Reviews with content warning for Death of parent - The Christie Affair

What a twisted tale of love! What does a woman do when her husband leaves her for his mistress? She disappears and uncovers a horrible past act that has impacted her future.

Content Warnings

fabs2510's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional mysterious sad medium-paced

3.25

Content Warnings

frantically's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional informative reflective sad slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.5

This would've been so much more fun without Agatha Christie. Sorry. Nan's story was so well-written and just deserved its own place, especially in this climate, where we're more openly talking about the horrible things that have happened due to organized religion. The "historical" details of what happened to the Christies always took me out the story and didn't really fit within the plot, in my opinion. I got really into it at the end but the writing was a bit confusing at times.

Content Warnings

oceanwriter's review

Go to review page

mysterious reflective medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

I have a lot of mixed feelings about this one. I enjoyed most of it, but not without some initial confusion and some scenes and plot lines I could have lived without.

I'll start with the title. It's a bit misleading. The story is told by Nan O'Dae, the fictionalized version of Archie Christie's mistress. Though Agatha Christie is present in the story and revolves around her disappearance, the story is largely about Nan and her backstory. While it was an interesting story, I spent the first fourth of the book trying to figure out why it's titled The Christie Affair and when the perspective would change to Agatha. Though it's not the biggest quip for me, it was distracting at first. As I said, Nan's story was interesting, but it overpowered Agatha's story.

My second issue with the book was the pacing. Even with Nan narrating, there were scenes with Agatha, Archie, and Chilton that didn't involve Nan which felt a little off now and then. Mostly it was the placement and the number of storylines going on. Nan often times broke the fourth wall, making it feel like a 'he said, she said' tale. That was the point of the narration, but those moments jarred me out of the story being told.

Lastly, I didn't care for some of the content in Nan's backstory. Though a driving force for the plot, I found the scenes with the nuns and the priest upsetting. I'm sure I'll get some flack for saying so. It's one thing to acknowledge it than have to read it in detail. Especially when it's not told in a way that's informing.

My complaints out of the way, I'll wrap this up by saying that I did like the book for the most part. The characters were likable and I like how they were written in a way that you're rooting for all of them even though their aspirations conflict with at least one of the others. There was mystery, romance, and intrigue all in one with none of them too over the top.

Content Warnings

catherine_t's review

Go to review page

emotional mysterious reflective medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

In 1926, Nan O'Dea became Archie Christie's mistress, fulfilling a plot she'd begun years earlier, in Ireland, when she was just a teenager. Moving back and forth in time, Nan recounts the events that led her to this moment, and the disappearance of Agatha Christie for eleven days.

My mother really enjoyed this book. I, on the other hand, did not. Yes, I am well aware that this book is fiction. It doesn't purport to solve the mystery of Christie's real-life disappearance (something which Christie herself never discussed, not even in her <i>Autobiography</i>). But the way it characterizes both Christies just struck me as false, hollow. Starting out, I couldn't understand why certain real-life details were changed (the Christies' daughter being named Teddy, for instance, not Rosalind, and Agatha using a typewriter when she was known to write longhand and have a secretary type the manuscript). In fact, it's these little niggling oddities that kept pulling me out of the story. Perhaps if I weren't such a devotee of Christie (I've read two biographies, most of her novels, and am eagerly awaiting the release of Lucy Worsley's biography of Christie later this year), these things wouldn't have bothered me, but they did.

Maybe this book isn't for those of us who know Christie and her work. As I said, my mother really enjoyed the book, and she's read one biography and a handful of the novels (I think). If you can consider this more of an alternate-universe version of Christie, perhaps you'll enjoy it more than I did.

Content Warnings

hermithebs's review

Go to review page

emotional mysterious reflective slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No

3.0

Content Warnings

jukietoss's review

Go to review page

emotional hopeful mysterious sad slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

3.5

I really like the concept of telling a story of Agatha Christie's 11-day disappearance, and I thought the story de Gramont conjured was quite compelling. It incorporated both romance and mystery in really satisfying ways. Where it fell down for me was in how it executed that narrative: the book's structure was really disjointed which made it hard to stay engaged. I understand what de Gramont was trying to do and why she told the story asynchronously, but the way it played out was disruptive and led to some reveals that felt premature or repetitive. De Gramont didn't just look backward in time to contextualize the present--she also did a lot of foreshadowing or explicitly naming what would take place years into the future. I found these forward-looking reveals distracting. The stories from the past were important to the story, but I think they could have been incorporated or examined more elegantly.

That said, the overall story was fun, and there were glimmers of ambience that showed really strong world-building and the ability to sweep the reader away. These were often interrupted by other locations or time periods, but I enjoyed the moments of respite where I could get swept up in Christie's story.

Content Warnings

More...