You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.68 AVERAGE
3.68 AVERAGE
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This was a mid-tier Agatha Christie for me. Some outdated language and concepts about adoption. As an adoptive mother, I certainly hope my kid doesn’t secretly resent me! Honestly I took off a 0.25 off my rating solely based on the last interaction between Dr. Calgary and Hester on the very last page of the book. It was so cheesy!
medium-paced
1848293 theories i came up with and they were all wrong. the plot twist! damn.
I think this is probably a 4 star book for how good it is, but I'm also factoring in my enjoyment, and it's not one of my most favourite Christies, so I'd say 3.5 stars overall. It's interesting because it's primarily about the suspicion on a whole family, and how they all suffer when a murder is unsolved because any of them could have done it. I think it's well done and the characters are good, but I don't love any of them. The ending/reveal is also very good, turning a lot of things on their head again.
I do find it very annoying, yet again, how Christie feels she has to marry everyone off in the last few sentences, even when they've been brought up as brother and sister, or barely know each other. So annoying. Just leave those sentences out and the ending would be fine.
adventurous
dark
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
A good Agatha Christie but not her best - I can see why they changed it slightly for TV.
This book could have made a good short story. It has almost no action, until near the end of the story when two events occur almost at the same time. There is a lot of talking and mulling over ideas, and Christie seems to have had some weird notions about adoption.
Suspicion is the main drive in this psychological mystery. Christie had used this in other novels, such as [b:Death in the Clouds|6418757|Death in the Clouds (Hercule Poirot, #12)|Agatha Christie|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1328312992l/6418757._SY75_.jpg|820002], but here it takes precedence. All the events start with the well-meaning Dr Calgary, back from a scientific expedition, realises he was the alibi of a man accused of murder. He arrives too late to save said man who died in prison, but believes that by confirming Jack’s innocence he will bring solace to the family. Well... he soon finds out that is not the case, quite the contrary in fact. If Jack didn’t kill his mother, who did when only the family members were present?
“The family would come under suspicion,” he said, “and it might remain under suspicion for a long time—perhaps for ever. If one of the family was guilty it is possible that they themselves would not know which one. They would look at each other and—wonder … Yes, that’s what would be the worst of all. They themselves would not know which….”
It’s another brilliant idea from Christie, allowing her to offer us a ‘murder mystery’ while really having fun with the psychological aspects. Another stroke of genius was using the reluctant doctor as the investigator.
“It’s not the guilty who matter. It's the innocent... It's we who matter. Don't you see what you've done to us all?"
“The family would come under suspicion,” he said, “and it might remain under suspicion for a long time—perhaps for ever. If one of the family was guilty it is possible that they themselves would not know which one. They would look at each other and—wonder … Yes, that’s what would be the worst of all. They themselves would not know which….”
It’s another brilliant idea from Christie, allowing her to offer us a ‘murder mystery’ while really having fun with the psychological aspects. Another stroke of genius was using the reluctant doctor as the investigator.
“It’s not the guilty who matter. It's the innocent... It's we who matter. Don't you see what you've done to us all?"
A clever premise: A man comes back from an Antarctic expedition and realizes he is the one able to supply an alibi too late for a young man who died in prison after being convicted of killing his mother. The family is not grateful for this posthumous name-clearing; no one liked Jacko, so they were content for him to take the blame, but now they must look at one another with suspicion. As with most Christie novels, I was not able to arrive at the solution on my own, even though the pieces were all there in retrospect. Even though most of the book involves the family nervously trying to go about their life while three different men try to solve the crime, I still found it well paced and plotted and read it in just a few days.
What's unfortunate is that the plot of this one revolves heavily around the fact that the victim adopted all five of her children, and much is made of her not being their "real" mother. Characters monologue at length about the unnatural relationship between mother and children (while repeatedly reminding each other that they weren't her "real" children) and how not bearing children out of her own body was somehow responsible for this woman becoming obsessive and overbearing as a mother. Certainly that was not an unusual position at the time this book was published (along with the comments made about Tina, the "half-caste" child who is always described as "dark" whenever she's mentioned), but it made it unpleasant to read nonetheless.
Aside from the unfortunate marks of its time, this book is a solid Christie mystery.
What's unfortunate is that the plot of this one revolves heavily around the fact that the victim adopted all five of her children, and much is made of her not being their "real" mother. Characters monologue at length about the unnatural relationship between mother and children (while repeatedly reminding each other that they weren't her "real" children) and how not bearing children out of her own body was somehow responsible for this woman becoming obsessive and overbearing as a mother. Certainly that was not an unusual position at the time this book was published (along with the comments made about Tina, the "half-caste" child who is always described as "dark" whenever she's mentioned), but it made it unpleasant to read nonetheless.
Aside from the unfortunate marks of its time, this book is a solid Christie mystery.
challenging
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Top-tier mystery. Like, really really well done. 4.5 because I did not care for a lot of the philosophy that's embedded regarding children, families, parenting, adoption, and so on. But the mystery itself was fantastic. Elegant, nuanced, and triiiiiiicky. This is one that's even better the second time you read it, because then you know what to look for and it's sooooo good.