Reading the Detectives discussion

A new month a new Poirot

I couldn't help myself and already started it! Right of the bat a completely different pace and scenery from the last book. I'm very much enjoying Poirot being in the thick of things from the very beginning.

Also appreciated the foreword. If this wasn't one of Hastings' favourites we're probably in for some exercise for the grey cells more than live action!

I never came across the expression at the end of chapter two before:

"Is it twenty-to or twenty past? An angel passing . . . . My feet aren't crossed—it must be a black angel!"

Must be referring to the awkward silence.

I like this story very much. How elegant and civil social interactions used to be.
Mr. Schaitana's guest list is interesting. Four crime-solving experts and four seemingly random "civilians". Only, they are not random guests. Schaitana told Poirot that instead of artifacts of crime, he collects the humans who committed a crime and got away with it.
Disguised as dinner conversation, Schaitana reminds all 4 of them that he knows of their respective crimes.
This is probably not a very wise move.
I still don't understand the last sentence in chapter 2.

I also wondered about the odd comment at the end of chapter two:
"Is it twenty-to or twenty past? An angel passing . . . . My feet aren't crossed—it must be a black angel!"

I know there are some old superstitions about those occasions when, for no apparent reason, there's a lull in the room where several different conversations had been going on. It's just coincidence of course, but it does feel odd when it happens, doesn't it? All those conversations just happen to come to a quiet point at the same time.

So I imagine she's referring to the superstitions.

I loved having four Christie investigators in one book - I just wish Miss Marple had been there. Who would triumph in a battle of wits between Poirot and Jane Marple, I wonder? Or would they just be the most formidable detecting twosome in fiction :))

I have never understood why Mr. Shaitana would organize the evening the way he did. He sequestered the four detectives in one room and the four alleged murderers in another. If the idea was to have fun then the detectives and murderers should have been made to interact with each other.

Bicky, I agree. A mix would have created more tension.

I’m so excited about rereading this one, I don’t remember a thing about it! Just getting started, it’s a great first chapter- Mr. Shaitana is creepy...

Isn't it fun to read a book essentially for the first time, but knowing you liked it once before? No bad surprises.
I do that with Nero Wolfe. In Stout's books the crime is background and the lure is the ambiance of the Brownstone and the interaction of it's inhabitants.

Yes!

Starfish wrote: "Isn't it fun to read a book essentially for the first time, but knowing you liked it once before? No bad surprises.
I do that with Nero Wolfe. In Stout's books the crime is background and the lure ..."

Yes in general and with Stout that is definitely true.

I've just finished this one so will head over to the spoiler threads for discussion.

Poirot trots after a bus! And catches it! This could be his action scene.

Much more believable than that ridiculous chase seen on the recent Murder on the Orient Express movie!

I love Adriana Oliver and the fun Christie has with their profession.

I wish I knew more about bridge (of which I know nothing), as I feel as though that would have enhanced my enjoyment of some of the plot elements. It seems like such a fun way to spend an evening, perhaps similar to modern game nights that are becoming popular again.