The Murder on the Links is the second “Poirot” novel by the famous author Agatha Christie. It was first published in 1923. I read the first Poirot mystery last year and I finally acquired and finished this novel. I think that the novels are both good – but this one is somehow more developed. For one thing, the most significant development is that Poirot is more vibrant, talkative, and active. In the previous novel, there are moments when the reader might believe that Christie expected the character Captain Hastings to be the major character, supported by the aloof and quirky Poirot. In fact, in the first Poirot novel (The Mysterious Affair at Styles), Poirot is not even a really likeable character.
This novel starts off very interestingly – Poirot receives a letter requesting him to come to France under the employ of a man who thinks that his life is in grave danger. Immediately, the characters are off and running, traveling to France. One of the things I liked about this novel was that the action, so to speak, was immediate and was continued throughout. None of the pacing was off.
My main complaint about the novel is that the twists and turns, red herrings and deductions seem a bit overwritten. I feel that the latter half of the book has too many twists and turns for it to be a perfectly written mystery. Nevertheless, the twists are explained fairly well and Poirot is always fun to follow around. Still, I think the mystery was a bit too entangled and there were too many “deltas.”
I also think that the title is a bit deceptive. This book really has nothing to do with golf whatsoever. I do not know, really, what a mystery about golf might entail (I’m not really a golf fan), but I do think it would have to involve more than someone dying nearby a golf course that is being constructed. Maybe even there could be a golf club? Normally, I do not comment on book titles, but this one probably should have been entitled something different.
However, this is not to say that this is a bad novel. It is a fast read – the pages fly by and the story is interesting and engaging. Fast reads are not necessarily good reads, but it doesn’t really speak well of a book if one describes it as tedious or undeveloped. I mean, honestly, who in 2013 would think that following a goofy detective and his sidekick around in the early part of the 1900s would be engaging? Let’s face it, for the majority of the book, Hastings and Poirot do a lot of walking back and forth, traveling to and fro, and making general circles in the township. Nevertheless, I was following right along and actually interested in where characters were walking to next!
Poirot has a little competition in this novel, as well. Another “star” detective is called to the case. This detective represents the very detail-oriented empirical approach to detective work. Poirot (as he will remind you endlessly) pays evidence only a fundamental concern, instead focusing on the psychologies involved in the case and working from cause to effect. The detective, Giraud, is as obnoxious about his method as Poirot is about his own. Therefore, there is a new twist to Poirot’s interactions, which is a neat counterbalance. I also really dig Poirot’s insistence against “sentimentality” and passion. Although basing his methods on psychology, Poirot refuses to draw conclusions based on emotion, sentimentality, or passion.
Hastings is a bit of a fool, though one truly believes he has a good heart and really does his best. This character’s role is to support Poirot, clearly, which sometimes means doubting Poirot. The dynamic that develops between the two characters is worthwhile reading.
Overall, I am thinking this is not Christie’s greatest novel. Still, it is a very interesting and charming read. The novel is not perfect, but it is a satisfying read that allows the reader to build their study of one of the most famous detectives. I would really recommend this to anyone who would like to read a short novel that has wit and charm. It probably is not something a person who likes a chance to figure out the mystery would read – after all, Poirot never gives you all the clues.