Puzzle Doctor

Poirot 14 – Cards On The Table (1936) by Agatha Christie

Mr Shaitana collected murderers. And at one dinner party, invited four murderers – Major Despard, Dr Roberts, Mrs Lorrimer and Miss Meredith – and four sleuths – Superintendent Battle, Colonel Race, Ariadne Oliver and Hercule Poirot. Shaitana, it seems, merely wanted to bask in his knowledge about the criminals, but one of them, it seems, was unwilling to take a chance on exposure.

A game of bridge ensues with the sleuths in one room and the murderers in the other, with Shaitana sitting watching the murderers’s game. But during the game, one of the players, when acting as dummy, took advantage of a small sharp dagger that Shaitana had left on display and stabbed him through the heart…

With no evidence, except for a bridge score card, can Poirot find the killer, and, moreover, bring them to justice?

So back to my Poirot Count-up – it hasn’t quite been a year – and on to what can be something of a Marmite book. I remember myself when I first read it not being desperately impressed by it, but much preferring it the second time around. This time, I absolutely loved it.

In part, it was just Christie’s writing. In theory, this book should drag. Four suspects, no evidence equals lots of conversations, but these never seem to get stale. The four sleuths (well, three and a half as you don’t see that much of Race) gives variety on that side and when the suspects start interlinking, that adds an extra dimension to it.

Let’s talk about Ariadne Oliver a bit. People cite her as being Christie writing a version of herself, but if so, she doesn’t have a lot in common with Christie. Yes, she can moan about having to keep writing about Sven Hjerson and people picking holes in her plots, but other than that, her personality doesn’t match Christie at all. It’s fair enough, as Oliver as a character is far more interesting that Christie as a character would be.

Oliver is a tad inconsistent in the first part of this one – breaking down in tears when finding out about the murder only to be full-bloodedly joining in the investigation mere pages later. Her addition to the book is a good choice though, as she adds a dimension to the sleuthing that would have been missing if she had been replaced by, say, Hastings.

There are a couple of issues – I don’t think it’s ever clear how Shaitana finds out about all of the murderers and what he intends to do with them. “Hello, I’m a sinister man who you’ve only met once before, would you like to come to dinner with Hercule Poirot?” But best to just gloss over that bit.

One odd thing – I have no recollection of watching the Suchet version of this (which renames Battle and Race for some reason – was The Man In The Brown Suit under copyright elsewhere?) but I was surprised when one change – involving Anne and Rhoda – didn’t happen in the book. I was convinced that it was part of the original, but obviously not. It’s actually a shame as it puts an interesting spin on that story, I thought. Obviously for spoiler reasons I’m not going into details, but if you’ve seen it, you’ll know what I’m talking about.

Ignoring that plot twist though (as it doesn’t happen) Christie is to be applauded for keeping the reader guessing on such a small closed circle of suspects. After giving on on three books this month (all of which were touted as “if you like Agatha Christie”), it was such a breath of fresh air to come back to the real deal.

BTW if you want to read another point of view, Brad at Ah Sweet Mystery has recently taken a run at it. Enjoy,

Ranking Poirot (So Far)

It’s been a while since I’ve done this, and reviewing the list, I do wonder about some of the order. But the idea was to not adjust the list as I was going on, merely to add to it. So I think this is definitely at the top end…

  1. The ABC Murders
  2. The Murder Of Roger Ackroyd
  3. The Mysterious Affair At Styles
  4. Peril At End House
  5. Cards On The Table
  6. Murder On The Orient Express
  7. Three Act Tragedy
  8. Lord Edgware Dies
  9. Death In The Clouds
  10. Murder In Mesopotamia
  11. The Murder On The Links
  12. Poirot Investigates
  13. The Mystery Of The Blue Train
  14. The Big Four
  15. Black Coffee

15 comments

      • But it is pretty obvious that once the thing in the river happens, that person won’t be the murderer, similarly with the person who confesses. Once the river event happens, it would be more surprising if someone else was the murderer rather than the who is revealed to be.

        Like

      • It is also part of a really obnoxious strategy of changes to the novel in the adaptation in terms of its handling of sexual difference – I thought it was ill-judged and offensive.

        Like

      • Just watched Miles Ledoux’s YouTube video on the adaptation. Holy crap! It is weird that for some reason I was expecting an Anne/Rhoda switch which would imply I’ve watched the adaptation but the rest of it? Shaitana drugged himsellf to get someone to kill him? A character is gay because they didn’t make a pass at their secretary? Utterly amazed that they kept the same killer, but the changes are so many and offensive at the same time, both to the source and to… well, everything else.

        It bugs me that they made a point of adapting every Poirot story but it would have been nice if they’d actually adapted them rather than rewriting them

        Like

      • Tried to warn you mate …given how recent it is, I just can’t imagine how this approach got produced. Depressing, not just if you’re a fan of the Suchet series either (which I definitely am btw).

        Like

      • Any others that I should avoid? I know The Big Four and The Labours are loose adaptations, but that’s due to the source material. Didn’t get very far with Orient Express, as it was far too dark…

        Like

      • The later novel adaptations are such a mixed bag. 5 LITTLE PIGS and SAD CYPRESS are especially good and AFTER THE FUNERAL very well done as well. As I recall APPOINTMENT WITH DEATH got fairly mangled. THE CLOCKS is pretty unconvincing as I recall. But then …

        Like

      • TAKEN AT THE FLOOD was changed quite considerably and didn’t work very well. I thought the attempt to adapt ACKROYD was not that successful (predictable in some respects) but I really respected the effort to try and find a viable TV alternative for it’s very literary special quality.

        Like

      • I know what you mean of course. But I don’t believe that strict textual fidelity is necessarily / automatically a good thing (I really like all three of the Branagh adaptations and really enjoyed the Marple version of By the Pricking of My Thumbs too). After all, that can make for some very dull drama (for example the later Harry Potter films, which are fairly unintelligible if you haven’t read the books too). But I think it can be so interesting to look at those that worked well (ABC MURDERS, MURDER IN THE CLOUDS, MURDER ON THE LINKS, 5 LITTLE PIGS) and those that were less successful. Fidelity can be a big issue (just think of that one word that strikes fear in the heart of most Christie devotees: Phelps) but it’s also a question of whether the adaptation works on its own terms (given how poor the novel is, the Suchet version of ELEPHANTS is merely mediocre as TV but still an improvement on the book). If you ever fancy coming on my podcast to argue the toss … 👍

        Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.