This is personally one of my favorite Poirot novels (I rate it 4.5 / 5). While the characters and setting were generally boring and dull, the mystery is easily one of the best mysteries Agatha Christie ever wrote. The misdirection and red herrings were well done and the reveal of the murderer and why was really interesting. I actually appreciated this novel for its ingenuity and the overall strength of the mystery more than I enjoyed it.
Totally agree! And while less "tight" mysteries are still fun sometimes, I love a mystery where it feels like the reader at least has a chance, where the clues are really there.
I understand your struggle with the start of the novel; as another comment notes, most of the adaptations have streamlined the cast in one way or another. One point I'd like to flag is the *method* of the murder. Contemporary reviews cited it as Christie dialing up the violence for thrills, but we only learn of it indirectly and it makes sense with the psychology of the guilty party. Their portrayal in the Suchet version put them near the top of my favorites list in the Poirot-verse. Overall, I'd say After the Funeral is similar to Evil Under the Sun--both are traveling well-worn paths, but very successfully.
That's an interesting point. Neither of these two novels is one I'd call "innovative" for Christie, but in each, the execution is better in some regards than in previous works.
Guessable - especially when Miss Gilchrist didn’t die after eating the poisoned cake - that immediately focuses attention on her - but ultimately fascinating in its solution and the exposure of a ‘ladylike killer’. What Miss Gilchrist says about no one looking at a housekeeper/servant too closely is interesting in its class implications, from a sociological point of view. I expected you to mention that. (Christie uses the trope in several other novels - no one looks at a servant twice etc.)
What is nice about Agatha Christie's detective stories is that, unlike Chesterton's Father Brown stories, they are pretty straightforward, more relaxing and easier to follow. When one reads a Father Brown story, one cannot fail to notice that Chesterton's masterful (i.e. sophisticated and deliberately intricate) writing style often gets in the way of understanding the plot. Maybe that is the main reason why the stories with Poirot are more popular that the stories with Father Brown.
This story has had several adaptations for the screen - both big and small. The first that I remember was where it was altered considerably making the investigator Miss Marple and it was renamed "Murder at the Gallop" and released in 1963. Then there is the David Suchet version and a BBC Radio 4 adaptation too. All alter the storyline and perhaps enhanced the original through shortening it
Yeah, I enjoyed the Suchet adaptation (the only one I've seen). I think they took out or modified a few characters and instead opted to better develop the ones they had there.
I love Agatha Christie but I didn't really feel this one and I'm not sure why. The characters were so dull and there was something off about the pace. The mystery was solid but it didn't impress me at all. Go figure.
![Dead Man's Folly -- Agatha Christie [Book Review] [Spoilers Second Half]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dJpGAmqmDEQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![Dead Man's Folly -- Agatha Christie [Book Review] [Spoilers Second Half]](/img/tr.png)
![Sense and Sensibility -- Jane Austen [Book Discussion]](/img/n.gif)
This is personally one of my favorite Poirot novels (I rate it 4.5 / 5). While the characters and setting were generally boring and dull, the mystery is easily one of the best mysteries Agatha Christie ever wrote. The misdirection and red herrings were well done and the reveal of the murderer and why was really interesting. I actually appreciated this novel for its ingenuity and the overall strength of the mystery more than I enjoyed it.
Totally agree! And while less "tight" mysteries are still fun sometimes, I love a mystery where it feels like the reader at least has a chance, where the clues are really there.
I understand your struggle with the start of the novel; as another comment notes, most of the adaptations have streamlined the cast in one way or another. One point I'd like to flag is the *method* of the murder. Contemporary reviews cited it as Christie dialing up the violence for thrills, but we only learn of it indirectly and it makes sense with the psychology of the guilty party. Their portrayal in the Suchet version put them near the top of my favorites list in the Poirot-verse.
Overall, I'd say After the Funeral is similar to Evil Under the Sun--both are traveling well-worn paths, but very successfully.
That's an interesting point. Neither of these two novels is one I'd call "innovative" for Christie, but in each, the execution is better in some regards than in previous works.
Guessable - especially when Miss Gilchrist didn’t die after eating the poisoned cake - that immediately focuses attention on her - but ultimately fascinating in its solution and the exposure of a ‘ladylike killer’. What Miss Gilchrist says about no one looking at a housekeeper/servant too closely is interesting in its class implications, from a sociological point of view. I expected you to mention that. (Christie uses the trope in several other novels - no one looks at a servant twice etc.)
Yeah that's a good point -- this invisibility of the servants does come up really often in Christie's work.
What is nice about Agatha Christie's detective stories is that, unlike Chesterton's Father Brown stories, they are pretty straightforward, more relaxing and easier to follow. When one reads a Father Brown story, one cannot fail to notice that Chesterton's masterful (i.e. sophisticated and deliberately intricate) writing style often gets in the way of understanding the plot. Maybe that is the main reason why the stories with Poirot are more popular that the stories with Father Brown.
Yeah, I think this is a pretty good summary of the differences between the two. Thanks for watching!
This story has had several adaptations for the screen - both big and small.
The first that I remember was where it was altered considerably
making the investigator Miss Marple and it was renamed
"Murder at the Gallop" and released in 1963.
Then there is the David Suchet version and a BBC Radio 4 adaptation too.
All alter the storyline and perhaps enhanced the original through shortening it
Yeah, I enjoyed the Suchet adaptation (the only one I've seen). I think they took out or modified a few characters and instead opted to better develop the ones they had there.
I love Agatha Christie but I didn't really feel this one and I'm not sure why. The characters were so dull and there was something off about the pace. The mystery was solid but it didn't impress me at all. Go figure.