nothing at all?! Is it possible we can¡¯t trust you? Are you some misdirecting magician? (Yes).
Detective writer (and suspect, but in Poirot's universe, we all are) Clancy hopes to write a novel based on the murder, with an ingenious solution! But, alas, if you thought he would be useful in figuring out a murder mystery, he says--when approached by Poirot for help--he can only make up stories, he has no sense how to actually solve them. This detective writer uses a character that loves bananas and bites his nails, which the writer laments has to happen in every book now that he put it in the first one! He also, on the other hand, laments that with a detective writer's stories ¡°unfortunately, it has to be a different thing every time.¡± Sound familiar, Agatha? The challenge of originality in genre writing. Let's nt have it be arsenic this time, but. . . boomslang venom!
This is a very solid book, not one of her best, or most original, but it's well done, overall. Maybe 3.5, as I build a basis of comparison on the range of her stuff, book after book.
A flight from Paris to Croydon. Poirot on the flight, asleep for most of it. A woman, Giselle, is murdered on the way. What ensues is a closed set mystery, including a scorecard with a short list of suspects and a map for us to peruse, illustrating where all were seated. Death, we learn at the Croydon inquest, was by Boomslang (South African tree snake) venom from the tip of a thorn found near the murder victim (Cool murder weapon, eh? And Boomslang is a better title than Death in the Clouds, maybe, Agatha?!).
When the egg-head-shaped Belgian awakes, an African blowgun is found wedged into his seat. Poirot: Suspect! Whoa! Shocking!
A wasp appears on the Harper Collins reprint cover. So the wasp must be very important, too, right?
Interesting suspects include a gambling coke addict (in 1935, yes; you thought you invented this life?), a detective novel writer and a dentist.
In the last book, Christie has Poirot pontificate about the importance of observation: We don¡¯t do enough of it, and surely, we have not observed what he has observed, to prove his point. Observe harder, look more closely, come on. Mysteries teach us to pay attention. So we set that goal.
In this book, however, Poirot pulls that particular rug from under us and insists that observation is not what it is cracked up to be, as perception is often deeply flawed. And besides, he says, it is often what we do NOT see that is key to a crime, and what didn¡¯t happen. Stop messing with us, Agatha/Hercule! You keep making us look at one thing and then another! Then nothing at all?! Is it possible we can¡¯t trust you? Are you some misdirecting magician? (Yes).
Detective writer (and suspect, but in Poirot's universe, we all are) Clancy hopes to write a novel based on the murder, with an ingenious solution! But, alas, if you thought he would be useful in figuring out a murder mystery, he says--when approached by Poirot for help--he can only make up stories, he has no sense how to actually solve them. This detective writer uses a character that loves bananas and bites his nails, which the writer laments has to happen in every book now that he put it in the first one! He also, on the other hand, laments that with a detective writer's stories ¡°unfortunately, it has to be a different thing every time.¡± Sound familiar, Agatha? The challenge of originality in genre writing. Let's nt have it be arsenic this time, but. . . boomslang venom!
This is a very solid book, not one of her best, or most original, but it's well done, overall. Maybe 3.5, as I build a basis of comparison on the range of her stuff, book after book.
August 5, 2019
Hercule Poirot at his best. A gripping who dun it high in the air drama. The only case where Jury actually convicts Poirot of murder before their opinion is not upheld.For a change we see Poirot moving around looking for clues rather than solving the case from the comforts of his chair. Interesting read
January 8, 2022
Agatha Christie Book Reading Challenge
BOOK 9 :- AUGUST 2019
3.25 STARS
BOOK 9 :- AUGUST 2019
3.25 STARS
April 17, 2023
3.5 stars out of 5
Death in the Clouds is the 12th book in the Hercule Poirot series but it can easily be read as a standalone novel. Agatha wastes no time as the death occurs at the beginning of the story and what's neat about this one is it happened on an airplane. Belgian detective Hercule Poirot is a passenger on the flight and so of course he is interested in solving the case.
I enjoyed Death in the Clouds but I wouldn't rank it very high among the books I have read by the author. It took me awhile before I felt comfortable with the cast of characters and keeping track of who was who. I was unable to predict the ending which is always a good thing when it comes to mysteries. My issue was I was left feeling indifferent about the ending and I'll leave it at that as to not give away spoilers.
Overall, it was still a fun read though.
Death in the Clouds is the 12th book in the Hercule Poirot series but it can easily be read as a standalone novel. Agatha wastes no time as the death occurs at the beginning of the story and what's neat about this one is it happened on an airplane. Belgian detective Hercule Poirot is a passenger on the flight and so of course he is interested in solving the case.
I enjoyed Death in the Clouds but I wouldn't rank it very high among the books I have read by the author. It took me awhile before I felt comfortable with the cast of characters and keeping track of who was who. I was unable to predict the ending which is always a good thing when it comes to mysteries. My issue was I was left feeling indifferent about the ending and I'll leave it at that as to not give away spoilers.
Overall, it was still a fun read though.
August 22, 2021
This is how I picture the conversation at the restaurant going:
August 14, 2022
just once i want Poirot himself to be the murderer
August 28, 2019
I have to keep reminding myself that Agatha Christie wrote this novel in 1935. She didn¡¯t grow up watching Murder She Wrote, or reruns of Matlock or any of the CSI programs. She couldn¡¯t just Google how to get away with murder, or research rare artifacts, weapons, toxins and how to obtain them. She didn¡¯t have PBS to watch all the National Geographic programs or any of those travelogues that take you around the world while sitting in your living room, and yet she managed to scribe interesting novels that take you on multicultural adventures with reams of international characters holding flaws and schemes and histories and secrets and she does it all in a concise and intriguing mystery, sprinkled with humour and drama.
While this is only the second novel of hers that I have read they both have possessed the attributes described above. This seemed to be an otherwise a regular whodunnit ... a dozen or so passengers on a plane and one dies an unnatural death....but the the prose and dialogue with which she tells it keeps you interested and guessing until the very end. There is always that list of characters with those you eliminate quickly as suspects, only to find something turning up to implicate them later on. There are of course the obvious suspects who seem to flit in and out of suspicion until the end. Then there are all those wafflers, the ones who on one page are written off and brought back on the next as the prime suspect, only to be written off and brought back three more times.
And of course M. Poirot is most charming and engaging, why he could sell you on any idea, and he does. He has a rousing way of uncovering the facts.
The story moves quickly and the characters develop along the way, the plot twists and turns, until the big reveal at the end ... and you reach the moment when the murderer is none other than..... you¡¯ve got to kidding!?
An enjoyable read. Would readily recommend it and will read more AC over time....
While this is only the second novel of hers that I have read they both have possessed the attributes described above. This seemed to be an otherwise a regular whodunnit ... a dozen or so passengers on a plane and one dies an unnatural death....but the the prose and dialogue with which she tells it keeps you interested and guessing until the very end. There is always that list of characters with those you eliminate quickly as suspects, only to find something turning up to implicate them later on. There are of course the obvious suspects who seem to flit in and out of suspicion until the end. Then there are all those wafflers, the ones who on one page are written off and brought back on the next as the prime suspect, only to be written off and brought back three more times.
And of course M. Poirot is most charming and engaging, why he could sell you on any idea, and he does. He has a rousing way of uncovering the facts.
The story moves quickly and the characters develop along the way, the plot twists and turns, until the big reveal at the end ... and you reach the moment when the murderer is none other than..... you¡¯ve got to kidding!?
An enjoyable read. Would readily recommend it and will read more AC over time....
February 5, 2025
?§³§Þ§ì§â§ä §Ó §à§Ò§Ý§Ñ§è§Ú§ä§Ö¡° §Þ§Ú §Ó§ì§Ù§Õ§Ö§Û§ã§ä§Ó§Ñ §Ú§Ù§Ü§Ý§ð§é§Ú§ä§Ö§Ý§ß§à §ã§Ú§Ý§ß§à! §®§Ú§ã§Ý§ñ, §é§Ö §ä§ñ §Ö§Õ§ß§Ñ §à§ä §ß§Ñ§Û-§ç§å§Ò§Ñ§Ó§Ú§ä§Ö §Ú §Ú§Ù§á§ì§Ý§ß§Ö§ß§Ú §ã §Þ§ì§Õ§â§à§ã§ä §Ü§ß§Ú§Ô§Ú §ß§Ñ §¡§Ô§Ñ§ä§Ñ §¬§â§Ú§ã§ä§Ú... §¥§à§á§Ñ§Õ§ß§Ñ§ç§Ñ §Þ§Ú §Ù§Ñ§á§Ý§Ö§ä§Ö§ß§Ú§ñ§ä §Ü§â§Ú§Þ§Ú§ß§Ñ§Ý§Ö§ß §ã§ð§Ø§Ö§ä §Ú §Ù§Ñ§Ô§Ñ§Õ§ì§é§ß§Ñ§ä§Ñ §Ñ§ä§Þ§à§ã§æ§Ö§â§Ñ, §à§Ò§Ñ§é§Ö §à§ä§ß§à§ê§Ö§ß§Ú§ñ§ä§Ñ §Þ§Ö§Ø§Õ§å §Ô§Ö§â§à§Ú§ä§Ö §Ú §ã§Þ§Ú§ã§Ý§Ö§ß§Ú§ä§Ö §á§à§ã§Ý§Ñ§ß§Ú§ñ §ß§Ñ §á§Ú§ã§Ñ§ä§Ö§Ý§Ü§Ñ§ä§Ñ §Þ§Ö §Ó§á§Ö§é§Ñ§ä§Ý§Ú§ç§Ñ §Þ§ß§à§Ô§à §á§à§Ó§Ö§é§Ö.
§¦§â§Ü§ð§Ý §±§à§Ñ§â§à §á§ì§ä§å§Ó§Ñ §ã§ì§ã §ã§Ñ§Þ§à§Ý§Ö§ä §Þ§Ö§Ø§Õ§å §¶§â§Ñ§ß§è§Ú§ñ §Ú §¡§ß§Ô§Ý§Ú§ñ, §ß§Ñ §Ò§à§â§Õ§Ñ §ß§Ñ §Ü§à§Û§ä§à §Ö §å§Ò§Ú§ä§Ñ §Ø§Ö§ß§Ñ §á§â§Ú §Þ§Ú§ã§ä§Ö§â§Ú§à§Ù§ß§Ú §à§Ò§ã§ä§à§ñ§ä§Ö§Ý§ã§ä§Ó§Ñ. §³§Ñ§Þ§Ú§ñ§ä §Õ§Ö§ä§Ö§Ü§ä§Ú§Ó §ã§ì§ë§à §Þ§à§Ø§Ö §Õ§Ñ §Ò§ì§Õ§Ö §á§à§Õ§à§Ù§Ú§â§Ñ§ß, §ä§Ñ§Ü§Ñ §é§Ö §ä§â§ñ§Ò§Ó§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §ã§Ö §Ù§Ñ§ç§Ó§Ñ§ß§Ö §Õ§à§ã§ä§Ñ §ã§Ö§â§Ú§à§Ù§ß§à §ã §â§Ñ§Ù§ã§Ý§Ö§Õ§Ó§Ñ§ß§Ö§ä§à, §Ù§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §ß§Ö §Ò§ì§Õ§Ñ§ä §à§Ò§Ó§Ú§ß§ñ§Ó§Ñ§ß§Ú §ä§à§Û §Ú §Õ§â§å§Ô§Ú§ä§Ö §ß§Ö§Ó§Ú§ß§ß§Ú...
?§¬§à§Ô§Ñ§ä§à §ã§Ö §à§Ò§ì§â§ß§Ñ, §Ù§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §Þ§å §Þ§Ñ§ç§ß§Ö §Ù§Ñ §Õ§à§Ó§Ú§Ø§Õ§Ñ§ß§Ö, §à§é§Ú§ä§Ö §Ú§Þ §ã§Ö §ã§â§Ö§ë§ß§Ñ§ç§Ñ §Ú §Ó §ä§à§Ù§Ú §â§Ñ§Ù§Þ§Ö§ß§Ö§ß §á§à§Ô§Ý§Ö§Õ §Ò§ñ§ç§Ñ §Ó§ã§Ú§é§Ü§Ú§ä§Ö §é§å§Ó§ã§ä§Ó§Ñ, §Ü§à§Ú§ä§à §Ó§ß§Ú§Þ§Ñ§ä§Ö§Ý§ß§à §á§à§Õ§Ò§â§Ñ§ß§Ú§ä§Ö §Ú§Þ §Õ§å§Þ§Ú §ß§Ö §Ò§ñ§ç§Ñ §Ú§Ù§â§Ñ§Ù§Ú§Ý§Ú.¡°
?§±§à§Ñ§â§à §á§à§Ü§Ý§Ñ§ä§Ú §Ô§Ý§Ñ§Ó§Ñ.
¡ª §ª§Þ§Ñ §á§à §Ó§Ñ§Ø§ß§Ú §ß§Ö§ë§Ñ §à§ä §à§ä§Ü§â§Ú§Ó§Ñ§ß§Ö§ä§à §ß§Ñ §å§Ò§Ú§Ö§è§Ñ. ?§³§á§â§Ñ§Ó§Ö§Õ§Ý§Ú§Ó§à§ã§ä¡° §Ö §ç§å§Ò§Ñ§Ó§Ñ §Õ§å§Þ§Ñ, §ß§à §á§à§ß§ñ§Ü§à§Ô§Ñ §Ö §ä§â§å§Õ§ß§à §Õ§Ñ §Ü§Ñ§Ø§Ö§Þ §Ü§Ñ§Ü§Ó§à §ä§à§é§ß§à §à§Ù§ß§Ñ§é§Ñ§Ó§Ñ §ä§ñ. §³§á§à§â§Ö§Õ §Þ§Ö§ß §ß§Ñ§Û-§Ó§Ñ§Ø§ß§à§ä§à §Ö §Õ§Ñ §ã§Ö §ã§Ó§Ñ§Ý§ñ§ä §Ó§ã§ñ§Ü§Ñ§Ü§Ó§Ú §á§à§Õ§à§Ù§â§Ö§ß§Ú§ñ §à§ä §ß§Ö§Ó§Ú§ß§ß§Ú§ä§Ö.
¡ª §°, §Ö§ã§ä§Ö§ã§ä§Ó§Ö§ß§à ¡ª §Ü§Ñ§Ù§Ñ §¥§Ø§Ö§Û§ß. ¡ª §¯§Ö §ë§Ö §Ú §Õ§å§Þ§Ñ. §¡§Ü§à §ß§ñ§Ü§à§Û §Ö §ß§Ö§ã§á§â§Ñ§Ó§Ö§Õ§Ý§Ú§Ó§à §à§Ò§Ó§Ú§ß§Ö§ß¡
¡ª §¥§à§â§Ú §ß§Ö §Ú §ä§à§Ó§Ñ. §®§à§Ø§Ö §Õ§Ñ §ß§ñ§Þ§Ñ §ß§Ú§Ü§Ñ§Ü§Ó§Ú §à§Ò§Ó§Ú§ß§Ö§ß§Ú§ñ. §¯§à §Õ§à§Ü§Ñ§ä§à §ß§Ö §ã§Ö §Õ§à§Ü§Ñ§Ø§Ö §Ò§Ö§Ù §ß§Ú§Ü§Ñ§Ü§Ó§à §ã§ì§Þ§ß§Ö§ß§Ú§Ö, §é§Ö §ß§ñ§Ü§à§Û §Ö §Ó§Ú§ß§à§Ó§Ö§ß, §Ó§ã§Ú§é§Ü§Ú §ã§Ó§ì§â§Ù§Ñ§ß§Ú §á§à §Ö§Õ§Ú§ß §Ú§Ý§Ú §Õ§â§å§Ô §ß§Ñ§é§Ú§ß §ã §å§Ò§Ú§Û§ã§ä§Ó§à§ä§à §ë§Ö §ã§ä§â§Ñ§Õ§Ñ§ä §Ó §Ö§Õ§ß§Ñ §Ú§Ý§Ú §Õ§â§å§Ô§Ñ §ã§ä§Ö§á§Ö§ß.¡°
?§¥§Ø§Ö§Û§ß §ã§Ö §Ó§Ô§Ý§Ö§Õ§Ñ §Ó §ß§Ö§Ô§à §à§Ù§Ñ§Õ§Ñ§é§Ö§ß§Ñ.
§¬§Ñ§Ü§ì§Ó §ã§ä§â§Ñ§ß§Ö§ß §Õ§â§Ö§Ò§Ö§ß §é§à§Ó§Ö§Ü! §³§Ü§Ñ§é§Ñ §à§ä §ä§Ö§Þ§Ñ §ß§Ñ §ä§Ö§Þ§Ñ §Ü§Ñ§ä§à §á§ä§Ú§é§Ü§Ñ §à§ä §Ü§Ý§à§ß §ß§Ñ §Ü§Ý§à§ß!
§³§ñ§Ü§Ñ§ê §±§à§Ñ§â§à §á§â§à§é§Ö§ä§Ö §Þ§Ú§ã§Ý§Ú§ä§Ö §Û §Ú §ã§Ö §å§ã§Þ§Ú§ç§ß§Ñ:
¡ª §¯§Ö §à§Õ§à§Ò§â§ñ§Ó§Ñ§ä§Ö §Ý§Ú §Þ§Ö§ä§à§Õ§Ú§ä§Ö §Þ§Ú, §Þ§Ñ§Õ§Þ§à§Ñ§Ù§Ö§Ý?
¡ª §³§ä§â§å§Ó§Ñ§ä §Þ§Ú §ã§Ö §Õ§à§ã§ä§Ñ §ç§Ñ§à§ä§Ú§é§ß§Ú.
¡ª §¯§Ú §ß§Ñ§Û-§Þ§Ñ§Ý§Ü§à. §±§â§Ö§ã§Ý§Ö§Õ§Ó§Ñ§Þ §è§Ö§Ý§ä§Ñ §ã§Ú §ã§ì§Ó§ã§Ö§Þ §Ý§à§Ô§Ú§é§ß§à, §Ó§ì§à§â§ì§Ø§Ö§ß §ã§ì§ã §ã§Ú§ã§ä§Ö§Þ§Ñ §Ú §Þ§Ö§ä§à§Õ. §¯§Ö §Ò§Ú§Ó§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §ã§Ö §á§â§Ñ§Ó§ñ§ä §á§â§Ú§Ò§ì§â§Ù§Ñ§ß§Ú §Ù§Ñ§Ü§Ý§ð§é§Ö§ß§Ú§ñ. §´§â§ñ§Ò§Ó§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §ã§Ö §Ö§Ý§Ú§Þ§Ú§ß§Ú§â§Ñ§ä §Ó§ì§Ù§Þ§à§Ø§ß§à§ã§ä§Ú§ä§Ö...¡°
§¦§â§Ü§ð§Ý §±§à§Ñ§â§à §á§ì§ä§å§Ó§Ñ §ã§ì§ã §ã§Ñ§Þ§à§Ý§Ö§ä §Þ§Ö§Ø§Õ§å §¶§â§Ñ§ß§è§Ú§ñ §Ú §¡§ß§Ô§Ý§Ú§ñ, §ß§Ñ §Ò§à§â§Õ§Ñ §ß§Ñ §Ü§à§Û§ä§à §Ö §å§Ò§Ú§ä§Ñ §Ø§Ö§ß§Ñ §á§â§Ú §Þ§Ú§ã§ä§Ö§â§Ú§à§Ù§ß§Ú §à§Ò§ã§ä§à§ñ§ä§Ö§Ý§ã§ä§Ó§Ñ. §³§Ñ§Þ§Ú§ñ§ä §Õ§Ö§ä§Ö§Ü§ä§Ú§Ó §ã§ì§ë§à §Þ§à§Ø§Ö §Õ§Ñ §Ò§ì§Õ§Ö §á§à§Õ§à§Ù§Ú§â§Ñ§ß, §ä§Ñ§Ü§Ñ §é§Ö §ä§â§ñ§Ò§Ó§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §ã§Ö §Ù§Ñ§ç§Ó§Ñ§ß§Ö §Õ§à§ã§ä§Ñ §ã§Ö§â§Ú§à§Ù§ß§à §ã §â§Ñ§Ù§ã§Ý§Ö§Õ§Ó§Ñ§ß§Ö§ä§à, §Ù§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §ß§Ö §Ò§ì§Õ§Ñ§ä §à§Ò§Ó§Ú§ß§ñ§Ó§Ñ§ß§Ú §ä§à§Û §Ú §Õ§â§å§Ô§Ú§ä§Ö §ß§Ö§Ó§Ú§ß§ß§Ú...
?§¬§à§Ô§Ñ§ä§à §ã§Ö §à§Ò§ì§â§ß§Ñ, §Ù§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §Þ§å §Þ§Ñ§ç§ß§Ö §Ù§Ñ §Õ§à§Ó§Ú§Ø§Õ§Ñ§ß§Ö, §à§é§Ú§ä§Ö §Ú§Þ §ã§Ö §ã§â§Ö§ë§ß§Ñ§ç§Ñ §Ú §Ó §ä§à§Ù§Ú §â§Ñ§Ù§Þ§Ö§ß§Ö§ß §á§à§Ô§Ý§Ö§Õ §Ò§ñ§ç§Ñ §Ó§ã§Ú§é§Ü§Ú§ä§Ö §é§å§Ó§ã§ä§Ó§Ñ, §Ü§à§Ú§ä§à §Ó§ß§Ú§Þ§Ñ§ä§Ö§Ý§ß§à §á§à§Õ§Ò§â§Ñ§ß§Ú§ä§Ö §Ú§Þ §Õ§å§Þ§Ú §ß§Ö §Ò§ñ§ç§Ñ §Ú§Ù§â§Ñ§Ù§Ú§Ý§Ú.¡°
?§±§à§Ñ§â§à §á§à§Ü§Ý§Ñ§ä§Ú §Ô§Ý§Ñ§Ó§Ñ.
¡ª §ª§Þ§Ñ §á§à §Ó§Ñ§Ø§ß§Ú §ß§Ö§ë§Ñ §à§ä §à§ä§Ü§â§Ú§Ó§Ñ§ß§Ö§ä§à §ß§Ñ §å§Ò§Ú§Ö§è§Ñ. ?§³§á§â§Ñ§Ó§Ö§Õ§Ý§Ú§Ó§à§ã§ä¡° §Ö §ç§å§Ò§Ñ§Ó§Ñ §Õ§å§Þ§Ñ, §ß§à §á§à§ß§ñ§Ü§à§Ô§Ñ §Ö §ä§â§å§Õ§ß§à §Õ§Ñ §Ü§Ñ§Ø§Ö§Þ §Ü§Ñ§Ü§Ó§à §ä§à§é§ß§à §à§Ù§ß§Ñ§é§Ñ§Ó§Ñ §ä§ñ. §³§á§à§â§Ö§Õ §Þ§Ö§ß §ß§Ñ§Û-§Ó§Ñ§Ø§ß§à§ä§à §Ö §Õ§Ñ §ã§Ö §ã§Ó§Ñ§Ý§ñ§ä §Ó§ã§ñ§Ü§Ñ§Ü§Ó§Ú §á§à§Õ§à§Ù§â§Ö§ß§Ú§ñ §à§ä §ß§Ö§Ó§Ú§ß§ß§Ú§ä§Ö.
¡ª §°, §Ö§ã§ä§Ö§ã§ä§Ó§Ö§ß§à ¡ª §Ü§Ñ§Ù§Ñ §¥§Ø§Ö§Û§ß. ¡ª §¯§Ö §ë§Ö §Ú §Õ§å§Þ§Ñ. §¡§Ü§à §ß§ñ§Ü§à§Û §Ö §ß§Ö§ã§á§â§Ñ§Ó§Ö§Õ§Ý§Ú§Ó§à §à§Ò§Ó§Ú§ß§Ö§ß¡
¡ª §¥§à§â§Ú §ß§Ö §Ú §ä§à§Ó§Ñ. §®§à§Ø§Ö §Õ§Ñ §ß§ñ§Þ§Ñ §ß§Ú§Ü§Ñ§Ü§Ó§Ú §à§Ò§Ó§Ú§ß§Ö§ß§Ú§ñ. §¯§à §Õ§à§Ü§Ñ§ä§à §ß§Ö §ã§Ö §Õ§à§Ü§Ñ§Ø§Ö §Ò§Ö§Ù §ß§Ú§Ü§Ñ§Ü§Ó§à §ã§ì§Þ§ß§Ö§ß§Ú§Ö, §é§Ö §ß§ñ§Ü§à§Û §Ö §Ó§Ú§ß§à§Ó§Ö§ß, §Ó§ã§Ú§é§Ü§Ú §ã§Ó§ì§â§Ù§Ñ§ß§Ú §á§à §Ö§Õ§Ú§ß §Ú§Ý§Ú §Õ§â§å§Ô §ß§Ñ§é§Ú§ß §ã §å§Ò§Ú§Û§ã§ä§Ó§à§ä§à §ë§Ö §ã§ä§â§Ñ§Õ§Ñ§ä §Ó §Ö§Õ§ß§Ñ §Ú§Ý§Ú §Õ§â§å§Ô§Ñ §ã§ä§Ö§á§Ö§ß.¡°
?§¥§Ø§Ö§Û§ß §ã§Ö §Ó§Ô§Ý§Ö§Õ§Ñ §Ó §ß§Ö§Ô§à §à§Ù§Ñ§Õ§Ñ§é§Ö§ß§Ñ.
§¬§Ñ§Ü§ì§Ó §ã§ä§â§Ñ§ß§Ö§ß §Õ§â§Ö§Ò§Ö§ß §é§à§Ó§Ö§Ü! §³§Ü§Ñ§é§Ñ §à§ä §ä§Ö§Þ§Ñ §ß§Ñ §ä§Ö§Þ§Ñ §Ü§Ñ§ä§à §á§ä§Ú§é§Ü§Ñ §à§ä §Ü§Ý§à§ß §ß§Ñ §Ü§Ý§à§ß!
§³§ñ§Ü§Ñ§ê §±§à§Ñ§â§à §á§â§à§é§Ö§ä§Ö §Þ§Ú§ã§Ý§Ú§ä§Ö §Û §Ú §ã§Ö §å§ã§Þ§Ú§ç§ß§Ñ:
¡ª §¯§Ö §à§Õ§à§Ò§â§ñ§Ó§Ñ§ä§Ö §Ý§Ú §Þ§Ö§ä§à§Õ§Ú§ä§Ö §Þ§Ú, §Þ§Ñ§Õ§Þ§à§Ñ§Ù§Ö§Ý?
¡ª §³§ä§â§å§Ó§Ñ§ä §Þ§Ú §ã§Ö §Õ§à§ã§ä§Ñ §ç§Ñ§à§ä§Ú§é§ß§Ú.
¡ª §¯§Ú §ß§Ñ§Û-§Þ§Ñ§Ý§Ü§à. §±§â§Ö§ã§Ý§Ö§Õ§Ó§Ñ§Þ §è§Ö§Ý§ä§Ñ §ã§Ú §ã§ì§Ó§ã§Ö§Þ §Ý§à§Ô§Ú§é§ß§à, §Ó§ì§à§â§ì§Ø§Ö§ß §ã§ì§ã §ã§Ú§ã§ä§Ö§Þ§Ñ §Ú §Þ§Ö§ä§à§Õ. §¯§Ö §Ò§Ú§Ó§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §ã§Ö §á§â§Ñ§Ó§ñ§ä §á§â§Ú§Ò§ì§â§Ù§Ñ§ß§Ú §Ù§Ñ§Ü§Ý§ð§é§Ö§ß§Ú§ñ. §´§â§ñ§Ò§Ó§Ñ §Õ§Ñ §ã§Ö §Ö§Ý§Ú§Þ§Ú§ß§Ú§â§Ñ§ä §Ó§ì§Ù§Þ§à§Ø§ß§à§ã§ä§Ú§ä§Ö...¡°
December 29, 2018
This is one of Agatha Christie's most enjoyable mysteries, with Poirot not only solving the murder but also enjoying success with his match making powers. It is during a flight from Paris to Croydon that a murder takes place - when moneylender and blackmailer Madame Giselle is found slumped in her seat, apparently killed by a poisoned blow dart. The whole thing seems incredible and Poirot sets out to discover who the culprit is, while protecting the innocent. There are some wonderful suspects here - a crime writer, a cocaine addict and her favourite archeologists among them. A side story has dentist Norman Gale teaming up with pretty hair assistant Jane Grey, who has used her winnings from a sweetstake to indulge a long wanted trip abroad and, in doing so, changes her life forever.
Christie never seems dated and Poirot is my favourite fictional detective of all time. Wonderful storyline, characters and a deft hand make this an assured and well plotted mystery that is a joy to read.
Christie never seems dated and Poirot is my favourite fictional detective of all time. Wonderful storyline, characters and a deft hand make this an assured and well plotted mystery that is a joy to read.
July 26, 2020
¦«¦Á¦Ó¦Ñ¦Å¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï? ¦§¦Ñ¦Á¦Ê¦Ë?? ¦°¦Ï¦Ô¦Á¦Ñ?!!!
¦¡¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ð?¦Ñ¦Á ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë? ¦Ê¦Á¦Ë? ¦Ó¦Ç?. ?¦Î¦Ô¦Ð¦Í¦Ç ¦Ð¦Ë¦Ï¦Ê?! ¦¤¦Å¦Í ¦Ð¦Ë¦Á¦Ó¦Å¦É?¦Æ¦Å¦É ¦Ê¦Á¦É ?¦Ó¦Ò¦É ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Â¦Á¦Ñ¦É?¦Ò¦Á¦É ¦Ï?¦Ó¦Å ¦Ò¦Ó¦É¦Ã¦Ì?, ¦Å¦Í¦Ø ¦Ð¦Á¦Ñ?¦Ë¦Ë¦Ç¦Ë¦Á ¦Ì?¦Ò¦Á ¦Ò¦Ó¦É? 200 ¦Ð¦Ô¦Ê¦Í¦Ï¦Ã¦Ñ¦Á¦Ì¦Ì?¦Í¦Å? ¦Ò¦Å¦Ë?¦Ä¦Å? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ë¦Á¦Â¦Á?¦Í¦Å¦É? ¦Í¦Á ¦Ã¦Í¦Ø¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Å¦É? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ö¦Á¦Ñ¦Á¦Ê¦Ó?¦Ñ¦Å? ¦Ì?¦Ò¦Á ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ð¦Ë?¦Ñ¦Ç ¦Ò¦Ê¦É¦Á¦Ã¦Ñ?¦Õ¦Ç¦Ò? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô?, ¦Í¦Á ¦Å¦É¦Ê?¦Ò¦Å¦É? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ä¦Ï¦Ë¦Ï¦Õ?¦Í¦Ï (¦Ð¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Ò¦Ò?¦Ó¦Å¦Ñ¦Å? ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Í¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ó¦Ô¦Ö?? ¦Ï¦Ì¦Ï¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã?) ¦Ê¦Á¦É ?¦Ë¦Ï ?¦Ñ¦Ö¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Í¦Á ¦Ê¦Ï¦Ô¦Ì¦Ð?¦Ò¦Å¦É ¦Ô¦Ð?¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ö¦Á ¦Ì¦Å ?¦Í¦Á ¦Á¦Ð¦Ñ?¦Â¦Ë¦Å¦Ð¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ó?¦Ë¦Ï?... ¦£¦É¦Á¦Ó? ¦Å¦Ä? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦È?¦Ì¦Á ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ï? ¦Á¦Ë¦Ë? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ð??.
¦²¦Å ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Ð¦Ó?¦Ò¦Ç ¦Á¦Ð? ¦°¦Á¦Ñ?¦Ò¦É ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï? ¦«¦Ï¦Í¦Ä?¦Í¦Ï, ?¦Í¦Ó¦Å¦Ê¦Á ¦Ò¦Ô¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦Î¦É¦Ä¦É?¦Ó¦Å? (¦Á¦Í?¦Ì¦Å¦Ò? ¦Ó¦Ï??? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ï ¦°¦Ï¦Ô¦Á¦Ñ?) ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ä?¦Ï ¦Á¦Å¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ô¦Í¦Ï¦Ä¦Ï?, ¦Â¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ê¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ì¦Ð¦Ë¦Å¦Ã¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï¦É ¦Ò¦Å ?¦Í¦Á ?¦Ã¦Ê¦Ë¦Ç¦Ì¦Á. ¦°¦Ï¦É¦Ï? ?¦Ö¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ê?¦Í¦Ç¦Ó¦Ñ¦Ï ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ç ¦Ä¦Ô¦Í¦Á¦Ó?¦Ó¦Ç¦Ó¦Á ¦Í¦Á ¦Ò¦Ê¦Ï¦Ó?¦Ò¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Ç ¦¬¦Á¦Í¦Ó?¦Ì ¦¦¦É¦Æ?¦Ë; ¦¥?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ø¦Ð¦É¦Ê? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï?¦Ö¦Ç¦Ì¦Á ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦§¦Ñ¦Á¦Ê¦Ë? ¦°¦Ï¦Ô¦Á¦Ñ?, ¦Á¦Õ¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ï ?¦Ð¦Ë¦Ï ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Å¦Ã¦Ê¦Ë?¦Ì¦Á¦Ó¦Ï? ¦Â¦Ñ?¦È¦Ç¦Ê¦Å ¦Ê?¦Ó¦Ø ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ä¦É¦Ê? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ê?¦È¦É¦Ò¦Ì¦Á.
¦§ ¦¡¦Ã¦Ê?¦È¦Á ¦Ä?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï¦É¦Ö¦Å?¦Á ¦Ì¦Å ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ò¦Ó¦Á¦Ã¦Ï¦Í?¦Ì¦Å¦Ó¦Ñ¦Ï, ¦Á¦Ñ¦Ê¦Ï?¦Í ?¦Ì¦Ø? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦Ð¦Á¦Í?¦Î¦Ô¦Ð¦Í¦Ï ¦Í¦Ó¦Å¦Ó?¦Ê¦Ó¦É¦Â ¦Ì¦Á? ?¦Ò¦Ó¦Å ¦Í¦Á ¦Î¦Å¦Ê¦É¦Í?¦Ò¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦É? ¦Å¦É¦Ê¦Á¦Ò?¦Å? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô. ¦°¦Á¦Ñ'?¦Ë¦Á ¦Á¦Ô¦Ó? ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ä?¦Ä¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ò¦Ô¦Ë¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã¦É¦Ò¦Ì¦Ï?? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô. ¦²¦Å ¦Á¦Õ?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Í¦Á ¦Ê?¦Í¦Å¦É? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ä¦É¦Ê¦Ï?? ¦Ò¦Ï¦Ô.
?¦Ð¦Ø? ¦Ê?¦È¦Å ¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ? ?¦Ó¦Ò¦É ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó?¦Ñ¦Á, ¦Ï ¦Õ?¦Í¦Ï? ¦Á¦Ð¦Ï¦Ó¦Å¦Ë¦Å? ¦Á¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ¦Ì? ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Å¦Í¦Ä¦Å¦Ë¦Å¦Ö? ¦×¦Ô¦Ö¦Ï¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã¦É¦Ê? ¦Á¦Í?¦Ë¦Ô¦Ò¦Ç ¦Ó¦Ø¦Í ¦Å¦Ì¦Ð¦Ë¦Å¦Ê?¦Ì¦Å¦Í¦Ø¦Í ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò?¦Ð¦Ø¦Í. ?¦Ë¦Ï¦É ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Å¦Í¦Ä¦Å¦Ö?¦Ì¦Å¦Í¦Ï¦É ¦Ä¦Ï¦Ë¦Ï¦Õ?¦Í¦Ï¦É, ¦Ê¦Á¦Í¦Å?? ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Á¦Ð¦Á¦Ë¦Ë?¦Ò¦Ò¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦É? ¦Ô¦Ð¦Ï¦×?¦Å? ?¦Ò¦Ï ¦Á¦È?¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Í ¦Õ¦Á?¦Í¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ê?¦Í¦Ç¦Ó¦Ñ? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô.
¦²¦Å ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Å¦Ð¦Ï¦Ö? ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ï ¦Ð¦Á¦Ñ¦Á¦Ì¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Ò¦Ì?? ¦Ê?¦È¦Å ¦Ê¦Ï¦Ì¦×?¦Ó¦Ç¦Ó¦Á? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ï¦É ¦Ò¦Ê¦Ë¦Ç¦Ñ??, ¦Á¦É¦Ì¦Ï¦Â?¦Ñ¦Å? ¦Å¦É¦Ê?¦Í¦Å? ¦Ê?¦Í¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦È¦Ñ¦Á?¦Ò¦Ç, ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Â?¦Ë¦Ò¦Á¦Ì¦Ï ¦Í¦Á ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ó¦Ñ?¦Õ¦Å¦É? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Á ¦Á¦Í¦Á?¦Ì¦Á¦Ê¦Ó¦Á ¦Ä¦Ç¦Ë¦Ç¦Ó?¦Ñ¦É¦Á ¦Ó¦Ç? ¦È¦Å?¦Á? ¦¡¦Ã¦Ê?¦È¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Í¦Ó¦Å¦Ë¦É¦Ê?¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ò¦Ô¦Ë¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã¦É¦Ò¦Ì¦Ï?? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦°¦Ï¦Ô¦Á¦Ñ?!
¦¦Á ¦Ò¦Ô¦Ì¦Ð¦Ë¦Ç¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ø ¦Ð¦Ø? ¦Ë¦Á¦Ó¦Ñ?¦Ô¦Ø ¦Í¦Á ¦Ä¦É¦Á¦Â?¦Æ¦Ø ¦¡¦Ã¦Ê?¦È¦Á ¦ª¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ó¦É ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦É? ¦Ð¦Á¦Ì¦Ð?¦Ë¦Á¦É¦Å? ¦Å¦Ê¦Ä?¦Ò¦Å¦É? ¦«¦Ô¦Ö¦Í?¦Ñ¦É... ?¦Ó¦Ò¦É ¦Ò¦Ê¦Ï¦Í¦É¦Ò¦Ì?¦Í¦Å? ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç ¦Ä¦Ç¦Ì¦Ï¦Ó¦É¦Ê? ¦Â¦É¦Â¦Ë¦É¦Ï¦È?¦Ê¦Ç... ¦¡¦¶..
¦¬¦Å ¦Ó¦Á¦Î¦É¦Ä¦Å?¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Å¦Ð¦Ï¦Ö? ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ã¦Ñ?¦Õ¦Ó¦Ç¦Ê¦Á¦Í ¦Ó¦Á ¦Â¦É¦Â¦Ë?¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ì¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ó¦Á¦É¦Ñ¦É?¦Æ¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ì¦Å ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ð¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Å¦Ö?¦Ì¦Å¦Í¦Ï ¦Ó¦Ø¦Í ¦É¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï¦Ñ¦É?¦Í...
¦¡¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ð?¦Ñ¦Á ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë? ¦Ê¦Á¦Ë? ¦Ó¦Ç?. ?¦Î¦Ô¦Ð¦Í¦Ç ¦Ð¦Ë¦Ï¦Ê?! ¦¤¦Å¦Í ¦Ð¦Ë¦Á¦Ó¦Å¦É?¦Æ¦Å¦É ¦Ê¦Á¦É ?¦Ó¦Ò¦É ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Â¦Á¦Ñ¦É?¦Ò¦Á¦É ¦Ï?¦Ó¦Å ¦Ò¦Ó¦É¦Ã¦Ì?, ¦Å¦Í¦Ø ¦Ð¦Á¦Ñ?¦Ë¦Ë¦Ç¦Ë¦Á ¦Ì?¦Ò¦Á ¦Ò¦Ó¦É? 200 ¦Ð¦Ô¦Ê¦Í¦Ï¦Ã¦Ñ¦Á¦Ì¦Ì?¦Í¦Å? ¦Ò¦Å¦Ë?¦Ä¦Å? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ë¦Á¦Â¦Á?¦Í¦Å¦É? ¦Í¦Á ¦Ã¦Í¦Ø¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Å¦É? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ö¦Á¦Ñ¦Á¦Ê¦Ó?¦Ñ¦Å? ¦Ì?¦Ò¦Á ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ð¦Ë?¦Ñ¦Ç ¦Ò¦Ê¦É¦Á¦Ã¦Ñ?¦Õ¦Ç¦Ò? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô?, ¦Í¦Á ¦Å¦É¦Ê?¦Ò¦Å¦É? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ä¦Ï¦Ë¦Ï¦Õ?¦Í¦Ï (¦Ð¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Ò¦Ò?¦Ó¦Å¦Ñ¦Å? ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Í¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ó¦Ô¦Ö?? ¦Ï¦Ì¦Ï¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã?) ¦Ê¦Á¦É ?¦Ë¦Ï ?¦Ñ¦Ö¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Í¦Á ¦Ê¦Ï¦Ô¦Ì¦Ð?¦Ò¦Å¦É ¦Ô¦Ð?¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ö¦Á ¦Ì¦Å ?¦Í¦Á ¦Á¦Ð¦Ñ?¦Â¦Ë¦Å¦Ð¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ó?¦Ë¦Ï?... ¦£¦É¦Á¦Ó? ¦Å¦Ä? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦È?¦Ì¦Á ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ï? ¦Á¦Ë¦Ë? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ð??.
¦²¦Å ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Ð¦Ó?¦Ò¦Ç ¦Á¦Ð? ¦°¦Á¦Ñ?¦Ò¦É ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï? ¦«¦Ï¦Í¦Ä?¦Í¦Ï, ?¦Í¦Ó¦Å¦Ê¦Á ¦Ò¦Ô¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦Î¦É¦Ä¦É?¦Ó¦Å? (¦Á¦Í?¦Ì¦Å¦Ò? ¦Ó¦Ï??? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ï ¦°¦Ï¦Ô¦Á¦Ñ?) ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ä?¦Ï ¦Á¦Å¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ô¦Í¦Ï¦Ä¦Ï?, ¦Â¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ê¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ì¦Ð¦Ë¦Å¦Ã¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï¦É ¦Ò¦Å ?¦Í¦Á ?¦Ã¦Ê¦Ë¦Ç¦Ì¦Á. ¦°¦Ï¦É¦Ï? ?¦Ö¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ê?¦Í¦Ç¦Ó¦Ñ¦Ï ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ç ¦Ä¦Ô¦Í¦Á¦Ó?¦Ó¦Ç¦Ó¦Á ¦Í¦Á ¦Ò¦Ê¦Ï¦Ó?¦Ò¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Ç ¦¬¦Á¦Í¦Ó?¦Ì ¦¦¦É¦Æ?¦Ë; ¦¥?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ø¦Ð¦É¦Ê? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï?¦Ö¦Ç¦Ì¦Á ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦§¦Ñ¦Á¦Ê¦Ë? ¦°¦Ï¦Ô¦Á¦Ñ?, ¦Á¦Õ¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ï ?¦Ð¦Ë¦Ï ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Å¦Ã¦Ê¦Ë?¦Ì¦Á¦Ó¦Ï? ¦Â¦Ñ?¦È¦Ç¦Ê¦Å ¦Ê?¦Ó¦Ø ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ä¦É¦Ê? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ê?¦È¦É¦Ò¦Ì¦Á.
¦§ ¦¡¦Ã¦Ê?¦È¦Á ¦Ä?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï¦É¦Ö¦Å?¦Á ¦Ì¦Å ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ò¦Ó¦Á¦Ã¦Ï¦Í?¦Ì¦Å¦Ó¦Ñ¦Ï, ¦Á¦Ñ¦Ê¦Ï?¦Í ?¦Ì¦Ø? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦Ð¦Á¦Í?¦Î¦Ô¦Ð¦Í¦Ï ¦Í¦Ó¦Å¦Ó?¦Ê¦Ó¦É¦Â ¦Ì¦Á? ?¦Ò¦Ó¦Å ¦Í¦Á ¦Î¦Å¦Ê¦É¦Í?¦Ò¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦É? ¦Å¦É¦Ê¦Á¦Ò?¦Å? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô. ¦°¦Á¦Ñ'?¦Ë¦Á ¦Á¦Ô¦Ó? ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ä?¦Ä¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ò¦Ô¦Ë¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã¦É¦Ò¦Ì¦Ï?? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô. ¦²¦Å ¦Á¦Õ?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Í¦Á ¦Ê?¦Í¦Å¦É? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ä¦É¦Ê¦Ï?? ¦Ò¦Ï¦Ô.
?¦Ð¦Ø? ¦Ê?¦È¦Å ¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ? ?¦Ó¦Ò¦É ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó?¦Ñ¦Á, ¦Ï ¦Õ?¦Í¦Ï? ¦Á¦Ð¦Ï¦Ó¦Å¦Ë¦Å? ¦Á¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ¦Ì? ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Å¦Í¦Ä¦Å¦Ë¦Å¦Ö? ¦×¦Ô¦Ö¦Ï¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã¦É¦Ê? ¦Á¦Í?¦Ë¦Ô¦Ò¦Ç ¦Ó¦Ø¦Í ¦Å¦Ì¦Ð¦Ë¦Å¦Ê?¦Ì¦Å¦Í¦Ø¦Í ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò?¦Ð¦Ø¦Í. ?¦Ë¦Ï¦É ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Å¦Í¦Ä¦Å¦Ö?¦Ì¦Å¦Í¦Ï¦É ¦Ä¦Ï¦Ë¦Ï¦Õ?¦Í¦Ï¦É, ¦Ê¦Á¦Í¦Å?? ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Á¦Ð¦Á¦Ë¦Ë?¦Ò¦Ò¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦É? ¦Ô¦Ð¦Ï¦×?¦Å? ?¦Ò¦Ï ¦Á¦È?¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Í ¦Õ¦Á?¦Í¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ê?¦Í¦Ç¦Ó¦Ñ? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô.
¦²¦Å ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Å¦Ð¦Ï¦Ö? ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ï ¦Ð¦Á¦Ñ¦Á¦Ì¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Ò¦Ì?? ¦Ê?¦È¦Å ¦Ê¦Ï¦Ì¦×?¦Ó¦Ç¦Ó¦Á? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ï¦É ¦Ò¦Ê¦Ë¦Ç¦Ñ??, ¦Á¦É¦Ì¦Ï¦Â?¦Ñ¦Å? ¦Å¦É¦Ê?¦Í¦Å? ¦Ê?¦Í¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦È¦Ñ¦Á?¦Ò¦Ç, ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Â?¦Ë¦Ò¦Á¦Ì¦Ï ¦Í¦Á ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ó¦Ñ?¦Õ¦Å¦É? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Á ¦Á¦Í¦Á?¦Ì¦Á¦Ê¦Ó¦Á ¦Ä¦Ç¦Ë¦Ç¦Ó?¦Ñ¦É¦Á ¦Ó¦Ç? ¦È¦Å?¦Á? ¦¡¦Ã¦Ê?¦È¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Í¦Ó¦Å¦Ë¦É¦Ê?¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ò¦Ô¦Ë¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã¦É¦Ò¦Ì¦Ï?? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦°¦Ï¦Ô¦Á¦Ñ?!
¦¦Á ¦Ò¦Ô¦Ì¦Ð¦Ë¦Ç¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ø ¦Ð¦Ø? ¦Ë¦Á¦Ó¦Ñ?¦Ô¦Ø ¦Í¦Á ¦Ä¦É¦Á¦Â?¦Æ¦Ø ¦¡¦Ã¦Ê?¦È¦Á ¦ª¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ó¦É ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦É? ¦Ð¦Á¦Ì¦Ð?¦Ë¦Á¦É¦Å? ¦Å¦Ê¦Ä?¦Ò¦Å¦É? ¦«¦Ô¦Ö¦Í?¦Ñ¦É... ?¦Ó¦Ò¦É ¦Ò¦Ê¦Ï¦Í¦É¦Ò¦Ì?¦Í¦Å? ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç ¦Ä¦Ç¦Ì¦Ï¦Ó¦É¦Ê? ¦Â¦É¦Â¦Ë¦É¦Ï¦È?¦Ê¦Ç... ¦¡¦¶..
¦¬¦Å ¦Ó¦Á¦Î¦É¦Ä¦Å?¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Å¦Ð¦Ï¦Ö? ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ã¦Ñ?¦Õ¦Ó¦Ç¦Ê¦Á¦Í ¦Ó¦Á ¦Â¦É¦Â¦Ë?¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ì¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ó¦Á¦É¦Ñ¦É?¦Æ¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ì¦Å ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ð¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Å¦Ö?¦Ì¦Å¦Í¦Ï ¦Ó¦Ø¦Í ¦É¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï¦Ñ¦É?¦Í...
December 11, 2024
3.5
Re-read. Finished in one sitting. Not the best Agatha Christie but fairly enjoyable and a quick read.
Re-read. Finished in one sitting. Not the best Agatha Christie but fairly enjoyable and a quick read.
September 29, 2020
Death in the clouds is another too fantastic murder-mystery story by Agatha Christie. It is certainly imaginative, but a little far fetched in my view. But this was the conclusion that I reached in the end, so it didn't affect my overall enjoyment.
Poirot becomes both a witness and a suspect of a murder committed in an airplane flying from Paris to Croydon. It is interesting how many times the innocence presence of our little detective is entangled in with a crime scene. And what is worse? Our famous detective was almost convicted at the inquest because the jury thought he looked suspicious. God, I had a good laugh! :) The indignant Poirot assists the investigation with a zeal "to clear his name". :)
The story flows in Poirot's order and method as he interrogates those on board the plane with a view of eliminating and narrowing down the suspects. The investigation takes place both in London and Paris, and Poirot assists both Inspector Japp of Scotland Yard and Monsieur Fournier of the French Police. The criminal seems to be extremely clever and is baffling both Scotland Yard and the French Police, but he cannot beat Poirot.
It was interesting to see Poirot working in a team rather than alone. And Inspector Japp plays quite an active role here. And Poirot amid the investigation does a bit of matchmaking. :) Our dear Poirot cannot resist the temptation to secure the "happiness of young people". There was also subtle humour throughout which elicited a few laughs despite the serious nature of the story.
Overall, I liked the story. Couldn't buy it as plausible, yet I enjoyed it on the whole.
Poirot becomes both a witness and a suspect of a murder committed in an airplane flying from Paris to Croydon. It is interesting how many times the innocence presence of our little detective is entangled in with a crime scene. And what is worse? Our famous detective was almost convicted at the inquest because the jury thought he looked suspicious. God, I had a good laugh! :) The indignant Poirot assists the investigation with a zeal "to clear his name". :)
The story flows in Poirot's order and method as he interrogates those on board the plane with a view of eliminating and narrowing down the suspects. The investigation takes place both in London and Paris, and Poirot assists both Inspector Japp of Scotland Yard and Monsieur Fournier of the French Police. The criminal seems to be extremely clever and is baffling both Scotland Yard and the French Police, but he cannot beat Poirot.
It was interesting to see Poirot working in a team rather than alone. And Inspector Japp plays quite an active role here. And Poirot amid the investigation does a bit of matchmaking. :) Our dear Poirot cannot resist the temptation to secure the "happiness of young people". There was also subtle humour throughout which elicited a few laughs despite the serious nature of the story.
Overall, I liked the story. Couldn't buy it as plausible, yet I enjoyed it on the whole.
April 16, 2024
Entertaining mystery listening ??
This kindle e-book novel is from my Kindle Unlimited account book 11
Hercules is on a plane when a woman ? is murdered. Hercule is part of the investigation which leads to the arrest of the killer.
I would recommend this series and author to ? readers of British ? mystery novels and fans of Agatha Christie. 2024
This kindle e-book novel is from my Kindle Unlimited account book 11
Hercules is on a plane when a woman ? is murdered. Hercule is part of the investigation which leads to the arrest of the killer.
I would recommend this series and author to ? readers of British ? mystery novels and fans of Agatha Christie. 2024
February 12, 2019
loved it. How he never let the killer suspect the game was known till the end.
August 30, 2023
Maybe 3.5. Hugely enjoyable as Christie always is, but not the most satisfying of her books.
June 14, 2020
Real Rating: 3.5* of five
Not too bad. Not her best, not as bad as many later efforts. But this is one of the most bizarrely satisfying comeuppance crimes I've read from Dame Agatha's pen. I will have more to say but after a nice long sleep. Dratted Overdrive! It went down and, when it came back up, had lost my place in the book. *grumble* So I just finished it!
Before I was so rudely interrupted...the French police had just found Anne Morisot's body on the Boulogne boat train...so what's next, M. Poirot? The heiress to a fortune, however ill-got (loan sharking is ill-got gains in my book), is dead! Now who benefits? In other words, find the husband she married so hastily a month ago.
It is this trend, this way of progressing...we need to find this, this will break the case! ONOZ more questions instead...that makes reading Dame Agatha's books fun. The smudge on the horizon with birds circling it is land for the shipwrecked to stand on! No, it's ...no, it's a mirage. She's a wicked old auntie, our Dame is, and she reveled in this misdirection while she could still construct it. (Late-career dementia means the end of most of this kind of fun.)
Here, in this 1935 book, the players and the played are all in intricate interlocking orbits, with plenty of greed and rage and regret fueling the proceedings. One of the dramatis personae is a killer (a particularly cold and calculating one, it turns out), but is that crime any more heinous than the willful and malicious ruin of the life, the very identity central to a person's presentation of self? Murder without death...blackmail is vile, the secrets that it battens on are almost always so much less so than the blackmail is. Lady Horbury, a nasty superficial baggage, has stolen bluff, hearty Lord Horbury's future; the loan shark blackmailing her into paying has compounded the crime, since her ruin will of necessity be his ruin as well.
But then the uglier and uglier cruelties the murdered loan shark has committed come suppurating up, involving children and caregivers and a whole world of ruin. Her murder was diabolically clever and would never work in real life. One is still delighted by her death. The manner of it, on a flight between Paris and London, well! Extra piquant. Especially delicious is Poirot attempting to recreate a murder by (hilariously undersized) blowpipe on the plane...the so-self-important little grey cellarer acting the fool in this public place, so perfect (and proves this was an impossible means). And, in my never-remotely humble opinion, early warning signs of just how extremely sick Dame Ags was getting of her arrogant, high-handed Belgian detective.
I'm there, too. This is it for me, at least for a while. I can't deal with Poirot's smugly superior attitude again. Some time away from each other is required, and since he exists in books, he won't care and I will probably return, refreshed and emboldened, to an unchanged Poirot.
Agatha Christie's Poirot: Death in the Clouds
Rating: 3.5* of five
Absolutely hilarious! Many anachronisms...the plane that features in the show, a 1940s DC-3, is understandable because there are no extant planes of the type in the book; less so is the caf¨¦ in 1935 London using Wedgwood bone china of the Colonnade Black pattern introduced the same year I was...but what the hell, it looked really pretty.
Inspector Japp, that fl?neur and bon vivant, is in Paris assisting Poirot and lording it over the Parisian gendarmerie? C'mon! Japp doesn't know how important , what a bidet is (see the filmed version of Hickory Dickory Dock), still less how the Byzantine French justice system works, and the French inspector is calmly going to let him run roughshod over his dignity? No. But it does make for a better episode of the show. No need to build a character for a single use, Japp will be showing up again anyway.
And that blowpipe scene? Suchet should've won awards for it. Side-splitting. I watched this episode with my Young Gentleman Caller and he made me pause the scene twice so he could get the laughs out.
There are some of the usual rebrandings of characters...Jane Grey, now a stewardess, finally makes sense in the story...though has some pretty tremendous superpowers as she gets Poirot a seat (Lord Horbury's abandoned one, which is never explained) at Fred Perry's final match! Where he scrapes acquaintance with both Dr. Gale and Lady Horbury, present though previously built up to be uninterested in tennis while the snit-throwing Lord Horbury dotes on it. It's not as though any of this is new.
But again, my fatigue overtakes me and I retire from the watching of the Poirot films. I am sated. Perhaps my appetite she will return to me after a fast? We shall see.
Not too bad. Not her best, not as bad as many later efforts. But this is one of the most bizarrely satisfying comeuppance crimes I've read from Dame Agatha's pen. I will have more to say but after a nice long sleep. Dratted Overdrive! It went down and, when it came back up, had lost my place in the book. *grumble* So I just finished it!
Before I was so rudely interrupted...the French police had just found Anne Morisot's body on the Boulogne boat train...so what's next, M. Poirot? The heiress to a fortune, however ill-got (loan sharking is ill-got gains in my book), is dead! Now who benefits? In other words, find the husband she married so hastily a month ago.
It is this trend, this way of progressing...we need to find this, this will break the case! ONOZ more questions instead...that makes reading Dame Agatha's books fun. The smudge on the horizon with birds circling it is land for the shipwrecked to stand on! No, it's ...no, it's a mirage. She's a wicked old auntie, our Dame is, and she reveled in this misdirection while she could still construct it. (Late-career dementia means the end of most of this kind of fun.)
Here, in this 1935 book, the players and the played are all in intricate interlocking orbits, with plenty of greed and rage and regret fueling the proceedings. One of the dramatis personae is a killer (a particularly cold and calculating one, it turns out), but is that crime any more heinous than the willful and malicious ruin of the life, the very identity central to a person's presentation of self? Murder without death...blackmail is vile, the secrets that it battens on are almost always so much less so than the blackmail is. Lady Horbury, a nasty superficial baggage, has stolen bluff, hearty Lord Horbury's future; the loan shark blackmailing her into paying has compounded the crime, since her ruin will of necessity be his ruin as well.
But then the uglier and uglier cruelties the murdered loan shark has committed come suppurating up, involving children and caregivers and a whole world of ruin. Her murder was diabolically clever and would never work in real life. One is still delighted by her death. The manner of it, on a flight between Paris and London, well! Extra piquant. Especially delicious is Poirot attempting to recreate a murder by (hilariously undersized) blowpipe on the plane...the so-self-important little grey cellarer acting the fool in this public place, so perfect (and proves this was an impossible means). And, in my never-remotely humble opinion, early warning signs of just how extremely sick Dame Ags was getting of her arrogant, high-handed Belgian detective.
I'm there, too. This is it for me, at least for a while. I can't deal with Poirot's smugly superior attitude again. Some time away from each other is required, and since he exists in books, he won't care and I will probably return, refreshed and emboldened, to an unchanged Poirot.
Agatha Christie's Poirot: Death in the Clouds
Rating: 3.5* of five
Absolutely hilarious! Many anachronisms...the plane that features in the show, a 1940s DC-3, is understandable because there are no extant planes of the type in the book; less so is the caf¨¦ in 1935 London using Wedgwood bone china of the Colonnade Black pattern introduced the same year I was...but what the hell, it looked really pretty.
Inspector Japp, that fl?neur and bon vivant, is in Paris assisting Poirot and lording it over the Parisian gendarmerie? C'mon! Japp doesn't know how important , what a bidet is (see the filmed version of Hickory Dickory Dock), still less how the Byzantine French justice system works, and the French inspector is calmly going to let him run roughshod over his dignity? No. But it does make for a better episode of the show. No need to build a character for a single use, Japp will be showing up again anyway.
And that blowpipe scene? Suchet should've won awards for it. Side-splitting. I watched this episode with my Young Gentleman Caller and he made me pause the scene twice so he could get the laughs out.
There are some of the usual rebrandings of characters...Jane Grey, now a stewardess, finally makes sense in the story...though has some pretty tremendous superpowers as she gets Poirot a seat (Lord Horbury's abandoned one, which is never explained) at Fred Perry's final match! Where he scrapes acquaintance with both Dr. Gale and Lady Horbury, present though previously built up to be uninterested in tennis while the snit-throwing Lord Horbury dotes on it. It's not as though any of this is new.
But again, my fatigue overtakes me and I retire from the watching of the Poirot films. I am sated. Perhaps my appetite she will return to me after a fast? We shall see.
January 22, 2015
This is the book that Agatha Christie wrote after she'd had her run-in with the Doctor, and it shows. I contend that Jean is the Doctor... Okay, that was my nerd moment. It's a fun read, as always, with a good solution. One nice thing about Agatha Christie is that she gives you all the clues. It isn't like she says, last minute, "And I knew you were the murderer because your fingerprints were on the gun!" If fingerprints are on the gun (which they never are, of course), you know as soon as the detective does. She doesn't always give you all the evidence, but the clues are there.
January 11, 2021
January 11, 2020 Update: Still a really solid story starring Hercule Poirot. Probably going to do a few more re-reads to get my brain to settle down.
Not too much to say about this one besides the fact I really enjoyed it.
On a flight we have Poirot on the scene when a woman is found dead before the end of the flight. At first it appears that a wasp has stung her, but looking closer it appears someone has killed her with a dart. With a plane of suspects it takes all of Poirot's little gray cells to figure out how do the killer do this and why.
I always enjoy it when Christie's books have diagrams in them. This one does and spells out where each character is sitting. I honestly didn't try to guess who did it and just enjoyed the ride that Christie takes us on. We get to follow a couple of different characters POV in this one and so at first glance you wonder if you are being fed a bill of goods by someone. It's honestly not til the end until everything neatly ties together.
We even have Poirot going back and forth from England to Paris in this one which was a lot of fun. No Hastings on the scene, but we do have Inspector Japp. There's also a reference to a man that Poirot one upped from Murder on the Links which made me crack up.
I thought all the characters were very done, though I always laugh when Poirot gathers everyone together and reveals all. If you're a murderer why even attend?
This case was great to me since we get to follow each line of inquiry that Poirot has and we in a way get to see how his brain works. I can't recall another Poirot book that got this in depth with questions, answers, descriptions of people's luggage, etc. It felt like a lot of info being thrown at you, but once the killer is revealed you get why Poirot did the things he did.
Not too much to say about this one besides the fact I really enjoyed it.
On a flight we have Poirot on the scene when a woman is found dead before the end of the flight. At first it appears that a wasp has stung her, but looking closer it appears someone has killed her with a dart. With a plane of suspects it takes all of Poirot's little gray cells to figure out how do the killer do this and why.
I always enjoy it when Christie's books have diagrams in them. This one does and spells out where each character is sitting. I honestly didn't try to guess who did it and just enjoyed the ride that Christie takes us on. We get to follow a couple of different characters POV in this one and so at first glance you wonder if you are being fed a bill of goods by someone. It's honestly not til the end until everything neatly ties together.
We even have Poirot going back and forth from England to Paris in this one which was a lot of fun. No Hastings on the scene, but we do have Inspector Japp. There's also a reference to a man that Poirot one upped from Murder on the Links which made me crack up.
I thought all the characters were very done, though I always laugh when Poirot gathers everyone together and reveals all. If you're a murderer why even attend?
This case was great to me since we get to follow each line of inquiry that Poirot has and we in a way get to see how his brain works. I can't recall another Poirot book that got this in depth with questions, answers, descriptions of people's luggage, etc. It felt like a lot of info being thrown at you, but once the killer is revealed you get why Poirot did the things he did.
June 5, 2021
Another fantastic murder-mystery story - with plenty of characters that could be guilty - an unusual murder weapon - just another great story by Agatha Christie
Ratings:- ????
Ratings:- ????
February 6, 2021
Ahora que he estado leyendo tan seguido los libros de Agatha y adem¨¢s en orden me he dado cuenta de que es notable el estado de animo que posiblemente ten¨ªa la escritora cuando escrib¨ªa sus libros, mientras en algunos el ambiente es jocoso, divertido o ligero, en otros es serio y formal o como en este caso incluso algo opresivo, hab¨ªa le¨ªdo libros de ella antes de empezar con este reto de Agatha, pero ni los hab¨ªa le¨ªdo en orden y ni los hab¨ªa le¨ªdo todos, claro me faltaban un mont¨®n, pero me ha encantado darme cuenta de estos cambios en la ambiente de sus historias.
Este libro es una chulada, veamos, el asesinato, es super ingenioso, no solo donde se perpetra si no el como y el con qu¨¦, no puedo, por mucho que lo intent¨¦ imaginarme a esta mujer ideando estas cosas, deb¨ªa ser un proceso fascinante verla concibiendo sus asesinatos, ya sabemos que la se?ora era la reina de los venenos, as¨ª que aunque muy interesante no me sorprende, lo que si que sorprende es como hace llegar dichos venenos a sus v¨ªctimas, luego pasas por darte cuenta que le da sus giros para que resulte todav¨ªa m¨¢s intrincado e ingenioso dicho asesinato.
Luego tenemos que por primera vez nuestro buen H¨¦rcules Poirot es sospechoso de dicho asesinato, lo cual es grandioso y adem¨¢s divertido de ver.
Y para terminar tenemos al asesino, mi buena Agatha ?me ha enga?ado otra vez!, que nunca, ni siquiera por casualidad sospech¨¦ de quien termin¨® siendo, as¨ª que, tambi¨¦n he terminado el libro con ganas de dar un aplauso de pie a la ingeniosidad, inteligencia y mordacidad que ten¨ªa esta mujer.
Como he dicho en este libro el ambiente es diferente a como lo he sentido en otros, no s¨¦, incluso ley¨¦ndolo llegue a pensar que tal vez nuestra buena Agatha estuviera pasando por momentos no muy felices en su vida mientras lo escrib¨ªa, no hay por ning¨²n lado ese sentido de humor que se ve en otras entregas e incluso nuestro buen Poirot est¨¢ mucho m¨¢s serio que de costumbre.
Este libro junto con el Asesinato de Roger Ackroyd, Diez negritos y cinco cerditos esta en el top de mis favoritos de est¨¢ escritora.
Este libro es una chulada, veamos, el asesinato, es super ingenioso, no solo donde se perpetra si no el como y el con qu¨¦, no puedo, por mucho que lo intent¨¦ imaginarme a esta mujer ideando estas cosas, deb¨ªa ser un proceso fascinante verla concibiendo sus asesinatos, ya sabemos que la se?ora era la reina de los venenos, as¨ª que aunque muy interesante no me sorprende, lo que si que sorprende es como hace llegar dichos venenos a sus v¨ªctimas, luego pasas por darte cuenta que le da sus giros para que resulte todav¨ªa m¨¢s intrincado e ingenioso dicho asesinato.
Luego tenemos que por primera vez nuestro buen H¨¦rcules Poirot es sospechoso de dicho asesinato, lo cual es grandioso y adem¨¢s divertido de ver.
Y para terminar tenemos al asesino, mi buena Agatha ?me ha enga?ado otra vez!, que nunca, ni siquiera por casualidad sospech¨¦ de quien termin¨® siendo, as¨ª que, tambi¨¦n he terminado el libro con ganas de dar un aplauso de pie a la ingeniosidad, inteligencia y mordacidad que ten¨ªa esta mujer.
Como he dicho en este libro el ambiente es diferente a como lo he sentido en otros, no s¨¦, incluso ley¨¦ndolo llegue a pensar que tal vez nuestra buena Agatha estuviera pasando por momentos no muy felices en su vida mientras lo escrib¨ªa, no hay por ning¨²n lado ese sentido de humor que se ve en otras entregas e incluso nuestro buen Poirot est¨¢ mucho m¨¢s serio que de costumbre.
Este libro junto con el Asesinato de Roger Ackroyd, Diez negritos y cinco cerditos esta en el top de mis favoritos de est¨¢ escritora.
May 11, 2022
4 Stars. Having read this years ago, I remembered the whodunit. Sort-of. I was not certain until near the end but it left me able to pounce on clues I surely missed the first time. A whole set of them can be found! "Clouds" is a good one but very complicated. It even has a Canadian connection! The book is from 1935 when flying between Paris and London was relatively new and exciting. Perceived as expensive and only for the rich. Hercule Poirot is on the airliner Prometheus which departs Le Bourget north of Paris bound for Croydon Airport south of London. Back then airplanes had names like ocean liners. The plane had two cabins and was likely a two-engine prop. Something extraordinary happens, but our private detective missed it all. He was asleep (are you suspicious?, I was) in seat #9 when the passenger in seat #2 behind him and to the right was poisoned by a dart thought to be shot from a blow-pipe. It was later revealed that the toxin was from a Boomslang snake from South Africa. Wild. It turns out that Madame Giselle was a money lender to the rich and famous - those desperate for privacy with secrets to hide. It was a hit. (April 2022)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 3,991 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.