I enjoyed writing this book, and I'm happy to answer any questions you have about it!I enjoyed writing this book, and I'm happy to answer any questions you have about it!...more
"I like people who stick together and enjoy their marriage and go on enjoying it." So says one of the Beresfords' friends, and I agree. The chief char"I like people who stick together and enjoy their marriage and go on enjoying it." So says one of the Beresfords' friends, and I agree. The chief charm of Postern of Fate is seeing dear Tommy and Tuppence once more. Unlike Miss Marple and Poirot, who start out elderly and retired (respectively) in the 1920/30s and age very little for the rest of Dame Agatha's career, Tommy and Tuppence age believably over the years. The "young adventurers" were introduced in Christie's second novel, The Secret Adversary (1922) so it is fitting that she wrote one last novel about them at the end of her career, having already penned a last one for Poirot (Curtain) and Miss Marple (Sleeping Murder). The Beresfords are *exactly* as I would have hoped--unlike Curtain, which broke my heart by having Poirot so elderly and ill, Postern of Fate ends cheerfully, with T&T in their lovely country home with their children and grandchildren (and dog!) around them, and a new mystery successfully solved.
For some reason, Postern of Fate has a poor reputation; I actually dreaded reading it because I had heard such negative reviews. I'm happy to say I was greatly relieved. Dame Agatha, in the last few years of her life in the 1970s, wrote a couple of novels that were strange (Passenger to Frankfurt) or weak (Elephants Can Remember), but Postern of Fate returns us to classic Agatha style. It's true that the novel could use a good editor; I seem to recall that by this time Dame Agatha's eyesight was not good, and so she was dictating. We are reading her thoughts as she spoke them. Therefore, there are an abundance of the "well, you know" type of tics common in verbal speech but usually removed in writing. But all that could easily have been tightened up, and the actual premise is wonderfully intriguing: a clue in a children's book points to a murder of long ago and presages more murders to come. Clues dot T&T's quintessential English country house and its garden, and there's a tie back to their earlier careers as British intelligence agents. The ending is not one of Dame Agatha's epic shockers or anything, but by the time I got there I had enjoyed myself enough not to mind. I didn't really have enough clues to have solved it, but that was better than solving it early and with ease, as I did with Elephants. I would say that By the Pricking of My Thumbs is my favorite T&T novel, but this is a pleasant encore performance.
And so ends my Year of Agatha, which was actually closer to 18 months. I found previously undiscovered gems, as well as some I may not read again. I may work on the Westmacotts at some point, and I want to go back and edit some of these, but for now I'm going to stop at 80 reviews, having experienced all the detective fiction the Queen of Crime ever wrote. The 81st review is my own book, a study of P. D. James!...more
Agatha Christie loved to use nursery rhymes as a motif in her mystery novels for added creepiness. Sometimes it works perfectly, as with And Then TherAgatha Christie loved to use nursery rhymes as a motif in her mystery novels for added creepiness. Sometimes it works perfectly, as with And Then There Were None or (my favorite) Crooked House . Sometimes it feels a little forced, as with One Two Buckle My Shoe or, in this case, A Pocket Full of Rye. The premise is clever and also disturbing--three murders echo the rhyme (the king, the queen, the maid). I wondered how on earth Dame Agatha would explain the murderer's use of the rhyme without resorting to sociopathy. The answer is...not as well as I hoped. The motif ultimately peters out into red herrings and some unlikely actions. I think perhaps she had the excellent idea for the set-up and then, like me, couldn't quite decide where it could go from there. I was also hoping for a twist regarding the Arthurian names of the children (Lancelot, Percival, Elaine) but no dice.
However, there are good elements here as well. I always love dear Miss Marple, and really enjoyed the idea of bringing her former maid Gladys in and giving her a starring role. (I feel as though I've encountered Gladys before but can't think where.) I also really liked the character of Mary Dove, who struck me a foil for Lucy Eyelesbarrow from 4:50 From Paddington. Christie seems to have been interested in the idea of a smart young woman getting rich by filling the void of domestic service in England in the 1950s. Lucy appeared just four years after Mary; I wish the two had met in the course of their profession!
Overall, this is not among my favorite Miss Marple mysteries--that award goes to The Body in the Library, A Murder is Announced, and Nemesis. However, it is always good to see Miss M outwit the killer and the police, knitting and drinking tea all the while....more
I read They Do It With Mirrors under its alternate title, Murder with Mirrors, and I do think the publisher's fetish for making all Agatha Christie's I read They Do It With Mirrors under its alternate title, Murder with Mirrors, and I do think the publisher's fetish for making all Agatha Christie's books have "death" or "murder" in the titles does this novel a disservice. "They do it with mirrors" is the expression from the theatre that Miss Marple evokes several times to mean that a conjuring trick has been done to fool the audience. Murder with Mirrors ruins the allusion (not the illusion!) and gives the impression that literal mirrors are involved, which they are not; the Victorian Gothic mansion setting is vast and opulent, but there is no equivalent of Versailles' Hall of Mirrors here. Actually, I think either title gives too much away; I came to the correct solution with more ease than I should have, for the simple reason that the title put me on the alert for suspects with the ability to have performed a sleight-of-hand trick with this murder.
I did not, however, guess the extent of the motive, and thought it very clever. They Do It With Mirrors reminds me of At Bertram's Hotel, though they are over a decade apart. Both feature Miss Marple revisiting her past--places she has been and/or very old friends. And both involve crime on a grand scale, much more involved that a simple whodunnit. This is not really my favorite premise; I think there is nothing better than Dame Agatha's classic whodunnits and don't need anything "bigger" behind them.
I wished there was more discussion of the actual College for delinquent youth; it is in the background, but only one or two of the boys really feature in the story. I found it quite interesting that this was apparently a "fad" in philanthropy in the 1950s, and was amused that clearly Dame Agatha didn't think much of Psychologists and Psychiatrists, and did not know the difference between them! (Modern readers may notice inaccuracies there). Had the focus of the setting really been an asylum rather than the nearby mansion, I would have found it more compelling. As it was, it seemed a somewhat odd background, although Dame Agatha had her reasons for this setting, as we eventually learn....more
In 1939, Agatha Christie published a short story featuring Hercule Poirot, entitled "Yellow Iris." A few years later, she expanded the story into thisIn 1939, Agatha Christie published a short story featuring Hercule Poirot, entitled "Yellow Iris." A few years later, she expanded the story into this excellent novel, changing the detective to Colonel Race. Having read the story before the novel, I immediately recognized the similarity of the setup (right down to the name Iris). I assumed, therefore, that I knew how the murder was done, and in fact that aspect remains the same. However, if you think that reading the story will make it pointless to read the novel, think again! The murderer is someone completely different, and I was wrong in my suspicions and shocked at the ending. I know it's a 5-star Agatha when she reveals the murderer and I smack myself on the forehead and yell, "Holy crap!" out loud. Sparkling Cyanide is such a novel. I was blindsided by the ending, immediately kicked myself for not seeing it, and went back to re-read earlier passages that contained clues--or significant omissions, for there is a touch of Roger Ackroyd-style omission here.
Sparkling Cyanide is one of my favorite Christie titles, by the way: it suggests the glamour of the elegant 1930s nightclub where the murder takes place, and certainly the idea of cyanide in the Champagne is a dramatic and memorable one. I also have to give Dame Agatha credit for introducing me to the verb "cyanosed" (i.e., killed via cyanide), which I now want to work into a conversation sometime. I think it might supersede "defenestrate" as my new favorite violent verb.
This is one of the novels I will keep and re-read, as knowing the solution does not diminish its style and the bravado with which Dame Agatha carries it off....more
I freely admit to my own bias: the reason I recently gave Peril at End House only 3 stars is the same reason I am giving Three Act Tragedy five--I solI freely admit to my own bias: the reason I recently gave Peril at End House only 3 stars is the same reason I am giving Three Act Tragedy five--I solved End House with embarrassing speed (for reasons outlined in my review), whereas Three Act Tragedy blindsided me. I was absolutely convinced that I knew who the murderer was, and I think Christie predicted that the careful reader would think so, hence her playing with us in a scene at the end when a certain person tries to destroy evidence. I loved having a further twist catch me off guard; I felt that all was back to normal in Christie-land when The Queen of Crime outfoxed me as I expect her to do! After all, that is why I love and respect her above all others; if I want to solve a mystery halfway through I'll read...well, pretty much anyone else, honestly.
However, Three Act Tragedy deserves all five stars quite apart from whether I solved it before Poirot or not. It's not a well-known novel at all; in fact, I'd never read it before and was amazed to find such a strong Golden Age Christie novel had slipped under my radar. Dame Agatha thinks of everything--she answers every question I had save one (more on that later). For example, I wondered at first why Poirot was even in this novel since Mr. Satterthwaite seemed to be doing well at sleuthing, but she explains it perfectly: Satterthwaite's psychology is wrong for this case. He is always, in every book in which he appears, the perfect "audience", and here that means he can't see past the acting. A nice touch, consistent with his characterization elsewhere--the quality that is usually his strength as a detective is his downfall here, so the even greater detective takes over!
I have never been stumped on so many different fronts before--I couldn't figure out who had done it, nor why, nor even how, like the world's most frustrating game of Clue! One of the most unusual motives in all of Christie-dom. Why didn't I suspect the right person? I think it's because I knew Mr. Satterthwaite was innocent (as he is a recurring amateur detective character, usually with his supernatural partner Mr. Quin to guide him). I thought his innocence extended to someone else (name omitted to avoid spoilers), even though I know perfectly well--and I say it ALL THE TIME--that with Christie the murderer can be absolutely anyone. Should have listened to myself.
Psychology is the theme of the novel and I was deeply impressed by some of the subtle ways Christie employs it. For instance, I got chills when a clue connected to the casual use of a childhood friend's former name; it rang completely true, as I could imagine my best friend referring to me with an old childhood nickname rather than my real name. Tiny details like that make the solution all the better. My only complaint: we never did find out where the secret passage was, did we?! It was somewhere in the library, but Poirot never found it and it was apparently irrelevant to the case. A shame, as I love a good secret passage!...more
I am going to have to employ spoilers (correctly tagged and hidden) in order to review Peril at End House, because I need to explain why I only gave tI am going to have to employ spoilers (correctly tagged and hidden) in order to review Peril at End House, because I need to explain why I only gave three stars. This is vintage 1930s Agatha Christie, with Poirot and Hastings and even a brief cameo from Japp; it's crisply written and as twisty and turny as a labyrinth. There were several references to earlier Poirot cases (Blue Train, Ackroyd), a nice in-joke for faithful readers. Then why not at least four stars? Because something quite unprecedented happened: I solved the case immediately, and spent the rest of the novel wondering why Poirot was being so dense. That is not supposed to happen--normally, I'm amazed along with Hastings when Poirot solves the case in a triumph of the grey cells.
To be fair, I had an enormous advantage: the rest of Dame Agatha's career! If you read all of her works close together, you cannot help noticing certain patterns--endlessly inventive though she was, certain truths held. (view spoiler)[ Whoever dies, it is never a case of mistaken identity; there is a hidden motive for that specific murder. Also, if anyone has an attempt on his/her life but DOESN'T die, s/he's done it to her/himself to avert suspicion and is in fact the killer. (hide spoiler)] Peril at End House was published in 1932. No one, including Christie herself, could have known that she would be consistent on these two points for so very many novels to follow. No doubt readers at the time, or those reading now who are new to Agatha, would be surprised indeed.
However, even so, I think Poirot really should have caught on sooner than he did. (view spoiler)[ The name "Maggie" is an immediate tip-off when one considers the emphasis on the family name "Magdala" in the will; Christie all but hits us over the head with it. My first thought was that Nick killed Maggie because the identical names might raise confusion about who would inherit...I was wrong about the motive but correct about the killer. If nothing else, Poirot should have known that Nick must have effected the chocolate box trick because she, and ONLY she, was present when Hastings talked about Poirot's one unsolved case with the switch between two candy boxes (from the short story "The Chocolate Box"). Nick basically just followed the script Hastings handed her on how to fool Poirot! I cannot believe he would be fooled twice. (hide spoiler)] So, despite my unfair advantage on this novel, I felt that Poirot was not his usual super-detective self, and that was as disappointing as if he had shaved his mustache. However, Christie does an excellent job of wrapping up all possible loose threads and red herrings in the end, so all is not lost...there were several minor mysteries that I did not deduce, and I enjoyed the novel's seaside setting and the convoluted plot....more
What a treat! This collection of stories was published in 1951, but turns out to be entirely comprised of early Poirot stories, of the same 1920s vintWhat a treat! This collection of stories was published in 1951, but turns out to be entirely comprised of early Poirot stories, of the same 1920s vintage as "Poirot Investigates". I had thought that Christie simply returned again and again to writing short stories about Poirot over the course of her long career, but it seems that instead she went through a hugely prolific period in the early days of her sleuth's popularity, and that the stories (published in various magazines) were simply collected later.
I am happy to report that "The Under Dog" has much more internal coherence than some of the other collections of Dame Agatha's short works. All stories feature Poirot and are from the same time period; really they could have been published in 1929 as Poirot Investigates Part II. But though they were not chosen to be presented by their author in that way, they are by no means inferior in quality. They have that distinctive Dame Agatha flair: clever and twisty, with a wonderful atmosphere of England between the wars.
My one complaint is that I wish Christie had saved a few of her ideas for later, as she went on to create detectives perhaps better suited to certain cases than Poirot was. "The Affair of the Victory Ball" is a story in which Mr. Harley Quin would be completely at home, and I expected to run into Miss Marple at any moment during the course of "The Market Basing Mystery." However, neither existed yet! Both appeared a very few years after these stories, in the early 1930s. I suspect that Christie started with Poirot and then other detectives arose organically for her over time. Be that as it may, this is a fine collection for any Christie fan....more
Double Sin is a collection of stories that feel grouped together more or less at random--they range in original publication date from 1925 all the wayDouble Sin is a collection of stories that feel grouped together more or less at random--they range in original publication date from 1925 all the way up to 1960, the year before they were published as this book. The good news is that it presents a bit of a snapshot of Dame Agatha's writing over the years, showing that times changed but her writing and her ingenuity remained strong. The bad news is that there is no thematic link among the stories beyond "stories by Agatha Christie that hadn't been collected yet" and so we have four stories about Poirot, two about Miss Marple, and two truly random supernatural tales. The reader may well be bewildered by the apparent anachronism as we jump around from a story clearly from the 1960s ("Royal Ruby", with its long-haired young man from the arty set in Chelsea) to one just as clearly from the '20s ("Double Sin," with Poirot motoring around the countryside in a charabanc).
Nonetheless, several of the stories are classic Christie. "The Double Clue" is fun because it introduces the character of Countess Vera Rossakoff in 1925--she went on to be something of an Irene Adler to Poirot and appeared as late as "The Capture of Cerberus" two decades later (1947). "Sanctuary" returns us to the charming English village of Chipping Cleghorn, which we know from Miss Marple's earlier adventures, and I was so happy to encounter familiar characters such as the Vicar and his wife, Bunch. "Royal Ruby", also known as "The Adventure of the Christmas Pudding", gives us a wonderful picture of a traditional English Christmas; it would be nice to read with "Poirot's Christmas", as both feature Poirot spending his holiday at a manor house with murder afoot. The less said about the two supernatural tales the better; their only real merit is to give us the complete Christie experience, good and bad!...more
Witness for the Prosecution is an uneven collection--it contains seven stories that are fairly forgettable and might rate a mere 2 stars (especially tWitness for the Prosecution is an uneven collection--it contains seven stories that are fairly forgettable and might rate a mere 2 stars (especially the two involving people being swindled in overly complicated and unlikely ways), but then there are three absolute stunners that pull the rating up for me and make this collection a must-have. The uneven feeling comes about because the stories were written anywhere between 1924 and 1947 but published together in 1948, their only commonality being that they hadn't been collected anywhere else yet! This makes more sense when we realize that Christie's stories often appeared in magazines first, to be collected every so often as books for the many fans who could not possibly track down a copy of, say, the March 1926 issue of Mystery Magazine.
The publication history also explains why the only Poirot story, "The Second Gong," would be in a 1948 collection even though it is clearly an *earlier* version of Dead Man's Mirror (1937) with a different solution! I felt as though I were in a game of "Clue" when I found myself reading a familiar story but then the murderer was someone other than expected. "The Second Gong" first appeared in a magazine in 1932; the novella Dead Man's Mirror, five years later. DMM is far superior; there are a LOT of characters and plot to cram into a short story, so the longer novella version feels far less rushed. Also, DMM has a charming cameo from Mr. Satterthwaite of the Harley Quin stories, and it was fun to see that he is a friend of Poirot's. Even though I prefer DMM, "Second Gong" is important for those of us who want a complete Christie collection because it does NOT appear in Poirot's Casebook, which ostensibly contains all the Poirot stories.
The other two treasures here are the taut title story, which was adapted as both a play and a film and has an ending that hits one with the force of a physical blow, and "Philomel Cottage", which is like a Hitchcock film in written form--terrifying suspense and a darkly ironic ending. ...more
I am going to give this collection of short stories 5 stars because I truly cannot find fault with it. I just reviewed The Labours of Hercules and remI am going to give this collection of short stories 5 stars because I truly cannot find fault with it. I just reviewed The Labours of Hercules and remarked that sometimes Christie had to force the stories to fit the theme, to their detriment. With Mr. Quin, there is no such strain--the overarching motif (stories with a touch of the supernatural and the whimsical) is elastic enough to accommodate a fine variety of excellent stories. I think this collection is unique in that Dame Agatha had the chance to integrate the two sides of her authorial persona--Mary Westmacott, the romantic Englishwoman, and Agatha Christie, the Queen of Crime. The result is a collection of stories with a romantic or Gothic atmosphere that ultimately (with one or two notable exceptions) resolve into a logical and clever solution.
I also think that the mystery of Harley Quin himself is quite fascinating. He is a shadowy figure from the underworld who appears to intercede on behalf of the dead--those who have a mystery to solve or a wrong to set right. He more or less follows the pattern of the Harlequin character from the Italian Commedia dell'arte, and he is attractive, beguiling, and at times extremely frightening. He likes to haunt places associated with his archetype--an inn called the Bells and Motley, a restaurant called Arlecchino (Italian for "harlequin"). He dresses in black but has a way of catching the light from, say, a stained glass window, so that he appears briefly to be dressed in motley.
I think of Mr. Quin as the "control" spirit for a medium, in this case dapper Mr. Satterthwaite. Satterthwaite is not usually numbered among Christie's detectives, but he manages to solve a number of mysteries with a little prodding from Mr. Quin and his messages from beyond.
The tone of the stories is dreamy and romantic and the tales of love and murder stick with the reader, especially The Dead Harlequin and The Man From the Sea in my case. Although one might complain that the stories are a departure from Christie's usual Miss Marple or Poirot cases, I found the change refreshing and actually many of the stories have the classic detective fiction "twists" we expect from Christie. I think her more open-minded fans will find a lot to admire and enjoy here....more
Of all Agatha Christie's collections of stories featuring the great Hercule Poirot, this is the one of which the man himself would most approve. It haOf all Agatha Christie's collections of stories featuring the great Hercule Poirot, this is the one of which the man himself would most approve. It has the order and method, to be sure! A perfect dozen cases, updating the Labours of Hercules for the modern world (well, the 1947 world). The stories have a certain inevitability to them--it would be a shame to name a character Hercule and NOT do something with the classical allusion. The format is both the collection's greatest strength and its weakness. The strength is that it seems so perfectly fitting for Poirot and that it allows Christie to be very clever and imaginative as she comes up with modern counterparts for the Labours. The weakness is that we must suspend a lot of disbelief to accept that Poirot found all these cases in their classical order, and inevitably some of them are a better success than others.
So, for example, the tale of the Nemean Lion is clever and charming (a Pekinese is the "lion"!), but in order to make all twelve stories fit, Poirot is obliged to do some globe-trotting and adventuring that are out of character for him (not quite as bad as The Big Four, but still) or to happen to be on the spot for cases that are far outside his normal sphere. I was a bit tired of the Labours conceit by the end, but I did really like some of the symbolism (gossip = the new Hydra, for example) and I loved that Poirot got a hint of love interest in the last story! ...more
"The Regatta Mystery" is a mongrel collection, featuring three of Agatha Christie's detectives and one supernatural tale. It's clear that she didn't w"The Regatta Mystery" is a mongrel collection, featuring three of Agatha Christie's detectives and one supernatural tale. It's clear that she didn't write these stories to go together, so I suppose her publisher simply collected her most recent short works as of 1939. The resulting assortment lacks the coherence of, say, Labours of Hercules or other "themed" collections. However, enough of the stories are excellent that they deserve a high rating even though the various detectives form a motley crew when forced to co-habit a single book! I am not a fan of Parker Pyne, and not sure why Christie invented him: he's not really a detective; he manipulates people with cheap, obvious tricks in order to bring about a facile state of supposed happiness. Hence, the two stories featuring him are the weakest links in an otherwise strong collection. Poirot outclasses him by a mile with several really ingenious puzzles, while Miss Marple graces us with her charming presence for one superb story only, then modestly exits the stage. A pleasant surprise is In a Glass Darkly, the supernatural tale. Although it seems out of place here, it is suspenseful and chilling, with a twist worthy of Christie's classic detective fiction. Overall, the bulk of the stories made more sense when they were later divided, with the Poirot and Marple stories included in anthologies devoted to those two great detectives. However, I'm glad I read this collection as I would otherwise have missed In a Glass Darkly....more
[Note: I read this in English! However, this seems to be the only edition in Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ, so it will do.]
Had Dame Agatha's publishers consulted me (ha![Note: I read this in English! However, this seems to be the only edition in Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ, so it will do.]
Had Dame Agatha's publishers consulted me (ha!) I would have suggested they title this collection after the last story it contains, "The Chocolate Box." To me that title is the perfect metaphor for Poirot Investigates: it is a box full of 14 perfect little bonbons for the delectation of the mystery connoisseur who won't settle for literary junk food! Each one is a standalone treat, but taken together they are even better since each has a different flavor to it.
Poirot Investigates came out very early in Agatha Christie's career, 1924, when she had only written 2 novels featuring Poirot. He was thus still a new character, and these stories serve to establish his reputation as a renowned detective by giving us a crash course in tricky cases he has solved. They lay the foundation for all his future appearances by showing that his famous hubris is not baseless.
In structure, Christie stuck close to the model of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories. The titles are similar to his, tending to start with "The Adventure of the..." or "The Case of..." etc. Poirot appears here as a consulting detective who sees clients in the sitting room of the London apartment he shares with his friend-and-narrator, Watson...er, Hastings. I wonder if this familiar setup came about because Christie was still such a novice at this point--her ingenuity is on full display, but perhaps she wasn't quite confident enough to break from the accepted format of a Great Detective story. Or perhaps she was VERY confident and wanted to establish herself as Doyle's successor--he was still writing about Holmes up until 1927, so there was slight overlap with Christie, but he was almost finished writing when she began. Either way, the stories are delightful for the many clever variations on the mystery theme, even including the bittersweet truffle of a case that Poirot DIDN'T solve!...more
Evil Under the Sun is an excellent early Agatha (1941), and it reminds me strongly of her short novella "Triangle at Rhodes" from 5 years earlier. I wEvil Under the Sun is an excellent early Agatha (1941), and it reminds me strongly of her short novella "Triangle at Rhodes" from 5 years earlier. I wonder if perhaps Dame Agatha realized that she had the seeds of a longer piece based around the same theme of Poirot at the beach and a romantic triangle that one has to shake like a kaleidoscope to see from the correct angle.
Characters and setting are all top-notch here. The Jolly Roger Hotel gives us a wonderful picture of what "holidays at the sea" were like in England in the early 20th century, before all-inclusive resorts and other such modern extravagances. I found myself really wanting to vacation there! The cast is varied and interesting; I was especially struck by the portrayal of Rosamund, whom one might almost call Poirot's Irene Adler--the one woman who really captures his fancy. Poirot alludes vaguely to ladies he has admired in his youth in various of Dame Agatha's novels, but this is the only one I can think of where he really does seem smitten in the present tense! I found myself rooting for Rosamund even though we know right away that she loves another and is unlikely to become Madame Poirot. :)
I was also impressed with the sheer variety of possible motives for the murder of Arlena Marshall--everything from a religious complex to greed to jealousy to hatred, etc. One gets the sense that she was bound to die sooner or later, the main question being who would get to her first! And therein lies what may or may not be a flaw, but made me hesitate to give Evil Under the Sun 5 stars: when we finally do learn whodunnit and why...well, it is certainly a breathtaking, clever twist, but the mechanics of it are SO complicated that it's hard to believe it could actually come off. I actually had suspected some of what turned out to be the truth, but couldn't see how it worked or what motive there could be. I do feel that we don't have sufficient clues to deduce the motive until very late in the game, which isn't quite as fair-play as usual from Dame Agatha. So, I had a slight sense of frustration about that, but this is still a classic mystery with tons of vintage charm that I will certainly return to...perhaps as a perfect beach book!...more
I read Five Little Pigs years ago and hated it! I couldn't get past how much I disliked Amyas Crale, egomaniac and womanizer; I didn't care who killedI read Five Little Pigs years ago and hated it! I couldn't get past how much I disliked Amyas Crale, egomaniac and womanizer; I didn't care who killed him as long as *someone* did! However, I'm glad that I re-read the novel for this review. I still dislike both the Crales--I know couples like them, who love to fight and make up and fight some more (their idea of "passion") and choose to do so in front of their uncomfortable guests. However, personal prejudice aside, I have to admit that this is an absolute tour de force of the mystery writer's craft, and only the Queen of Crime could have pulled it off.
Dame Agatha loved to write cold cases, and this is a prime example--the alternate title is Murder in Retrospect. How can one solve a murder that took place 16 years earlier? Well, if one is Hercule Poirot, one can use the little grey cells for an excellent psychological study of the 5 suspects. Christie also liked to include a nursery rhyme motif, for irony or general creepiness, and the "five little pigs" rhyme fits quite well with the suspects here.
Speaking of pigs, on re-reading I still consider Amyas a swine. However, I can now give Dame Agatha credit for tackling a risque topic for the 1940s and handling it gracefully. Amyas and Caroline had an open marriage, one that worked fine according to their rules: Amyas had his affairs with artistic muses, but they knew he would never leave his wife. However, in the days leading up to the murder, Amyas has broken the rules and gotten involved with a young woman who doesn't respect his marriage at all. Caroline has considered a fling with Amyas' best friend in retaliation. Whether the murder reflects Christie's censure of their Bohemian lifestyle is anyone's guess.
Five Little Pigs is written with absolute assurance and insight. The five suspects write their narratives in completely different voices and come to life for the reader. The twist at the end is fair but completely surprising. And we are left with one of the most chilling images in Christie-dom: (view spoiler)[ the painting of a killer by her victim, captured forever gloating as she watches her victim die. (hide spoiler)] Not exactly "cozy" but first-rate mystery!...more
I debated between 4 and 5 stars because I really wanted 4 1/2. I honestly have no criticism of this excellent mystery except for the fact that I can'tI debated between 4 and 5 stars because I really wanted 4 1/2. I honestly have no criticism of this excellent mystery except for the fact that I can't mentally reconcile a story about a Hollywood film star with Agatha Christie--completely silly of me, but it just harshes my cozy buzz. ;) She does transplant Marina Gregg to Gossington Hall, classic British estate and perfect site for a murder, so that helps. And, really, Marina could have been any public figure and it would have worked as well; what matters is that she is famous enough to have a reception at her new home, and that some of her loyal fans attend.
I do think this is one of Christie's most compelling premises and best denouements. I adore Tennyson's Lady of Shalott and love that Miss Marple and her friends do as well, so that it makes perfect sense to describe Marina as looking as though "the curse has come upon [her]" when she sees her doom. I imagined it as the look on the Lady's face in Waterhouse's famous painting of her. What could possibly have caused her to have that expression is the crux of the mystery--what was the doom she saw? The ending is first-rate--one of the most original and emotionally compelling motives for murder I've ever come across. The clues tie up perfectly, and Miss Marple is always a treat. I've almost talked myself into 5 stars, but...darn it, I prefer the everyday denizens of St. Mary Mead to this glamorous newcomer, and I just can't help that....more
Elephants Can Remember made me sad...because I solved it. You see, the reason I hold Dame Agatha Christie in such high regard is that she always outfoElephants Can Remember made me sad...because I solved it. You see, the reason I hold Dame Agatha Christie in such high regard is that she always outfoxes me, even though I've been studying the detective genre and teaching courses on it for years. No other author can do it; fond as I am of Dame Agatha's Golden Age contemporaries--Dorothy Sayers, Patricia Wentworth, Josephine Tey, Ngaio Marsh, et. al.--they seldom baffle me unless they haven't played fair and given me enough to go on. But Dame Agatha...I rarely figure her out before the end. This novel, though, seemed transparent to me, and that's a shame. I don't believe for one moment that Dame Agatha declined in talent with age--she wrote excellent novels throughout her 56-year career, and a few of my favorites were written late in her life. I just think, for whatever reason, this wasn't one of her best.
Dame Agatha has many excellent "cold case" novels; they were one of her specialties--Murder in Retrospect, Dumb Witness, Nemesis, Sleeping Murder, and many others. Perhaps she did finally run out of variations on this specific theme. Perhaps it should have been a Miss Marple case instead of a Poirot, since Miss Marple does such a wonderful job of playing the gossipy old lady in situations like this. I don't know. I just know that for once the obvious twist was the correct one, and I'd rather never speak of that again!...more
One of my very favorite things about Agatha Christie is that when she said anyone could be a murderer under the right circumstances, she *meant* it. OOne of my very favorite things about Agatha Christie is that when she said anyone could be a murderer under the right circumstances, she *meant* it. One would think that when you read a mystery, you should suspect everyone, but for most authors it just isn't true--if you read a "cozy" author, you can bet it won't be one of the charming young lovers, or the trusty Watson-like friend, or dear old Granny, or the kindly priest, etc. With Dame Agatha, it could be any of those, or everybody, or nobody (oh yes! I can think of at least one example of a suicide disguised as murder). It could be the person with the perfect alibi or the one with no apparent motive (but there really is a motive). This is why I think of Dame Agatha as absolutely ruthless in her fiction, however genteel she was in life, and Crooked House is Exhibit A! She was particularly proud of this novel, and rightly so.
Oddly enough, I know from her notebooks that Dame Agatha didn't have a specific murderer in mind when she began this novel. She had the premise of the extended family in their mansion, whose patriarch has died, but she debated among several suspects. I must say, if she'd chosen anyone else I would be giving this fewer stars--I felt it almost as a physical blow when she revealed the truth, then immediately thought that no other ending would have done half so well.
I love Dame Agatha's use of the multi-valenced term "crooked" here. It is a reference to one of the nursery rhymes that she employs to such creepy effect in many of her novels ("and they all lived together in a little crooked house"). The victim was a bit crooked in the legal sense, but he had a good heart. Someone in his family is mentally off-kilter in a far more sinister sense. Even the house is lopsided due to its whimsical design. The running motif is well done and makes the novel worth re-reading even once the shocking twist is known. It's one of my favorites, just as it was one of Dame Agatha's own....more
If I had to name Agatha Christie's most famous novels worldwide, I would say the prize goes to "Murder on the Orient Express" and "And Then There WereIf I had to name Agatha Christie's most famous novels worldwide, I would say the prize goes to "Murder on the Orient Express" and "And Then There Were None." Although she has many other titles that are beloved by mystery fans, I think these are the ones you've probably heard of even if you are not a fan of the genre. I love "Orient Express" more because I love Hercule Poirot, but I have to admit that "And Then There Were None" is flawless. It is also extremely frightening! It is so famous that I'd forgotten how implacable and chilling it is until I re-read it for this review. With no detective in sight, no Poirot or Miss Marple to take charge, we have ten people isolated on an island, dying one by one...and a solution so ingenious that I doubt anyone would guess it unless it were spoiled for them.
I love teaching this novel for my elective course on Detective Fiction; my students absolutely lose their minds debating solutions as they read! I also notice something new every time I re-read it; working out the logistics of this intricate novel was a real challenge (according to Agatha Christie's notebooks). Something I hadn't really thought about on earlier readings is that all the corpses are left in their respective guest rooms, until the remaining few are sleeping each night with dead bodies in all the neighboring rooms. Ugh, it freaks me out to think about it! But the novel is subtle that way--most of the horror is so matter-of-fact in presentation that it sneaks up on you. Some of my students said they couldn't sleep after reading!
A word about the title: Christie titled many of her novels after nursery rhymes. It is always a creepy juxtaposition to have a child's rhyme tied to a murder. Christie did not write the "Ten Little Indians" rhyme herself; she just saw the murderous potential of it. In fact, the real poem had an even more offensive racist term in it, which was changed as early as 1940; the book was never published in the U.S. with that title. Recent editions have changed the "Indians" to "Soldiers". I don't think Christie would have cared WHAT there were ten of; the point is the terrifying inevitability of the deaths that echo the poem. That's why the novel is timeless even though the "Ten Little Who?" changes....more
Dr. Laurel
>
Books:
Read
(81)
Loading...
