Poirot 16 – Dumb Witness (1937) by Agatha Christie

Emily Arundel, a wealthy spinster, injured herself falling down the stairs. The cause? Bob, her fox terrier, who left his ball at the top of the stairs. Or was it? Bob had a habit of leaving it there, but as she recovers, she begins to doubt that was what caused her fall. So she writes a letter to Hercule Poirot.

By the time Poirot receives the somewhat-rambling letter, Emily has passed away – from natural causes or from another cause. Feeling that he needs to decide if his would-be client was murdered, Poirot, with Hastings in tow, visits the witnesses and Emily’s family to try and get to the bottom of things… Luckily he has the most obvious clue in the world to help him out.

So, we finally return to my Poirot Count-up – it’s been a while – and we come to what has always been for me a problematic book, for a couple of reasons. First of all, way back in the day, it was a Poirot that for some reason I could never find in bookshops – this and Appointment With Death. The second one was worth the wait, but when I finally got hold of this one – well, it’s a bit boring, isn’t it?

It’s hardly a great farewell for Hastings. It’s the last appearance of the good Captain, bar Curtain, and even his presence is a bit weird. There’s no sense of the fact that he has an ongoing business and wife in Argentina – he’s just in London, staying with Poirot for no clear reason. And they’re not exactly getting on here. Poirot’s subterfuges to get information seem to really annoy Hastings. It doesn’t really feel as if they’re friends here, more sparring partners. It just feels off.

And apparently Poirot believes in the possibility of spiritualism. Really?

What else before we get to the mystery itself? Oh, yes, Poirot names four murderers from past cases, just for fun.

Right, on to the mystery. The clue of the initials is so thundering obvious that you expect the first explanation to be a red herring. I’m not sure why we need Poirot to quickly give one half of the explanation of it so early, either, because it’s a) obvious anyway and b) once that is pointed out, the killer (who for some reason has the initialled thing in the first place) becomes inevitable. But hey, they were hammering nails at three in the morning, of course they were going to be seen, so why not wear an extra label saying who they are?

OK, the bits where we hear from Bob (via Hastings) are fun, but they are few and far between. But that’s about it.

Ranking Poirot (So Far)

So where does it compare with the rest so far. Low, I think, due to the dullness… In fact, looking at the list, I’d rather read anything on it apart from The Big Four before coming back to this one, so I guess that puts it at number 15… Luckily Death On The Nile is next…