Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

This is probably Christie's worst book.

It's not even bland and fomulaic (Three Act Tragedy, anyone?) - in fact, it's neither of those things. It's just totally nonsensical.

There's a proliferation of Chinamen that Hastings actually states that he can't tell apart. There's a secret base under a volcano where they keep the nuclear weaponry. Don't get me started on "Madame Olivier".

Although, it feels like it should have been written about thirty years later than it was, so it's got that going for it. I suppose some bits were charming in a very Agatha Christie sort of way, and some bits were fleetingly good fun, but also, OH MY GOD.

(view spoiler)[And the twin brother? Really? But it's one of her earliest novels, so she can be forgiven, both for a lousy plot and the racism of her time. (hide spoiler)]

Robert Barnard: "This thriller was cobbled together at the lowest point in Christie's life, with the help of her brother-in-law. Charity is therefore the order of the day, and is needed, for this is pretty dreadful, and (whatever one may think of him as a creation) demeaning to Poirot". Well said.

@fiona about the book its your opinion.. but sean connery is on of the best james bond ever..

Oh, Ankit, don't take this as a slight towards Sean Connery! You are quite right, he's a great and very entertaining Bond. I just don't think he'd make quite such a good Hercule Poirot, you know?

yeah!! when you put it that way..

Fiona wrote: "Oh, Ankit, don't take this as a slight towards Sean Connery! You are quite right, he's a great and very entertaining Bond. I just don't think he'd make quite such a good Hercule Poirot, you know?"

How could you best David Suchet?

Now Peter Ustinov, there was a terrible Poirot.

Ahhh, you got me - he's no David Suchet, for sure, but I shan't hear a word against Ustinov Death on the Nile. I grew up on Ustinov Death on the Nile and it's wonderful.

Fiona wrote: "Ahhh, you got me - he's no David Suchet, for sure, but I shan't hear a word against Ustinov Death on the Nile. I grew up on Ustinov Death on the Nile and it's wonderful."

I love the late Sir Peter, too; however, his interpretations of Hercule Poirot lose that sense of fastidiousness and conceit that make Poirot, Poirot.

I think this bizarre example of Christie's work has a lot to do with both the initial newspaper serialization and the fact that this was the first book written after her 1926 disappearance. It definitely does read like a 007 but predates Bond in print by 26 years. And if we're going to bust Hastings on his inability to tell "Chinamen" apart, I don't think we can give a pass to Sean Connery publicly stating it's okay to slap women. Hastings is, after all, a fictional character, and a rather stupid one at that. Connery's all too real; am glad Craig finally made a real man out of Bond!

Dana wrote: "I think this bizarre example of Christie's work has a lot to do with both the initial newspaper serialization and the fact that this was the first book written after her 1926 disappearance. It defi..."

Oh, certainly, Dana - Connery has no excuse whatsoever and should be ashamed of himself. Christie does have a history of racial insensitivity, though, which is partly informed by the prejudices of her time. For a writer who managed to put so many nationalities and ethnicities into her books, she certainly ran roughshod over quite a few of them - as a reader in 2015 (or 2014 as this was) who has loved Captain Hastings since Murder on the Links, I can still give him and his author a hard time over the ridiculous pantomime 1920s racism. Because, damn!

Agreed - I don't expect writers to be ahead of their time, though some have been - but maybe it's a sign of progress that we gasp when we see casual bigotry. I've been reading her complete works, though out of order, and more to see how her plots/puzzles are structured than for any deeper meaning, by and large, as they're not especially literary books. However, as time capsules they are startling in places. She seemed to be a little ahead of her time (or maybe just in sync with it) in her focus on psychology, and there are a remarkable number of unexpected references to such things as open marriage and drug addiction as early as the 1920s. I've yet to hit one book where the ethnic or cultural minority has actually been the villain, but there have definitely been some cringe-worthy descriptions, and the romances I've seen in the mysteries certainly don't make me want to read her romances (I'm not that much of a completist!) Yet she does have some strong, intelligent female characters, at least as many as ones I want to shake until their heads pop off (Gerda Christow, this means you). And while many of her characters are very disparaging of "foreigners", Poirot, an outsider himself most of the time, tends to make fools of them. At times it's hard to guess when she's presenting her own view or just making the prejudiced thinking a facet of a particular character; it'll be interesting to see how she comes off in her autobiography (just got that), and I'm sure someone somewhere has analysed her pre-Mallowan writing vs. her later period. For myself, I feel very privileged to have started life in the late 20th Century when I read anything written before then.

Dana wrote: "Agreed - I don't expect writers to be ahead of their time, though some have been - but maybe it's a sign of progress that we gasp when we see casual bigotry. I've been reading her complete works, t..."

Good observations that I can agree with. I've always through she made strives to be ahead with the women characters in some of the older stories and dared to get into psychological issues that were often shied over by other media in those time periods. She was certainly ahead of the day with some of subtle psychological twists in 'And Then There Were None' - I still haven't seen that blended explanation again for a villain, it's always fascinated me.

I read her autobiography - there are racist terms in there from the Victorian time period. I chalk it up to different culture/upbringing and not outright racism - while we consider the term racist in modern times, they weren't considered that when she was being raised.

She seemed well rounded and traveled - her exposure to different cultures would, hopefully, enable her to see everyone in a fair light.

As for the foreigner remarks so common in her books, I think most are there for humor because of the quirky Poirot often dismissed for being Belgian. It's more obvious in books like Murder on the Orient Express, where every character would come through a door with a bias against a certain foreigner. To me it was clear she was being humorous - Poirot himself thought how odd it was all these nationalities were mixing on one train, but that ties into the story in the end of course.

Fiona, if you read John Buchan's Richard Richard Hannay stories, you will find much similarity in style. It was understandably the fashion to write that kind of story then. Other authors also used the same kind of subject then. If you read with this in mind, you will enjoy the book. In my opinion Mrs. Christie was a wonderful writer, no matter what she wrote.

This may be the best review I've seen on Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ so far. I just started reading the book and reached the bit about the frickin' lazer beam, um, sorry, I mean "powerful wireless installation... capable of focusing a beam of great intensity upon some given spot", and I had to do an actual double take to make sure I'd really just read that.

I've been reading the Poirot's and Miss Marple's in order over the past few weeks, generally alternating between them, and this came so completely out of left-field that I am now utterly intrigued as to the circumstances behind which the story was written. Blatantly time-travel must be involved. Or, as you say, copious amounts of Scotch. Either way, I can't wait to see where this goes...

Excellent review - my sentiment exactly.

ROFFL. Sure, she watched Bond movies in the early 1920s....ROFL.

That explains it!

hahahajajajaja

this has to be the most epic review of this book I have come across. my thoughts exactly.

Same reason I never go on Amazon when I've been drinking. I did it once; it did not end well.

This may be the best comment I've ever seen