January 2021- The Poisoned Chocolates Case - SPOILER Thread

[Susan]

Welcome to our first group read of 2021, The Poisoned Chocolates Case by Anthony Berkeley. The Poisoned Chocolates Case is the fifth in the Roger Sheringham series, first published in 1929.

n this, the best-known of Anthony Berkeley's novels, amateur detective Roger Sheringham investigates his most famous case. When Joan Bendix makes a bet with her husband for a box of chocolates, no one imagines that winning will cost her her life. The seven she eats poison her and the two her husband eats nearly kill him. The Sheringham Crime Circle find the unusual case baffling, but eventually come up with some very interesting theories - which they then proceed to disprove one by one. Due to a series of false clues the identity - and motive - of the killer appears to be out of reach...

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

[Jill]

I did find this book a slow starter, but once it got going I did enjoy it. Each person in the club giving their theory as to how the murder was committed did make it different from the usual detective books. The way the stories were alike but then differed was entertaining, but then I did find some of it repetitive.

[Rosina]

I read it in 2016, and I'm not sure if I remember what they decided on as a solution - so it's interesting to re-read!

[Judy]

I loved this as a teenager, and eagerly reread it when it was reprinted but found it left me cold. However, when I reread it again for our group read, I really enjoyed it all over again!

I like the sheer cleverness of the way the same events can be endlessly repackaged to produce different solutions.

[Rosina]

I feared that this would be more like The Floating Admiral, where the clues multiplied alarmingly as the plot twitched itself out of the reach of any single author. But I am relieved that although different authors might try to find a solution, the story itself seems to have been written by one man.

[Roman Clodia]

Judy wrote: "I like the sheer cleverness of the way the same events can be endlessly repackaged to produce different solutions."

Yes! It's like the end of an Agatha Christie where Poirot points to all the suspects in turn with how they *could* have been guilty before rounding on the real culprit. Berkeley cleverly deconstructs that idea of a single correct solution and so questions the whole genre. If there had been more members, would even the final answer have been overturned?!

[Susan in NC]

Roman Clodia wrote: "Judy wrote: "I like the sheer cleverness of the way the same events can be endlessly repackaged to produce different solutions."

Yes! It's like the end of an Agatha Christie where Poirot points to..."

Yes, I think so - as each member seemed to approach the case with their own preconceived notions rooted in their own background!

[Carol]

I just finished this one and I really enjoyed it! Of course, as soon as they announced the order of the reports, I figured that Chitterwick would have the final answer. And he did. I just loved the chart he made. It really brought the whole story together and made it easier for me to understand his reasoning.
Hard book to find, but it was definitely worth reading.

[Angie]

I did enjoy this book, but I thought it ended so abruptly.

[Judy]

I agree the chart was really useful, Carol.

Who was everyone's favourite choice for culprit? I had my eye on Sir Eustace, thinking he was an interesting character and the way he passes the chocolates over initially seems suspicious!

[Judy]

Angie wrote: "I did enjoy this book, but I thought it ended so abruptly."

I agree it does end quite abruptly - maybe that's why people keep wanting to add extra solutions! I enjoyed both the extra ones in the British Library edition, by Christianna Brand and Martin Edwards.

[Susan in NC]

Carol wrote: "I just finished this one and I really enjoyed it! Of course, as soon as they announced the order of the reports, I figured that Chitterwick would have the final answer. And he did. I just loved the..."

I wish I could have seen the chart, not available with audible, of course; I think it would have been helpful.

[Susan in NC]

Judy wrote: "I agree the chart was really useful, Carol.

Who was everyone's favourite choice for culprit? I had my eye on Sir Eustace, thinking he was an interesting character and the way he passes the chocola..."

Me, too! But then I wondered about the husband, because traditional mysteries make you suspicious of spouses, and they are usually the ones with a motive...and imbibing a bit, to be sick and allay suspicion, seemed likely!

[Rosina]

I realise there were flaws in all the 'detectives'' theories, but I found Sheringham's the most satisfactory. Too bad that his evidence could be demolished!

[Frances]

I am afraid I felt very differently about this read-I was not at all engaged initially and eventually gave up, skipped to the end to read the solution but even that was a bit disappointing. Not sure why it didn't work for me, but look forward to some of the other reads for this month.

[Susan]

I liked the portrait of the 'detective author,' Percy Robinson, who wrote as Morton Harrogate Bradley and slightly resented Roger Sheringham. I wondered whether Harrogate was a nod to Agatha Christie, who, of course, was found there when she vanished.

[Roman Clodia]

I loved all that witty interplay between the various characters and yes, the gentle poking of fun against the crime writer. That reminded me of the way Christie has fun with authors in various books, plus Ariadne Oliver, of course.

I also laughed when they turn against each other and the delicious awkwardness that ensues!

[Susan]

Yes, me too. I felt Berkeley had great fun writing it.

[Judy]

Susan wrote: "I wondered whether Harrogate was a nod to Agatha Christie, who, of course, was found there when she vanished...."

I think Martin Edwards also suggests this in the introduction if I remember rightly, so I believe you are right to suspect this, Susan! The name is also slightly similar to one of Berkeley's own pseudonyms, A. Monmouth Platts!

[Susan]

I often skip the introductions as they tend to give so much away, so may have missed that. I always mean to read the introduction once I have got to the end, but sometimes forget! Thanks, Judy.

[Judy]

I usually skip them and read them afterwards too, but I've read this book several times before so read the introduction first this time!

[Shaina]

I just finished this book and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I agree with most here about the wit and banter. I also suspected the husband would be found guilty but clearly, that didn't happen. I did not see that ending at all.

I'm definitely keeping an eye out for this series on the Kindle store.

[Pamela]

I really liked this, the author was very skilful to construct the different solutions without it becoming boring. As others have said, it was very mischievous with the sly digs at detective writers, and I loved the part where Sir Charles was accused of being the murderer.

I didn’t much like the additional endings supplied in this edition, I wish Martin Edwards had rejected the suggestion. Leave well alone, the original author did a fine job and the book didn’t need them (and they disrupted the pattern that Chitterwick had in his chart)

[Susan in NC]

Roman Clodia wrote: "I loved all that witty interplay between the various characters and yes, the gentle poking of fun against the crime writer. That reminded me of the way Christie has fun with authors in various book..."

Yes!

[Susan in NC]

Pamela wrote: "I really liked this, the author was very skilful to construct the different solutions without it becoming boring. As others have said, it was very mischievous with the sly digs at detective writers..."

Same here, as an audiobook listener (the only version I could find) the extra ending was very confusing, I didn’t know what it was, which ending was actually meant to be the solution.

[Judy]

Did you have the Christianna Brand extra endingon the audiobook as well, Susan? The ending of the original book is the one presented by Ambrose Chitterwick, but then in the BLCC Kindle edition there is one added later by Brand (the brother) and another by Edwards (the porter). I enjoyed these but enjoyed the main book better.

[Susan]

Part of the appeal was the fact the author tried something different I thought. I have read one or two of the other books in the series, although they are hard to get hold of and really liked them, but they were much more traditional in terms of writing.

[Susan]

By the way, I recently realised that The Layton Court Mystery, Anthony Berkeley's long out of print first novel is currently available on kindle and have snapped it up. I have a hard cover copy which cost a small fortune at the time, but always good to have a kindle version. Let's hope the publisher, Mysterious Press, also publish further titles by him.

[Judy]

Thanks for the great news, Susan, I looked for The Layton Court Mystery a few days ago and it wasn't on Kindle then, so I'm really pleased to hear it has now been republished (today according to Amazon!) I will snap it up too.

[Rosina]

I have snapped too! A reasonable price, at least for the moment

[Michaela]

I found this really good! Reminded me of the 1976 film "Murder by Death", which I found hilarious. I wondered how the end would turn out, and found it a bit disappointing. The additions were unnecessary, though I liked the idea that the professionals once won over the amateurs in Edward´s solution.

I preferred Sheringham´s solution, as I thought from the beginning that perhaps the victim was the right one, and the chocolates weren´t intended for Sir Eustace at all. I confess though that his throwing the chocolates at Bendix was highly suspicious.

I also liked the different characters and their banter, which made the read quite funny.

[Susan]

Glad you enjoyed it, Michaela. I think the majority of us have found it an interesting read.

[Piyangie]

A different structure in detective fiction than I'm used to, but, I'm enjoying the read so far. I find it even hilarious. Out of the solutions, the one rendered by Roger Sherringham is the most interesting. I entertain the same suspicion.

[Judy]

The film Murder by Death sounds like fun, Michaela, thanks for the mention - I see it is written by Neil Simon, so should have a great script. And what a fantastic cast!
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074937/...

[Susan]

I do, vaguely, remember that film. I think the nearest they have gone in modern terms is "Knives Out."

[Tania]

Judy wrote: "Who was everyone's favourite choice for culprit? I had my eye on Sir Eustace, thinking he was an interesting character and the way he passes the chocola..."

From the beginning, I thought it would be Mr Bendix. I went along with Roger Sherringham's theory; until he put it forward, then I realised I must be wrong.

I really enjoyed this one, thought it was one of the better BLCC's

[Susan in NC]

Judy wrote: "Did you have the Christianna Brand extra endingon the audiobook as well, Susan? The ending of the original book is the one presented by Ambrose Chitterwick, but then in the BLCC Kindle edition ther..."

Sorry, Judy, I missed this question - yes, the brand ending was there, but no real explanation, the narrator just said “alternative ending by Christianne Brand”, and read it. I wasn’t sure which was the real ending!

[Susan]

My copy had the Brand ending and the Edwards ending. I guess anyone related to this book can't resist adding to it!

[Nick]

I thoroughly enjoyed this; Essential reading for classic detective/GA novel enthusiasts:
1.) I enjoyed the structure; A little like a Poirot summing up, but different because with each new ‘solution’ we receive more information; The ultimate solution reveals that the originator of the penultimate ‘solution’ is the murderer.
2.) It explores the potentially/actually contrived nature of the solutions to the genre. However, I don’t think it ultimately undermines it because, with enough information there is only one correct solution once the information is complete. The earlier interpretations are shown not to be adequate in themselves or once further information is available; Brand and Edwards have to introduce new information/undermine previous information to provide alternative solutions. Thus this seems like an important precursor to the setting up of the real life Detection Club, with it’s ten rules for a fairly-clued detective novel, given Berkeley’s role in that and it’s admiration by prominent members of that club.
3. I enjoyed Edwards’ choice of the name Cox for the murderer in his alternative solution, given that Berkeley’s full name was actually Anthony Berkeley Cox!

[Susan]

Great points, Nick. Especially regarding the name. As well as the Harrogate mention, it seems there were a lot of in jokes in this mystery.

[Judy]

Yes, great comments, Nick - I like your point about each solution bringing forward more information until the final one.

On the eventual solution/in-jokes, I was intrigued to see Martin Edwards' introduction mention that "The character of Alicia Dammers seems to bear some resemblance to that of E.M. Delafield, a gifted and witty novelist most renowned for Diary of a Provincial Lady, who shared Berkeley's interest in true crime."

[Tania]

I've been meaning to read Messalina of the Suburbs by E.M. Delafield. It's based on the Ilford murder, a true crime, I think Edith Thompson was one of the last women to be hanged for murder.

I think I missed a lot of the in jokes, so it's nice to see them come up in this thread.

[Judy]

Brenda, I've just deleted your comment and am reposting with a spoiler tag, just in case anyone is about to read the short story version, so they won't see the culprit in that one. :)

Brenda wrote:

I’ve just finished and thought it was a fun mystery. I read the introduction my book had which was a short story that had (view spoiler)[Mr Bendix (hide spoiler)] as the culprit, although they had different names.

I was glad it did end differently and was surprised myself at the real culprit. I didn’t read any of the other endings.

I liked the premise of each of the members trying to solve it and each with such different outcomes. Their “performances” dragged a bit at times for me, but I did enjoy the humor in the book, it really had some great lines.

[Judy]

Glad you liked it, Brenda. I also enjoyed the humour. The funny thing for me was that I reread it a couple of years ago and didn't like it as much as I had when I was younger, but then when I reread I really enjoyed it all over again!

[Brenda]

I think that happens to a lot of us. It’s strange how tastes can change like that. Or sometimes I’m just in a different mood and something doesn’t strike me I think normally might.

It was a fun set up though and I like how it was reimagined through different eyes. And how each had a rather analytical specialty which tilted the outcomes in all sorts of directions.

[Brenda]

Thanks Judy for fixing my post, my apologies! I hope I didn’t ruin it for anyone.

[Tr1sha]

I liked the beginning of the book & expected to enjoy reading it. Instead I found it increasingly boring & repetitive. This was the first book I’ve read by this author & it gave me no interest in reading other books by him, especially as others have said this was his best book.

[Judy]

Trisha, sorry you didn't enjoy it. I also felt the book was repetitive when I read it a couple of years ago, but changed my mind this time around and enjoyed it - not sure why my reaction changed! I had also read it when I was much younger and liked it then.

[Tr1sha]

Judy wrote: "Trisha, sorry you didn't enjoy it. I also felt the book was repetitive when I read it a couple of years ago, but changed my mind this time around and enjoyed it - not sure why my reaction changed! ..."

It’s interesting that you changed your opinion about it this time, Judy. Some books appeal to us much more at different times or in different circumstances. I might have enjoyed this in summer, reading it on a beach somewhere! I probably judged the book too harshly.

[ChrisGA]

I enjoyed this, even listening to it as audiobook. I guess he was demonstrating that we can find "proof" of whatever we want to prove to support our position.. Coming in a time of "fake news" and "alternative facts", this was particularly timely.. The theories all sounded plausible to me.