Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.48 AVERAGE
3.48 AVERAGE
This book is beautifully unique in Christie’s collection. The best part of it was its portrayal of mental illness. It is surprising progressive for 2018, let alone its 1972 publishing date. It was a bit repetitive and simple compared to her other novels, but the intrigue of the story and the creation of the characters make it very much worth the read.
mysterious
slow-paced
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
medium-paced
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I love the Ariadne Oliver Poirot mysteries. This one is especially fun for me because I like the cold case aspect. The comments from Christie about the 1970s are also very charming.
Elephants Can Remember | Agatha Christie | 08Jul2018
Hercule Poirot #40
-------------------------
One-Sentence Review
A very lackluster, predictable, unconvincing finale (written!) for arguably one of the greatest detectives of all time.
---------------------------
Published/Pages : Nov1972 | 299 pages
Location: London (England)
Genre: Mystery, Crime Fiction
Characters: Hercule Poirot, Ariadne Oliver, Margaret Ravenscroft, Celia Ravenscroft, Desmond Burton-Cox, Mrs. Burton-Cox, Zélie Meauhourat, Kathleen Fenn, Mr. Garroway, Mr. Spence, Mr. Goby, Dr. Willoughby, Julia Carstairs, Mrs. Matcham, Mrs. Buckle, Mrs. Rosentelle
-------------------------------
Rating Analysis
Premise: 6/10
Introduction: 6/10
Number of Characters: 5/10
Character Development: 4/10
Backup History for the Story: 6/10
Fiction Quality: 6/10
Pace of the Story: 6/10
Dramatic Effect: 4/10
Climax: 5/10
Impact it Made: 4/10
TOTAL: 52/100 (5.2 Stars = 2.6 Stars ~ ★★★)
--------------------------------
Review
Coming up
Reaction Section
Hercule Poirot #40
-------------------------
One-Sentence Review
A very lackluster, predictable, unconvincing finale (written!) for arguably one of the greatest detectives of all time.
---------------------------
Published/Pages : Nov1972 | 299 pages
Location: London (England)
Genre: Mystery, Crime Fiction
Characters: Hercule Poirot, Ariadne Oliver, Margaret Ravenscroft, Celia Ravenscroft, Desmond Burton-Cox, Mrs. Burton-Cox, Zélie Meauhourat, Kathleen Fenn, Mr. Garroway, Mr. Spence, Mr. Goby, Dr. Willoughby, Julia Carstairs, Mrs. Matcham, Mrs. Buckle, Mrs. Rosentelle
-------------------------------
Rating Analysis
Premise: 6/10
Introduction: 6/10
Number of Characters: 5/10
Character Development: 4/10
Backup History for the Story: 6/10
Fiction Quality: 6/10
Pace of the Story: 6/10
Dramatic Effect: 4/10
Climax: 5/10
Impact it Made: 4/10
TOTAL: 52/100 (5.2 Stars = 2.6 Stars ~ ★★★)
--------------------------------
Review
Coming up
Reaction Section
What I recommend - read this book, and then listen to the Radio Lab short called Vanishing Words. Excellent.
This review can also be found here!
This was better, but not by much. That disappoints me since this is a Poirot mystery and I loved Poirot. And, I actually remember watching the episode of this one but I literally forgot all of the details besides loving the last name Ravenscroft. Thanks, brain for not letting me down on this one.
Anyways, this was okay. Just okay. It’s not memorable since there’s literally no action to the story, even if the mystery is engaging. Ariadne Oliver has a goddaughter. That goddaughter’s parents died. But they never figured out if the husband killed the wife or if the wife killed the husband. The only fingerprints on the gun were those two.
And the whole thing happened a good decade ago. Which means that there’s nothing going on. No interesting action or drama between the players. A whole bunch of armchair detectives.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing, of course. I thought that Christie did a good job with it, even if I wish there had been more action. It wasn’t too long and it didn’t get lost in the process of the story. But it still wasn’t particularly the most riveting Poirot mystery.
This was better, but not by much. That disappoints me since this is a Poirot mystery and I loved Poirot. And, I actually remember watching the episode of this one but I literally forgot all of the details besides loving the last name Ravenscroft. Thanks, brain for not letting me down on this one.
Anyways, this was okay. Just okay. It’s not memorable since there’s literally no action to the story, even if the mystery is engaging. Ariadne Oliver has a goddaughter. That goddaughter’s parents died. But they never figured out if the husband killed the wife or if the wife killed the husband. The only fingerprints on the gun were those two.
And the whole thing happened a good decade ago. Which means that there’s nothing going on. No interesting action or drama between the players. A whole bunch of armchair detectives.
That’s not necessarily a bad thing, of course. I thought that Christie did a good job with it, even if I wish there had been more action. It wasn’t too long and it didn’t get lost in the process of the story. But it still wasn’t particularly the most riveting Poirot mystery.
Enjoyed as always but felt Poirot was not much in character, nor the mystery too difficult to solve once more context had been provided. The later mysteries lack Poirot being too involved in the investigations, and as Christie herself admitted to disliking him very much as a character, I am not surprised. Still saddened, and am glad that I have a lot of the intervening ones to read.
