Scan barcode
A review by kai3cll
Evil Under the Sun by Agatha Christie
1.0
Prelude: I am shocked to see the number of great reviews here that I am in doubt about my perspective. Did I miss something? I am not sure but I still believe I should continue with my review as I thought to write it, and as I felt after reading the book.
*The review contains spoilers*
_______________
I have found my least favorite book from Christie. I hate this book for the following reason: Deceit.
I have written a similar note in one of my past reviews that one thing that I believe a detective mystery writer shouldn't ever do is to hide information from the reader. It is okay to confuse the reader and create suspicion but hiding essential clues is a big no-no.
Agatha does exactly that in this novel. Her narrative isn't as powerful as usual and she skips certain points which I believe were essential to find the murderer. I'll list all the points I didn't enjoy below.
1) The fake body concept
All bodies do NOT look the same when sunbathing unless they are similar. Secondly, nobody mentioned Christine had a height similar to Arlene. I imagined her as a 5'3 woman bcs of the description. This would be alright if it was a visual work as the audience can form their doubts about her appearance but that wasn't possible in a written format. Cheating.
Additionally, how did she manage to get a similar outfit as Arlene, who has an elaborate wardrobe, on a remote island? If she did then how did she know what outfit Arlene would wear on that particular day? If she managed that somehow as well, why not discard the scissors used to cut the hat? Lastly, the soundproof nature of the cave was not hinted at whatsoever.
2) The basic information
Agatha mentions the timing of the crime is narrow and it is a hot-blooded murder. This means traveling from one part of the Island to another would be difficult. Only to later mention that it would take only 4 minutes to run from the hotel to pixie cove.
3) In general, the nature of the suspects is changed during the last explanation. Shrewd and independent Rosamund gives false testimonies to help escape, who she suspects is the murderer? The oyster Marshall despite being 'responsible for his choices' that refrain him from divorcing his wife, doesn't mind being irresponsible in helping officials sort out her murder case.
__________
Those are my major complaints about this book. However, there are a few that Agatha did right, including Linda, the narcotic racket, Rev. Lane, and past cases.
One thing that I gave the star for is her depiction of Arlene. The story continues to mention her as a 'man-hunting' woman. All blame of men getting attracted to her and sexualizing her is blamed on her. This gender-biased stereotype is refuted by Poirot at the end. I bet there will be plenty of readers who will unknowingly fall for this little trap.
However, I re-take that star as Rosamund gave up her business to be with a man at the end. Whose own business is btw not in great condition- not only is it backward (not a word I associate with Agatha) but also financially wrong.
Overall, I believe Agatha is capable of better logic.
*The review contains spoilers*
_______________
I have found my least favorite book from Christie. I hate this book for the following reason: Deceit.
I have written a similar note in one of my past reviews that one thing that I believe a detective mystery writer shouldn't ever do is to hide information from the reader. It is okay to confuse the reader and create suspicion but hiding essential clues is a big no-no.
Agatha does exactly that in this novel. Her narrative isn't as powerful as usual and she skips certain points which I believe were essential to find the murderer. I'll list all the points I didn't enjoy below.
1) The fake body concept
All bodies do NOT look the same when sunbathing unless they are similar. Secondly, nobody mentioned Christine had a height similar to Arlene. I imagined her as a 5'3 woman bcs of the description. This would be alright if it was a visual work as the audience can form their doubts about her appearance but that wasn't possible in a written format. Cheating.
Additionally, how did she manage to get a similar outfit as Arlene, who has an elaborate wardrobe, on a remote island? If she did then how did she know what outfit Arlene would wear on that particular day? If she managed that somehow as well, why not discard the scissors used to cut the hat? Lastly, the soundproof nature of the cave was not hinted at whatsoever.
2) The basic information
Agatha mentions the timing of the crime is narrow and it is a hot-blooded murder. This means traveling from one part of the Island to another would be difficult. Only to later mention that it would take only 4 minutes to run from the hotel to pixie cove.
3) In general, the nature of the suspects is changed during the last explanation. Shrewd and independent Rosamund gives false testimonies to help escape, who she suspects is the murderer? The oyster Marshall despite being 'responsible for his choices' that refrain him from divorcing his wife, doesn't mind being irresponsible in helping officials sort out her murder case.
__________
Those are my major complaints about this book. However, there are a few that Agatha did right, including Linda, the narcotic racket, Rev. Lane, and past cases.
One thing that I gave the star for is her depiction of Arlene. The story continues to mention her as a 'man-hunting' woman. All blame of men getting attracted to her and sexualizing her is blamed on her. This gender-biased stereotype is refuted by Poirot at the end. I bet there will be plenty of readers who will unknowingly fall for this little trap.
However, I re-take that star as Rosamund gave up her business to be with a man at the end. Whose own business is btw not in great condition- not only is it backward (not a word I associate with Agatha) but also financially wrong.
Overall, I believe Agatha is capable of better logic.