I just finished listening to the audio book of this and I found the overall plot to be interesting. I really liked how she described the time period of the 60s even if I dont always agree with her thoughts on things. Spoilers I found the ending to be kind of complicated. Up until the end I had suspected Frances and David being the killers. But at the end I realized that couldnt be right. For obvious reasons. I was actually surprised at who Christie choose to be the victims in this story. I also picked up on the stepmom being poisoned and suspecting her doing that to herself but i didnt piece together the dual identity connection. Same thing with the stepdad. I thought he wasnt her dad but i thought it was just a subplot to the main story. I think if i realized the duel identity i would have pieced it all together. All in all it was still enjoyable.
I read all the Christie I read in 2017 and am shocked how little i remember about some of these books. I recall "it was fun seeing Christie trying to deal with the 60s" but that's about it from this book. I was gonna say "i forgot everything about the mystery" but i remembered the main twist while I was writing that sentence, it was a fairly good twist so i guess i just have a poor memory :P Poirot discussing mystery novels comes back in my head when you mention it. That he's friends with Christie's surrogate Oliver leads to it making some sense. "Hasn't aged well" - I get the feeling that Christie's older books were out dated in their values even when they were written, given how often she has her characters talk about how old they feel. 8:00 seeing someone discuss the hippies (people my grandparent's age) as kids they can't understand was the most fun i had with this book. The "modern young women" she's disparaging being in their 70s now.
One of the things that makes me love Christie books is their picture of the Society around her. Her work probably had a big influence on my interest in fashions-both couture and domestic. ETA: on the drug issue, yeah, she incorporated that problem in several of her books. Dorothy Sayers dealt with the whole drug scene of the twenties and thirties especially well.
Yes! I read Christie for the first time nearly forty years ago, and thought of her books at that time only as 'fun stories'. Now I know more about the history of Britian during the first half of the 20th century, the 'fun stories' become even more fun, since we can see all kinds of preoccupations of the world around Christie shining through.
Oh that’s so interesting- yes, I agree that the Christie verse def influenced my interest 30s fashions, though I don’t think I realized that til just now 😂
omg I'm obsessed with The Kinks and Ray Davies! Hello, fellow British Invaders fan!! I remember that the Suchet adaptation of Third Girl has James Wilby in it! But I must say, having lived in London (though not glamorously), I do understand Agatha Christie's feelings about London, IDK-- it seems to me that the situation in question is one of those where it is glamorous from the outside and idk, a bit shallow from the inside? Also considering the fact that Agatha Christie DID live the "glamour" of the upper-middle class society in the 1890s as a child, of the 1900s as a teenager and the inter-war period, so I do understand that compared to that (and also with the improvement that memories give to certain things) the 1960s glamour was not that glamorous at all? (Does that make sense at all???)
Oh yeah, I completely agree! I think she saw olden time London as much more glamorous, and tbh, who can blame her?? With all the post-war construction, it had to have been a totally different landscape by the 60s
My last read was Murder on the Links. I found it to be a great book. The end was from far out of left field. I enjoyed the book. My next read will be CURTAIN. I know you still have two books to go before you get to CURTAIN so I will not spoil it for you. Thank you for getting me interested in reading more Poirot books.
I think I might of liked Halloween Party better than this one. I hate it when the resolution to the mystery is too convoluted, and the one here was a real stretch. I did love the mod 60s setting, which is why I decided to read this one, and Halloween Party just before. I’ve only read a handful of Christie’s books, and I was curious as to what her work would be like at this period of time.
If you're looking for the mod 60s vibe, those are definitely the right ones for her backlist! I think it's definitely YMMV... none of these are her best works, but they still have a lot of charm
Full disclaimer I love Agatha Christie books but have a very low opinion of Agatha herself. The Third Girl reminds me a lot of Peril at end house i.e. drug use, girls being on their own and Hercule Poirot feeling unsure of the direction he should be headed in. Funny enough (not funny) I always considered Agatha as the anti- feminist i.e. the way she describes Ariadne Oliver as being foolish and lost and just her general negative views on women through out all her books another example Tuppence from the Tommy and Tuppence series. Granted I know I am judging her harshly because I have time on my side. I was born waaaaaaaaay before Harry Potter would ever be a thing so for me Agatha Christie was reading for young people. Like you, my ideas of the 20's - 40's were shaped because of Agatha Christie so her later books and her dismissive attitude I understood. As for Curtains hmmmm I found that to be a most unsatisfying book and I was going to add more but I refuse to include spoilers so I will reiterate Curtains was most unsatisfying.
I totally see the parallels with Peril at End House! I weirdly like this one maybe better than that one, though Peril is objectively probably a better book. I think I just am grasping for something approaching a good book at this point in the reread. I think that Agatha is complicated re:feminism. For her time, I actually think she's pretty darn progressive relative to the period for a good chunk of her career (ending, I will say, by the 60s). She has a lot of overtly feminist characters who yes are sometimes undercut, but ultimately end up being in the right a lot of the time (think Mrs. Oliver's initial deductions in Cards on the Table, or Sarah King from Appointment with Death). I want to think more about Agatha & feminism before my wrap up, though, because as you say, I think she is definitely not consistent with presenting what we would think of today as being a feminist POV. A lot to unpack! And I'm excited/dreading Curtain. I figure it has to be better than what I've been reading recently, but I also have a feeling it's doomed to disappoint. :/
You made me think regarding the feminist pov the most empowered female may be Miss Marple now that was one tough lady. Agatha was inconsistent on quite a few area but she knew how to hook a reader until the very end. As for Curtains that is the one book I haven't re-read I always felt she did a disservice to her "egg-shaped Belgian detective" but that is just my opinion :)
Why don't you read Christie's autobiography? It's her best book, imho, and you'll understand that Agatha was indeed NOT a feminist, and for very good reasons. Agatha was surrounded in her formative years by very strong and intelligent women, from her original widowed mother, her formidable Victorian grandmothers, witty sister and Jane, the stoic and authoritarian cook, and so developed a very good understanding of human nature and judgment of character. Victorian women were, as she tells us, very shrewd and realistic and subsequently grew up to see, like her foremothers, straight through bullshit rhetoric, an ability we seem to have lost in the last few generations. This is one reason why reading Christie is such a joy for me: her villains are often, if not always, malignant narcissists who (until the detective sniffed them out) got away with murder because of their clever lies and by manipulating their surroundings into believing that they, the baddy, was actually the victim!
I really liked this book and how it captures 1960s London life.
I just finished listening to the audio book of this and I found the overall plot to be interesting. I really liked how she described the time period of the 60s even if I dont always agree with her thoughts on things.
Spoilers
I found the ending to be kind of complicated. Up until the end I had suspected Frances and David being the killers. But at the end I realized that couldnt be right. For obvious reasons. I was actually surprised at who Christie choose to be the victims in this story. I also picked up on the stepmom being poisoned and suspecting her doing that to herself but i didnt piece together the dual identity connection. Same thing with the stepdad. I thought he wasnt her dad but i thought it was just a subplot to the main story. I think if i realized the duel identity i would have pieced it all together. All in all it was still enjoyable.
I read all the Christie I read in 2017 and am shocked how little i remember about some of these books. I recall "it was fun seeing Christie trying to deal with the 60s" but that's about it from this book.
I was gonna say "i forgot everything about the mystery" but i remembered the main twist while I was writing that sentence, it was a fairly good twist so i guess i just have a poor memory :P
Poirot discussing mystery novels comes back in my head when you mention it. That he's friends with Christie's surrogate Oliver leads to it making some sense.
"Hasn't aged well" - I get the feeling that Christie's older books were out dated in their values even when they were written, given how often she has her characters talk about how old they feel.
8:00 seeing someone discuss the hippies (people my grandparent's age) as kids they can't understand was the most fun i had with this book. The "modern young women" she's disparaging being in their 70s now.
Fantastic review! I will have to pick this one up! Have a great weekend! 📚
You as well!
One of the things that makes me love Christie books is their picture of the Society around her. Her work probably had a big influence on my interest in fashions-both couture and domestic.
ETA: on the drug issue, yeah, she incorporated that problem in several of her books. Dorothy Sayers dealt with the whole drug scene of the twenties and thirties especially well.
Yes! I read Christie for the first time nearly forty years ago, and thought of her books at that time only as 'fun stories'. Now I know more about the history of Britian during the first half of the 20th century, the 'fun stories' become even more fun, since we can see all kinds of preoccupations of the world around Christie shining through.
Oh that’s so interesting- yes, I agree that the Christie verse def influenced my interest 30s fashions, though I don’t think I realized that til just now 😂
omg I'm obsessed with The Kinks and Ray Davies! Hello, fellow British Invaders fan!!
I remember that the Suchet adaptation of Third Girl has James Wilby in it!
But I must say, having lived in London (though not glamorously), I do understand Agatha Christie's feelings about London, IDK-- it seems to me that the situation in question is one of those where it is glamorous from the outside and idk, a bit shallow from the inside?
Also considering the fact that Agatha Christie DID live the "glamour" of the upper-middle class society in the 1890s as a child, of the 1900s as a teenager and the inter-war period, so I do understand that compared to that (and also with the improvement that memories give to certain things) the 1960s glamour was not that glamorous at all? (Does that make sense at all???)
Oh yeah, I completely agree! I think she saw olden time London as much more glamorous, and tbh, who can blame her?? With all the post-war construction, it had to have been a totally different landscape by the 60s
I agree that Christie was very good at presenting the social / fashion norms of the day in her novels.
My last read was Murder on the Links. I found it to be a great book. The end was from far out of left field. I enjoyed the book. My next read will be CURTAIN. I know you still have two books to go before you get to CURTAIN so I will not spoil it for you. Thank you for getting me interested in reading more Poirot books.
Glad you're enjoying them! I'm excited/dreading getting to Curtain, but am intrigued to see how things wrap up
One of my most favourite Christie novels!
I think I might of liked Halloween Party better than this one. I hate it when the resolution to the mystery is too convoluted, and the one here was a real stretch. I did love the mod 60s setting, which is why I decided to read this one, and Halloween Party just before. I’ve only read a handful of Christie’s books, and I was curious as to what her work would be like at this period of time.
If you're looking for the mod 60s vibe, those are definitely the right ones for her backlist! I think it's definitely YMMV... none of these are her best works, but they still have a lot of charm
🥰
Full disclaimer I love Agatha Christie books but have a very low opinion of Agatha herself. The Third Girl reminds me a lot of Peril at end house i.e. drug use, girls being on their own and Hercule Poirot feeling unsure of the direction he should be headed in. Funny enough (not funny) I always considered Agatha as the anti- feminist i.e. the way she describes Ariadne Oliver as being foolish and lost and just her general negative views on women through out all her books another example Tuppence from the Tommy and Tuppence series. Granted I know I am judging her harshly because I have time on my side. I was born waaaaaaaaay before Harry Potter would ever be a thing so for me Agatha Christie was reading for young people. Like you, my ideas of the 20's - 40's were shaped because of Agatha Christie so her later books and her dismissive attitude I understood. As for Curtains hmmmm I found that to be a most unsatisfying book and I was going to add more but I refuse to include spoilers so I will reiterate Curtains was most unsatisfying.
I totally see the parallels with Peril at End House! I weirdly like this one maybe better than that one, though Peril is objectively probably a better book. I think I just am grasping for something approaching a good book at this point in the reread. I think that Agatha is complicated re:feminism. For her time, I actually think she's pretty darn progressive relative to the period for a good chunk of her career (ending, I will say, by the 60s). She has a lot of overtly feminist characters who yes are sometimes undercut, but ultimately end up being in the right a lot of the time (think Mrs. Oliver's initial deductions in Cards on the Table, or Sarah King from Appointment with Death). I want to think more about Agatha & feminism before my wrap up, though, because as you say, I think she is definitely not consistent with presenting what we would think of today as being a feminist POV. A lot to unpack!
And I'm excited/dreading Curtain. I figure it has to be better than what I've been reading recently, but I also have a feeling it's doomed to disappoint. :/
You made me think regarding the feminist pov the most empowered female may be Miss Marple now that was one tough lady. Agatha was inconsistent on quite a few area but she knew how to hook a reader until the very end. As for Curtains that is the one book I haven't re-read I always felt she did a disservice to her "egg-shaped Belgian detective" but that is just my opinion :)
Why don't you read Christie's autobiography? It's her best book, imho, and you'll understand that Agatha was indeed NOT a feminist, and for very good reasons. Agatha was surrounded in her formative years by very strong and intelligent women, from her original widowed mother, her formidable Victorian grandmothers, witty sister and Jane, the stoic and authoritarian cook, and so developed a very good understanding of human nature and judgment of character. Victorian women were, as she tells us, very shrewd and realistic and subsequently grew up to see, like her foremothers, straight through bullshit rhetoric, an ability we seem to have lost in the last few generations. This is one reason why reading Christie is such a joy for me: her villains are often, if not always, malignant narcissists who (until the detective sniffed them out) got away with murder because of their clever lies and by manipulating their surroundings into believing that they, the baddy, was actually the victim!