What do you think?
Rate this book
Agatha Christie- The Finished Portrait
When Agatha Christie, the so-called 'Queen of Crime', disappeared from her home in Sunningdale in Berkshire for eleven days on 3 December 1926, the whole nation held its breath. The following day, when her car was found abandoned 14 miles away at Newlands Corner in Surrey, a nationwide search was instigated. From a painstaking reconstruction of Agatha's movements and behaviour during those eleven days, Dr Andrew Norman is able to shed new light on what, in many ways, has remained a baffling mystery about the most successful crime writer of all time. In Agatha Christie: The Finished Portrait, Dr Andrew Norman delves deep into the crime writer's past to discover the desperate insecurity that sparked her disappearence in 1926. Agatha Christie suffered from recurrent nightmares where she was petrified that one or other of her family would be replaced by a terrifying figure called the 'Gunman' and lost to her forever. She was reminded of this figure both when her father died, and when her husband Archie demanded a divorce. This event precipitated such a crisis in Agatha's mind that she became temporarily unhinged. She lost her memory and assumed a new identity: that of her husband's mistress. Only now, thirty years after Agatha's death, is it possible to explain fully, in the light of scientific knowledge, her behaviour during her troubled disappearence, when she lived incognito in a Harrogate hotel. Dr Andrew Norman graduated in animal physiology from St Edmund Hall, Oxford before qualifying in medicine from the Radcliffe Infirmary. He worked as a GP until 1983, and is now an established writer. He is the author of several biographies, including Adolf Hitler: The Final Analysis, published by Spellmount. He lives with his wife Rachel in Poole, Dorset.
192 pages, Hardcover
First published March 1, 2007
3 people are currently reading
110 people want to read
About the author
Andrew Norman
99 books9 followersIn 1970 he qualified in medicine and worked as a family doctor in the UK until 1983 when sustaining a back injury.
Then deciding to use his diagnostic skills in a different way and become a writer.
Then deciding to use his diagnostic skills in a different way and become a writer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
January 13, 2016
Криминален уют
Агата Кристи е от онези автори, които нареждам сред любимците си, но чиито недостатъци (не са много!) ясно осъзнавам. Още в ранна тийнейджърска възраст бях прочела всичките й романи и разкази. Помня как бях направила списъци с произведенията й на три езика, за да не пропусна някое от тях и горко съжалявах, че не е все още жива, за да твори. Тогава я виждах в съвършени краски и всеки, който я критикуваше, отнасяше недотам справедливия ми гняв. Сега, в 20-те си години, трябва да призная, че в нейното творчество понякога е налице преплитане в криминалните й сюжети, което дори самата тя признава (съдейки по биографичните материали). Тоест, използва повече от един път дадено идейно скеле, върху което налага различни фабулни дрехи. Имало е и романи, от които съм била откровено разочарована, но са не повече от 4-5. Въпреки това обаче - окончателната "оценка" на творчеството й, която давам, е висока - в противовес на гореспоменатото.
Продължавам да виждам в нея онази умна английска лейди, впечатляваща ме с очарованието на криминалния уют (никак не е оксиморонно съчетание), който създава. Вярвам, че мис Марпъл е нейното алтер его, някак и поради това тя е любимият ми разследващ не само в нейните книги, но от всички криминални като цяло, които съм прочела. Пък и ми е доста по-вълнуваща идеята за наблюдателна, разплитаща убийства бабка, която всички подценяват, отколкото за надутия пуяк Поаро и несъобразителния му приятел - Хейстингс:
И да, знам, че книгите й нямат за цел да навлизат в екзистенциални дълбини, но това не ги прави посредствени. Всъщност - мисля, че е много трудно да се създаде добро произведение в този жанр. Изискват се много въображение и особен вид интелигентност според мен, за да се напише нещо различно, излизащо извън стандартно заложеното. За съжаление, голяма част от криминалните книги на редица автори, които съм прочела, не мога да определя с нещо различно от конфекционна литература. Но това е друг въпрос. Връщайки се към Агата - мисля си, че част от очарованието на нейните произведения се дължи на културно-историческия контекст, в който е творила. Малко книги имат това типично британско очарование от онова време, към което съм толкова привързана. Както съм си мислела и преди, има книги, които те карат да си задаваш въпроса "какъв ли е бил авторът като личност" и да предполагаш или по-точно - да се надяваш, обзет от читателска романтика :Д, че той е не по-малко интересен от творенията си. Е, за Агата май съм била права: http://mentalfloss.com/article/52724/...
В крайна сметка биографията е интересна, но как да кажа - единствената заслуга е на Агата Кристи. Сигурна съм, че има доста по-добри и прегледно систематизирани нейни биографии. А и да не говорим, че в българското издание шрифтът беше абсурдно малък, а за хора с по-слабо зрение, четенето би било истинско мъчение.
Агата Кристи е от онези автори, които нареждам сред любимците си, но чиито недостатъци (не са много!) ясно осъзнавам. Още в ранна тийнейджърска възраст бях прочела всичките й романи и разкази. Помня как бях направила списъци с произведенията й на три езика, за да не пропусна някое от тях и горко съжалявах, че не е все още жива, за да твори. Тогава я виждах в съвършени краски и всеки, който я критикуваше, отнасяше недотам справедливия ми гняв. Сега, в 20-те си години, трябва да призная, че в нейното творчество понякога е налице преплитане в криминалните й сюжети, което дори самата тя признава (съдейки по биографичните материали). Тоест, използва повече от един път дадено идейно скеле, върху което налага различни фабулни дрехи. Имало е и романи, от които съм била откровено разочарована, но са не повече от 4-5. Въпреки това обаче - окончателната "оценка" на творчеството й, която давам, е висока - в противовес на гореспоменатото.
Продължавам да виждам в нея онази умна английска лейди, впечатляваща ме с очарованието на криминалния уют (никак не е оксиморонно съчетание), който създава. Вярвам, че мис Марпъл е нейното алтер его, някак и поради това тя е любимият ми разследващ не само в нейните книги, но от всички криминални като цяло, които съм прочела. Пък и ми е доста по-вълнуваща идеята за наблюдателна, разплитаща убийства бабка, която всички подценяват, отколкото за надутия пуяк Поаро и несъобразителния му приятел - Хейстингс:
И да, знам, че книгите й нямат за цел да навлизат в екзистенциални дълбини, но това не ги прави посредствени. Всъщност - мисля, че е много трудно да се създаде добро произведение в този жанр. Изискват се много въображение и особен вид интелигентност според мен, за да се напише нещо различно, излизащо извън стандартно заложеното. За съжаление, голяма част от криминалните книги на редица автори, които съм прочела, не мога да определя с нещо различно от конфекционна литература. Но това е друг въпрос. Връщайки се към Агата - мисля си, че част от очарованието на нейните произведения се дължи на културно-историческия контекст, в който е творила. Малко книги имат това типично британско очарование от онова време, към което съм толкова привързана. Както съм си мислела и преди, има книги, които те карат да си задаваш въпроса "какъв ли е бил авторът като личност" и да предполагаш или по-точно - да се надяваш, обзет от читателска романтика :Д, че той е не по-малко интересен от творенията си. Е, за Агата май съм била права: http://mentalfloss.com/article/52724/...
В крайна сметка биографията е интересна, но как да кажа - единствената заслуга е на Агата Кристи. Сигурна съм, че има доста по-добри и прегледно систематизирани нейни биографии. А и да не говорим, че в българското издание шрифтът беше абсурдно малък, а за хора с по-слабо зрение, четенето би било истинско мъчение.
March 21, 2018
This read like a poorly edited book report
March 16, 2017
This is an invaluable guide for those Agatha Christie lovers who want to find out more about the author, particularly her 11 missing days. Those 11 missing days are why I picked up this book. What really did happen to the famous author? Norman has his theories and I am, as it turns out, in agreement with him.
Norman quotes most frequently from Christie’s autobiography which I am familiar with but he does also draw on newspaper reports of the time which I am very grateful for as newspaper research is so tedious.
Where I got a little impatient with Norman was his often repeated explanations regarding the novel Unfinished Portrait that Christie wrote under the pen name of Mary Westmacott. (For readers unfamiliar with these six Westmacott novels they are definitely worth investigating and are very enjoyable to read).
Here is Norman explaining for the first of umpteen times the Agatha/Celia connection:
“That Agatha, from an early age, absolutely loved being read to can be deduced from her semi-autobiographical novel Unfinished Portrait (published in 1934, where the character of Agatha is represented by ‘Celia’).”
However Norman is very good at highlighting Agatha’s childhood loneliness and also pointing out the quirks in Christie’s personality, in particular her gunman dreams. He also investigates the psychology of her marriage with egotist Archie and her difficult early relationship with her daughter Rosalind.
In regards to Christie’s disappearance, Norman takes us through it step by step:
“The newspaper headlines of the time reveal the enormous public interest in the case, and the strenuous efforts that were devoted to the solving of it: ‘500 POLICE SEARCH FOR MRS CHRISTIE (Daily Mail); THE MISSING WOMAN NOVELIST: POLICE WORKING ON NEW INFORMATION: AEROPLANES USED FOR THE FIRST TIME’ (The Times). (There is no doubt that aeroplanes were seen overhead during the search but as Superintendent Kenward states, these were, ‘nothing to do with the police.)”
Norman does make conclusions about what caused Agatha to go missing. You will have to read the book to see if you are in agreement with Norman and myself.
Norman quotes most frequently from Christie’s autobiography which I am familiar with but he does also draw on newspaper reports of the time which I am very grateful for as newspaper research is so tedious.
Where I got a little impatient with Norman was his often repeated explanations regarding the novel Unfinished Portrait that Christie wrote under the pen name of Mary Westmacott. (For readers unfamiliar with these six Westmacott novels they are definitely worth investigating and are very enjoyable to read).
Here is Norman explaining for the first of umpteen times the Agatha/Celia connection:
“That Agatha, from an early age, absolutely loved being read to can be deduced from her semi-autobiographical novel Unfinished Portrait (published in 1934, where the character of Agatha is represented by ‘Celia’).”
However Norman is very good at highlighting Agatha’s childhood loneliness and also pointing out the quirks in Christie’s personality, in particular her gunman dreams. He also investigates the psychology of her marriage with egotist Archie and her difficult early relationship with her daughter Rosalind.
In regards to Christie’s disappearance, Norman takes us through it step by step:
“The newspaper headlines of the time reveal the enormous public interest in the case, and the strenuous efforts that were devoted to the solving of it: ‘500 POLICE SEARCH FOR MRS CHRISTIE (Daily Mail); THE MISSING WOMAN NOVELIST: POLICE WORKING ON NEW INFORMATION: AEROPLANES USED FOR THE FIRST TIME’ (The Times). (There is no doubt that aeroplanes were seen overhead during the search but as Superintendent Kenward states, these were, ‘nothing to do with the police.)”
Norman does make conclusions about what caused Agatha to go missing. You will have to read the book to see if you are in agreement with Norman and myself.
September 22, 2015
Poorly written. Meh.
December 3, 2014
Great background on the author and details of what influenced her writing. Interesting reading for Agatha Christie lovers.
July 15, 2021
This was one of the most poorly written books I have ever read. It read like a poorly written book report on another book-"Agatha Christie: An Unfinished Portrait".
February 26, 2025
DNF… Really poorly written. Most of this book was boring and unnecessary. I stuck with it through the more interesting chapters about her childhood night terrors and disappearance but ultimately did not finish.
September 15, 2025
#Binge Reviewing my previous Reads # Dame Christie Birthday, September 15
Agatha Christie: The Finished Portrait opens with a promise: to explore that most famous enigma of her life, the eleven-day disappearance in December 1926, and to do so through a kind of detective work of the psyche. Andrew Norman, a doctor-turned-biographer, leans on his medical and psychiatric background to ask not just what happened, but why Christie might have split off from her public self, from memory, and from identity, and what her dreams, nightmares, and imaginative writing might reveal.
From the start he signals that this won’t simply be a conventional biography; it will propose hypotheses, psychological readings, connections between fiction and life, and perhaps some controversial suggestions.
We are taken into Christie’s inner world via three strands: published evidence (her autobiographical writing, Unfinished Portrait under her pseudonym Mary Westmacott, public records, and newspapers), Norman’s interpretations using psychiatric frameworks (night terrors, identity fears, and amnesia), and the patterns or recurring motifs in her fiction (characters, recurring fears, and symbolic figures).
One of the most striking threads is the recurring figure Norman calls the “Gunman” in Christie's nightmares: this terrifying figure who represents loss, replacement, and fear that loved ones will be snatched away. Norman argues that the gunman recurs in her writing and her dreams; that it is tied to her personal losses (her father’s death and the betrayal and domestic crisis in her first marriage to Archie) and to her emotional state leading up to the disappearance. Norman suggests that a convergence of external crises (husband’s infidelity, mother’s death, family instability) and internal psychological pressures triggered Christie’s 1926 disappearance: recurring nightmares, identity anxiety, and fear of being replaced, forgotten, or lost.
The way Norman uses Unfinished Portrait is interesting: he treats Celia, the heroine, as a thin veil for Christie’s own emotional life. Celia’s fears, her retreats, and her longing for identity and stability are taken as clues. Norman’s thesis is that Unfinished Portrait is semi-autobiographical in more than style: it holds keys to understanding how Christie saw herself, and how she used fiction to try to work through fears. He reads Christie's fiction not merely as entertainment or puzzle building but as expressive of fear, of psychological pain, and even of hallucination or dream logic.
On the plus side, Norman’s medical background allows him to bring a kind of clarity to certain psychological phenomena (night terrors, amnesia) that many other biographers’ only gesture at. He tries to synthesise what was known at the time, what Christie said, and what recent psychiatric understanding might add to the puzzle. For readers who enjoy psychological depth in biographies, that adds a fresh dimension. Norman also gives a fair amount of context: childhood fears, the influence of her parents, her feeling of loneliness, imagination in early life, and how those early emotional patterns may have laid the groundwork for later breakdowns.
However, there are also places where the theory feels strained or speculative. Because many of the key facts about the disappearance remain uncertain (she never explained fully what happened; memory lost; records ambiguous), Norman has to build from gaps. Sometimes the links between fiction and real life are persuasive; sometimes they seem more like elaborate inference. For example, the idea that nightmares about a gunman are directly decoding emotional trauma is evocative, but not always guaranteed: dreams are slippery, symbols multiply, and fiction can echo life but also invent. Some of Norman’s reading depends heavily on what Christie could have meant, rather than what she clearly said or documented.
Another tension is historiographical: Norman, in effect, asks to treat the disappearance almost as a case study in psychogenic amnesia—a medically defined collapse of memory and identity, triggered by emotional trauma. Nevertheless, that means interpreting ambiguous evidence under that lens, which might impose a pattern Christie did not consciously endorse. Whether Christie herself would accept such a reading is unknown.
Also, such interpretations risk overshadowing other dimensions of her life: the sheer discipline of her writing, her pragmatic need (books = income), the public pressures, the art of mystery-craft, the genre expectations, etc. Norman does discuss some of these, but they sometimes feel secondary to the psychological explanation. For someone who loves Christie’s novels for their structure, plotting, and voice, sometimes the “why she psychologically cracked” reading can feel like it’s stealing the spotlight from “how she performed, how she wrote, and how she built her craft”.
In terms of structure and style, the book is readable, though not always elegant. The short-chapter format helps in digesting ideas, but sometimes it feels like jumping, so the narrative cohesion is less strong. Also, because the focus is so heavily on one great mystery (the disappearance), other periods of Christie’s life — her later years, her life with Max Mallowan, her later views, her public perception, and controversies — get less interpretative depth. Norman touches on them, but they are not the centre of gravity.
One of the more provocative claims Norman makes is that through Unfinished Portrait, Christie's personal creative life was trying to “finish” some internal portrait of self (hence the title “The Finished Portrait”). He suggests that Unfinished Portrait is her attempt to represent Celia’s, i.e. Christie’s, emotional state, fears, and losses, but also a way of coping. Norman’s title is punning and symbolic: that perhaps the “finished portrait” is not a completed external painting or image but a completed internal self-portrait, a reconciled psyche. I find that idea powerful — as a writer, you see the idea that writers sometimes write not to entertain but to heal, to understand, and to assemble themselves.
Comparing Norman’s account with other biographies, the difference is that Norman is more ready to make diagnostic claims. Where Laura Thompson or others approach the emotional life with respect, Norman more boldly asserts that Christie had recurring nightmares, identity fears, and possibly psychogenic amnesia. Other biographers might treat those ideas more as possibilities rather than conclusions. So this book is more controversial in its claims: it asks the reader to accept that the disappearance was more than scandal or mystery, that it was a psychological crisis, not just literary drama.
For a reader like you, who loves writing, literature, and teaching, The Finished Portrait offers both riches and something to question. It shows how much the imagination, fear, memory and trauma can shape even someone as legendary and commercially successful as Christie. It offers a model (though you “borrowed with care”) of reading between lines — fiction as a path to self-portrait, nightmares as data. It also warns: when we interpret too strongly, we may impose coherence where there is none. The evidence is fragmentary; memory is partial; fiction is ambiguous.
In the end, does Norman “solve” Christie’s greatest mystery? Not fully. What he offers is a plausible, psychologically grounded interpretation. He doesn’t definitively prove what happened during those eleven days. But he gives us tools: nightmares, fears, early loss, and emotional betrayal — as factors. And seeing Christie through Norman’s lens, one finishes the book more aware of those shadowy edges of her life: the anxieties behind her composure, the fears behind her brilliance, and the cost of being both a public icon and a deeply private person.
Overall, The Finished Portrait is perhaps less satisfying for readers seeking pure archival biography (exact dates, documents, letters) than for those who want psychological insight, emotional texture, and speculative imagination anchored in medical knowledge.
If I were to give it a verdict: it is bold, sometimes overreaching, but rewarding. It might deepen one’s reading of Christie’s fiction (or Unfinished Portrait) by showing how motifs of identity, loss, and fear appear not by accident, but from emotional logic. It also nudges at something larger: that sometimes the greatest mysteries are not in fictional murders, but inside us — memory, identity, fear.
Agatha Christie: The Finished Portrait opens with a promise: to explore that most famous enigma of her life, the eleven-day disappearance in December 1926, and to do so through a kind of detective work of the psyche. Andrew Norman, a doctor-turned-biographer, leans on his medical and psychiatric background to ask not just what happened, but why Christie might have split off from her public self, from memory, and from identity, and what her dreams, nightmares, and imaginative writing might reveal.
From the start he signals that this won’t simply be a conventional biography; it will propose hypotheses, psychological readings, connections between fiction and life, and perhaps some controversial suggestions.
We are taken into Christie’s inner world via three strands: published evidence (her autobiographical writing, Unfinished Portrait under her pseudonym Mary Westmacott, public records, and newspapers), Norman’s interpretations using psychiatric frameworks (night terrors, identity fears, and amnesia), and the patterns or recurring motifs in her fiction (characters, recurring fears, and symbolic figures).
One of the most striking threads is the recurring figure Norman calls the “Gunman” in Christie's nightmares: this terrifying figure who represents loss, replacement, and fear that loved ones will be snatched away. Norman argues that the gunman recurs in her writing and her dreams; that it is tied to her personal losses (her father’s death and the betrayal and domestic crisis in her first marriage to Archie) and to her emotional state leading up to the disappearance. Norman suggests that a convergence of external crises (husband’s infidelity, mother’s death, family instability) and internal psychological pressures triggered Christie’s 1926 disappearance: recurring nightmares, identity anxiety, and fear of being replaced, forgotten, or lost.
The way Norman uses Unfinished Portrait is interesting: he treats Celia, the heroine, as a thin veil for Christie’s own emotional life. Celia’s fears, her retreats, and her longing for identity and stability are taken as clues. Norman’s thesis is that Unfinished Portrait is semi-autobiographical in more than style: it holds keys to understanding how Christie saw herself, and how she used fiction to try to work through fears. He reads Christie's fiction not merely as entertainment or puzzle building but as expressive of fear, of psychological pain, and even of hallucination or dream logic.
On the plus side, Norman’s medical background allows him to bring a kind of clarity to certain psychological phenomena (night terrors, amnesia) that many other biographers’ only gesture at. He tries to synthesise what was known at the time, what Christie said, and what recent psychiatric understanding might add to the puzzle. For readers who enjoy psychological depth in biographies, that adds a fresh dimension. Norman also gives a fair amount of context: childhood fears, the influence of her parents, her feeling of loneliness, imagination in early life, and how those early emotional patterns may have laid the groundwork for later breakdowns.
However, there are also places where the theory feels strained or speculative. Because many of the key facts about the disappearance remain uncertain (she never explained fully what happened; memory lost; records ambiguous), Norman has to build from gaps. Sometimes the links between fiction and real life are persuasive; sometimes they seem more like elaborate inference. For example, the idea that nightmares about a gunman are directly decoding emotional trauma is evocative, but not always guaranteed: dreams are slippery, symbols multiply, and fiction can echo life but also invent. Some of Norman’s reading depends heavily on what Christie could have meant, rather than what she clearly said or documented.
Another tension is historiographical: Norman, in effect, asks to treat the disappearance almost as a case study in psychogenic amnesia—a medically defined collapse of memory and identity, triggered by emotional trauma. Nevertheless, that means interpreting ambiguous evidence under that lens, which might impose a pattern Christie did not consciously endorse. Whether Christie herself would accept such a reading is unknown.
Also, such interpretations risk overshadowing other dimensions of her life: the sheer discipline of her writing, her pragmatic need (books = income), the public pressures, the art of mystery-craft, the genre expectations, etc. Norman does discuss some of these, but they sometimes feel secondary to the psychological explanation. For someone who loves Christie’s novels for their structure, plotting, and voice, sometimes the “why she psychologically cracked” reading can feel like it’s stealing the spotlight from “how she performed, how she wrote, and how she built her craft”.
In terms of structure and style, the book is readable, though not always elegant. The short-chapter format helps in digesting ideas, but sometimes it feels like jumping, so the narrative cohesion is less strong. Also, because the focus is so heavily on one great mystery (the disappearance), other periods of Christie’s life — her later years, her life with Max Mallowan, her later views, her public perception, and controversies — get less interpretative depth. Norman touches on them, but they are not the centre of gravity.
One of the more provocative claims Norman makes is that through Unfinished Portrait, Christie's personal creative life was trying to “finish” some internal portrait of self (hence the title “The Finished Portrait”). He suggests that Unfinished Portrait is her attempt to represent Celia’s, i.e. Christie’s, emotional state, fears, and losses, but also a way of coping. Norman’s title is punning and symbolic: that perhaps the “finished portrait” is not a completed external painting or image but a completed internal self-portrait, a reconciled psyche. I find that idea powerful — as a writer, you see the idea that writers sometimes write not to entertain but to heal, to understand, and to assemble themselves.
Comparing Norman’s account with other biographies, the difference is that Norman is more ready to make diagnostic claims. Where Laura Thompson or others approach the emotional life with respect, Norman more boldly asserts that Christie had recurring nightmares, identity fears, and possibly psychogenic amnesia. Other biographers might treat those ideas more as possibilities rather than conclusions. So this book is more controversial in its claims: it asks the reader to accept that the disappearance was more than scandal or mystery, that it was a psychological crisis, not just literary drama.
For a reader like you, who loves writing, literature, and teaching, The Finished Portrait offers both riches and something to question. It shows how much the imagination, fear, memory and trauma can shape even someone as legendary and commercially successful as Christie. It offers a model (though you “borrowed with care”) of reading between lines — fiction as a path to self-portrait, nightmares as data. It also warns: when we interpret too strongly, we may impose coherence where there is none. The evidence is fragmentary; memory is partial; fiction is ambiguous.
In the end, does Norman “solve” Christie’s greatest mystery? Not fully. What he offers is a plausible, psychologically grounded interpretation. He doesn’t definitively prove what happened during those eleven days. But he gives us tools: nightmares, fears, early loss, and emotional betrayal — as factors. And seeing Christie through Norman’s lens, one finishes the book more aware of those shadowy edges of her life: the anxieties behind her composure, the fears behind her brilliance, and the cost of being both a public icon and a deeply private person.
Overall, The Finished Portrait is perhaps less satisfying for readers seeking pure archival biography (exact dates, documents, letters) than for those who want psychological insight, emotional texture, and speculative imagination anchored in medical knowledge.
If I were to give it a verdict: it is bold, sometimes overreaching, but rewarding. It might deepen one’s reading of Christie’s fiction (or Unfinished Portrait) by showing how motifs of identity, loss, and fear appear not by accident, but from emotional logic. It also nudges at something larger: that sometimes the greatest mysteries are not in fictional murders, but inside us — memory, identity, fear.
August 13, 2022
Ugh. So poorly written. Where was the editor? They should be ashamed of themselves. I only stuck with it so I could see what happened to who. Don't bother. Wikipedia would be more enlightening.
Read
May 23, 2024Ma ei pea end küll Agatha Christie andunud fänniks, kuid ilmselgelt on ta tähelepanuväärne naine ja pean tunnistama, et ega ma temast endast enne selle raamatu lugemist suurt ei teadnudki.
Sissejuhatuses öeldakse, et peamiselt pööratakse selles teoses tähelepanu 1926. aasta detsembrikuule, kui Agatha närvivapustusest tingituna 11 päevaks kadus. Tegelikult räägitakse raamatus palju ka tema lapsepõlvest, mis oli "liiga turvaline" ega valmistanud teda reaalseks eluks ette. Samuti tema suhetest ema, mehe ja tütrega ja muidugi loomingust. NB! Kes Christie teoseid eriti palju lugenud pole ja alles plaanib avastama hakata, siis spoiler alert. Kui lugemise alguses midagi nagu häiris, siis lugemist lõpetades veendusin, et tegelikult oli tegemist täitsa hea raamatuga. Eelkõige on keskendutud just kuulsa kirjaniku hingemaailma avamisele ja psühholoogilistele aspektidele. Muu hulgas visatakse õhku küsimus, kas see 11-päevane kadumine oli ikka ehtne või vaid lihtsalt nutika naise reklaamitrikk. Ja tõeline fänn võib ehk veidi pettuda, saades teada, miks Agatha üldse peamiselt kirjutas. Igal juhul täitsa kobe lugemine, kui kirjavead välja arvata.
Sissejuhatuses öeldakse, et peamiselt pööratakse selles teoses tähelepanu 1926. aasta detsembrikuule, kui Agatha närvivapustusest tingituna 11 päevaks kadus. Tegelikult räägitakse raamatus palju ka tema lapsepõlvest, mis oli "liiga turvaline" ega valmistanud teda reaalseks eluks ette. Samuti tema suhetest ema, mehe ja tütrega ja muidugi loomingust. NB! Kes Christie teoseid eriti palju lugenud pole ja alles plaanib avastama hakata, siis spoiler alert. Kui lugemise alguses midagi nagu häiris, siis lugemist lõpetades veendusin, et tegelikult oli tegemist täitsa hea raamatuga. Eelkõige on keskendutud just kuulsa kirjaniku hingemaailma avamisele ja psühholoogilistele aspektidele. Muu hulgas visatakse õhku küsimus, kas see 11-päevane kadumine oli ikka ehtne või vaid lihtsalt nutika naise reklaamitrikk. Ja tõeline fänn võib ehk veidi pettuda, saades teada, miks Agatha üldse peamiselt kirjutas. Igal juhul täitsa kobe lugemine, kui kirjavead välja arvata.
August 8, 2021
I received this book as a prize in school, and could never bring myself to read it until a few days ago. I liked the insights into Agatha's childhood - seemed to find a lot in common with myself, meheh - but overall, kind of boring. I guess I was expecting more of how Agatha's life cropped up in her writing, but the book's primary focus was her disappearance and the circumstances surrounding it. Read it if you're a huge fan, or if you're bored and have it lying around.
May 6, 2023
Execrable. Not just badly, almost childishly, written, but facile, superficial, and lacking any real understanding of psychology; literature, culture, and their possible relevance to Christie's life and work, are ignored, and on top of this he also gets facts quite fantastically wrong. Any book about Agatha Christie which tells you that The Murder of Roger Ackroyd features Miss Marple is pretty difficult to take seriously. The real mystery is how it ever got published.
August 1, 2025
This has to be one of the worst books I've ever read. It's a copy and paste job with the same paragraphs appearing in several chapters. Instead of taking short extracts from the ideas of psychiatrists etc whole chunks of their work are included with little in the way of original expansion provided. Where the author tries to add their own ideas, they feel totally outdated or stilted. Read Westmacott's Unfished Portrait instead and read between the lines.
August 17, 2021
An interesting read, particularly about her break down or assumption of an alternate identity.
March 23, 2025
The chapters on Christie’s 11-day disappearance— including news reports, the author’s own statements,
and her fictionalized version of the events—were filled with surprises.
and her fictionalized version of the events—were filled with surprises.
July 7, 2025
The background on the author was interesting, but very poorly written
January 3, 2017
Ma ei ole kunagi eriti elulooraamatuid lugenud ja tegelikult on üsna kahju, et üks neist vähestest, mis mu kätte on sattunud, on niivõrd nadi.
Jutt on hüplik ning toimetus- ja faktivigu täis. Näiteks väidetakse, et "Roger Ackroydi mõrvamine" oli esimene raamat, kus tegelasena esines miss Marple. Tegelikult on see aga Poirot lugu. Ja sugugi mitte esimene.
Suure osa raamatust võtavad enda alla erinevate Christie teoste (või lõikude) lühikokkuvõtted.
Palju rõhku on ka tema (isiklikul elul põhineval) romaanil "Lõpetatud portree".
Kuigi autor ütleb, et keskendub eriti Christie 11-päevasele kadumisele, ei tee ta sedagi. Kadumisest antakse üsna napp ja üldsõnaline ülevaade.
Tegelikult on kõnekas seegi, et raamatus on 39 peatükki. See tähendab, et ühe peatüki pikkuseks on keskmiselt napilt viis lehekülge. Teemaarenduseks kuidagi vähevõitu.
Jutt on hüplik ning toimetus- ja faktivigu täis. Näiteks väidetakse, et "Roger Ackroydi mõrvamine" oli esimene raamat, kus tegelasena esines miss Marple. Tegelikult on see aga Poirot lugu. Ja sugugi mitte esimene.
Suure osa raamatust võtavad enda alla erinevate Christie teoste (või lõikude) lühikokkuvõtted.
Palju rõhku on ka tema (isiklikul elul põhineval) romaanil "Lõpetatud portree".
Kuigi autor ütleb, et keskendub eriti Christie 11-päevasele kadumisele, ei tee ta sedagi. Kadumisest antakse üsna napp ja üldsõnaline ülevaade.
Tegelikult on kõnekas seegi, et raamatus on 39 peatükki. See tähendab, et ühe peatüki pikkuseks on keskmiselt napilt viis lehekülge. Teemaarenduseks kuidagi vähevõitu.
February 26, 2022
Interesting - I knew the story and read many of her novels. At library school we were taught she only had three plots, the most obvious (but there's an untraceable alibi), the most obscure and where there's a sequence but only one of the victims is important to cracking the crime (ABC Murders). Anyway, poor soul was married unhappily to a complete bouncer but brought joy to millions with her detective stories and Hercule Poirot is a Belgian legend.
October 24, 2011
I first read Agatha Christie detective novels when I was 11 years odl. since then, i have read most of them. There was a 1978 film made about Agatha Christie's disappearance which at the time i found fascinating. It was interesting to read this book and learn more about this author.
April 24, 2015
The life and career of a famous writer are described in this book.
Quite interesting but the writing was very dry - it was like reading an academic research paper (in my opinion). This is probably only really for Agatha Christie fans.
Quite interesting but the writing was very dry - it was like reading an academic research paper (in my opinion). This is probably only really for Agatha Christie fans.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews