Reading the Detectives discussion
This topic is about
Endless Night
Group Challenges
>
October 21 - Endless Night - SPOILER Thread
This is really a physiological thriller rather than a “who-dun-it”. I had never read this book before, but must admit I had my suspicions from early on about this “happily married couple”,but then there are always surprises with this author, and this was no exception.
The "happily married couple" was a bit too fantastical to me. I knew it won't last knowing this is Agatha Christie. My biggest issue, however, was the choice of the narrator.
Yes, I was holding my breath, waiting for all “young love” stuff to blow up! Being Agatha Christie, I knew there would be twists, but even knowing what to expect about one of the young lovers getting killed, I was still surprised by the betrayal behind it.
Mod
I didn't see the twist coming at all even though I was waiting for it to come. I suspected Greta but felt she may have been working with one of the other relations.
I loved the atmosphere she created also. The creepiness came through really well and the extra touch at the end, his seeing Ellie, even if it may have been a hallucination added to the creepiness for me. Overall it really gave me the chills.
Did anyone else get the feeling that Ellie herself perhaps suspected something-- her you're looking at me as though you loved me observation seemed to hint at this
Susan wrote: "I thought this was quite good for a later Christie, which are often weaker. The mother and the architect added different views of the characters, which were interesting."I agree - it may never be a favorite for me, but as much as Christie may have been on “autopilot” with the later Poirots (thinking especially of the Ariadne Oliver books. I enjoyed them very much, because they were humorous, almost slapstick in Ariadne’s parts), but they weren’t as dramatic or dark as these more psychological, or gothic, thrillers.
Also, I get the impression from comments here from more knowledgeable Christie fans that Agatha was tired of Poirot by that time, probably still wanted to stretch her imagine and writing/plotting skills, but fans wanted Poirot. I think of the twisted, dark killer and motive behind “Crooked House”, or the psychological terror of “ And then There Were None”, and I think by the late 1960s, Christie would have liked to shove Poirot’s pinched patent leather shoes and mustaches where the sun doesn’t shine! ;)
Lady Clementina wrote: "Did anyone else get the feeling that Ellie herself perhaps suspected something-- her you're looking at me as though you loved me observation seemed to hint at this"Good point - especially after talking to the lawyer from America, and seeing how wise she was about security, threats that very rich people face. I suspected the young swain was getting a bit nervous, also, that she understood so much about business, inheritance, and wasn’t intimidated by it all. She seemed to have a solid core of gritty common sense - didn’t she even invoke that at some point, a reference to the hard scrabble life of the founder of the family’s fortune?
Mod
I agree about the choice of narrator - I feel it would have been so much better if it had been someone else. I've finished this now and must say I was very disappointed by the twists at the end. I enjoyed it until I came to the ending, which I thought was very weak indeed and for me ruined the whole book.
Mod
ITV shoehorned Miss Marple into the story - I did watch that, after listening to the book, and I don't approve of the changes that it required!https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2166494/
Mod
Mod
I haven't decided how, or if, I will rate the book. It is well written and plotted but not to my taste. Glad to have read it to complete my Christie's.
Mod
While I didn't catch this at the time Ellie said it, when the husband remembered her comment I realized Ellie suspected. But I wonder if she suspected Greta as well. Was there any hint of that? Would it follow naturally as Greta played a crucial role in their courtship?
Sandy wrote: "Lady Clementina wrote: "Did anyone else get the feeling that Ellie herself perhaps suspected something-- her you're looking at me as though you loved me observation seemed to hint at this"While I..."
Honestly, I suspected him all along, I just wasn’t sure when or how he would kill her. Then I suspected Greta, because she seemed too perfect, too dominant a personality. The shock for me was them (view spoiler)
I suspected him from very early on but I was debating with myself as to whether Greta was working for one or more of Ellie’s relations.
Mod
I thought that the mistrust of his mother was pointing to the fact that he just wasn’t to be trusted. When whoever it was (I can’t remember who) said a boy had died in the ice, and he said that had happened to him, I was wondering if the person had remembered something connected to him.
Jill wrote: "I suspected him from very early on but I was debating with myself as to whether Greta was working for one or more of Ellie’s relations."Oh, yes, good point - I wondered about that, but I thought Agatha was too “fair play” to introduce an unknown coconspirator!
Judy wrote: "I didn't think it would be him until quite late on because of the way he misleads the reader, telling us that he didn't like Greta and hadn't seen her before, etc. I didn't like him much, though."Me neither, he was too controlling, seemed unstable- and his mother’s treatment of him were HUGE red flags…
Jill wrote: "I thought that the mistrust of his mother was pointing to the fact that he just wasn’t to be trusted. When whoever it was (I can’t remember who) said a boy had died in the ice, and he said that had..."When he said it happened to him too, I started having suspicions that he might have killed the kid, or at least let him drown for some reason (hating him, angry at him for some perceived slight, didn’t think it was for theft!)
Judy wrote: "I didn't think it would be him until quite late on because of the way he misleads the reader, telling us that he didn't like Greta and hadn't seen her before, etc. I didn't like him much, though."The reason for my dislike of him was more that he wanted an easy life and seemed to take to Ellie's money much too easily. But the narration didn't lead me to suspect him, especially since, as Judy said, he emphasized his dislike of Greta.
Susan in NC wrote: "Judy wrote: "I didn't think it would be him until quite late on because of the way he misleads the reader, telling us that he didn't like Greta and hadn't seen her before, etc. I didn't like him mu..."I ought to have caught on to his keeping her away from his mother; but I fell for his claim that she would simply be seeing him as marrying beyond his means; a gold-digger for want of better term but not a murderer.
Jill wrote: "I suspected him from very early on but I was debating with myself as to whether Greta was working for one or more of Ellie’s relations."I didn't suspect him until very late in the story so my bet was Greta with one of the relatives.
Judy wrote: "Piyangie wrote: "The "happily married couple" was a bit too fantastical to me. I knew it won't last knowing this is Agatha Christie. My biggest issue, however, was the choice of the narrator."I a..."
I actually enjoyed the end; she kept is both real and ambiguous in terms of the eerie, supernatural elements which I liked.
I didn't a problem with Michael as the narrator since I felt the whole point was the unreliable or deceiving narrator whom we don't realise is deceiving us.
Judy wrote: "Piyangie wrote: "The "happily married couple" was a bit too fantastical to me. I knew it won't last knowing this is Agatha Christie. My biggest issue, however, was the choice of the narrator."I a..."
I actually enjoyed the end; she kept is both real and ambiguous in terms of the eerie, supernatural elements which I liked.
I didn't a problem with Michael as the narrator since I felt the whole point was the unreliable or deceiving narrator whom we don't realise is deceiving us.
Mod
Good point, Lady C, but I suppose I prefer books to be more fair play and to feel I can trust what I've been told. I find it rather a weak ending suddenly to find out that all the clues have been red herrings!
Clearly many lovers of detective fiction do like this kind of psychological thriller, though, and to be fair, when looking back at the book, there are plenty of signals that Michael may not be what he claims. So, not my favourite type of mystery, but I realise I'm probably in a minority.
That's always the case with Christie, don't you think? One notices all the clues only in retrospect. And she does give us a fair few.
I get annoyed with narrators who have no good reason for 'writing' their account (although it's sometimes framed as confessional) yet throughout obscure and deceive about their actions and motves. I am happier with an unreliable narrator who doesn't understand the significance of what they are recounting - that leaves it open to the reader to be cleverer than the narrator.
I didn't suspect Michael at all. I wasn't comfortable with him felt that he was hiding something, especially because of his refusal to meet Ellie with his mother. I felt that his mother might know some undesirable thing from his past and he wanted to avoid being exposed. But I never thought he was a calculating criminal as he turned out to be. Like Judy said it wasn't fair to be misled till the very end with an unreliable narrator, whose conduct and motive when revealed, would certainly make the readers question the story to which they have been listening. Although it was an impressive twist, in the end, the anger and disappointment at discovering that we were deliberately deceived took out all the enjoyment from me.
I guess I get what you are saying but for me it worked as the puzzle itself; the fact that we are being told a story by someone, and that's the only voice we hear and then the surprise is sprung on us. I'm fairly sure there were plenty of clues though I'll probably only spot them if I reread.I remember an iris Murdock I read with another group which was also similar in that there was an unreliable narrator and only quite a bit of the way in one starts to realise that he isnt quite as truthful as we take him to be
*someone we obviously trust I mean (sorry no edit on the phone)
Mod
This was one where I did suspect from fairly early on-mainly because Greta was beautiful and controlling/a great organizer and Mike was quite happy to take Ellie's money. Christie has also done the "lovers who arrange for one of them to marry money and then pretend to hate each other until the wealthy spouse gets killed off" plot before (a Poirot in one case) and the unreliable/guilty narrator before (view spoiler) so I was primed. I did find it very atmospheric and did wonder about how much Santonix knew, and was surprised Mike signed over control of his assets to Lippincott. I also hoped that when he saw Ellie that she/someone had figured out his plan and had prevented it but faked her death until they could find evidence to arrest him, but I guess that would be asking too much.So...who gets the money?
Mod
Frances, I'd thought of that one too as regards unreliable narrators and that's one of Christie's best known books as well.
Lady Clementina wrote: "Susan in NC wrote: "Judy wrote: "I didn't think it would be him until quite late on because of the way he misleads the reader, telling us that he didn't like Greta and hadn't seen her before, etc. ..."That’s what i thought, too, but the scenes between his mother and him soon convinced me it was something from his past.
Lady Clementina wrote: "Judy wrote: "Piyangie wrote: "The "happily married couple" was a bit too fantastical to me. I knew it won't last knowing this is Agatha Christie. My biggest issue, however, was the choice of the na..."I agree on both these points - Michael walking toward the house, revealing through interior monologue the true nature of the deception, reminded me (view spoiler)
Michael comes across as bitter and angry at the world, but I don't think I necessarily saw him as being evil in my first reading. I probably should have figured out the back-stabbing lover angle, especially considering Christie has used this before, but somehow she manages to make it seem fresh every time. I do appreciate that this is one instance of a depiction of an American that does not come across as cartoonish. Ellie is sweet and loving, and does not seem spoiled by her money. It does seem that her family's desire to protect her at all costs ultimately led to her choosing poorly, as she had had no opportunity to make her own choices, and learn from her mistakes, as we all do when we navigate the dating world.
Tara wrote: "Michael comes across as bitter and angry at the world, but I don't think I necessarily saw him as being evil in my first reading. I probably should have figured out the back-stabbing lover angle, e..."Good point - the “poor little rich girl” vibe comes across strongly here, yet she seemed unfazed by talk of security and managing her vast wealth, whereas Michael seemed self-conscious of their background differences at such times. I wasn’t sure if it might not be a clue to his evil intentions, when Ellie calmly mentions the staff may be security installed by her lawyer, as it’s common in ultra wealthy circles, and Michael freaks out (yet again!). Honestly, I’m surprised with all his demands that it just be the two of them in their isolated dream house, that she didn’t get at least irritated, if not suspicious! Here’s a girl who has probably never had to do much housework, yet he wants no staff - and I don’t recall him offering to dust and vacuum!
Susan in NC wrote: "Tara wrote: "Michael comes across as bitter and angry at the world, but I don't think I necessarily saw him as being evil in my first reading. I probably should have figured out the back-stabbing l..."Perhaps she was so desperate to break away from what she felt was a prison, that being along with the man she loved seemed ideal. Assuming he was telling the truth, Michael does mention that Ellie got as much pleasure from a simple baguette and cheese from the grocer as expensive meals at fancy restaurants, so perhaps there was an appeal for a simpler life that she felt she had more control over.
Tara wrote: "Susan in NC wrote: "Tara wrote: "Michael comes across as bitter and angry at the world, but I don't think I necessarily saw him as being evil in my first reading. I probably should have figured out..."True, I’d forgotten that - she did seem very unhappy in the beginning when they first meet. Sad that she couldn’t just be patient and wait to come into her fortune - and it turns out her guardians were right to protect her from gold diggers!
I think escaping the prison that her life was would have been a big motivation. And while you are right re her guardians wanting to protect her from gold diggers, I am not sure they'd not have tried to continue to sponge on her had she remained single. What I was wondering about was when her guardian Uncle Andrew (I'm sorry about the name, I am terrible at remembering them), seemed to suspect Geta and Michael's connection, and Ellie herself (you look at me like you love me) isn't as convinced of his love, why didn't they take any precautions? Or did they simply see him as a gold digger but not more
Mod
True, yes she did mention having security on the premises which unnerved michael. Only I didn't realise at the time why.
Lady Clementina wrote: "I think escaping the prison that her life was would have been a big motivation. And while you are right re her guardians wanting to protect her from gold diggers, I am not sure they'd not have trie..."Good point, I wondered about that - certainly got the impression Greta was NOT a favorite with Uncle Andrew! At one point I wondered if that was a clever ruse, and he and Greta were in cahoots!
Sandy wrote: "If Ellie was correct that some of the help were also security people then some one did take precautions. Didn't Poirot say once that a determined murderer couldn't be prevented but could only caugh..."Oh, good catch, true!
Lady Clementina wrote: "True, yes she did mention having security on the premises which unnerved michael. Only I didn't realise at the time why."Me, either- I figured he was controlling, which we see now as a red flag for a potential abuser, but back then was seen as a romantic trope, a la “he wants me all to himself!”
Reading the Detectives
Books mentioned in this topic
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd (other topics)Endless Night (other topics)
Gipsy’s Acre was a truly beautiful upland site with views out to sea – and in Michael Rogers it stirred a child-like fantasy. There, amongst the dark fir trees, he planned to build a house, find a girl and live happily ever after. Yet, as he left the village, a shadow of menace hung over the land. For this was the place where accidents happened. Perhaps Michael should have heeded the locals’ warnings: ‘There’s no luck for them as meddles with Gipsy’s Acre.’ Michael Rogers is a man who is about to learn the true meaning of the old saying ‘In my end is my beginning.’
Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.