You'll love this one...!! A book club & more discussion
Closed Discussion Topic
>
April's Mysteries - And Then There Were None
I'm 100% sure I'll be reading this one, as it's the only book I'll be having access to. Hopefully by April 21st, eh?
Oh I can't wait! Like Judy, I read it long ago but don't remember anything other than my opinion that it was great! It was the first AC book I ever read.
I'll be reading this one whenever my hold comes in.
Ok I'm done with it. Mystery fans, Christie fans, tell me what's so wonderful about this?
I've got it on my laptop and will be reading it on the 19th to the 20th. I have no idea.
I started reading it the other day and am enjoying it so far.
Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "Ok I'm done with it. Mystery fans, Christie fans, tell me what's so wonderful about this?"This was my first Christie book, and I enjoyed it. I am usually able to predict the ending of mystery books. I liked this book because I didn't guess correctly. :)
Oh how fun, Emily! Do you think you'll read more by Christie, now?
I enjoyed this as much for its psychological aspects as I did for the mystery. To picture myself on that island, stranded with that assortment of people, watching the numbers dwindle...to sit in the dining room, eating food and drinking tea that I hoped wasn't poisoned, planning my survival strategy and knowing that someone in the room is planning a murder, but who? Will I be next to die? And then to be tormented by a secret crime I committed so long ago... one that I thought was well buried but in fact was exposed to all in a spooky, anonymous manner...I thought the order of the deaths was interesting as well. Those with the most benign crimes died right away, while those with significant crimes in their past were tormented longer.
Neat - it never occurred to me to imagine myself there... hm... that would be creepy...
Mandy wrote: "I enjoyed this as much for its psychological aspects as I did for the mystery. To picture myself on that island, stranded with that assortment of people, watching the numbers dwindle...to sit in t..."I can't imagine the horror the people went through, knowing they'd never get off the island and waiting for their turn.
I never thought about the order in respect to the significance of their crimes. I noticed they are all tied in with the poem, though. I imagine the longer you wait for your turn, the more agony you go through. Waiting can be worse than the punishment.
I'm about 1/2 way through and if my memory serves me correctly, I think I know who U.N. Owen is.
Its the first time I've read it, but has seen a film many years ago and found that version pretty creepy. When I was reading this one I just kept thinking how rediculous it was that the guests were still expecting the poor butler to do everything for them after his bereavement. The class divide is very entertaining.
Judy wrote: "Were you right, Janice? I just listened to the audio version this morning. I didn't remember who did it, so it was like reading a new book."
Not exactly! I was thinking that (view spoiler)
I thought that I had read the book years ago, but perhaps it was the movie that I saw. There are several movies on the same theme and I think I got confused. It's not hard to do these days.
I am still reading it. I remember reading it a long, long time ago and was confused about the title. Here is some background. The words are not mine,"The novel was originally published in Britain under the title Ten Little Niggers in 1939.[2][3] All references to "Indian" in the US version of the story were originally "Nigger": thus the island was called "Nigger Island" [3] rather than "Indian Island" and the rhyme found by each murder victim was also called Ten Little Niggers [3] rather than Ten Little Indians. Modern printings use the rhyme Ten Little Indians and "Indian Island" for reasons of political and ethnic sensitivity.
The UK serialisation was in twenty-three parts in the Daily Express from Tuesday, June 6 to Saturday, July 1, 1939. All of the installments carried an illustration by "Prescott" with the first installment having an illustration of Burgh Island in Devon which inspired the setting of the story. This version did not contain any chapter divisions.[10]
For the United States market, the novel was first serialised in the Saturday Evening Post in seven parts from 20 May (Volume 211, Number 47) to 1 July 1939 (Volume 212, Number 1) with illustrations by Henry Raleigh and then published separately in book form in January 1940. Both publications used the less inflammatory title And Then There Were None. The 1945 motion picture also used this title. In 1946, the play was published under the new title Ten Little Indians (the same title under which it had been performed on Broadway), and in 1964 an American paperback edition also used this title.
British editions continued to use the work's original title until the 1980s and the first British edition to use the alternative title And Then There Were None appeared in 1985 with a reprint of the 1963 Fontana Paperback.[11] Today And Then There Were None is the title most commonly used.
Good point about the class divide and the poor butler, Alison. Of course, he did sorta bring it upon himself, as he didn't even try to ask for a break. Stiff upper lip and all that, eh...Tx for the background, Susan. :)
Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "Good point about the class divide and the poor butler, Alison. Of course, he did sorta bring it upon himself, as he didn't even try to ask for a break. Stiff upper lip and all that, eh...Tx for..."
Yes he just completely accepted it as his lot - perhaps Christie just saw ther servant classes as completely below such finer feelings, although they were a pair of murderers of course. None of the characters are likeable at all - including the one who sets it up.
Agreed. I think that's maybe why I'm having trouble with the book - there's no hero, nobody to root for...
That's quite an insight - we were just talking about the classist division of labor & expectations, but the author lumped them all together as deserving (according to the murderer) of death.
After the butler met his demise, the next sterotype took over - the woman did most of the cooking.
Judy wrote: "Christie is the queen of stereotypes IMO. She doesn't like Americans either...they are almost always loudmouth, obnoxious women. It always cracked me up."The stereotyping was part of the prevailing attitude of the time wasn't it? It's not surprising that she reflected that. I wonder how our culture and current attitudes will be evident to future generations.
Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "Agreed. I think that's maybe why I'm having trouble with the book - there's no hero, nobody to root for..."They were all flawed individuals who had murdered someone, so it was hard to feel any sympathy for them.
I finished it yesterday. I think Agatha Christie books are meant as pure entertainment, although you can get, as mentioned above, a feel for the social strata and stereotypes of the place and time. How do you mark something as a spoiler alert?
If you click on "some html is ok" above the comment box, you will find the directions. Basically you start the spoiler with spoiler (surrounded the <> brackets) and finish with /spoiler (surrounded by the <> brackets).
Oh, thanks. You know, I had seen that list before, but couldn't remember where it was. I was clicking all over looking for it.
Susan wrote: "Spoiler alert [spoilers removed]"Let's see if we can make it plausible.
The murderer could have selected the victims based on the poem. I think the poem was loose enough that he could have made the death fit. Luck would have certainly played a part in it, but he supposedly was resourceful enough to orchestrate opportunities.
For me, the greatest bit of luck was that the final victim did follow through with the death described in the poem. If I was the last person left alive, I don't think I would have hung myself.
I know, he had to count on the woman being somewhat unhinged and guilt-plagued enough to commit suicide. Actually, I think you're just supposed to take it all with a grain of salt and be entertained,
I suspect you're right. I never got the impression that Christie was known for writing Literature, but rather just intriguing entertainment.
She was an extremely prolific writer. I haven't read much of her work and I'm wondering if some of it followed a formula.
I bought an autobiography of hers years ago. I don't remember if I finished reading it or not. I do remember her telling a story about going swimming at the beach. Weird, the things we remember!
I like the analogy of the nanny handing out sweets. The villians get their just desserts. :)
Yes, very good. And a very good description of why they are so popular. I thought it was true synchronicity that I had just read an Agatha Christie novel, and her books were discussed in the next book I read.
Thanks for sharing; that is interesting indeed.
Alison wrote: "When I was reading this one I just kept thinking how rediculous it was that the guests were still expecting the poor butler to do everything for them after his bereavement. .."I also thought it was odd that he continued his role as butler, and became cook. Not only did the guests expect it and not show concern for him, but he didn't seem to act affected by his wife's death either.
Later defaulting to women in the kitchen seemed to everyone involved a natural progression. The roles of women in Christie's time would have been set this way, without a second thought. (Didn't they know women are famous poisoners?)
Susan wrote: "The novel was originally published in Britain under the title Ten Little Niggers in 1939.[2][3] All references to "Indian" in the US version of the story were originally "Nigger": thus the island was called "Nigger Island" [3] rather than "Indian Island" and the rhyme found by each murder victim was also called Ten Little Niggers [3] rather than Ten Little Indians. ..."I remember having read about this change before, now that you mention it...but had forgotten about it while reading.
The version I had, from an eigthy some odd volume collection, has a reference to "Nigger Island" but the rest of the book refers to "Indian Island"....somebody did't do their editing job very well. The reference did catch me off guard.
Judy wrote: "This is typical with a lot of Christie mysteries. I think she does a great job of capturing what motivates many types of people..."I enjoyed Christie's character portrayals. She seemed to know a lot about the stereotypical nature in a multitude of forms, and included one of each in this cast.
What did you think of the change of point of view from the thoughts of one traveling guest to another as they all merged toward their destination?I thought it was a fairly good way to introduce each character and understand a bit of each personality, while actually getting inside their head. Each person seems to reflect on some dubious past, with opinions quite possibly strong enough for causing mayhem.
This is also how we learn that the invitations to the island are really some sort of lure. No one receives the same kind of invite and quite often not even from the same person. Right from the beginning we learn to trust no one, including the host/hostess.
Later we hear thoughts but can not identify which mind the ideas are coming from.
Very effective, I thought.
Judy wrote: "Later defaulting to women in the kitchen seemed to everyone involved a natural progression. The roles of women in Christie's time would have been set this way, without a second thought. (Didn't the..."I'm not sure much has changed. Whenever we had guests for dinner after church, the women would be in the kitched, cooking and then cleaning up, and the men would be in the living room. It was an unspoken "agreement".
There is a married couple that rent the office across from me. The woman goes downstairs to the cafe and brings back lunch for both of them. I've never seen him go down.
Mandy wrote: "I thought the order of the deaths was interesting as well. Those with the most benign crimes died right away, while those with significant crimes in their past were tormented longer. ..."Interesting perspective Mandy. I thought that they died in the order of weakness. The strongest seemed to have survived to the last. Those with weak character flaws, like vanity or weak will or daydreaming, were the first to go.
Cheryl in CC NV wrote: "Ok I'm done with it. Mystery fans, Christie fans, tell me what's so wonderful about this?"Cheryl, you don't seem too happy about this read. What is your opinion of it? Did you find anything redeeming?
This was different from most detective fiction that I have read. There was no detective to follow around seeking clues. Anything one or a group of the guests did to try to solve things were not effective; e.g. search the island for hiding places, inspect the house for false walls, frisk each other for weapons and poisons. AND the critical clue needed to discover the murderer was not given to us. The detectives who arrive after the fact are unable to piece things together properly. The murderer himself has to do the "drawing room" wrap up.
Still Christie implies that “Justice was Served”. (Both the man and the sentiment.)
Almeta wrote: "This was different from most detective fiction that I have read. There was no detective to follow around seeking clues. Anything one or a group of the guests did to try to solve things were not e..."Do you think it would be safe to say that the reader was the detective? Except the reader can only interpret what is printed. There's no suggesting - check this, check that. I was pretty sure that the first to die was the murderer, that he had feigned his death in order to have free reign.
I wasn't sure that I cared for the ending - with the murderer confessing via a "note in a bottle".
Was it a detective story, or just a mystery? Agatha Christie novels were always considered gentile, mild reading. There was never any real blood or gore involved like in many murder mysteries today where there is often sadism and sex and torture involved. Everything in this book seemed very antiseptic. There was no necessary cleaning up of blood, other bodily fluids and viscera, and no one seemed to worry about all the dead bodies piling up and perhaps starting to smell.
I did like the introduction to each character on their journeys. Everything was intriguing. And I didn't mind the implausible 'antispetic' treatment of the bodies, though I'm sure you're right, Susan, that there would be mess & stench. I just don't much care for mysteries at all, is all. NBD.
Didn't they know women are famous poisoners?I remember reading once in a National Geographic (probably in 2008-2009) about a 'school' someone had in earlier times (if only I could remember) where young women with rich husbands went to learn how to poison them. Get rid of the guy, and you become a wealthy young widow!
--
I couldn't really get into this story. Like you said, Susan, it's antiseptic. But not just in its treatment of the bodies-- the only emotions that seem to exist are fear and guilt. Now I think of it, why would they feel anything else? But it's really hard to care for any of the characters, which makes it really just a 'surface' read for me.
At the beginning the style was really annoying, but it makes the book move quickly, which I liked.
This was an interesting read for me. I agree with many of you the characters were stereotypes, but they were also very strong illustrations of English culture of the day. I also agree that it was a mystery, rather than a detective story, and that the characters were not particularly likable. It was difficult for me to follow so many characters, especially as they were introduced so close together. The interesting thing is that even while we watched the characters be killed one after the other, the sense of dread they clearly felt was not felt by me, the reader. Christie managed to communicate the characters fear, anger and dread, but kept the interest in the mystery for the reader.
I've not read it yet, but go ahead and start if you're ready.