It is difficult, I think, to write reviews of Agatha Christie novels. The most significant reason being that since they are so amazingly popular and well-known that there is not a whole lot left to “review” in 2023. Another reason is that much of these little novels is entwined in plot twists, red herrings, or key plot elements so that it could be easy to spoil the read for another reader. Beyond that, there are all the TV adaptations etc. that also color the contemporary reader’s image of Poirot and his author. It can be a bit sticky to try and separate some of these ideas out because they are just sort of homegrown things that do influence, rightly or wrongly, the actual reaction to the novel.
Thirteen at Dinner is the U.S.A. title for the 1933 novel Lord Edgware Dies. It is the eighth or ninth Poirot novel; I read the Dell 1969 edition. I am finally getting around to making my way through Christie’s novels. Its easier reading than Walter Burkert and Rene Wellek – the other things I am currently reading. I mention this to explain that I read Thirteen at Dinner mainly at night before bedtime just to wind down and read something entertaining. In this novel, Poirot is exceptionally patient and circumspect in his investigation. His calmness is opposite Inspector Japp’s activities, which entail chasing all over the place after every clue and trail. Throughout, Poirot’s reticence to do much more than ponder and have dinner really aggravates Captain Hastings. In this novel, in fact, it seems Hastings has quite a bit of animosity and frustration with the main character. Several times Hastings asserts that he is very fond of Poirot, but in his narrative asides, Hastings shares much of his impatience and annoyance.
And Poirot replied with a smile, “Alas! Not the cigarette ash – nor the footprint – nor a lady’s glove – nor even a lingering perfume! Nothing that the detective of fiction so conveniently finds.”
“The police are always made out to be as blind as bats in detective stories,” said Japp with a grin. — pg. 64, chapter 7
One of the things that I think was done well in this novel were the characterizations. By this I mean that Christie makes fairly interesting and insightful analyses of her characters – via the observations of Poirot et al. So, her characters seem realistic and have believable attitudes and personalities. The characters are a cross-section sampling of what Christie probably saw around her in London. Its not always flattering, its not always a judgment. It is keen observation and it allows for all the technical matters of a mystery novel to have their place. For example, the characters have idiosyncrasies that would lend themselves toward red herrings, motives, and plot twists.
Chapter 25 is probably the best chapter in the book. There is a dinner party. There is a reference to the “judgment of Paris.” I cannot tell you how amusingly coincidentally apropos this little segment is to my observations – I felt a lot like Hastings in this scene because recently I have seen and cringed at similar gauche gaffe situations. Needless to say, I am now mentally using “judgment of Paris” as a sort of half-serious litmus test in my social interactions. Anyway, Christie nails this scene perfectly and with an economy of words and with heightened insights. It is an excellent sample of writing – describing a scene perfectly.
The story itself is not one that I felt very intrigued by. Largely, it involves the relationships of a well-known, beautiful actress. In fact, the novel is, at points, quite a bit less of a detective mystery and more of a character study of this particular character. The character is self-centered, mercenary, but also utterly oblivious to their own flaws. If readers really consider this character, it is shocking and upsetting because also believable. And it is difficult to watch how right to the last this character exactly unable to engage their conscience. But I do not really care to read about marriages and actresses. So, the storyline generally was never going to pull me to the edge of my seat. I think it is a good read, nevertheless.
In fact, I encourage all readers to read this novel. It is a short novel, very available and well-known. It would not be an imposition on any tbr list to read this one. My reasons for recommending it are several, the characterization as I have mentioned, of course being one reason. Beyond that, I feel like many, many authors have copied, imitated, and borrowed some of the moments and ideas in this story. Its good to see some of the original presentation of these tropes and/or scenes. While I give this one a sort of middling score, that is more of a sign of my personal preference than Christie’s skills.
3 stars
Peril at End House is my latest read Agatha Christie novel. I read The Mystery of the Blue Train earlier this year, but I did not write a review. That is the sort of novel that does not really need to be looked into any further. Christie’s personal troubles during that novel do seem to have spilled over into her writing of it – it is not a very good novel. There really is not much I can add to what has already been said about it dozens and dozens of times. However, Peril at End House was very good and seems to represent Christie back to form.
I finished Agatha Christie’s The Mysterious Affair at Styles. This is the Bantam 1974 edition. This is actually Agatha Christie’s first published novel (1920) and it also introduces the famous Hercule Poirot. In 1990, an episode based on this novel was aired as part of the Agatha Christie’s Poirot series in the UK.
AQ's Reviews 