Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Agatha Christie rather famously hated her most famous character Hercule Poirot. There’s even a quote from her that goes:

There are moments when I have felt: Why-Why-Why did I ever invent this detestable, bombastic, tiresome little creature? ...Eternally straightening things, eternally boasting, eternally twirling his moustaches and tilting his egg-shaped head... I point out that by a few strokes of the pen... I could destroy him utterly. He replies, grandiloquently: "Impossible to get rid of Poirot like that! He is much too clever."

This is the fifth novel in the series, and I honestly think she already hated the character by this point. He is truly in top arrogant form here. “My name is Hercule Poirot,� he says, “and I am probably the greatest detective in the world.� What a way to introduce one’s self! (As a side note, the makers of the new Murder on the Orient Express film must have liked that line too, as it’s used in the trailer). The only reason that “probably� is there is because Poirot does not make definitive statements without all the facts, and, alas, he has not traveled the entire world� yet.

At another point he introduces himself. When the person does not seem to recognize him, he responds, “Permit me to say that you have been badly educated. It is the name of one of the great ones of this world.� This is a man whose arrogance knows no bounds. With many authors this type of character would come off as annoying (indeed, Christie obviously thought he was), but personally, it only adds to the charm for me. This book is by no means one of the greatest Poirot novels, but it exemplifies what I love about the character. Poirot, is an arrogant ass, quite possibly the most arrogant detective in literature (which is saying something) and yet, his arrogance seems utterly justified and, dare I say, a part of his charm. Usually I would hate this type of character, but not Poirot, he is just too much fun.

The novel is something of a mess if I’m to be completely honest. It alternates characters frequently, thus meaning that many clues the reader notices are not ones seen by others. I solved the crime not by clues pointing towards the killer, but by seeing scenes from other points of view that cleared the other characters. Clues were presented without Poirot’s knowledge, and thus he got them through different means than us, often without us knowing when. It felt� awkward. Still, an improvement after the previous (dreadful) novel, The Big Four.

The plot is worth 2 stars. In that regard this is nothing special, but the characters here are very good. Christie came up with a wonderful cast for this one, and I found myself interested in where each were going. Thus, the rating is raised to a solid 3/5. Recommended more for Christie fans than casual readers, but if you like Poirot, you could certainly do worse.