What do you think?
Rate this book
Hercule Poirot #9
Lord Edgware Dies
It's true; Hercule Poirot had been present when the famous actress Jane Wilkinson bragged of her plan to ‘get rid of’ her estranged husband, Lord Edgware.
Now the man was dead. And yet the great Belgian detective couldn’t help feeling that he was being taken for a ride. After all, how could Jane have stabbed her thoroughly detestable husband to death in his library at exactly the same time she was seen dining with friends? And what could be her motive now that the aristocrat had finally agreed to grant her a divorce?
Librarian's note: the first fifteen novels in the Hercule Poirot series are 1) The Mysterious Affair at Styles, 1920; 2) The Murder on the Links, 1923; 3) The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, 1926; 4) The Big Four, 1927; 5) The Mystery of the Blue Train, 1928; 6) Peril at End House, 1932; 7) Lord Edgware Dies, 1933; 8) Murder on the Orient Express, 1934; 9) Three Act Tragedy, 1935; 10) Death in the Clouds, 1935; 11) The A.B.C. Murders, 1936; 12) Murder in Mesopotamia, 1936; 13) Cards on the Table, 1936; 14) Dumb Witness, 1937; and 15) Death on the Nile, 1937. These are just the novels; Poirot also appears in this period in a play, Black Coffee, 1930, and two collections of short stories, Poirot Investigates, 1924, and Murder in the Mews, 1937. Each novel, play and short story has its own entry on Goodreads.
Now the man was dead. And yet the great Belgian detective couldn’t help feeling that he was being taken for a ride. After all, how could Jane have stabbed her thoroughly detestable husband to death in his library at exactly the same time she was seen dining with friends? And what could be her motive now that the aristocrat had finally agreed to grant her a divorce?
Librarian's note: the first fifteen novels in the Hercule Poirot series are 1) The Mysterious Affair at Styles, 1920; 2) The Murder on the Links, 1923; 3) The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, 1926; 4) The Big Four, 1927; 5) The Mystery of the Blue Train, 1928; 6) Peril at End House, 1932; 7) Lord Edgware Dies, 1933; 8) Murder on the Orient Express, 1934; 9) Three Act Tragedy, 1935; 10) Death in the Clouds, 1935; 11) The A.B.C. Murders, 1936; 12) Murder in Mesopotamia, 1936; 13) Cards on the Table, 1936; 14) Dumb Witness, 1937; and 15) Death on the Nile, 1937. These are just the novels; Poirot also appears in this period in a play, Black Coffee, 1930, and two collections of short stories, Poirot Investigates, 1924, and Murder in the Mews, 1937. Each novel, play and short story has its own entry on Goodreads.
219 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1933
About the author
Agatha Christie
5,175 books59.4k followersAgatha Christie also wrote romance novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott, and was occasionally published under the name Agatha Christie Mallowan.
More than seventy detective novels of British writer Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie include The Murder of Roger Ackroyd (1926), and And Then There Were None (1939); she also wrote plays, including The Mousetrap (1952).
This best-selling author of all time wrote 66 crime novels and story collections, fourteen plays, and six novels under a pseudonym in romance. Her books sold more than a billion copies in the English language and a billion in translation. According to Index Translationum, people translated her works into 103 languages at least, the most for an individual author. Of the most enduring figures in crime literature, she created Hercule Poirot and Miss Jane Marple. She atuhored The Mousetrap, the longest-running play in the history of modern theater.
The youngest of three children of the Miller family. The Millers had two other children: Margaret Frary Miller (1879–1950), called Madge, who was eleven years Agatha's senior, and Louis Montant Miller (1880–1929), called Monty, ten years older than Agatha.
Before marrying and starting a family in London, she had served in a Devon hospital during the First World War, tending to troops coming back from the trenches. During the First World War, she worked at a hospital as a nurse; later working at a hospital pharmacy, a job that influenced her work, as many of the murders in her books are carried out with poison. During the Second World War, she worked as a pharmacy assistant at University College Hospital, London, acquiring a good knowledge of poisons which feature in many of her novels.
Her first novel, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, came out in 1920. During her first marriage, Agatha published six novels, a collection of short stories, and a number of short stories in magazines.
In late 1926, Agatha's husband, Archie, revealed that he was in love with another woman, Nancy Neele, and wanted a divorce. On 8 December 1926 the couple quarreled, and Archie Christie left their house, Styles, in Sunningdale, Berkshire, to spend the weekend with his mistress at Godalming, Surrey. That same evening Agatha disappeared from her home, leaving behind a letter for her secretary saying that she was going to Yorkshire. Her disappearance caused an outcry from the public, many of whom were admirers of her novels. Despite a massive manhunt, she was not found for eleven days.
In 1930, Christie married archaeologist Max Mallowan (Sir Max from 1968) after joining him in an archaeological dig. Their marriage was especially happy in the early years and remained so until Christie's death in 1976.
Christie frequently used familiar settings for her stories. Christie's travels with Mallowan contributed background to several of her novels set in the Middle East. Other novels (such as And Then There Were None) were set in and around Torquay, where she was born. Christie's 1934 novel Murder on the Orient Express was written in the Hotel Pera Palace in Istanbul, Turkey, the southern terminus of the railway. The hotel maintains Christie's room as a memorial to the author. The Greenway Estate in Devon, acquired by the couple as a summer residence in 1938, is now in the care of the National Trust.
Christie often stayed at Abney Hall in Cheshire, which was owned by her brother-in-law, James Watts. She based at least two of her stories on the hall: the short story The Adventure of the Christmas Pudding, and the novel After the Funeral. Abney Hall became Agatha's greatest inspiration for country-house life, with all the servants and grandeur which have been woven into her plots.
To honour her many literary works, she was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empir
More than seventy detective novels of British writer Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie include The Murder of Roger Ackroyd (1926), and And Then There Were None (1939); she also wrote plays, including The Mousetrap (1952).
This best-selling author of all time wrote 66 crime novels and story collections, fourteen plays, and six novels under a pseudonym in romance. Her books sold more than a billion copies in the English language and a billion in translation. According to Index Translationum, people translated her works into 103 languages at least, the most for an individual author. Of the most enduring figures in crime literature, she created Hercule Poirot and Miss Jane Marple. She atuhored The Mousetrap, the longest-running play in the history of modern theater.
The youngest of three children of the Miller family. The Millers had two other children: Margaret Frary Miller (1879–1950), called Madge, who was eleven years Agatha's senior, and Louis Montant Miller (1880–1929), called Monty, ten years older than Agatha.
Before marrying and starting a family in London, she had served in a Devon hospital during the First World War, tending to troops coming back from the trenches. During the First World War, she worked at a hospital as a nurse; later working at a hospital pharmacy, a job that influenced her work, as many of the murders in her books are carried out with poison. During the Second World War, she worked as a pharmacy assistant at University College Hospital, London, acquiring a good knowledge of poisons which feature in many of her novels.
Her first novel, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, came out in 1920. During her first marriage, Agatha published six novels, a collection of short stories, and a number of short stories in magazines.
In late 1926, Agatha's husband, Archie, revealed that he was in love with another woman, Nancy Neele, and wanted a divorce. On 8 December 1926 the couple quarreled, and Archie Christie left their house, Styles, in Sunningdale, Berkshire, to spend the weekend with his mistress at Godalming, Surrey. That same evening Agatha disappeared from her home, leaving behind a letter for her secretary saying that she was going to Yorkshire. Her disappearance caused an outcry from the public, many of whom were admirers of her novels. Despite a massive manhunt, she was not found for eleven days.
In 1930, Christie married archaeologist Max Mallowan (Sir Max from 1968) after joining him in an archaeological dig. Their marriage was especially happy in the early years and remained so until Christie's death in 1976.
Christie frequently used familiar settings for her stories. Christie's travels with Mallowan contributed background to several of her novels set in the Middle East. Other novels (such as And Then There Were None) were set in and around Torquay, where she was born. Christie's 1934 novel Murder on the Orient Express was written in the Hotel Pera Palace in Istanbul, Turkey, the southern terminus of the railway. The hotel maintains Christie's room as a memorial to the author. The Greenway Estate in Devon, acquired by the couple as a summer residence in 1938, is now in the care of the National Trust.
Christie often stayed at Abney Hall in Cheshire, which was owned by her brother-in-law, James Watts. She based at least two of her stories on the hall: the short story The Adventure of the Christmas Pudding, and the novel After the Funeral. Abney Hall became Agatha's greatest inspiration for country-house life, with all the servants and grandeur which have been woven into her plots.
To honour her many literary works, she was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empir
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,864 reviews
May 9, 2023
Which is a better title, in your opinion: Lord Edgware Dies or “Thirteen at Dinner”? It depends, you might say. When does Lord Edgware Die? Is it a spoiler? And what is the significance of the number thirteen, at dinner?
Well to have thirteen guests at dinner is, according to superstition, unlucky. The legend goes that if thirteen are present at a dinner, then bad luck will come to the person who first leaves the table. And, yes Lord Edgware does die, although not before the story starts, so that the entire novel is a “flashback”, but . Neither does he die at the end of the story: it is a true whodunnit, where the rule is that enough clues are provided as the story moves along, for the reader to be able to solve it.
(I did not by the way. As usual I was merrily carried away by the fact that I had spotted a detail near the beginning, which would explain the otherwise hidden identity of the murderer. But no. It was a red herring, carefully placed by Agatha Christie to entrap and misdirect innocent readers like me.)
In fact there is a lot of skilful misdirection in Lord Edgware Dies. It is well up to standard for a Poirot novel. And it also has a little welcome humour, such as this comment by one of the characters, where the author delightfully pokes fun at herself:
“And that very same evening – that very same evening – Lord Edgware dies. Good title that, by the way. Lord Edgware Dies. Look well on a book stall.”
So why the two titles? It came as a surprise to me, to learn that this novel by an English author was originally published in the USA. It was entitled “Thirteen for Dinner”, and serialised in six monthly parts, between March and August 1933, in “The American Magazine”. Just a month later, in September 1933, it was published in the UK as Lord Edgware Dies, and we know it better now under that later title. But I feel there should be a warning to Agatha Christie enthusiasts, who may believe that they have stumbled on a lesser known work by the Great Dame: they are the same novel. And interestingly, both titles do actually function as a kind of spoiler, although it is not really possible to tell until the conclusion is known.
And the dedication? Who were “Dr. and Mrs. Campbell Thompson”?
At the time of writing, the author and her second husband, Max Mallowan, the archaeologist, were friends with the Campbell Thompson couple. Agatha Christie and Max Mallowan had first met at the Ur site three years previously, in 1930, and married the same year. Reginald Campbell Thompson had employed Max to work on a dig at the ancient Assyrian city of Upper Mesopotamia, located on the outskirts of Mosul in modern-day northern Iraq.
Apparently Thompson was notoriously tight-fisted; so much so that he wanted Agatha Christie to use use orange boxes as a desk! Agatha Christie instead insisted on buying a solid table to place her typewriter on, in order to complete her next book. Thompson was aghast at the fact that she spent ten pounds of her own money on a table at a local bazaar, and apparently took two weeks to recover his temper over such an “extravagance”! The book in question was, of course, Lord Edgware Dies.
Despite these disagreements, Thompson often asked Agatha how the book was progressing. In fact the Thompson couple were uniquely honoured, because Agatha Christie read the manuscript of the book aloud to them, and this was something that she only ever usually did for her family. Agatha Christie and Reginald Campbell Thompson clearly regained their mutual respect, because not only did she dedicate the novel to the Thompson couple, but a skeleton found on the dig was named “Lord Edgware”!
There is little point in retelling the story here. There are plenty of places where one can read a synopsis of this convoluted tale. As you would expect, Agatha Christie’s ninth work featuring her great detective Hercule Poirot, shows her well into her stride. Satisfyingly, both Hercule Poirot and Captain Hastings are present for the whole story, rather than one of them making a late appearance, as sometimes happens. Once again, Hastings’s wife, Dulcie Duveen, or “Cinderella”, first introduced to us in “Murder on the Links”, does not appear in the novel. Presumably she is back at home on their ranch in the Argentine. The single reference to this comes at the beginning of the last chapter, when:
“I was suddenly recalled to the Argentine”.
Chief Inspector Japp too, is also on the scene, as the officer in change of the murder case – or cases, I should say – as there will be three murders in total.
For much of the novel we watch the interaction between these three. The relationship between Poirot and Hastings is far better described than in the previous novel, “Peril at End House” in which the duo seemed to spend all their time carping at one another. The author Robert Barnard has noticed this too, calling the novel:
“clever and unusual, with the Hastings/Poirot relationship done less crudely than usual.”
The narrator is as ever, Captain Arthur Hastings, who describes what he thinks of as his friend’s limitations in an affectionate way:
“Oh! I know very well that you always have a little idea that I am conceited, but, indeed, I assure you, I am really a very humble person.”
I laughed.
“You – humble!”
“It is so. Except – I confess it – that I am a little proud of my moustaches.”
And Poirot kindly observes to Hastings:
“No human being should learn from another. Each individual should develop his own powers to the uttermost, not try to imitate those of someone else. I do not wish you to be a second and inferior Poirot. I wish you to be the supreme Hastings. And you are the supreme Hastings. In you, Hastings, I find the normal mind almost perfectly illustrated.”
Hastings is also quick to observe that Inspector Japp does not usually have Poirot’s powers of deduction and insight. Nevertheless he reports events faithfully. Here is an exchange between Poirot and the good Inspector:
“You have the confidence — always the confidence! You never stop and say to yourself — can it be so? You never doubt — or wonder. You never think: this is too easy!’
'You bet your life I don’t! And that's just where, if you’ll excuse me saying so, you go off the rails every time. Why shouldn’t a thing be easy? What’s the harm in a thing being easy?’”
The trio are a treat to read about, and their little peccadilloes only add to the enjoyment of this classic golden age mystery.
It is obvious from the title that the characters are going to be aristocrats and those in high society. We move in these circles throughout the novel, and also into the realms of the theatre. Lord Edgware’s wife is the actress, Jane Wilkinson, and we plunge straight into the nitty-gritty of the book when, at the end of chapter one, she announces:
“M. Poirot, somehow or other I’ve just got to get rid of my husband.”
We know the next bit of the plot, from the title, but who exactly might have done the deadly deed? Apart from his wife, there are other suspects within his family. There is his nephew, Captain Ronald Marsh, who is the heir to his title, and has money troubles. There is Geraldine Marsh, his daughter from his first marriage, whose life he makes a misery. There is the Duke of Merton, whom Lord Edgware’s wife wishes to be free to marry. And as ever, there are butlers, housekeepers and maids of the various households, all of whom could easily have a good motive to murder Lord Edgware.
Prominent in the story are Jane Wilkinson, who like many actresses depicted in fiction, seems completely self-obsessed, and described by her friends as having no conscience at all. But despite reports of having been seen in Lord Edgware’s house at the time of the murder, she has a perfect alibi, as she was also seen attending a dinner with a dozen other guests.
We also meet Carlotta Adams, an American impersonator, who is on tour in London and Paris. In a performance watched by Poirot and Hastings in chapter 1, she mimics Jane Wilkinson exceptionally well. Interestingly, this performance is viewed with pleasure by Jane Wilkinson herself, who is seated in the audience, just behind Poirot and Hastings.
Surely the inclusion of a talented impersonator, who is able to mimic one of the chief suspects, cannot be immaterial to the plot? Throughout much of the novel, we are trying to work out what exactly might have happened here. Carlotta Adams herself is an endearing character. She was based on the American dramatist Ruth Draper, and Agatha Christie was so impressed by her, that she became the inspiration behind the story. In Agatha Christie’s autobiography, she wrote:
“I thought how clever she was and how good her impersonations were; the wonderful way she could transform herself from a nagging wife to a peasant girl kneeling in a cathedral. Thinking about her led me to the book Lord Edgware Dies”
The characters in Lord Edgware Dies are slightly better filled out than in some of her other novels. Another feisty female is Genevieve or “Jenny” Driver, a friend of Carlotta Adams, who specialises in the creation of fashionable hats. Another strong character is Bryan Martin, a successful actor, who knows all three females well. Other actors and minor members of the aristocracy come and go.
To say the settings are so limited – various barely described locations in London – it remains an absorbing read. Much of the text consists of dialogue between the detectives and those involved in the case, and even more is between Poirot and Hastings, where Poirot explains his thoughts (or Hastings complains that he doesn’t!) We are privy to all Poirot’s mistaken theories, as he postulates first one solution, and then another. But none will suffice, as none cover all the questions Poirot has asked himself. This infuriates Japp, who merely looks for the obvious answer, and we gleefully watch the irritable conversations that ensue.
The structure of the story is also nicely done. Right at the end of the book is an account, a letter to Poirot . It is a satisfying way to end the novel. And the opposite end of the book, the conclusion to chapter one already quoted, sets a precedent for many of the other chapter endings to also end with a surprise — or on a cliffhanger —to ensure that we carry on reading.
Red herrings are placed randomly, some of which we pick up, certain that this time they will not be misdirection, but actual clues which we have cleverly spotted. (We are invariably wrong!) A person in a particular place at a particular time. An initial which is the correct one. A relationship which had been hidden hitherto, but is suddenly revealed. Surely these are pertinent?
Probably not. Things are never as they seem.
“Enemies! People these days don’t have enemies! Not English people!”
“Do you not know, my friend, that each one of us is a dark mystery, a maze of conflicting passions and desires and aptitudes? Mais oui, c’est vrai. One makes one’s little judgments — but nine times out of ten one is wrong.”
“One cannot be interested in crime without being interested in psychology. It is not the mere act of killing, it is what lies behind it that appeals to the expert.”
Well to have thirteen guests at dinner is, according to superstition, unlucky. The legend goes that if thirteen are present at a dinner, then bad luck will come to the person who first leaves the table. And, yes Lord Edgware does die, although not before the story starts, so that the entire novel is a “flashback”, but . Neither does he die at the end of the story: it is a true whodunnit, where the rule is that enough clues are provided as the story moves along, for the reader to be able to solve it.
(I did not by the way. As usual I was merrily carried away by the fact that I had spotted a detail near the beginning, which would explain the otherwise hidden identity of the murderer. But no. It was a red herring, carefully placed by Agatha Christie to entrap and misdirect innocent readers like me.)
In fact there is a lot of skilful misdirection in Lord Edgware Dies. It is well up to standard for a Poirot novel. And it also has a little welcome humour, such as this comment by one of the characters, where the author delightfully pokes fun at herself:
“And that very same evening – that very same evening – Lord Edgware dies. Good title that, by the way. Lord Edgware Dies. Look well on a book stall.”
So why the two titles? It came as a surprise to me, to learn that this novel by an English author was originally published in the USA. It was entitled “Thirteen for Dinner”, and serialised in six monthly parts, between March and August 1933, in “The American Magazine”. Just a month later, in September 1933, it was published in the UK as Lord Edgware Dies, and we know it better now under that later title. But I feel there should be a warning to Agatha Christie enthusiasts, who may believe that they have stumbled on a lesser known work by the Great Dame: they are the same novel. And interestingly, both titles do actually function as a kind of spoiler, although it is not really possible to tell until the conclusion is known.
And the dedication? Who were “Dr. and Mrs. Campbell Thompson”?
At the time of writing, the author and her second husband, Max Mallowan, the archaeologist, were friends with the Campbell Thompson couple. Agatha Christie and Max Mallowan had first met at the Ur site three years previously, in 1930, and married the same year. Reginald Campbell Thompson had employed Max to work on a dig at the ancient Assyrian city of Upper Mesopotamia, located on the outskirts of Mosul in modern-day northern Iraq.
Apparently Thompson was notoriously tight-fisted; so much so that he wanted Agatha Christie to use use orange boxes as a desk! Agatha Christie instead insisted on buying a solid table to place her typewriter on, in order to complete her next book. Thompson was aghast at the fact that she spent ten pounds of her own money on a table at a local bazaar, and apparently took two weeks to recover his temper over such an “extravagance”! The book in question was, of course, Lord Edgware Dies.
Despite these disagreements, Thompson often asked Agatha how the book was progressing. In fact the Thompson couple were uniquely honoured, because Agatha Christie read the manuscript of the book aloud to them, and this was something that she only ever usually did for her family. Agatha Christie and Reginald Campbell Thompson clearly regained their mutual respect, because not only did she dedicate the novel to the Thompson couple, but a skeleton found on the dig was named “Lord Edgware”!
There is little point in retelling the story here. There are plenty of places where one can read a synopsis of this convoluted tale. As you would expect, Agatha Christie’s ninth work featuring her great detective Hercule Poirot, shows her well into her stride. Satisfyingly, both Hercule Poirot and Captain Hastings are present for the whole story, rather than one of them making a late appearance, as sometimes happens. Once again, Hastings’s wife, Dulcie Duveen, or “Cinderella”, first introduced to us in “Murder on the Links”, does not appear in the novel. Presumably she is back at home on their ranch in the Argentine. The single reference to this comes at the beginning of the last chapter, when:
“I was suddenly recalled to the Argentine”.
Chief Inspector Japp too, is also on the scene, as the officer in change of the murder case – or cases, I should say – as there will be three murders in total.
For much of the novel we watch the interaction between these three. The relationship between Poirot and Hastings is far better described than in the previous novel, “Peril at End House” in which the duo seemed to spend all their time carping at one another. The author Robert Barnard has noticed this too, calling the novel:
“clever and unusual, with the Hastings/Poirot relationship done less crudely than usual.”
The narrator is as ever, Captain Arthur Hastings, who describes what he thinks of as his friend’s limitations in an affectionate way:
“Oh! I know very well that you always have a little idea that I am conceited, but, indeed, I assure you, I am really a very humble person.”
I laughed.
“You – humble!”
“It is so. Except – I confess it – that I am a little proud of my moustaches.”
And Poirot kindly observes to Hastings:
“No human being should learn from another. Each individual should develop his own powers to the uttermost, not try to imitate those of someone else. I do not wish you to be a second and inferior Poirot. I wish you to be the supreme Hastings. And you are the supreme Hastings. In you, Hastings, I find the normal mind almost perfectly illustrated.”
Hastings is also quick to observe that Inspector Japp does not usually have Poirot’s powers of deduction and insight. Nevertheless he reports events faithfully. Here is an exchange between Poirot and the good Inspector:
“You have the confidence — always the confidence! You never stop and say to yourself — can it be so? You never doubt — or wonder. You never think: this is too easy!’
'You bet your life I don’t! And that's just where, if you’ll excuse me saying so, you go off the rails every time. Why shouldn’t a thing be easy? What’s the harm in a thing being easy?’”
The trio are a treat to read about, and their little peccadilloes only add to the enjoyment of this classic golden age mystery.
It is obvious from the title that the characters are going to be aristocrats and those in high society. We move in these circles throughout the novel, and also into the realms of the theatre. Lord Edgware’s wife is the actress, Jane Wilkinson, and we plunge straight into the nitty-gritty of the book when, at the end of chapter one, she announces:
“M. Poirot, somehow or other I’ve just got to get rid of my husband.”
We know the next bit of the plot, from the title, but who exactly might have done the deadly deed? Apart from his wife, there are other suspects within his family. There is his nephew, Captain Ronald Marsh, who is the heir to his title, and has money troubles. There is Geraldine Marsh, his daughter from his first marriage, whose life he makes a misery. There is the Duke of Merton, whom Lord Edgware’s wife wishes to be free to marry. And as ever, there are butlers, housekeepers and maids of the various households, all of whom could easily have a good motive to murder Lord Edgware.
Prominent in the story are Jane Wilkinson, who like many actresses depicted in fiction, seems completely self-obsessed, and described by her friends as having no conscience at all. But despite reports of having been seen in Lord Edgware’s house at the time of the murder, she has a perfect alibi, as she was also seen attending a dinner with a dozen other guests.
We also meet Carlotta Adams, an American impersonator, who is on tour in London and Paris. In a performance watched by Poirot and Hastings in chapter 1, she mimics Jane Wilkinson exceptionally well. Interestingly, this performance is viewed with pleasure by Jane Wilkinson herself, who is seated in the audience, just behind Poirot and Hastings.
Surely the inclusion of a talented impersonator, who is able to mimic one of the chief suspects, cannot be immaterial to the plot? Throughout much of the novel, we are trying to work out what exactly might have happened here. Carlotta Adams herself is an endearing character. She was based on the American dramatist Ruth Draper, and Agatha Christie was so impressed by her, that she became the inspiration behind the story. In Agatha Christie’s autobiography, she wrote:
“I thought how clever she was and how good her impersonations were; the wonderful way she could transform herself from a nagging wife to a peasant girl kneeling in a cathedral. Thinking about her led me to the book Lord Edgware Dies”
The characters in Lord Edgware Dies are slightly better filled out than in some of her other novels. Another feisty female is Genevieve or “Jenny” Driver, a friend of Carlotta Adams, who specialises in the creation of fashionable hats. Another strong character is Bryan Martin, a successful actor, who knows all three females well. Other actors and minor members of the aristocracy come and go.
To say the settings are so limited – various barely described locations in London – it remains an absorbing read. Much of the text consists of dialogue between the detectives and those involved in the case, and even more is between Poirot and Hastings, where Poirot explains his thoughts (or Hastings complains that he doesn’t!) We are privy to all Poirot’s mistaken theories, as he postulates first one solution, and then another. But none will suffice, as none cover all the questions Poirot has asked himself. This infuriates Japp, who merely looks for the obvious answer, and we gleefully watch the irritable conversations that ensue.
The structure of the story is also nicely done. Right at the end of the book is an account, a letter to Poirot . It is a satisfying way to end the novel. And the opposite end of the book, the conclusion to chapter one already quoted, sets a precedent for many of the other chapter endings to also end with a surprise — or on a cliffhanger —to ensure that we carry on reading.
Red herrings are placed randomly, some of which we pick up, certain that this time they will not be misdirection, but actual clues which we have cleverly spotted. (We are invariably wrong!) A person in a particular place at a particular time. An initial which is the correct one. A relationship which had been hidden hitherto, but is suddenly revealed. Surely these are pertinent?
Probably not. Things are never as they seem.
“Enemies! People these days don’t have enemies! Not English people!”
“Do you not know, my friend, that each one of us is a dark mystery, a maze of conflicting passions and desires and aptitudes? Mais oui, c’est vrai. One makes one’s little judgments — but nine times out of ten one is wrong.”
“One cannot be interested in crime without being interested in psychology. It is not the mere act of killing, it is what lies behind it that appeals to the expert.”
February 2, 2023
It's probably safe to say you already know Lord Edgware doesn't make it to the end of the book.
Who killed him is another matter entirely.
This one is a great example of Agatha Christie at her finest when it comes to moving things around on the page, and fooling everyone as to who did what when, and why.
There were also some great clues in this one that are a lot of fun to watch Poirot decode.
It starts with an obvious suspect, Edgware's estranged wife.
Actress Jane Wilkinson wants a divorce so that she can marry another man, and the doomed Lord has refused to give it to her. When she runs into Poirot and Hastings at a show, she begs him to visit Lord Edgware and convince him to let her go. Later during dinner, she laughingly and loudly announces that if that doesn't work, she'll just drive up to his front door, go inside, and kill him herself.
So when her husband ends up dead in exactly the way she described, and a woman who looked like her was the last person seen entering the house?
Naturally, Japp thinks it's all sewn up.
Unfortunately, the lady in question had attended a dinner party at the last minute, which has given her a rock-solid alibi.
So. If it wasn't Jane, who killed him? And why did they try to make it look like she did it?
This is one that I've personally read again and again, and I'd argue that most Christie fans would say this is a classic Poirot story. It's also a must-read for anyone who is interested in seeing why she's the Queen of Mystery.
Highly Recommended.
Who killed him is another matter entirely.
This one is a great example of Agatha Christie at her finest when it comes to moving things around on the page, and fooling everyone as to who did what when, and why.
There were also some great clues in this one that are a lot of fun to watch Poirot decode.
It starts with an obvious suspect, Edgware's estranged wife.
Actress Jane Wilkinson wants a divorce so that she can marry another man, and the doomed Lord has refused to give it to her. When she runs into Poirot and Hastings at a show, she begs him to visit Lord Edgware and convince him to let her go. Later during dinner, she laughingly and loudly announces that if that doesn't work, she'll just drive up to his front door, go inside, and kill him herself.
So when her husband ends up dead in exactly the way she described, and a woman who looked like her was the last person seen entering the house?
Naturally, Japp thinks it's all sewn up.
Unfortunately, the lady in question had attended a dinner party at the last minute, which has given her a rock-solid alibi.
So. If it wasn't Jane, who killed him? And why did they try to make it look like she did it?
This is one that I've personally read again and again, and I'd argue that most Christie fans would say this is a classic Poirot story. It's also a must-read for anyone who is interested in seeing why she's the Queen of Mystery.
Highly Recommended.
July 6, 2020
13 For Dinner = Thirteen at Dinner = Lord Edgware Dies, Agatha Christie
Lord Edgware Dies is a work of detective fiction by British writer Agatha Christie.
عنوانها: سیزده نفر سر میز شام؛ لرد اجور میمیرد؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: سال 1994میلادی، و نسخه دیگر روز نوزدهم ماه سپتامبر سال 2011میلادی
عنوان: سیزده نفر سر میز شام؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ مترجم: بهرام افراسیابی؛ تهران، سخن، 1372؛ در 289ص؛ موضوع: داستانهای کارآگاهی از نویسندگان انگلیسی - سده 20م
عنوان: لرد اجور میمیرد؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ مترجم: محمد گذرآبادی؛ تهران، هرمس، کارآگاه، 1388؛ در 282ص؛
چاپ دوم 1393؛ شابک 9789643636180؛
رمان در باره ی «جین وینکلسون»، بازیگر حرفه ای زیبا، خودخواه و مغرور است، که هماره از همسر خویش نفرت داشته، و هماره سر زبانش این سخن بوده، که اگر از من جدا نشود، او را خواهم کشت. «جین» پس از مدتی، پیش «پوآرو» میرود، و از او میخواهد تا یاریش کند. «پوآرو» میپذیرد و میرود تا با «لرد آجور» حرف بزند. او با شگفتی میشنود، که «لرد آجور» با درخواست طلاق، موافقت کرده، و میخواهد «جین» را طلاق دهد. اما روز بعد «لرد آجور» به قتل میرسد؛ و ...؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 16/04/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
Lord Edgware Dies is a work of detective fiction by British writer Agatha Christie.
عنوانها: سیزده نفر سر میز شام؛ لرد اجور میمیرد؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: سال 1994میلادی، و نسخه دیگر روز نوزدهم ماه سپتامبر سال 2011میلادی
عنوان: سیزده نفر سر میز شام؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ مترجم: بهرام افراسیابی؛ تهران، سخن، 1372؛ در 289ص؛ موضوع: داستانهای کارآگاهی از نویسندگان انگلیسی - سده 20م
عنوان: لرد اجور میمیرد؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ مترجم: محمد گذرآبادی؛ تهران، هرمس، کارآگاه، 1388؛ در 282ص؛
چاپ دوم 1393؛ شابک 9789643636180؛
رمان در باره ی «جین وینکلسون»، بازیگر حرفه ای زیبا، خودخواه و مغرور است، که هماره از همسر خویش نفرت داشته، و هماره سر زبانش این سخن بوده، که اگر از من جدا نشود، او را خواهم کشت. «جین» پس از مدتی، پیش «پوآرو» میرود، و از او میخواهد تا یاریش کند. «پوآرو» میپذیرد و میرود تا با «لرد آجور» حرف بزند. او با شگفتی میشنود، که «لرد آجور» با درخواست طلاق، موافقت کرده، و میخواهد «جین» را طلاق دهد. اما روز بعد «لرد آجور» به قتل میرسد؛ و ...؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 16/04/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
March 19, 2019
A book devoid of genius levels of narration but with the customary gusto of Agatha Christie is still a solid entry in the Hercule Poirot series.
What enhanced the reading experience was the system of chapter allocation. Christie varies her ways of indenting her story from book to book. But this time the chapters were short, with titles of their own. I liked that.
There was no stupefying twists present but the murderer...well I don't want to spoil the fun for you. Altogether the translators keep on changing but the quality remains there or thereabouts.
What enhanced the reading experience was the system of chapter allocation. Christie varies her ways of indenting her story from book to book. But this time the chapters were short, with titles of their own. I liked that.
There was no stupefying twists present but the murderer...well I don't want to spoil the fun for you. Altogether the translators keep on changing but the quality remains there or thereabouts.
June 12, 2018
Take it from me, nothing is as "riveting" as Hercules Poirot hanging about letting the little grey cells percolate.
If you’re looking for the master detective to bitch slap a Duke or put the moves on some English babe or pull out a gat and plug a few holes in the snobbish butler, move on dear reader. Poirot thinks. A lot.
In this volume, he does lots and lots of contemplating and not much in the way of getting about and searching for clues. Let that pompous fool, Inspector Japp, do most of the leg work while Poirot takes a nap or eats le omelet. “Hastings, my dear friend, we haven’t gone over the clues in a page and a half, let us do so once again.”
Again, I don’t expect Poirot to chase a suspect, leaping across London rooftops in a single bound or beat a knife wielding thug into a bloody pulp or hang out at the hotel pool, drinking Boilermakers and ogling the honeys, but in this volume, our Belgian detective is more inert than usual.
Plus, this very regular mystery, doesn’t offer a lot of mental gymnastics for the reader looking for a brain workout. The answer is pretty much there after a quarter of the book, then Christie plays hide the suspect salami, diverting the reader away from the truth with feeble feints and jabs. The fun for these types of mysteries is having to re-adjust your thinking cap when different clues and suspects are brought to light – this book just brought on le brain cramps.
If you want better Christie or Poirot, check out The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, Murder on the Orient Express or The A.B.C. Murders.
Oh, and the American title of this book makes very little sense in the grand scheme of things, I would have stuck with the original title, Lord Edgeware Dies. It’s what this perfunctory mystery deserves.
If you’re looking for the master detective to bitch slap a Duke or put the moves on some English babe or pull out a gat and plug a few holes in the snobbish butler, move on dear reader. Poirot thinks. A lot.
In this volume, he does lots and lots of contemplating and not much in the way of getting about and searching for clues. Let that pompous fool, Inspector Japp, do most of the leg work while Poirot takes a nap or eats le omelet. “Hastings, my dear friend, we haven’t gone over the clues in a page and a half, let us do so once again.”
Again, I don’t expect Poirot to chase a suspect, leaping across London rooftops in a single bound or beat a knife wielding thug into a bloody pulp or hang out at the hotel pool, drinking Boilermakers and ogling the honeys, but in this volume, our Belgian detective is more inert than usual.
Plus, this very regular mystery, doesn’t offer a lot of mental gymnastics for the reader looking for a brain workout. The answer is pretty much there after a quarter of the book, then Christie plays hide the suspect salami, diverting the reader away from the truth with feeble feints and jabs. The fun for these types of mysteries is having to re-adjust your thinking cap when different clues and suspects are brought to light – this book just brought on le brain cramps.
If you want better Christie or Poirot, check out The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, Murder on the Orient Express or The A.B.C. Murders.
Oh, and the American title of this book makes very little sense in the grand scheme of things, I would have stuck with the original title, Lord Edgeware Dies. It’s what this perfunctory mystery deserves.
April 26, 2015
رواية من روايات أجاثا المحيرة، والمربكة جداً تدور بك في دوائر مغلقة كلما تمسك بخيط يقود إلى إكتشاف الجريمة يرجع بك الامر إلى نقطة الصفر ..
شخصيات كثيرة في الرواية وثلاث جرائم معقدة وغامضة ..رواية عبقرية مترابطة ومتماسكة جداً ولا أظن أن القارئ سيصل إلى القاتل سوى في الصفحة قبل الأخيرة .. إلا إذا كان من طراز هركيول بوارو..
شخصيات كثيرة في الرواية وثلاث جرائم معقدة وغامضة ..رواية عبقرية مترابطة ومتماسكة جداً ولا أظن أن القارئ سيصل إلى القاتل سوى في الصفحة قبل الأخيرة .. إلا إذا كان من طراز هركيول بوارو..
May 25, 2021
Lectura muy amena, como la gran mayoría de las historias de la gran Agatha Christie.
La resolución no es tan brillante como en otras ocasiones, pero el espíritu Poirot está presente.
Very enjoyable reading, like the vast majority of the stories by the great Agatha Christie.
The resolution is not as brilliant as on other occasions, but the Poirot spirit is present.
La resolución no es tan brillante como en otras ocasiones, pero el espíritu Poirot está presente.
Very enjoyable reading, like the vast majority of the stories by the great Agatha Christie.
The resolution is not as brilliant as on other occasions, but the Poirot spirit is present.
November 13, 2018
Review to follow tomorrow, but woo hoo, was that good or what ??
(Rhetorical English question 😬)
And yes it was good, a great story, fabulous characters and a real twist at the end as Poirot solves the crime(s).
I'm reading this as part of a read "all of the Poirots" challenge, and I must admit I am thoroughly enjoying it. Some of them I have read and remember, some of them I remember from David Suchet's excellent portrayal on TV, and in some ways the best are those that I just don't know. This falls into the latter category and so was enthralling and kept me riveted all the way to the denouement.
so I give it a solid 5 ⭐️
(Rhetorical English question 😬)
And yes it was good, a great story, fabulous characters and a real twist at the end as Poirot solves the crime(s).
I'm reading this as part of a read "all of the Poirots" challenge, and I must admit I am thoroughly enjoying it. Some of them I have read and remember, some of them I remember from David Suchet's excellent portrayal on TV, and in some ways the best are those that I just don't know. This falls into the latter category and so was enthralling and kept me riveted all the way to the denouement.
so I give it a solid 5 ⭐️
October 11, 2021
Rating: 4* of five
Perfectly wicked little jeu d'esprit; I absolutely can not imagine a corporeal Poirot putting up with such a rosbif as Arthur Hastings! I can hear Dame Ags gagging behind her typewriter every time he says something else dimwitted:
I know she created Hastings as a foil for the too-clever Poirot to explain himself to, but it's about this time we begin to see the poor chap sent off to the Argentine to be married more often. I don't recall which was his final appearance (before Curtain), but I get the feeling he was for the chop as he bumbles and mumbles his way through one of Poirot's more annoying-to-him puzzles. At every step, poor old Belgian, he is positive he knows who did what to whom. Then they die! He is up and down the ladder of clues. He was right, wasn't he, every step of his reasoning? And yes, it is really necessary to have Hastings to narrate. Anything else would be unbearably precious.
And precious is not the word for this story. Wickedly astute. Mordantly amusing. Casually anti-Semitic and deeply unimpressed by Americans. But never twee.
So when it suddenly popped into my Overdrive queue, I leapt upon it like the lion upon the chamois. Gorged my weary, twitching eyes on the feast of unrepentant bourgeois snobbery and ridiculous prejudice. Battened on the clearly experienced writer's unsparing judgment of actors, of opportunists and wheeler-dealers, of the mildly amusing ways they have of trying to drag Our Sort down with their vulgar dollars and scents. (That joke will be *gold* after you've read the book.)
And Lord Edgware? Good riddance to bad rubbish. I was almost, almost sorry the killer didn't get away with it; had it not involved the collateral damage it did, I'd've said, "let sleeping dogs lie," and gone about my day. Ma'at must be preserved, though. Dame Agatha knew best.
Agatha Christie's Poirot season 7, episode 2: Lord Edgware Dies
Rating: 4.5* of five
A fairly faithful adaptation of the story that, but for a late-act solution to a problem handled quite differently, runs along the amusing rails laid down in the novel. A few other things are different for some actually interesting reasons...the seriously dull Donald (!) is a playwright not an actor and it really improves that little thread, for example...but, in the main, we get the purpose and point quite well served.
Hastings, always in my mind the inimitable pro bumbler Hugh Fraser, still makes me want to pluck my own eyes out; Japp, as Philip Jackson plays him, is endearingly outclassed; Pauline Moran's Miss Lemon (absent from the novel; see hint about "late-act clue" above) is acerbically pointed as always.
No mention need be made of the One True Poirot.
I rate this version above the book because the more, erm, objectionable traits are eliminated. This is more comfortable for me as a consumer of entertainment and impacts the novel and its pleasures not at all. The story is unaltered by their alteration. So why were they there at all?
Perfectly wicked little jeu d'esprit; I absolutely can not imagine a corporeal Poirot putting up with such a rosbif as Arthur Hastings! I can hear Dame Ags gagging behind her typewriter every time he says something else dimwitted:
“Enemies! People these days don't have enemies! Not English people!”
–and–
“But she seemed like a thoroughly nice girl!” said of a suspect who is found dead of an overdose
I know she created Hastings as a foil for the too-clever Poirot to explain himself to, but it's about this time we begin to see the poor chap sent off to the Argentine to be married more often. I don't recall which was his final appearance (before Curtain), but I get the feeling he was for the chop as he bumbles and mumbles his way through one of Poirot's more annoying-to-him puzzles. At every step, poor old Belgian, he is positive he knows who did what to whom. Then they die! He is up and down the ladder of clues. He was right, wasn't he, every step of his reasoning? And yes, it is really necessary to have Hastings to narrate. Anything else would be unbearably precious.
And precious is not the word for this story. Wickedly astute. Mordantly amusing. Casually anti-Semitic and deeply unimpressed by Americans. But never twee.
So when it suddenly popped into my Overdrive queue, I leapt upon it like the lion upon the chamois. Gorged my weary, twitching eyes on the feast of unrepentant bourgeois snobbery and ridiculous prejudice. Battened on the clearly experienced writer's unsparing judgment of actors, of opportunists and wheeler-dealers, of the mildly amusing ways they have of trying to drag Our Sort down with their vulgar dollars and scents. (That joke will be *gold* after you've read the book.)
And Lord Edgware? Good riddance to bad rubbish. I was almost, almost sorry the killer didn't get away with it; had it not involved the collateral damage it did, I'd've said, "let sleeping dogs lie," and gone about my day. Ma'at must be preserved, though. Dame Agatha knew best.
Agatha Christie's Poirot season 7, episode 2: Lord Edgware Dies
Rating: 4.5* of five
A fairly faithful adaptation of the story that, but for a late-act solution to a problem handled quite differently, runs along the amusing rails laid down in the novel. A few other things are different for some actually interesting reasons...the seriously dull Donald (!) is a playwright not an actor and it really improves that little thread, for example...but, in the main, we get the purpose and point quite well served.
Hastings, always in my mind the inimitable pro bumbler Hugh Fraser, still makes me want to pluck my own eyes out; Japp, as Philip Jackson plays him, is endearingly outclassed; Pauline Moran's Miss Lemon (absent from the novel; see hint about "late-act clue" above) is acerbically pointed as always.
No mention need be made of the One True Poirot.
I rate this version above the book because the more, erm, objectionable traits are eliminated. This is more comfortable for me as a consumer of entertainment and impacts the novel and its pleasures not at all. The story is unaltered by their alteration. So why were they there at all?
April 5, 2021
En este nuevo caso tenemos a un Poirot algo paternalista, en demasía prejuicioso y lleno de estereotipos de género, solo para que al final la mente maestra detrás de los crímenes se cague en sus muertos (disculpen el vocabulario) con más inteligencia de la que él creía. Y sí, sin mentir eso fue lo que más me encantó. Este es el segundo libro que demuestra que Poirot no es un ser perfecto y que las cosas al principio no le saldrán como él siempre espera.
En cuanto a la identidad del asesin@ no pude deducirla ni mucho menos atiné a adivinarla. De hecho, fue la última persona que se me pasó por la mente, así que también caí en la trampa; me fui por otros rumbos y hasta creí que habían más implicados en el asunto. Tuve algunas hipótesis muy idas de la olla y otras no tantas, pero al final nada de nada. Otra vez fallé con mis células grises, cosa que sí comparto con el pobre Hastings; fiel compañero de Poirot.
En cuanto a la identidad del asesin@ no pude deducirla ni mucho menos atiné a adivinarla. De hecho, fue la última persona que se me pasó por la mente, así que también caí en la trampa; me fui por otros rumbos y hasta creí que habían más implicados en el asunto. Tuve algunas hipótesis muy idas de la olla y otras no tantas, pero al final nada de nada. Otra vez fallé con mis células grises, cosa que sí comparto con el pobre Hastings; fiel compañero de Poirot.
August 18, 2020
My recent Agatha Christie reads were not remarkable. However this book has made me realise why I used to like Agatha Christie's work so much. This is a Poirot mystery in which Poirot isn't overly arrogant and irritating and the plot is intriguing enough.
Jane Wilkinson a beautiful actress is married to Lord Edgware. One evening at a hotel, she walks over to Poirot and Hastings in the middle of dinner, to have a private conversation. She tells Poirot that she is in love with a Duke and wants to divorce her husband and if he doesn't oblige, she might have to kill him (half joking, I guess)! She wants Poirot to meet Lord Edgware and convince him to grant her divorce. Reluctantly Poirot complies to this strange request.
Upon meeting Lord Edgware, Poirot learns that he had already send a letter to Jane stating that he has no objection in granting her divorce. Poirot confronts Jane and she says she didn't receive any letter, but is happy that her wish is granted and yes, she needn't murder him! But as fate may have it, Lord Edgware is found murdered in his home and his butler and maid thinks it's Jane who has done the deed. Now it's upto Poirot and Hastings to figure out this mess.
I enjoyed this book a lot even though I could find a few plot holes in it which I will list in the spoilers section. Reccomend this book to all Agatha Christie mystery lovers.
**Spoilers**
Points which I found unconvincing:
1. The Duke falls in love with Jane knowing that she is a married woman. The only way he can marry her is if her husband is dead.
Since that is not a choice, he should have stopped pursuing this relationship. Since he doesn't, does that mean he is indirectly involved in the murder?
2. The whole story is a bit unusual. To find a voice actress who can imitate Jane is understandable. But a whole bunch of people at a party is unable to recognise her (she is a famous actress) is hard to believe! No matter how good Carlotta Adams is at impersonation, this is strange.
3. The book doesn't explain how Jane is there at the right moment to kill Ross, just before Poirot meets up with him.
Nevertheless it was a fun read.
Jane Wilkinson a beautiful actress is married to Lord Edgware. One evening at a hotel, she walks over to Poirot and Hastings in the middle of dinner, to have a private conversation. She tells Poirot that she is in love with a Duke and wants to divorce her husband and if he doesn't oblige, she might have to kill him (half joking, I guess)! She wants Poirot to meet Lord Edgware and convince him to grant her divorce. Reluctantly Poirot complies to this strange request.
Upon meeting Lord Edgware, Poirot learns that he had already send a letter to Jane stating that he has no objection in granting her divorce. Poirot confronts Jane and she says she didn't receive any letter, but is happy that her wish is granted and yes, she needn't murder him! But as fate may have it, Lord Edgware is found murdered in his home and his butler and maid thinks it's Jane who has done the deed. Now it's upto Poirot and Hastings to figure out this mess.
I enjoyed this book a lot even though I could find a few plot holes in it which I will list in the spoilers section. Reccomend this book to all Agatha Christie mystery lovers.
**Spoilers**
Points which I found unconvincing:
1. The Duke falls in love with Jane knowing that she is a married woman. The only way he can marry her is if her husband is dead.
Since that is not a choice, he should have stopped pursuing this relationship. Since he doesn't, does that mean he is indirectly involved in the murder?
2. The whole story is a bit unusual. To find a voice actress who can imitate Jane is understandable. But a whole bunch of people at a party is unable to recognise her (she is a famous actress) is hard to believe! No matter how good Carlotta Adams is at impersonation, this is strange.
3. The book doesn't explain how Jane is there at the right moment to kill Ross, just before Poirot meets up with him.
Nevertheless it was a fun read.
December 1, 2020
I've read Lord Edgware dies more than 10years ago and I only remembered that I really liked it and I had only a feeling about what happens in the end.
In every review about a book written by Agatha Christie I find another thing that I like about her books as for example that the number of the victims in every book isn't set as in a series I read some time ago and I knew beforehand how many victims there would be.
In this story Hercule Poirot is asked to help Lady Edgware in a problem she has with her husband and when he is found dead everybody thinks that she has done it but what happens when she has no motive for killing him and also an alibi?
Hercule Poirot with the help of his friend Hastings starts to investigate other people who might have had reasons to want Lord Edgware dead.
My only complained is that while following the unraveling of the mystery I grew fond of some characters and felt disappointed when in the end there was no information given as to their whereabouts.
Another great mystery written by Agatha Christie that I highly recommend!
In every review about a book written by Agatha Christie I find another thing that I like about her books as for example that the number of the victims in every book isn't set as in a series I read some time ago and I knew beforehand how many victims there would be.
In this story Hercule Poirot is asked to help Lady Edgware in a problem she has with her husband and when he is found dead everybody thinks that she has done it but what happens when she has no motive for killing him and also an alibi?
Hercule Poirot with the help of his friend Hastings starts to investigate other people who might have had reasons to want Lord Edgware dead.
My only complained is that while following the unraveling of the mystery I grew fond of some characters and felt disappointed when in the end there was no information given as to their whereabouts.
Another great mystery written by Agatha Christie that I highly recommend!
September 24, 2021
Maybe 4.5.I really thoroughly enjoyed this one – one of my favourites so far.
November 24, 2017
So, as the title says, Lord Edgeware dies. His wife tells everyone she’s going to kill him and how. But when he does get killed she has an air tight alibi, even though she was seen at the scene of the crime. It’s up to Poirot to find the true murderer. I don’t think I’ve read a Poirot book before where he says, “I was wrong!” so many times. This one stumped him for quite awhile.
October 19, 2018
American actress, Jane Wilkinson, Lady Edgware, approaches Poirot, asking him to help her obtain a divorce from her cold, estranged husband. However, when Poirot, and Hastings, go to see Lord Edgware, he seems to have no issue with divorcing her. It seems that Jane Wilkinson, after all, will have her freedom and then the probable becomes the definite, when Lord Edgware is found dead.
This is not my favourite Poirot novel, although it is always delightful to have Hastings and Japp both involved in a mystery. There are a good cast of suspects and twists in the tale, as Poirot uncovers who really killed Lord Edgware, and why. There are mercenary actresses, female impersonators, a downtrodden daughter, a ne’er do well nephew, alibis, and twists galore.
Hugh Fraser narrates this delightfully – I am a huge fan of his reading of Audible books. The next in the series is Murder on the Orient Express, and I intend to listen to David Suchet narrating one of my very favourite Poirot mysteries. Poirot remains my favourite, fictional detective and it is a delight to revisit the books.
This is not my favourite Poirot novel, although it is always delightful to have Hastings and Japp both involved in a mystery. There are a good cast of suspects and twists in the tale, as Poirot uncovers who really killed Lord Edgware, and why. There are mercenary actresses, female impersonators, a downtrodden daughter, a ne’er do well nephew, alibis, and twists galore.
Hugh Fraser narrates this delightfully – I am a huge fan of his reading of Audible books. The next in the series is Murder on the Orient Express, and I intend to listen to David Suchet narrating one of my very favourite Poirot mysteries. Poirot remains my favourite, fictional detective and it is a delight to revisit the books.
September 24, 2018
3.5 stars. I actually changed my mind about this book right at the end, during Poirot’s gathering people together to reveal the murderer. I found I did not like the characters involved in the case, and this is the first time I’ve found Hastings genuinely tiresome. Poirot chastising Hastings for being so simple-minded throughout the book had me wholeheartedly agreeing.
Then, Poirot put one of the suspects through the wringer because the suspect had dared to tell Poirot a series of really dumb stories. That showed a side of Poirot I had not seen before, a rather frightening side I can well imagine he used to advantage when he worked in Belgium years before. And the reveal of the murderer and an explanation of the murderer’s devious plan, which I’d seen parts of and had even briefly suspected this person, was really smart. Well done, Mrs. Christie!
Then, Poirot put one of the suspects through the wringer because the suspect had dared to tell Poirot a series of really dumb stories. That showed a side of Poirot I had not seen before, a rather frightening side I can well imagine he used to advantage when he worked in Belgium years before. And the reveal of the murderer and an explanation of the murderer’s devious plan, which I’d seen parts of and had even briefly suspected this person, was really smart. Well done, Mrs. Christie!
April 6, 2021
13 la cină sau Moartea Lordului Edgware este unul dintre cele mai dificile și complicate volume din seria Poirot de până acum. Însuși Poirot consideră că în acest caz a eșuat, căci soluția a descoperit-o aproape întâmplător. Recunosc, pe parcursul romanului am avut senzația că toți sunt vinovați, toți au prea multe secrete. Iar când Poirot dă soluția, trebuie să citești cu atenție, căci cazul este extrem de complicat, iar linia dintre victimă și criminal este destul de fină.
Acesta este un nou roman în care relația dintre Poirot și Hastings este una savuroasă, plină de replici amuzante. Nu știu exact ce percepție a avut în acea perioadă seria Hercule Poirot, dar cred că în zilele noastre ar stârni oarecare vâlvă prin prisma limbajului folosit de autoare și felului în care relatează direct prejudecățile vremii, descrie personajele și nu este câtuși de puțin „politically correct”.
Acesta este un nou roman în care relația dintre Poirot și Hastings este una savuroasă, plină de replici amuzante. Nu știu exact ce percepție a avut în acea perioadă seria Hercule Poirot, dar cred că în zilele noastre ar stârni oarecare vâlvă prin prisma limbajului folosit de autoare și felului în care relatează direct prejudecățile vremii, descrie personajele și nu este câtuși de puțin „politically correct”.
April 25, 2019
I read this in Portuguese in just one sitting, as usual for me when the book is a suspense. I found this book spectacular. I suspected who was the killer from the beginning, since it was too obvious. So I discarded this person from the list of the killers.
April 9, 2020
Sacré! It took me only 2 days to literally devour this book. I most certainly didn't saw that coming, I never could guessed who was the murderer, Agatha did good job!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 5, 2021
Lord Edgware is not a very agreeable man.His wife,Lady Edgware tells Hercule Poirot that she would like to "get rid" of her husband.
After Poirot visits Lord Edgware,he is murdered.Two more murders follow.A chance remark from a passerby leads Poirot to the murderer.
The solution comes to him as he stands in the middle of the road and buses nearly kill him.Poirot is in his element and gets even with the culprit after feeling that he is being taken for a ride.
An entertaining and cleverly plotted Agatha Christie mystery.I'm reading a fair bit of Agatha Christie these days and her books are so consistently good.
After Poirot visits Lord Edgware,he is murdered.Two more murders follow.A chance remark from a passerby leads Poirot to the murderer.
The solution comes to him as he stands in the middle of the road and buses nearly kill him.Poirot is in his element and gets even with the culprit after feeling that he is being taken for a ride.
An entertaining and cleverly plotted Agatha Christie mystery.I'm reading a fair bit of Agatha Christie these days and her books are so consistently good.
June 4, 2022
I mostly listened to this mystery. I had an opportunity to get the audible book, and figured, Why not? I usually get lost with all the accents, but here it was a rather simple follow, very much like an old-time radio drama. Even while doing something else, there were times I was pulled away from my real-world responsibilities mesmerized by the murder mystery. Hercule Poirot is our hero who engages the "grey cells" way too much. He was so obnoxious to the point where you say, "Can someone please just slap that old man?" (I'm not advocating elder abuse; I live with my senior father, and would never even consider such a heinous thing, but they have a tendency to ramble.) Lord Edgeware is not very well-liked so the number of people with cause to murder is ample. Led by his wife, who wants to become his ex-wife, his nephew in financial straits, servants feeling abused, the list is long. We learn of actors and actresses, in and out of make-up, and pince-nez. Overall, a good, slow-burn story that provides the type of plot gymnastics that Christie mastered. Hence, she continues to remain queen.
November 8, 2020
Es cierto. No todos los libros de un mismo autor te pueden gustar de la misma manera. También es verdad que Agatha Christie tiene libros muy buenos y otros que no lo son tanto. Para mí este libro ha sido así. Me ha recordado al “Caso Styles” o “Asesinato en el campo de Golf” los dos primeros libros donde encontramos a nuestro peculiar Hércules Poirot. Dos obras que están bien pero que no las puedo comparar como por ejemplo “ El aseinato de Rogelio Ackroyd” o “Peligro inminente”.
A pesar del hecho de que la historia me ha mantenido entretenida, los personajes y la trama me han dado la impresion que han sido reciclados de otras novelas. Incluso, ha habido momentos que no entendía las conclusiones a las que estaba llegando Poirot, parecían sacadas de la manga más que por intuición.
Por último, quiero recalcar algo positivo y es que en esta obra la autora nos demuestra que Poirot no lo que se dice invencible. Al fin y al cabo es un ser humano como Hastings, Japp entre otros. Hay veces en los que simplemente uno tiene que admitir que todo lo que hace no es perfecto.
A pesar del hecho de que la historia me ha mantenido entretenida, los personajes y la trama me han dado la impresion que han sido reciclados de otras novelas. Incluso, ha habido momentos que no entendía las conclusiones a las que estaba llegando Poirot, parecían sacadas de la manga más que por intuición.
Por último, quiero recalcar algo positivo y es que en esta obra la autora nos demuestra que Poirot no lo que se dice invencible. Al fin y al cabo es un ser humano como Hastings, Japp entre otros. Hay veces en los que simplemente uno tiene que admitir que todo lo que hace no es perfecto.
April 30, 2022
I am still working my way through the Hercule Poirot series and find myself impressed with each passing novel. While each story stands on its own, Agatha Christie offers small nuggets that can connect the novels, which attentive readers will discover throughout the adventure. Poirot is again presented with a unique situation and uses his ‘little grey cells’ to help unravel the crime. Working alongside his longtime friend, Captain Arthur Hastings, Poirot fingers the killer by the final chapter as readers watch in awe. Christie offers a stunning novel, sure to entertain all those who take the time to read it.
While Hercule Poirot and Captain Arthur Hastings are out one day, they are approached by none of their than the famous American actress, Jane Wilkinson. While she expects them to be in awe, she admits that she needs help trying to ‘get rid of’ her husband, Lord Edgware. Wilkinson wants a divorce, hoping to marry someone who can love and respect her without leaving her feeling controlled. Baffled and yet not interesting in getting in the middle of a marital spat, Poirot declines and continues on his way. He and Hastings are left to discuss the gall of Americans and their forward nature. However, soon things will take on a new urgency when Lord Edgware turns up murdered.
Jane Wilkinson was seen leaving the marital home around the time Lord Edgware was said to have been killed, making her the prime suspect. However, Wilkinson has a solid alibi, having been in the middle of dining with friends at the same time. Poirot is flummoxed, but not ready to give up on the mystery. Slowly and thoroughly, the retired Belgian detective begins building a case, learning more about both Wilkinson and her late husband, as well as those both had confided in leading up to the murder. When more bodies turn up, Poirot is sure that he will have to act swiftly to neutralise the killer.
Was someone trying to stymie a chance to ensure a smooth divorce between the two? Could there have been someone trying to pretend to play the role of Jane Wilkinson in order to frame her? Poirot cannot be sure but slowly learns that there is a deeper and much darker narrative taking place here. He will have to use all his grey cells and ask for the help of others to put all the pieces together effectively. Agatha Christie does a brilliant job making this one of the best in the series to date.
The series keeps getting better as I learn more about Poirot and the writing style that Agatha Christie made popular all those years ago. The narrative flows so well and keeps the reader hooked as the plot develops through the mystery’s development. Christie has shown herself to be one of the greatest in the genre and makes no effort to lessen the impact. With many books to go, I can only hope that the momentum is not lost as I keep reading.
Poirot remains a great character and uses his ego to his own advantage. Without the need for a developed backstory, Poirot lives in the present and uses his interactions to tease out new tidbits about himself. Readers will likely love much of what they know, or hate his haughty attitude. Either way, there is nothing like a great mystery and a detective who knows how to get to the core of the matter. I am eager to see what else there is to learn about him in the coming novels.
Christie delivers another winner and provides readers of the series with a strong mystery, free of fluff and filler. A strong narrative creates a foundation for a mystery that is full of twists and turns throughout. Wonderful characters provide the reader additional entertainment to contrast with Poirot’s serious nature. With one of the most popular stories in the series next in line, I feel ready to tackle such a popular story and hope that I can revel in all that is set to be revealed.
Kudos, Dame Christie, for crafting so many wonderful stories. I am addicted and reader to push onwards.
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
While Hercule Poirot and Captain Arthur Hastings are out one day, they are approached by none of their than the famous American actress, Jane Wilkinson. While she expects them to be in awe, she admits that she needs help trying to ‘get rid of’ her husband, Lord Edgware. Wilkinson wants a divorce, hoping to marry someone who can love and respect her without leaving her feeling controlled. Baffled and yet not interesting in getting in the middle of a marital spat, Poirot declines and continues on his way. He and Hastings are left to discuss the gall of Americans and their forward nature. However, soon things will take on a new urgency when Lord Edgware turns up murdered.
Jane Wilkinson was seen leaving the marital home around the time Lord Edgware was said to have been killed, making her the prime suspect. However, Wilkinson has a solid alibi, having been in the middle of dining with friends at the same time. Poirot is flummoxed, but not ready to give up on the mystery. Slowly and thoroughly, the retired Belgian detective begins building a case, learning more about both Wilkinson and her late husband, as well as those both had confided in leading up to the murder. When more bodies turn up, Poirot is sure that he will have to act swiftly to neutralise the killer.
Was someone trying to stymie a chance to ensure a smooth divorce between the two? Could there have been someone trying to pretend to play the role of Jane Wilkinson in order to frame her? Poirot cannot be sure but slowly learns that there is a deeper and much darker narrative taking place here. He will have to use all his grey cells and ask for the help of others to put all the pieces together effectively. Agatha Christie does a brilliant job making this one of the best in the series to date.
The series keeps getting better as I learn more about Poirot and the writing style that Agatha Christie made popular all those years ago. The narrative flows so well and keeps the reader hooked as the plot develops through the mystery’s development. Christie has shown herself to be one of the greatest in the genre and makes no effort to lessen the impact. With many books to go, I can only hope that the momentum is not lost as I keep reading.
Poirot remains a great character and uses his ego to his own advantage. Without the need for a developed backstory, Poirot lives in the present and uses his interactions to tease out new tidbits about himself. Readers will likely love much of what they know, or hate his haughty attitude. Either way, there is nothing like a great mystery and a detective who knows how to get to the core of the matter. I am eager to see what else there is to learn about him in the coming novels.
Christie delivers another winner and provides readers of the series with a strong mystery, free of fluff and filler. A strong narrative creates a foundation for a mystery that is full of twists and turns throughout. Wonderful characters provide the reader additional entertainment to contrast with Poirot’s serious nature. With one of the most popular stories in the series next in line, I feel ready to tackle such a popular story and hope that I can revel in all that is set to be revealed.
Kudos, Dame Christie, for crafting so many wonderful stories. I am addicted and reader to push onwards.
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
August 5, 2019
Solid Poirot story, but this time it really feels we have heard it all before - not a single new grip in this one. Poirot often berates himself “I have been blind/an imbecile/a moron” but in this he must set some record. 4-5 times during the investigation this is what he realises...
November 13, 2018
This is also cleverly executed plot by Agatha Christie.
Lord Edgware, an unpopular aristocrat, is murdered in his home. And who is the initial suspect? His wife, as she wanted to divorce him and remarry. But is she really the culprit? Isn’t there any other who would have wanted him dead, like his nephew, the next in line to the title, who is in the midst of financial crisis? Question after question rises as Christie takes us through the murder mystery where Poirot is dealing with a clever and calculating murderer. However, the murderer finally succumbs to Poirot's brilliant analytical and deductive powers, but not without mistakes from the part of the great detective.
I did like this new approach of bringing out mistaken "little ideas" of Poirot in to light. One feels that this brilliant detective is after all human and do make mistakes too, and not a superhuman.
As I said before, it is a well executed point. Even though by the mid of the story, the reader can guess the murderer, Christie with her usual twists and turns keeps of keeping the reader in doubt as to whether the guess is correct. Also Christie had the ability to create plots that are thematically similar yet different in their execution. Only an exceptionally gifted writer can do that.
However, despite all the plus points of the story, the pace was rather slow and I found our brilliant detective a little too inert. Perhaps, like Mr. Hastings, I'm becoming impatient and fond of action. But no matter, comparatively this story lacked that gripping effect I have enjoyed in many a Poirot books. It is a good read, overall, but not one of Christie's best.
Lord Edgware, an unpopular aristocrat, is murdered in his home. And who is the initial suspect? His wife, as she wanted to divorce him and remarry. But is she really the culprit? Isn’t there any other who would have wanted him dead, like his nephew, the next in line to the title, who is in the midst of financial crisis? Question after question rises as Christie takes us through the murder mystery where Poirot is dealing with a clever and calculating murderer. However, the murderer finally succumbs to Poirot's brilliant analytical and deductive powers, but not without mistakes from the part of the great detective.
I did like this new approach of bringing out mistaken "little ideas" of Poirot in to light. One feels that this brilliant detective is after all human and do make mistakes too, and not a superhuman.
As I said before, it is a well executed point. Even though by the mid of the story, the reader can guess the murderer, Christie with her usual twists and turns keeps of keeping the reader in doubt as to whether the guess is correct. Also Christie had the ability to create plots that are thematically similar yet different in their execution. Only an exceptionally gifted writer can do that.
However, despite all the plus points of the story, the pace was rather slow and I found our brilliant detective a little too inert. Perhaps, like Mr. Hastings, I'm becoming impatient and fond of action. But no matter, comparatively this story lacked that gripping effect I have enjoyed in many a Poirot books. It is a good read, overall, but not one of Christie's best.
October 21, 2021
Agatha Christie almost always fools me and this novel is no exception. I try so hard, just like Arthur Hastings, and I have just as much luck as him. Poor Hastings, Christie writes him so thick headed, stubborn, and easily misled. I also wonder how he can spend so much time in England and away from his wife and financial life in Argentina. But that's beside the point, I guess.
Between Hastings and Japp, the two of them allow Poirot to explain his theories to the reader. Poirot may use the little grey cells a lot, but there's no easy way for us to appreciate his virtuosity without an audience. Hastings may doubt his friend's sanity or debate with Japp if Poirot is past his best-before date, seemingly during every book. But you would think after eight installments he would have learned that his own instincts were off kilter. Poirot realizes it and tells his sidekick that he judges what the murderer is trying to make Poirot believe by what Hastings believes. Hastings is convinced every time by the killer's ruses.
I never feel like I can discuss the details of the plot for fear of spoiling things for readers who are more attentive to detail than I am. But I do think I can safely say that Hastings represents the common, conservative Englishman in Christie's books. Completely and erroneously convinced of their own superiority despite all the evidence to the contrary.
I enjoy matching wits with Ms Christie and I'm always entertained by the twisty path that she leads me on while on the way to the solution. I think I am more pleased with being hoodwinked than I have been on the rare occasions when I anticipated the correct answer.
Between Hastings and Japp, the two of them allow Poirot to explain his theories to the reader. Poirot may use the little grey cells a lot, but there's no easy way for us to appreciate his virtuosity without an audience. Hastings may doubt his friend's sanity or debate with Japp if Poirot is past his best-before date, seemingly during every book. But you would think after eight installments he would have learned that his own instincts were off kilter. Poirot realizes it and tells his sidekick that he judges what the murderer is trying to make Poirot believe by what Hastings believes. Hastings is convinced every time by the killer's ruses.
I never feel like I can discuss the details of the plot for fear of spoiling things for readers who are more attentive to detail than I am. But I do think I can safely say that Hastings represents the common, conservative Englishman in Christie's books. Completely and erroneously convinced of their own superiority despite all the evidence to the contrary.
I enjoy matching wits with Ms Christie and I'm always entertained by the twisty path that she leads me on while on the way to the solution. I think I am more pleased with being hoodwinked than I have been on the rare occasions when I anticipated the correct answer.
September 22, 2018
“Do you not realize, Hastings, that each and everyone of us is a complete mystery with layers. We each try to judge each other, but nine times out of ten, we are wrong.”
Quite devious, this one. Poirot is his usual self while Hastings bumbles around as clueless as ever :O) This time however the culprit nearly pulls the wool over our favourite Belgian detective... Not the best but entertaining, and rather machiavellian.
Quite devious, this one. Poirot is his usual self while Hastings bumbles around as clueless as ever :O) This time however the culprit nearly pulls the wool over our favourite Belgian detective... Not the best but entertaining, and rather machiavellian.
January 27, 2021
No se qué más podría decir que no haya dicho ya sobre Agatha Christie, la mujer era una escritora fuera de serie, más allá de sus historias y sus personajes, su manera de narrar, de escribir, es que es tan entretenido y fácil leerla.
En esta ocasión el buen Poirot se encuentra con el asesinato de un hombre y como siempre, comienza el uso de sus células grises para desenmarañar el misterio.
Me encanta que el narrador sea Hastings porque a veces es tan inocente que sus pensamientos hacen que la inteligencia de Poirot deslumbre, aunque en esta ocasión en particular el Inspector de la policía, Japp fue dibujado como un hombre tan tonto, tan obtuso, necio y lisonjero que a mi parecer la buena Agatha se pasó de tueste.
Por primera vez me he encontrado adivinando quien es el culpable, debo añadir que es la primera vez que me sucede en un libro de esta autora, así que ¡felicidades para mí! Aunque mis deducciones no le lleguen a la suela de los zapatos a Poirot, creo que si me conociera me habría felicitado por mi uso maravilloso de las células grises.
¡Bien por Agatha y a por el que sigue!
En esta ocasión el buen Poirot se encuentra con el asesinato de un hombre y como siempre, comienza el uso de sus células grises para desenmarañar el misterio.
Me encanta que el narrador sea Hastings porque a veces es tan inocente que sus pensamientos hacen que la inteligencia de Poirot deslumbre, aunque en esta ocasión en particular el Inspector de la policía, Japp fue dibujado como un hombre tan tonto, tan obtuso, necio y lisonjero que a mi parecer la buena Agatha se pasó de tueste.
Por primera vez me he encontrado adivinando quien es el culpable, debo añadir que es la primera vez que me sucede en un libro de esta autora, así que ¡felicidades para mí! Aunque mis deducciones no le lleguen a la suela de los zapatos a Poirot, creo que si me conociera me habría felicitado por mi uso maravilloso de las células grises.
¡Bien por Agatha y a por el que sigue!
March 15, 2018
“And the same evening – the very same evening – Lord Edgware dies. Good title that, by the way. Lord Edgware Dies. Look well on a bookstall.”
I get the impression Christie had a lot of fun with this one. It is a very plot twist heavy book, with every couple of chapters presenting a new clue or red herring that changes your perception of events. I’m rather pleased to say I solved this one, but figuring out who did it did not hurt it in the slightest. This is one of those mystery novels where I delighted in just watching events unfold and seeing the awareness come to others.
The plot follows Poirot as he meets an actress desperate to be rid of her husband Lord Edgware. She asks Poirot to convince Edgware to grant her a divorce, but not after loudly announcing that she would be happy just to go to their house and flat out kill him. Poirot investigates the matter and finds that getting Edgware to agree is shockingly easy… then the next day he is murdered, and it becomes a less than easy task at figuring out who killed Lord Edgware, especially considering that that the obvious suspect no longer had a reason for wishing his demise.
This is another Hastings narrated novel and another one where he didn’t annoy me. It seems like around Peril at End House, Christie decided to tone down his stupidity and while still making him naïve, gave him a bit more witty dialogue. There are a couple of moments where he notes Poirot’s arrogance in a rather brilliant manner and plays off of his sense of superiority towards others. There is also one wonderful scene where Christie seems to be trying to explain why she feels he is an important character. As Poirot explains to him; “You are beautifully and perfectly balanced. In you sanity is personified. Do you realize what that means to me? When the criminal sets out to do a crime his first effort is to deceive. Who does he seek to deceive? The image in his mind is that of the normal man. There is probably no such thing actually – it is a mathematical abstraction. But you come as near to realizing it as possible.”
In classic Poirot fashion his compliments are more than slightly insulting… and what can I say, I still find that his personality is what keeps me coming back. He is that annoying person who feels he’s the smartest man in the room and has to show it off to everyone… in Poirot’s case though, he’s right.
As I said, I solved the case in this one before Poirot did, but that in no way hurt the novel. After hitting a streak of some decent novels in the series, we again hit a something special. Lord Edgware Dies receives four out of five stars and a strong recommendation for all mystery fans.
I get the impression Christie had a lot of fun with this one. It is a very plot twist heavy book, with every couple of chapters presenting a new clue or red herring that changes your perception of events. I’m rather pleased to say I solved this one, but figuring out who did it did not hurt it in the slightest. This is one of those mystery novels where I delighted in just watching events unfold and seeing the awareness come to others.
The plot follows Poirot as he meets an actress desperate to be rid of her husband Lord Edgware. She asks Poirot to convince Edgware to grant her a divorce, but not after loudly announcing that she would be happy just to go to their house and flat out kill him. Poirot investigates the matter and finds that getting Edgware to agree is shockingly easy… then the next day he is murdered, and it becomes a less than easy task at figuring out who killed Lord Edgware, especially considering that that the obvious suspect no longer had a reason for wishing his demise.
This is another Hastings narrated novel and another one where he didn’t annoy me. It seems like around Peril at End House, Christie decided to tone down his stupidity and while still making him naïve, gave him a bit more witty dialogue. There are a couple of moments where he notes Poirot’s arrogance in a rather brilliant manner and plays off of his sense of superiority towards others. There is also one wonderful scene where Christie seems to be trying to explain why she feels he is an important character. As Poirot explains to him; “You are beautifully and perfectly balanced. In you sanity is personified. Do you realize what that means to me? When the criminal sets out to do a crime his first effort is to deceive. Who does he seek to deceive? The image in his mind is that of the normal man. There is probably no such thing actually – it is a mathematical abstraction. But you come as near to realizing it as possible.”
In classic Poirot fashion his compliments are more than slightly insulting… and what can I say, I still find that his personality is what keeps me coming back. He is that annoying person who feels he’s the smartest man in the room and has to show it off to everyone… in Poirot’s case though, he’s right.
As I said, I solved the case in this one before Poirot did, but that in no way hurt the novel. After hitting a streak of some decent novels in the series, we again hit a something special. Lord Edgware Dies receives four out of five stars and a strong recommendation for all mystery fans.
August 16, 2020
One of my favorite Poiret mysteries.
SPOILER ALERT: if you do not want to know who the murderer is do not continue reading this review.
Jane Wilkinson announces in front of several witnesses that she is going to get a taxi and go and kill her husband Lord Edgware. A day later he is murdered. So many suspects. His Greek godlike butler, his daughter Geraldine who hates him, Roland his pecuniary challenged nephew, the efficient secretary, Bryan Adams an actor jilted by Jane or perhaps the Duke of Merton’d mother or the Duke. Throw in Carlotta an American actress and you have a wealth of choices.
Lady Edgware is a beautiful woman with one goal in mind to marry the Catholic Duke and become a Duchess. The beauty of this plot is that she is absolutely ruthless. Kills the Duke with her maids corn knife, poisons Carlotta with veronal and eliminates the hapless Ross when he tumbled she was not at the dinner party which provides her alibi.
Hastings is marvelous as Poiret’s sidekick and Japp just wants to arrest someone without to much evidence. The key is Ellis her maid and it is through her Poiret answers his five questions.
Why did Lord Edgware change his mind about the divorce?
What happened to the letter he sent agreeing to divorce?
What was the meaning of the furious expression on his face that Hastings saw when leaving the library?
Why were the pince-nez glasses in Carlotta’s bag?
Why did someone telephone Jane Wilkinson at the Chiswick dinner part and who was it?
I think Lady Edgware deserves to be in Madame Tussaud’s. She was a wonderful amoral character without conscience and utterly ruthless.
SPOILER ALERT: if you do not want to know who the murderer is do not continue reading this review.
Jane Wilkinson announces in front of several witnesses that she is going to get a taxi and go and kill her husband Lord Edgware. A day later he is murdered. So many suspects. His Greek godlike butler, his daughter Geraldine who hates him, Roland his pecuniary challenged nephew, the efficient secretary, Bryan Adams an actor jilted by Jane or perhaps the Duke of Merton’d mother or the Duke. Throw in Carlotta an American actress and you have a wealth of choices.
Lady Edgware is a beautiful woman with one goal in mind to marry the Catholic Duke and become a Duchess. The beauty of this plot is that she is absolutely ruthless. Kills the Duke with her maids corn knife, poisons Carlotta with veronal and eliminates the hapless Ross when he tumbled she was not at the dinner party which provides her alibi.
Hastings is marvelous as Poiret’s sidekick and Japp just wants to arrest someone without to much evidence. The key is Ellis her maid and it is through her Poiret answers his five questions.
Why did Lord Edgware change his mind about the divorce?
What happened to the letter he sent agreeing to divorce?
What was the meaning of the furious expression on his face that Hastings saw when leaving the library?
Why were the pince-nez glasses in Carlotta’s bag?
Why did someone telephone Jane Wilkinson at the Chiswick dinner part and who was it?
I think Lady Edgware deserves to be in Madame Tussaud’s. She was a wonderful amoral character without conscience and utterly ruthless.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,864 reviews