Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.39 AVERAGE
3.39 AVERAGE
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
This is definitely not my favorite Poirot mystery. From what I understand, Agatha Christie got tired of writing his novels at the tail end of her career, and it really shows in this. Still, it’s well-written, but lacks the dramatic flair of the other works I’ve read of hers.
I'm not sure how to think about this mystery. This was written very late in Agatha Christie's career and thus, instead of a riotous 1930s feel -- fresh and clever -- tonally it reads like the nostalgic musings of an older person thinking about how the world used to be. Besides Hercule Poirot, the main character is an older mystery novelist named Mrs. Ariadne Oliver, who seems like a bit of a stand-in for the authoress herself, though perhaps a bit more dim-witted. Hercule Poirot himself knows he's nearing the end of his career, and Poirot, Mrs. Oliver, and other characters spend lots of time pondering 'youths,' and youth culture, from which they feel very far removed. Knowing very little about Christie herself, or her beliefs and politics, it was hard to tell if Christie's stance was that older adults are too harsh on young people or if she meant to say that the world used to be a better place. I'm inclined towards the former based on some exchanges, but the latter has equally strong sway. For example, besides the elfin Miranda and a few others, most of the children seem like bad apples (apples -- get it?). She discusses young people's necking at parties, using LSD, and more. But then, she has a section about Victorian women also gussying themselves up to get attention from men, so... maybe the more things change the more they stay the same? In addition to this, it was difficult to tell whether this novel was xenophobic or not; again, not knowing Christie's own views, there were times when, despite having a Belgian lead detective, the novel seemed very censorious of immigrants. I feel pretty confident in saying that most of the people in Woodleigh Common would have voted for Brexit if given the choice.
It's also very dark -- it centers around the murder of a 13-year-old girl, and pulls no punches on letting readers know that this girl was detested by nearly everyone in town, simply because she told tall tales and wanted attention. I can't explain how very, very dark this goes without mild spoilers.
The mystery itself was fine and kept me sort of guessing. I worked out who the shady characters were pretty quickly, and while there were a few convincing red herrings thrown in, I felt fairly confident in who the killer(s) might be. I did think that one thing was left out/insufficiently explained that could have made it all more convincing. Oh, and I thought of another thing.
Anyway, not a terrible mystery book, but not Agatha Christie's best, either.
It's also very dark -- it centers around the murder of a 13-year-old girl, and pulls no punches on letting readers know that this girl was detested by nearly everyone in town, simply because she told tall tales and wanted attention. I can't explain how very, very dark this goes without mild spoilers.
Spoiler
Near the end of the novel, another child -- a 10-year-old boy -- is murdered. Finally, a girl is groomed by a 'beautiful' adult man to believe that she should be ritually sacrificed. It then transpires that this man was her father, which he knew, although she did not know it. The layers of disgust boiled into this story line are difficult to fathom.The mystery itself was fine and kept me sort of guessing. I worked out who the shady characters were pretty quickly, and while there were a few convincing red herrings thrown in, I felt fairly confident in who the killer(s) might be. I did think that one thing was left out/insufficiently explained that could have made it all more convincing.
Spoiler
Mrs. Drake tells Poirot she saw Leopold open the library door and it made her think he had committed the murder. Then, in the unraveling, Poirot says that Mrs. Drake had to make it look convincing that something had startled her, so made up the story about Leopold later. Wouldn't it have made more sense that she DID she Leopold open the door, realized he'd been in the library the whole time, agreed to pay his blackmail fee, and then killed him -- instead of Poirot's wishy-washy, 'He may have suspected but didn't really know...' shit?Spoiler
Why didn't Poirot mention that Mrs. Drake's husband died prior to the aunt? He doesn't include that as part of why he suspected her. That's what made me suspect her. When he said she lost her aunt and then her husband, and then she replied that her husband died a bit before the aunt, I thought, 'Aha! And she's worried with him dead the courts will find in favor of Olga in the codicil, since it was known that Mrs. Drake and her aunt had a strained relationship. With her husband dead -- the one to whom the previous four wills deferred -- her claim to the money isn't nearly as good.' I think I'm remembering that right.Anyway, not a terrible mystery book, but not Agatha Christie's best, either.
I don't think I've appreciated Agatha Christie before, but this probably wasn't the best one to start in on. Whilst a good mystery story on its own, reminiscent of a Midsomer Murder, I think I'll pick up Murder on the Orient Express, ABC Murders, or one of her more prominent novels next!
mysterious
medium-paced
Happy Halloween re-read. I enjoyed this as much the second time and appreciated the context you gain of Agatha Christie as the years changed. This book, being set in the 1960s, gives a good overview of how Poirot and the world around him changed since the heyday of the 1930s whodunnits (even though this is still the same style of murder mystery).
I also gain a great deal of amusement about how much the people around her aren’t sad that Joyce, a little girl, was horribly murdered. Kids are demons but come on.
Despite this not being the strongest of her works, Agatha Christie is an incredible writer.
I also gain a great deal of amusement about how much the people around her aren’t sad that Joyce, a little girl, was horribly murdered. Kids are demons but come on.
Despite this not being the strongest of her works, Agatha Christie is an incredible writer.
Overall this book was a bit slower than I wanted. I didn't feel like the book displayed a lot of urgency to figure out who killed Joyce, even though she was a child. You'd think the murder of a 13-year-old girl would have caused a lot of strong emotions from the people in the town and a universal furvor to find the killer. But no one really seemed to care, including her own family. I think one of the reasons I didn't love this book was that everyone seemed to dislike Joyce, including the adults, and her death didn't feel like the tragedy it really was. Granted, I didn't predict the ending, but even that wasn't very satisfactory to me. I don't totally buy the motives explained in the last chapter. It sort of just boils down to "they're just bad people, I guess" and I don't like that reasoning when it comes to the murder of children. This is not one of my favorite Agatha Christie novels and not one that I'd easily recommend.
Another sensational Agatha Christie. For the first time I had a hunch who the murderer was, but still shocked by the motive and carrying out of it.
Christie is the funniest writer of all time and I’ll die on this hill.
Excited to see how the movie holds up
Christie is the funniest writer of all time and I’ll die on this hill.
Excited to see how the movie holds up
Agatha Christie challenge
Book 6
Don't even ask me what happened in this book, I could not tell you
Book 6
Don't even ask me what happened in this book, I could not tell you