HERCULE POIROT'S CHRISTMAS
US title: MURDER FOR CHRISTMAS
Other titles: A HOLIDAY FOR MURDER (in US reprint, Avon, 1947)
UK publication: 1938 (Collins)
US publication: 1939 (Dodd, Mead)
Detective: Hercule Poirot
Genre: Novel
Plot
summary and comments: This novel combines the traditional murder in the English country house-party with a locked-room (i.e. seemingly impossible) crime. Perhaps a less realistic story, the Christmas party is that of the family of a wealthy and unpleasant old man, assembled from around the world, and the old man is (naturally) murdered on Christmas eve. Poirot has been staying nearby, with Colonel Johnson of the Middleshire Police (whom he met before, in Three-Act Tragedy) and is called in. The family is rather a collection of stereotypes (the exotic foreigner, the strong and silent Colonial son, the sympathetic wife, and so on), and the locked-room clue perhaps disappointing.
::READERS REVIEWS::
The title is a bit
misleading. However, I do believe that Agatha meant it to be that way.
I have studied literature for a while and know that the everything that
is in the novel is meant for something. To all the people wanting to read
this novel, here's a tip: Everything that is stated in the book, diaglogue,
details, etc. are all key to solving the mystery. To all of us Agatha
fans, it proves to be true. The characters are very well developed, much
better than any other Agatha novel I've read to date. The plot is priceless,
the identities confusing (deliciously so!), and the conclusion is a shocking.
Agatha knows how to lead her readers on, and proves so with this tale
of murder and mayhem around Christmas time. At the beginning of the conclusion,
who think it's Suspect A, but then you lean towards Suspect B, and at
the end, Poirot reveals in all grandness the killer, and you're sitting
there kicking yourself saying, "Why didn't I think of that!"
The pacing of the book is good and I read it in two days. The suspense
builds and the storytelling is at it's finest. For those of you waiting
for a plot summary, read the synopsis above. I won't reveal anything for
it'll ruin the surprise of the novel. Though not one of her famous books,
it's one her best!!"
"Have
you ever gotten one of those easy-to-assemble kits and discovered that
no matter how you try, the pieces just will not go together? Have you
ever labored to solve a puzzle only to find a piece or two missing?
In this case Christie assembles a cast of suspects, gives them ample motive and opportunity, gives them all reasons to lie, throws in a group of clues that simply cannot be reconciled in any logical fashion, and then brings off a solution which explains everything and exposes a killer you'd never suspect.
The story (originally titled "Murder for Christmas") was written in 1938, the same year Christie wrote "Appointment with Death." The two stories share much in common. "Appointment" features a fabulously wealthy, tyrannical matriarch who delights in tormenting her children. "Christmas" features a fabulously wealthy, tyrannical patriarch who delights in tormenting his children. By the time the matriarch/patriarch is bumped off, the reader is ready help kill him/her. The children in both stories are all pathetic weaklings. Despite their weakness, the reader can develop affection for some of them.
"Appointment" featured a rather straightforward, easily achieved modus operandi and Christie's favorite murder weapon--poison. "Christmas" served up a locked room mystery with a diabolically clever methodology fraught with the peril of miscarriage.
One feature of the murder was the vast amount of blood shed when the victim was stabbed. The murderer would have been covered with blood, but none of the suspects seems to have any blood on them. Having read "Murder on the Orient Express," I was familiar with Christie's seeming lack of understanding of the dynamics of blood spatter in stabbing cases. In this case, however, there was a very good explanation for the non-detection of blood on any of the suspects.
Christie never ceases to amaze with her perpetrators. In one case the narrator was the killer. In another the apparent victim turned out to be the murderer. Murderers keep falling out of the woodwork from the most unexpected places. She once even had the butler do it! Poirot's theory of the case insisted on the murderer being a family member. In the end, I think even Poirot was surprised at which family member it was.
Christie plants the clues to the murderer's identity so skillfully, that even though they're there, you'll read right past them without taking any note whatever. When the killer is revealed, you'll slap your forehead and say "of course!"
::YOUR OPINION::
