A rare Agatha Christie Halloween mystery!
Christie’s Middle East Ghost Story
"In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate. . .” Poirot recites this Islamic blessing for journies, as we are on a journey to find the name of a killer. And he also jokes around, too:
"I joke, mademoiselle," he said, "and I laugh. But there are some things that are no joke. There are things that my profession has taught me. And one of these things, the most terrible thing, is this: murder is a habit. . ."
Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie married archaeologist Max Mallowan in 1930 and became Lady Mallowan. They met on a dig and this is Christie’s first (only?) mystery set on the site of a dig, at Hassanieh, Iraq, though the setting isn’t that relevant to the plot, nor the culture (though a few of the visiting British characters are racist about locals, as usual). But things--ah, sweet love!--were going pretty well for the auld Dame in those days. In 1936 (the year this book came out) alone she produced three Poirot books! This one features another closed set murder, narrated by nurse Amy Leatheran, who was asked to document the story by another member of the company, Dr. Reilly. She says, “I’m not a writer, it’s not going to be literary,” (oh oh, will the writing be lame?) but as it is, Christie's first female narrator, Nurse Amy, helps anticipate the charm of her Miss Marple mysteries. She's less formal than Poirot, though also less of an actual detective.
The lead archaeologist of the expedition is the world-renowned Dr. Leidner, accompanied by his charming and vivacious wife, the “Lovely Louise.” But she seems nervous. She hears noises, has seen a hand outside her window. She can't sleep. She had received anonymous letters threatening her with death if she remarried. Who wrote them? Is it indeed her ex, who is maybe not really dead? Is it someone in the expedition? Did she write them herself? Or is it a ghost!? Is she going crazy? Are we?!
Then Louise is killed (sorry for that smallish spoiler) and Poirot just happens to be passing through Iraq (!!) to lend a hand with the investigation, with the assistance of Nurse Amy Leidner, with her storied speculations veering of course into fiction. Leidner initially claims no one could have killed her--we all get along, we all loved her--but of course we know this is not true, and we need the psychologist Poirot to dig deep into each soul, each psyche, to reveal what complex and contradictory creatures humans can be. Over time Poirot helps us see that anyone there could and would have killed Louise. This would seem to be a somewhat Calvinist view of the world: Dig just a bit under the surface and we could all easily be murderers. And because murder may be a habit, will the murderer kill again?
At one point Poirot observes with Leidner that there is something that archaeology has in common with solving a mystery: Both are involved in reconstructing the past. Ooh . . . (from those late night discussions the Dame might have had with new hubby Max!?).
Some random observations:
**Insanity is again a consideration, as is common for Christie in these books--it must be a lunatic!!--but this is the simplest idea and almost never is true: “Nerves are the core of one’s being, aren’t they?" Mrs. Mercado contends, but desires might be a more accurate name for the core as Christie sees it.
**As with any ghost story, there is the sense of impending doom, rising terror. Did Louise's first husband rise from the grave? But I have to say, Christie tends to science over the supernatural in her world view, as far as I can tell; in other words, the likelihood of there being ghosts in her fictional world is slim.
**In one sort of bizarre chapter entitled “I Go Psychic” the nurse Leidner goes into the bedroom of one who is murdered and imagines the scene. This is a weird scene with light horror/comic effects as someone actually enters the room as she plays this out. But the idea of "play acting" solutions is something Poirot and the nurse engage in here as with other Poirot books.
**Poirot and Christie have a strategy in crime-solving: “Don’t parade your knowledge.” Keep as many secrets hidden for as long as possible. Thus the solution Poirot waits as usual til the very end to reveal. As she expects me to be, I am, as usual. . . wrong.
This is a good one, that got better as it went along, especially with the ending that surprised and pleased me. This is usually what happens with Christie for me: Half of the books seem too long, tending to tiresome, too obviously focused on elaborate red herrings, but then we come to the wind-up, and suddenly she seems very good indeed at what she does. Happy Christie Mallowan Halloween!