What do you think?
Rate this book
New Hercule Poirot Mysteries #3
Misteri Tiga Perempat
Mrs. Sylvia Rule muncul di depan rumah Hercule Poirot sambil marah-marah. Ia ingin tahu kenapa Poirot mengirim surat yang menuduhnya bertanggung jawab atas pembunuhan Barnabas Pandy padahal ia belum pernah bertemu dengan pria itu. Namun, Poirot juga belum pernah mendengar nama Barnabas Pandy dan tidak pernah mengirim surat apa pun kepada Mrs. Sylvia Rule.
Tidak hanya Mrs. Sylvia Rule, tiga orang lain datang menemui Poirot dan menyatakan bahwa mereka juga menerima surat dari Poirot yang menuduh mereka sebagai pembunuh Barnabas Pandy.
Kenapa ada orang yang memalsukan nama Poirot dan mengirim surat-surat itu? Siapa yang mengirimnya, dan kenapa? Yang lebih penting lagi, siapa sebenarnya Barnabas Pandy? Apakah ia masih hidup atau sudah tewas? Dan apabila ia memang sudah tewas, apakah ia dibunuh?
Dengan bantuan Edward Catchpool, polisi Scotland Yard, Poirot pun mulai menyelidiki—mengerahkan sel-sel kelabunya untuk menguak teka-teki rumit yang melibatkan skandal, rahasia, dan kejahatan di masa lalu.
Tidak hanya Mrs. Sylvia Rule, tiga orang lain datang menemui Poirot dan menyatakan bahwa mereka juga menerima surat dari Poirot yang menuduh mereka sebagai pembunuh Barnabas Pandy.
Kenapa ada orang yang memalsukan nama Poirot dan mengirim surat-surat itu? Siapa yang mengirimnya, dan kenapa? Yang lebih penting lagi, siapa sebenarnya Barnabas Pandy? Apakah ia masih hidup atau sudah tewas? Dan apabila ia memang sudah tewas, apakah ia dibunuh?
Dengan bantuan Edward Catchpool, polisi Scotland Yard, Poirot pun mulai menyelidiki—mengerahkan sel-sel kelabunya untuk menguak teka-teki rumit yang melibatkan skandal, rahasia, dan kejahatan di masa lalu.
392 pages, Paperback
First published August 23, 2018
1806 people are currently reading
8620 people want to read
About the author
Sophie Hannah
106 books4,504 followersSophie Hannah is an internationally bestselling writer of psychological crime fiction, published in 27 countries. In 2013, her latest novel, The Carrier, won the Crime Thriller of the Year Award at the Specsavers National Book Awards. Two of Sophie’s crime novels, The Point of Rescue and The Other Half Lives, have been adapted for television and appeared on ITV1 under the series title Case Sensitive in 2011 and 2012. In 2004, Sophie won first prize in the Daphne Du Maurier Festival Short Story Competition for her suspense story The Octopus Nest, which is now published in her first collection of short stories, The Fantastic Book of Everybody’s Secrets.
Sophie has also published five collections of poetry. Her fifth, Pessimism for Beginners, was shortlisted for the 2007 T S Eliot Award. Her poetry is studied at GCSE, A-level and degree level across the UK. From 1997 to 1999 she was Fellow Commoner in Creative Arts at Trinity College, Cambridge, and between 1999 and 2001 she was a fellow of Wolfson College, Oxford. She is forty-one and lives with her husband and children in Cambridge, where she is a Fellow Commoner at Lucy Cavendish College. She is currently working on a new challenge for the little grey cells of Hercule Poirot, Agatha Christie’s famous detective.
Sophie has also published five collections of poetry. Her fifth, Pessimism for Beginners, was shortlisted for the 2007 T S Eliot Award. Her poetry is studied at GCSE, A-level and degree level across the UK. From 1997 to 1999 she was Fellow Commoner in Creative Arts at Trinity College, Cambridge, and between 1999 and 2001 she was a fellow of Wolfson College, Oxford. She is forty-one and lives with her husband and children in Cambridge, where she is a Fellow Commoner at Lucy Cavendish College. She is currently working on a new challenge for the little grey cells of Hercule Poirot, Agatha Christie’s famous detective.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,898 reviews
July 27, 2018
Sophie Hannah resurrects Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot in this, her latest addition to the series. Having been disappointed with her last effort, I was pleasantly surprised to find myself really enjoying this much more. Set in 1930s England, it has the requisite country manor and a Poirot with all his eccentricities and comic touches, although I should add that by now Hannah has made her Poirot her own creation, rather than a straight take off of the original. Poirot returns home after lunch to be confronted by an outraged Sylvia Rule, apoplectic that she has received a letter from him accusing her of murdering Barnaby Pandy and urging her to confess. Faced with Annabel Treadway, John McCrodden, and Hugo Dockerill having received an identical letter with the same accusation of killing Pandy, purportedly from him, Poirot is baffled as he has done no such thing, more to the point, it would be so out of character for him to have engaged in such behaviour.
Poirot is suitably intrigued and cannot help but exercise his legendary grey skills to get to the bottom of this complex mystery narrated by Scotland Yard Inspector Edward Catchpool, who ably assists our Belgian detective. Waitress Euphemia Spring bakes the four square Church Window Cake to a secret family recipe, she is irate that the exact same cake is being sold in another establishment and insists Poirot finds out how her recipe was stolen. It is the four quarters of the cake, metaphorically representing the 4 people accused of Pandy's murder that gives rise to the title of this novel. Initially it appears none of the individuals are connected, but upon close inspection, it soon transpires that three of them emerge to be loosely connected, leaving one of them the odd one out but is that true? We are presented with a host of suspects, a search for a typewriter with a dysfunctional letter 'e', a boarding school and a Barnaby Pandy who at 96 years old, is deemed to have accidentally drowned whilst falling asleep in his bath. Could it possibly have been a murder, or is there something more dangerous at play? We have a father who is famously resolute over his support of the death penalty, at odds with his wayward son, John, a melancholic put upon Annabel who is madly obsessed with her beloved dog, a Sylvia about whom rumours abound, and the jolly, all over the place teacher, Hugo. There is scandal, with secrets from the past spilling out, and a family drama with all its intrigue, all to be sniffed out by our ever reliable Poirot.
This is a entertaining and compelling addition to Hannah's Poirot series, with its complicated mystery for Poirot to get his teeth into. I was so pleased to see that Hannah makes a considerably better entry to the series than Closed Casket which I was far less impressed with. I have no doubt that most readers who love the Golden Age of Classic Crime and are fans of Hercule Poirot will enjoy this with all its familiar tropes, just be prepared for Poirot not to be same as Christie's famous detective. Many thanks to HarperCollins for an ARC.
Poirot is suitably intrigued and cannot help but exercise his legendary grey skills to get to the bottom of this complex mystery narrated by Scotland Yard Inspector Edward Catchpool, who ably assists our Belgian detective. Waitress Euphemia Spring bakes the four square Church Window Cake to a secret family recipe, she is irate that the exact same cake is being sold in another establishment and insists Poirot finds out how her recipe was stolen. It is the four quarters of the cake, metaphorically representing the 4 people accused of Pandy's murder that gives rise to the title of this novel. Initially it appears none of the individuals are connected, but upon close inspection, it soon transpires that three of them emerge to be loosely connected, leaving one of them the odd one out but is that true? We are presented with a host of suspects, a search for a typewriter with a dysfunctional letter 'e', a boarding school and a Barnaby Pandy who at 96 years old, is deemed to have accidentally drowned whilst falling asleep in his bath. Could it possibly have been a murder, or is there something more dangerous at play? We have a father who is famously resolute over his support of the death penalty, at odds with his wayward son, John, a melancholic put upon Annabel who is madly obsessed with her beloved dog, a Sylvia about whom rumours abound, and the jolly, all over the place teacher, Hugo. There is scandal, with secrets from the past spilling out, and a family drama with all its intrigue, all to be sniffed out by our ever reliable Poirot.
This is a entertaining and compelling addition to Hannah's Poirot series, with its complicated mystery for Poirot to get his teeth into. I was so pleased to see that Hannah makes a considerably better entry to the series than Closed Casket which I was far less impressed with. I have no doubt that most readers who love the Golden Age of Classic Crime and are fans of Hercule Poirot will enjoy this with all its familiar tropes, just be prepared for Poirot not to be same as Christie's famous detective. Many thanks to HarperCollins for an ARC.
February 2, 2020
In The Mystery of Three Quarters, it's not at all clear that a crime has been committed. Hercule Poirot is pressed into service when multiple people start showing up at his door berating him for sending them letters accusing them of a murder they hadn't committed. The victim is someone who seemingly died of natural causes. So is it murder? Who is the mysterious letter writer? And what is the connection between the accused?
I found this story to be engrossing and interesting. The unusual premise of finding out if even a crime has been committed added an intriguing layer to the investigation. It has all the hallmarks of a great Agatha Christie--a small set of possible suspects, each with their own secrets, and plenty of misdirection and red herrings. The end reveal was a little long in terms of the explanation, but it was still extremely satisfying.
This is the second Poirot book I've read by Sophie Hannah. It must not be easy to fill Agatha Christie's famous shoes, yet Sophie Hannah is really starting to come into her own with this one. She adds her own style to it, so that it feels like a modern interpretation. All the quirks and charms of Poirot are still here, but without the excessive persnickety and fuss. There were many quirky and funny moments, and I found myself chuckling along happily. Reading this, it feels like meeting an old friend after a long absence. You've both grown into slightly different people, but underlying that is the same old comfortable joy at reuniting.
I found this story to be engrossing and interesting. The unusual premise of finding out if even a crime has been committed added an intriguing layer to the investigation. It has all the hallmarks of a great Agatha Christie--a small set of possible suspects, each with their own secrets, and plenty of misdirection and red herrings. The end reveal was a little long in terms of the explanation, but it was still extremely satisfying.
This is the second Poirot book I've read by Sophie Hannah. It must not be easy to fill Agatha Christie's famous shoes, yet Sophie Hannah is really starting to come into her own with this one. She adds her own style to it, so that it feels like a modern interpretation. All the quirks and charms of Poirot are still here, but without the excessive persnickety and fuss. There were many quirky and funny moments, and I found myself chuckling along happily. Reading this, it feels like meeting an old friend after a long absence. You've both grown into slightly different people, but underlying that is the same old comfortable joy at reuniting.
September 6, 2018
Having had a soft spot for Agatha Christie, particularly those stories that feature Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple, I was more than a little giddy at the thought of someone talented taking over to keep the Poirot character alive. But I was concerned that whoever was to take the reins would fail miserably at creating and fostering the Belgian detective's character in this new mystery. Crisis somewhat averted, Hannah does a decent, respectable job. As is acutely obvious to me and most other crime readers, nobody has the ability to write like Christie. It doesn't matter who they are it's not likely to be as wonderful as her crime classics, and that's just a fact.
Although I did enjoy this it had a distinct lack of atmosphere, atmosphere that was always present in Christie's writing no matter which of her stories you were reading. I found the storytelling was adequate here, the issue I had was that the plot was simply too straightforward, which is nothing like the originals that feature complex investigations with Poirot standing stroking his moustache before making his play. I understand that various best selling series' have been taken over by new writers, as the original author is no longer with us, but it often doesn't go down as well as they planned. Ultimately, the main issue is that it feels a world away from the Poirot we all know and love. There are no ingenius plot twists or misdirection that have you on the edge-of-your-seat, which I feel is essential to a Poirot novel.
I'm sad I didn't appreciate this more. It's not a terrible book by any stretch of the imagination, it's just mediocre in every respect. This was a risk, and i'm afraid it didn't pay off this time.
Many thanks to HarperCollins for an ARC. I was not required to post a review, and all thoughts and opinions expressed are my own.
Although I did enjoy this it had a distinct lack of atmosphere, atmosphere that was always present in Christie's writing no matter which of her stories you were reading. I found the storytelling was adequate here, the issue I had was that the plot was simply too straightforward, which is nothing like the originals that feature complex investigations with Poirot standing stroking his moustache before making his play. I understand that various best selling series' have been taken over by new writers, as the original author is no longer with us, but it often doesn't go down as well as they planned. Ultimately, the main issue is that it feels a world away from the Poirot we all know and love. There are no ingenius plot twists or misdirection that have you on the edge-of-your-seat, which I feel is essential to a Poirot novel.
I'm sad I didn't appreciate this more. It's not a terrible book by any stretch of the imagination, it's just mediocre in every respect. This was a risk, and i'm afraid it didn't pay off this time.
Many thanks to HarperCollins for an ARC. I was not required to post a review, and all thoughts and opinions expressed are my own.
September 22, 2018
This is just awful. It reads like the most mediocre of fan fiction, as if the author has decided "no, I'm not even going to attempt to imitate Christie's auctorial voice". More Agatha Raisin than Agatha Christie. I'm done with this excrescent drivel, both book and series.
November 2, 2018
I really wanted to like this book. I've read the other Sophie Hannah Poirot books and they've been a respectable addition to the poirot legacy. This one however was really disappointing. I read in another review that this plot just didn't seem clever enough for a Christie novel and I completely agree. The premise is interesting, 4 people receive letters from "Poirot" accusing them of the murder of the same man. Concerned with his reputation and interested in getting to the root of the issue, Poirot investigates along with Catchpool.
The plot was chugging along okay for a little while and then the end wrap up just ruined the novel for me. The motivation of the killer was questionable at best, the letters didn't seem to make a huge amount of sense, and some of the evidence Poirot reveals in the end is almost nonsensical. Usually, Christie books are well oiled machines with perfect interlocking parts. This book gave the impression of a bunch of ill-fitting parts hammered in and duct taped in order to make the plot work. Kind of spoiler but I doubt it'll make sense until you read it in the novel That was some of Poirot's actual evidence. I almost began to get the impression of Mrs Marple because Poirot's schtick has never been based on feelings or assumptions. He's a puzzle solver. The biggest issue however is that the ending is drawn on far too long and is over explained. Many characters barely have a purpose in the plot. There's a weird subplot about abortions. There's another ham fisted subplot about chess cake that seems to merely exist to explain the title.
Obviously a good number of people disagree and I'm glad they all got enjoyment out of the novel. I feel however that this addition to the series was disappointing.
The plot was chugging along okay for a little while and then the end wrap up just ruined the novel for me. The motivation of the killer was questionable at best, the letters didn't seem to make a huge amount of sense, and some of the evidence Poirot reveals in the end is almost nonsensical. Usually, Christie books are well oiled machines with perfect interlocking parts. This book gave the impression of a bunch of ill-fitting parts hammered in and duct taped in order to make the plot work. Kind of spoiler but I doubt it'll make sense until you read it in the novel That was some of Poirot's actual evidence. I almost began to get the impression of Mrs Marple because Poirot's schtick has never been based on feelings or assumptions. He's a puzzle solver. The biggest issue however is that the ending is drawn on far too long and is over explained. Many characters barely have a purpose in the plot. There's a weird subplot about abortions. There's another ham fisted subplot about chess cake that seems to merely exist to explain the title.
Obviously a good number of people disagree and I'm glad they all got enjoyment out of the novel. I feel however that this addition to the series was disappointing.
January 10, 2019
2.5
Hercule Poirot is being blamed for writing letters to four people, accusing them of the murder of one Barnabas Pandy, whom he has never heard of. Loathing his name to be thus tainted he decides to investigate and find the identity of the letter-writer and his motive for doing so.
All the evidence shows that Barnabas Pandy has died of natural causes. But what if one of the four recipients of the letters is a murderer? Is there a connection between these four people. Do they know each other? Or are they unacquainted with each other as they claim to be?
I am a big fan of Agatha Christie and have read all of her books more than once. In my humble opinion Agatha Christie would have never wrote this book and would have never portrayed Poirot in the light that Sophie Hannah has done.
Agatha’s Poirot is always to the point. He doesn’t bore you. He is fun and lively, albeit sometimes serious and musing.
Her stories do not drag on. You read them in a sitting and if you don’t, you wish you could. Her characters, even the villains, are somehow likable and vivid.
Maybe this book would have had more success if it was written as a standalone mystery without Poirot.
Hercule Poirot is being blamed for writing letters to four people, accusing them of the murder of one Barnabas Pandy, whom he has never heard of. Loathing his name to be thus tainted he decides to investigate and find the identity of the letter-writer and his motive for doing so.
All the evidence shows that Barnabas Pandy has died of natural causes. But what if one of the four recipients of the letters is a murderer? Is there a connection between these four people. Do they know each other? Or are they unacquainted with each other as they claim to be?
I am a big fan of Agatha Christie and have read all of her books more than once. In my humble opinion Agatha Christie would have never wrote this book and would have never portrayed Poirot in the light that Sophie Hannah has done.
Agatha’s Poirot is always to the point. He doesn’t bore you. He is fun and lively, albeit sometimes serious and musing.
Her stories do not drag on. You read them in a sitting and if you don’t, you wish you could. Her characters, even the villains, are somehow likable and vivid.
Maybe this book would have had more success if it was written as a standalone mystery without Poirot.
August 4, 2023
I abandoned this book after about 90 pages. I could have finished it, but I wasn't interested at all.
In defense of this book, I can say that I am not a huge fan of Agatha Christie, although I consider some of her books to be very good. However, this book had very little to do with Christie's work, or at least with the good ones.
Actually, I would even say that this book has nothing to do with Christie's work, except that one of the characters is called Hercule Poirot. This is where the similarities end. Because the character of this Poirot is not very similar to what we know from the original, or even from popular movies. This is some brand new Poirot, a bit caricatured but quite boring as a character. The main character and narrator of the novel is Edward Catchpool (a character created for this series), who is introduced by the author in a terribly amateur and inept way when he tries to explain to the reader why he knows so much about events he has not witnessed.
And here we come to the crux of the problem with this book. It’s not even that it is very little like Christie's work, but it is just a mediocre story, badly written. This applies to both an uninteresting storyline and a poor writing style. Although I admit that it was the latter that made me finally abandon this book. The author treats the reader like a dull turkey who is unable not only to read between the lines but even to come to the most obvious conclusions. Therefore, it is crucial to repeat everything that is important several times so that the reader gets it. As a result, we have such nightmares as a list of questions and doubts (a dozen in total) that are related to the mystery. Because if they aren't all gathered in one place, the reader won't understand that we're looking for a murderer, right? The author also tries hard to include well-known elements from Christie's work, like symmetry, for example. So Catchpool is asked by Poirot to ask the suspects the above questions in exactly that order. And of course, he emphasizes twice how important it is. And there is also French. I'm not sure if the author knows this language, because the added phrases seem unnatural and inserted after a thought.
As for the plot, I liked the idea. And even at first, I found it interesting. But the story goes so slowly that I have lost my patience. I read almost one-third of the book, and still, nothing significant or particularly interesting happened. I put this book aside for a few days to read something else, and after two months I still haven't come back to it. When the day came when I had to return the book to the library, I found I didn't want to finish it.
In defense of this book, I can say that I am not a huge fan of Agatha Christie, although I consider some of her books to be very good. However, this book had very little to do with Christie's work, or at least with the good ones.
Actually, I would even say that this book has nothing to do with Christie's work, except that one of the characters is called Hercule Poirot. This is where the similarities end. Because the character of this Poirot is not very similar to what we know from the original, or even from popular movies. This is some brand new Poirot, a bit caricatured but quite boring as a character. The main character and narrator of the novel is Edward Catchpool (a character created for this series), who is introduced by the author in a terribly amateur and inept way when he tries to explain to the reader why he knows so much about events he has not witnessed.
And here we come to the crux of the problem with this book. It’s not even that it is very little like Christie's work, but it is just a mediocre story, badly written. This applies to both an uninteresting storyline and a poor writing style. Although I admit that it was the latter that made me finally abandon this book. The author treats the reader like a dull turkey who is unable not only to read between the lines but even to come to the most obvious conclusions. Therefore, it is crucial to repeat everything that is important several times so that the reader gets it. As a result, we have such nightmares as a list of questions and doubts (a dozen in total) that are related to the mystery. Because if they aren't all gathered in one place, the reader won't understand that we're looking for a murderer, right? The author also tries hard to include well-known elements from Christie's work, like symmetry, for example. So Catchpool is asked by Poirot to ask the suspects the above questions in exactly that order. And of course, he emphasizes twice how important it is. And there is also French. I'm not sure if the author knows this language, because the added phrases seem unnatural and inserted after a thought.
As for the plot, I liked the idea. And even at first, I found it interesting. But the story goes so slowly that I have lost my patience. I read almost one-third of the book, and still, nothing significant or particularly interesting happened. I put this book aside for a few days to read something else, and after two months I still haven't come back to it. When the day came when I had to return the book to the library, I found I didn't want to finish it.
February 29, 2020
2.5 Stars: I felt the unique and quirky personality of Hercule Poirot was captured by author Hannah very well. Poirot is my favorite book character of all time. Hannah pulled off Poirot's conversations, thought processes and characteristics convincingly. It is obvious Hannah studied Christie's novels very hard to accurately copy the portrayal of Poirot as her main character.
It is obvious though that while Hannah tried so hard to portray Poirot accurately, Hannah failed to copy Christie's execution of clues and plot. Christie did not ramble or over complicate her murder mysteries. Hannah's execution of plot narrative is what failed to earn 5 Stars from me. She convoluted the plot, and it was at least 15 chapters too long from her convolution. Hannah led me around in plot circles needlessly, causing disappointment and frustration.
It is obvious though that while Hannah tried so hard to portray Poirot accurately, Hannah failed to copy Christie's execution of clues and plot. Christie did not ramble or over complicate her murder mysteries. Hannah's execution of plot narrative is what failed to earn 5 Stars from me. She convoluted the plot, and it was at least 15 chapters too long from her convolution. Hannah led me around in plot circles needlessly, causing disappointment and frustration.
January 28, 2021
The main problem with the book is that it has nothing in common with the original Hercule Poirot's books, written by Agatha Christie - apart from the fact that it uses the figure of the detective. But that figure is a fake - he doesn't act like the original, he doesn't speak like him and, most importantly - he doesn't think like him. As for the plot - it is verbose where the original Christie's novels were concise, it's illogical, overcomplicated and absurd when the originals were simple, elegant and "obvious" once the reader knew the solution of the mystery. Never again I'll touch another book of this series.
February 23, 2019
Another not by AC Poirot book set early on long before Curtain. I did try see anyone else but David S no luck . She has great talent in making Mr.P sound like Agatha wrote him. Which is of course what you want , it is no good doing a mystery with Mr.P if not right. This the 3rd in the series but doesn't matter if you have not read the others .
That was the joy of AC no order series books .I am huge fan of HP my favorite crime is Murder on the Orient Express.
This is a poison pen book that drops Poirot in the shit has him nearly getting sued , he is mad spiting Feathers as he is dropped in the shit feet first. Poor Poirot he really needs to solve this soon before his reputation is tuned inside out.
.This not Japp but Edward Catchpool who tells the story after his 'escape' from his mother's matchmaking again. Catchpool is been dragged over the carpet by his bosses who think Poirot has gone of the rails accusing important people of murdering an OAP of 94 being murdered a Mr Barnabas Pandy who at inquest was decided to have died of an accident. Everybody agrees that what happened could have happened to me or you at 94 & he had good innings
But Poison pen does not agree Poison Pen who ever he/she is has other ideas .A cat & mouse game with Mr P as the cheese & Catchpool as the big bad Cat.
The idea of somebody else writing another person's Detective is not new we have 1000s of Sherlock Holmes by other authors. AC would not been upset as she often said her author friends bounced ideas over coffee and cake at crime clubs off each other Patrica Wentworth, Dorothy L Sayers, Gladys Mitchell, Nagio Marsh & Margery Allingham all friends of same age group like Tolkien all moved in small circles. If look at their books you see similar things, such as Miss Marple & Miss Silver, Roderic Allen & Catchpool, Campion to Lord Peter are simliar & AC was know to enjoy putting her friends into her books such as Miss Marple was a lot of Margery Allingham.
So the idea of Sophie doing Poirot how much fun AC would been happy with the idea a real compliment
That was the joy of AC no order series books .I am huge fan of HP my favorite crime is Murder on the Orient Express.
This is a poison pen book that drops Poirot in the shit has him nearly getting sued , he is mad spiting Feathers as he is dropped in the shit feet first. Poor Poirot he really needs to solve this soon before his reputation is tuned inside out.
.This not Japp but Edward Catchpool who tells the story after his 'escape' from his mother's matchmaking again. Catchpool is been dragged over the carpet by his bosses who think Poirot has gone of the rails accusing important people of murdering an OAP of 94 being murdered a Mr Barnabas Pandy who at inquest was decided to have died of an accident. Everybody agrees that what happened could have happened to me or you at 94 & he had good innings
But Poison pen does not agree Poison Pen who ever he/she is has other ideas .A cat & mouse game with Mr P as the cheese & Catchpool as the big bad Cat.
The idea of somebody else writing another person's Detective is not new we have 1000s of Sherlock Holmes by other authors. AC would not been upset as she often said her author friends bounced ideas over coffee and cake at crime clubs off each other Patrica Wentworth, Dorothy L Sayers, Gladys Mitchell, Nagio Marsh & Margery Allingham all friends of same age group like Tolkien all moved in small circles. If look at their books you see similar things, such as Miss Marple & Miss Silver, Roderic Allen & Catchpool, Campion to Lord Peter are simliar & AC was know to enjoy putting her friends into her books such as Miss Marple was a lot of Margery Allingham.
So the idea of Sophie doing Poirot how much fun AC would been happy with the idea a real compliment
September 10, 2018
This is the 3rd book written by Sophie Hannah using the the character Hercule Poirot who was of course dreamed up by the legendary Agatha Christie. I have possibly read every novel written by Agatha Christie and have been a massive fan most of my life so I was always going to want to read this series. That said Sophie does change things a little and Hercule Poirot is certainly recognisable but nevertheless written in her own style. I had already read the previous books in this series but was left a little unsure on how I felt having one of my favourite characters revamped by another author. But I found this book an improvement on the previous ones and was very entertaining.
In this latest book, Hercule Poirot is accused by four individuals of sending a letter accusing them of being the murderer of Barnabus Pandy. The letters are stated to be from Poirot and he seeks to not only to clear his name but to solve the mystery. Was Barnabus Pandy actually murdered, if so by who and who sent the accusing letters.
I suggest readers try as much as possible to avoid comparisons and concentrate on the novel itself to give the book a fair chance. A good entertaining read.
I would like to thank Net Galley and Harper Collins for supplying a copy of this novel in exchange for an honest review.
In this latest book, Hercule Poirot is accused by four individuals of sending a letter accusing them of being the murderer of Barnabus Pandy. The letters are stated to be from Poirot and he seeks to not only to clear his name but to solve the mystery. Was Barnabus Pandy actually murdered, if so by who and who sent the accusing letters.
I suggest readers try as much as possible to avoid comparisons and concentrate on the novel itself to give the book a fair chance. A good entertaining read.
I would like to thank Net Galley and Harper Collins for supplying a copy of this novel in exchange for an honest review.
May 31, 2020
3,5/5 αστεράκια.
Το «Μυστήριο των τριών τετάρτων» είναι η τρίτη περιπέτεια του διάσημου ντετέκτιβ Ηρακλή Πουαρό διά χειρός Sophie Hannah.
Όλα ξεκινούν μια συνηθισμένη κατά τα άλλα μέρα, όταν ο Ηρακλής Πουαρό επιστρέφει από το μεσημεριανό του γεύμα. Η καλή του διάθεση θα χαλάσει από μια εξαγριωμένη γυναίκα, που τον περιμένει έξω από το σπίτι του και τον κατηγορεί για ένα γράμμα που της έστειλε εκείνος. Στην εν λόγω επιστολή, ο ντετέκτιβ φαίνεται να κατηγορεί τη γυναίκα για τον φόνο ενός άντρα που εκείνη ισχυρίζεται πως δεν έχει δει ποτέ στη ζωή της.
Πριν προλάβει να συνέλθει από την έκπληξή του, ο Πουαρό συναντά έναν άντρα που επίσης τον κατηγορεί για μια παρόμοια επιστολή που έλαβε. Ο διάσημος ντετέκτιβ αρχίζει να ενοχλείται ιδιαίτερα, επειδή κάποιος άγνωστος χρησιμοποίησε το όνομά του για να παίξει ένα άσχημο παιχνίδι σ’ αυτούς τους ανθρώπους. Γρήγορα θα ανακαλύψει την ύπαρξη δύο ακόμη επιστολών, πάντα με την υπογραφή του. Έτσι, αποφασίζει να ασχοληθεί προσωπικά με την υπόθεση και να εξιχνιάσει τον θάνατο του Μπάρναμπας Πάντι, του άντρα που αναφέρεται στις επιστολές.
Ποιος ήταν ο Μπάρναμπας Πάντι; Ήταν ο θάνατός του ένα μοιραίο ατύχημα, όπως δείχνουν τα στοιχεία, ή κάποιος αποφάσισε να τον βγάλει από τη μέση; Ποιος είχε λόγους να επιθυμεί τον θάνατό του, ούτως ή άλλως; Και κυρίως, ποιος είναι ο αποστολέας των επίμαχων επιστολών και γιατί χρησιμοποίησε το όνομα του Πουαρό; Σε αυτά τα ερωτήματα καλείται να απαντήσει ο διαβόητος ντετέκτιβ, σε μια υπόθεση που, κατά κάποιον περίεργο τρόπο, μοιάζει αρκετά με ένα κομμάτι κέικ κομμένο στα τέσσερα…
Δεν είναι η πρώτη φορά που αναφέρω -και σίγουρα δεν είμαι η μόνη που το έχει κάνει- πως είναι άτοπο και άδικο να συγκρίνει κανείς τη Sophie Hannah με την Αgatha Christie. Ή να υποστηρίζει πως η πρώτη προσπαθεί να οικειοποιηθεί το έργο της δεύτερης. Καμία σχέση. Η Hannah έχει αναλάβει να γράψει τις νέες περιπέτειες του ντετέκτιβ Ηρακλή Πουαρό και η προσπάθειά της είναι τίμια, με όσο τον δυνατόν μεγαλύτερη πιστότητα στον χαρακτήρα που έπλασε η Christie, βάζοντάς του όμως τη δική της προσωπική σφραγίδα.
Εδώ, λοιπόν, έχουμε ένα μυστήριο τύπου «κλειστού δωματίου»· ένας θάνατος που συνέβη σε ένα σπίτι, όπου βρίσκονταν συγκεκριμένα μόνο άτομα. Ένα από αυτά θα πρέπει να είναι ο δράστης, μιας κι αποδεικνύεται πως θα ήταν εξαιρετικά δύσκολο να μπει κάποιος ξένος στο σπίτι εκείνη την ώρα χωρίς να γίνει αντιληπτός. Παρ’ όλα αυτά, η λίστα του Πουαρό περιλαμβάνει όλους όσοι εμπλέκονται στην ιστορία, είτε βρίσκονταν στο σκηνικό του εγκλήματος τη δεδομένη στιγμή είτε όχι. Το κίνητρο που θα μπορούσε να έχει κάποιος για να σκοτώσει τον ηλικιωμένο άντρα είναι αυτό που αναζητά ο ντετέκτιβ – όλα τα άλλα έρχονται μετά.
Ο χαρακτήρας του Πουαρό εύκολα εξυψώνεται ανάμεσα στους υπόλοιπους, μιας και είναι ολοφάνερα ο πιο έξυπνος και δραστήριος απ’ όλους – και φυσικά, ο πιο εκκεντρικός. Ο φίλος του, ο επιθεωρητής Κάτσπουλ της Σκότλαντ Γιαρντ, κρατάει κυρίως τον ρόλο του αφηγητή-κομπάρσου, μην καταφέρνοντας ούτε για ένα λεπτό να κλέψει τη δόξα από τον αδιαμφισβήτητο πρωταγωνιστή. Οι υπόλοιποι αποτελούν ένα συνονθύλευμα ανθρώπων, που είτε σχετίζονται μεταξύ τους είτε δεν έχουν καμία σχέση, όμως έχει ο καθένας τη δική του προσωπικότητα και ιδιαίτερη ταυτότητα που τον κάνει να ξεχωρίζει. Δεν είναι εξαιρετικά ενδιαφέροντες, δεν διαθέτουν κάποιο αξιόλογο χάρισμα· είναι απλοί, καθημερινοί τύποι που έχουν βρεθεί μπλεγμένοι σε μια περίεργη υπόθεση. Κάποιοι από αυτούς κρύβουν μυστικά, κάποιοι είναι εντελώς γραφικοί μέσα στην ανεμελιά τους. Κανείς δεν είναι σκιαγραφημένος τόσο βαθιά και προσεχτικά ώστε να ξεχωρίσει. Η υπόθεση, βέβαια, δεν χάνει τίποτε από αυτό· ο γρίφος παραμένει γρίφος και η εξιχνίασή του και μόνο είναι αυτό που απασχολεί τον ήρωά μας, τίποτε παραπάνω.
Το τέλος σίγουρα δεν είναι το δυνατότερο σημείο του βιβλίου· θα έλεγε κανείς πως όλη η ουσία της πλοκής βρίσκεται στη διαδρομή που κάνει κάποιος μέχρι να φτάσει εκεί. Επίσης, για τους «δυνατούς» του είδους της αστυνομικής λογοτεχνίας και των ιστοριών μυστηρίου, η ταυτότητα του δράστη δεν αποτελεί καμία έκπληξη. Πιθανότατα οι περισσότερο θα μαντέψουν ποιος είναι πολύ πριν γίνει η αποκάλυψη και στους υπόλοιπους ήρωες. Όσο για τους λόγους που παραθέτει ως δικαιολογία; Μοιάζουν εντελώς παιδικοί, πόσο μάλλον για μια τέτοια ιστορία. Όμως είναι αυτοί που είναι, και τίθεται στην κρίση του αναγνώστη να αποφανθεί αν στέκουν ή όχι.
Όπως και να ’χει, φτάνοντας κανείς στο τέλος νιώθει ικανοποίηση που τελικά όλα μπήκαν σε μια σειρά και το μυστήριο λύθηκε. Πρόκειται για μια καλοδουλεμένη ιστορία, μια ικανοποιητική προσπάθεια και ένα ακόμα κεφάλαιο των περιπετειών του «νέου» Πουαρό. Και η τελική αίσθηση που θα αφήσει στον αναγνώστη μάλλον θα έχει γλυκιά γεύση, όπως ένα κομμάτι από το περιβόητο κέικ βιτρό που τιμάει ο Πουαρό περισσότερες από μία φορές στις σελίδες του βιβλίου.
Το «Μυστήριο των τριών τετάρτων» είναι η τρίτη περιπέτεια του διάσημου ντετέκτιβ Ηρακλή Πουαρό διά χειρός Sophie Hannah.
Όλα ξεκινούν μια συνηθισμένη κατά τα άλλα μέρα, όταν ο Ηρακλής Πουαρό επιστρέφει από το μεσημεριανό του γεύμα. Η καλή του διάθεση θα χαλάσει από μια εξαγριωμένη γυναίκα, που τον περιμένει έξω από το σπίτι του και τον κατηγορεί για ένα γράμμα που της έστειλε εκείνος. Στην εν λόγω επιστολή, ο ντετέκτιβ φαίνεται να κατηγορεί τη γυναίκα για τον φόνο ενός άντρα που εκείνη ισχυρίζεται πως δεν έχει δει ποτέ στη ζωή της.
Πριν προλάβει να συνέλθει από την έκπληξή του, ο Πουαρό συναντά έναν άντρα που επίσης τον κατηγορεί για μια παρόμοια επιστολή που έλαβε. Ο διάσημος ντετέκτιβ αρχίζει να ενοχλείται ιδιαίτερα, επειδή κάποιος άγνωστος χρησιμοποίησε το όνομά του για να παίξει ένα άσχημο παιχνίδι σ’ αυτούς τους ανθρώπους. Γρήγορα θα ανακαλύψει την ύπαρξη δύο ακόμη επιστολών, πάντα με την υπογραφή του. Έτσι, αποφασίζει να ασχοληθεί προσωπικά με την υπόθεση και να εξιχνιάσει τον θάνατο του Μπάρναμπας Πάντι, του άντρα που αναφέρεται στις επιστολές.
Ποιος ήταν ο Μπάρναμπας Πάντι; Ήταν ο θάνατός του ένα μοιραίο ατύχημα, όπως δείχνουν τα στοιχεία, ή κάποιος αποφάσισε να τον βγάλει από τη μέση; Ποιος είχε λόγους να επιθυμεί τον θάνατό του, ούτως ή άλλως; Και κυρίως, ποιος είναι ο αποστολέας των επίμαχων επιστολών και γιατί χρησιμοποίησε το όνομα του Πουαρό; Σε αυτά τα ερωτήματα καλείται να απαντήσει ο διαβόητος ντετέκτιβ, σε μια υπόθεση που, κατά κάποιον περίεργο τρόπο, μοιάζει αρκετά με ένα κομμάτι κέικ κομμένο στα τέσσερα…
Δεν είναι η πρώτη φορά που αναφέρω -και σίγουρα δεν είμαι η μόνη που το έχει κάνει- πως είναι άτοπο και άδικο να συγκρίνει κανείς τη Sophie Hannah με την Αgatha Christie. Ή να υποστηρίζει πως η πρώτη προσπαθεί να οικειοποιηθεί το έργο της δεύτερης. Καμία σχέση. Η Hannah έχει αναλάβει να γράψει τις νέες περιπέτειες του ντετέκτιβ Ηρακλή Πουαρό και η προσπάθειά της είναι τίμια, με όσο τον δυνατόν μεγαλύτερη πιστότητα στον χαρακτήρα που έπλασε η Christie, βάζοντάς του όμως τη δική της προσωπική σφραγίδα.
Εδώ, λοιπόν, έχουμε ένα μυστήριο τύπου «κλειστού δωματίου»· ένας θάνατος που συνέβη σε ένα σπίτι, όπου βρίσκονταν συγκεκριμένα μόνο άτομα. Ένα από αυτά θα πρέπει να είναι ο δράστης, μιας κι αποδεικνύεται πως θα ήταν εξαιρετικά δύσκολο να μπει κάποιος ξένος στο σπίτι εκείνη την ώρα χωρίς να γίνει αντιληπτός. Παρ’ όλα αυτά, η λίστα του Πουαρό περιλαμβάνει όλους όσοι εμπλέκονται στην ιστορία, είτε βρίσκονταν στο σκηνικό του εγκλήματος τη δεδομένη στιγμή είτε όχι. Το κίνητρο που θα μπορούσε να έχει κάποιος για να σκοτώσει τον ηλικιωμένο άντρα είναι αυτό που αναζητά ο ντετέκτιβ – όλα τα άλλα έρχονται μετά.
Ο χαρακτήρας του Πουαρό εύκολα εξυψώνεται ανάμεσα στους υπόλοιπους, μιας και είναι ολοφάνερα ο πιο έξυπνος και δραστήριος απ’ όλους – και φυσικά, ο πιο εκκεντρικός. Ο φίλος του, ο επιθεωρητής Κάτσπουλ της Σκότλαντ Γιαρντ, κρατάει κυρίως τον ρόλο του αφηγητή-κομπάρσου, μην καταφέρνοντας ούτε για ένα λεπτό να κλέψει τη δόξα από τον αδιαμφισβήτητο πρωταγωνιστή. Οι υπόλοιποι αποτελούν ένα συνονθύλευμα ανθρώπων, που είτε σχετίζονται μεταξύ τους είτε δεν έχουν καμία σχέση, όμως έχει ο καθένας τη δική του προσωπικότητα και ιδιαίτερη ταυτότητα που τον κάνει να ξεχωρίζει. Δεν είναι εξαιρετικά ενδιαφέροντες, δεν διαθέτουν κάποιο αξιόλογο χάρισμα· είναι απλοί, καθημερινοί τύποι που έχουν βρεθεί μπλεγμένοι σε μια περίεργη υπόθεση. Κάποιοι από αυτούς κρύβουν μυστικά, κάποιοι είναι εντελώς γραφικοί μέσα στην ανεμελιά τους. Κανείς δεν είναι σκιαγραφημένος τόσο βαθιά και προσεχτικά ώστε να ξεχωρίσει. Η υπόθεση, βέβαια, δεν χάνει τίποτε από αυτό· ο γρίφος παραμένει γρίφος και η εξιχνίασή του και μόνο είναι αυτό που απασχολεί τον ήρωά μας, τίποτε παραπάνω.
Το τέλος σίγουρα δεν είναι το δυνατότερο σημείο του βιβλίου· θα έλεγε κανείς πως όλη η ουσία της πλοκής βρίσκεται στη διαδρομή που κάνει κάποιος μέχρι να φτάσει εκεί. Επίσης, για τους «δυνατούς» του είδους της αστυνομικής λογοτεχνίας και των ιστοριών μυστηρίου, η ταυτότητα του δράστη δεν αποτελεί καμία έκπληξη. Πιθανότατα οι περισσότερο θα μαντέψουν ποιος είναι πολύ πριν γίνει η αποκάλυψη και στους υπόλοιπους ήρωες. Όσο για τους λόγους που παραθέτει ως δικαιολογία; Μοιάζουν εντελώς παιδικοί, πόσο μάλλον για μια τέτοια ιστορία. Όμως είναι αυτοί που είναι, και τίθεται στην κρίση του αναγνώστη να αποφανθεί αν στέκουν ή όχι.
Όπως και να ’χει, φτάνοντας κανείς στο τέλος νιώθει ικανοποίηση που τελικά όλα μπήκαν σε μια σειρά και το μυστήριο λύθηκε. Πρόκειται για μια καλοδουλεμένη ιστορία, μια ικανοποιητική προσπάθεια και ένα ακόμα κεφάλαιο των περιπετειών του «νέου» Πουαρό. Και η τελική αίσθηση που θα αφήσει στον αναγνώστη μάλλον θα έχει γλυκιά γεύση, όπως ένα κομμάτι από το περιβόητο κέικ βιτρό που τιμάει ο Πουαρό περισσότερες από μία φορές στις σελίδες του βιβλίου.
November 5, 2018
I love the Poirot TV series with David Suchet. However, I have never actually read a Poirot novel until I read this one. Which isn't even written by Agatha Christie. It's probably good that I haven't read the original novels since I have nothing to compare with. But, I must say I was impressed with the story. The humor, the mystery and trying to figure out who sent the letters, before Poirot did.
I could really see David Suchet as Poirot before my eyes all through the book and I was utterly charmed by the story and the writing. I especially like the beginning when Poirot is accused by several people on being the author of several letters claiming that just he/she was a murderer. He took it all in stride (not) and quickly tried to explain that he was not at all the one that penned the letters. Although they didn't want to believe him and hardly listened to his explanations. And, then, of course, he had to try to find out who wrote the letters and if anyone killed poor Barnabus Pandy.
This book not only made me want to read the previous two books by Sophie Hannah, now I want to read the books by Agatha Christie as well. This a truly great book and I recommend it warmly!
Thanks to Bookmarks förlag for the review copy!
I could really see David Suchet as Poirot before my eyes all through the book and I was utterly charmed by the story and the writing. I especially like the beginning when Poirot is accused by several people on being the author of several letters claiming that just he/she was a murderer. He took it all in stride (not) and quickly tried to explain that he was not at all the one that penned the letters. Although they didn't want to believe him and hardly listened to his explanations. And, then, of course, he had to try to find out who wrote the letters and if anyone killed poor Barnabus Pandy.
This book not only made me want to read the previous two books by Sophie Hannah, now I want to read the books by Agatha Christie as well. This a truly great book and I recommend it warmly!
Thanks to Bookmarks förlag for the review copy!
May 17, 2025
Dieses Buch war eine herbe Enttäuschung.
Die beiden Vorgänger waren zwar auch nicht überragend. Poirot und seine empirischen Betrachtungen wurden von der Autorin schon immer ins absurde übertrieben. Die Logik war meistens haarsträubend und durchaus nicht nachvollziehbar. Daran änderte sich auch hier nichts.
Allerdings leistete sich Frau Hannah einen unverzeihlichen Fauxpas. Sie maßte sich an, über Schwangerschaftsabbrüche öffentlich über ihre Charaktere eine negative Einstellung zu äußern.
Unter anderem spiegelt sich das in diesem Zitat wieder:
"Hast du [...]dich meiner auf so barbarischer Weise zu entledigen!"
Bereits vorher wurde eine Frau, die solche Abbrüche vornahm, negativ dargestellt.
Im weiteren Verlauf kam es noch einmal zu so einer extremen Darstellung, dass ich mich wirklich fragte, wer hier die Mörder sind, der zu findende Täter oder Frauen, die entweder eine Schwangerschaft abbrechen möchten bzw den Eingriff vornehmen.
Excuse Me, Wir Haben 2022!
Dieses Frauenbild ist schlimmstes Mittelalter und darf unter keinen Umständen gefördert werden!
Es ist übrigens nicht eine Sekunde zu erkennen, dass die Autorin dies als Kritik tut oder es lediglich so war damals. Dafür hätte sie es nicht so harsch darstellen müssen. So ist zumindest für mich klar, dass sie Schwangerschaftsabbrüche zumindest als Straftat ansieht. Das mag sie gerne in ihrem Kämmerlein still für sich denken aber nicht als Fakt in ihrem Buch stehen lassen.
Hannah erklärt Frauen zu Mördern. Alleine die Bereitschaft zu einem Schwangerschaftsabbruch mache sie dazu. Entsprechend dieser perversen Logik töten diese Frauen (siehe Buch) auch wirklich.
Ein deutscher Verlag gab dieses Gedankengut der Autorin unzensiert so in Druck? Ich frage mich, wer dafür verantwortlich ist und was ich davon halten soll!
Der Körper der Frau gehört ihr! Kein Gott und keine Institution hat darüber zu entscheiden, ob eine Frau ein Embryo austragen muss.
Nur sie alleine.
Die beiden Vorgänger waren zwar auch nicht überragend. Poirot und seine empirischen Betrachtungen wurden von der Autorin schon immer ins absurde übertrieben. Die Logik war meistens haarsträubend und durchaus nicht nachvollziehbar. Daran änderte sich auch hier nichts.
Allerdings leistete sich Frau Hannah einen unverzeihlichen Fauxpas. Sie maßte sich an, über Schwangerschaftsabbrüche öffentlich über ihre Charaktere eine negative Einstellung zu äußern.
Unter anderem spiegelt sich das in diesem Zitat wieder:
"Hast du [...]dich meiner auf so barbarischer Weise zu entledigen!"
Bereits vorher wurde eine Frau, die solche Abbrüche vornahm, negativ dargestellt.
Im weiteren Verlauf kam es noch einmal zu so einer extremen Darstellung, dass ich mich wirklich fragte, wer hier die Mörder sind, der zu findende Täter oder Frauen, die entweder eine Schwangerschaft abbrechen möchten bzw den Eingriff vornehmen.
Excuse Me, Wir Haben 2022!
Dieses Frauenbild ist schlimmstes Mittelalter und darf unter keinen Umständen gefördert werden!
Es ist übrigens nicht eine Sekunde zu erkennen, dass die Autorin dies als Kritik tut oder es lediglich so war damals. Dafür hätte sie es nicht so harsch darstellen müssen. So ist zumindest für mich klar, dass sie Schwangerschaftsabbrüche zumindest als Straftat ansieht. Das mag sie gerne in ihrem Kämmerlein still für sich denken aber nicht als Fakt in ihrem Buch stehen lassen.
Hannah erklärt Frauen zu Mördern. Alleine die Bereitschaft zu einem Schwangerschaftsabbruch mache sie dazu. Entsprechend dieser perversen Logik töten diese Frauen (siehe Buch) auch wirklich.
Ein deutscher Verlag gab dieses Gedankengut der Autorin unzensiert so in Druck? Ich frage mich, wer dafür verantwortlich ist und was ich davon halten soll!
Der Körper der Frau gehört ihr! Kein Gott und keine Institution hat darüber zu entscheiden, ob eine Frau ein Embryo austragen muss.
Nur sie alleine.
November 15, 2018
You open up with a middle aged woman, her face caked in makeup screaming "I'll sue you for slander!"
And That's when I should have refunded the book.
Had this been a random cozy mystery book it would have been just fine, A typical american book with typical american characters. As an Agatha Christie fan however it was like I paid to read some sub-par Poirot fan fiction.
And That's when I should have refunded the book.
Had this been a random cozy mystery book it would have been just fine, A typical american book with typical american characters. As an Agatha Christie fan however it was like I paid to read some sub-par Poirot fan fiction.
January 14, 2024
Hércules Poirot se encuentra con una mujer muy enfadada esperando a la puerta de su casa: le exige saber por qué motivo le ha enviado una carta acusándola del asesinato de Barnabas Pandy, un hombre a quien no conoce y que aparentemente falleció por causas naturales. El problema es que Poirot no le ha enviado ninguna carta y, además, tampoco conoce al Sr. Pandy.
A diferencia de otros libros e Agatha o de la misma autora más bien Sophie Hannah, disfrute mucho este libro, basicamente me lo acabe en un día y no esta corto, pero siento que la escritura de la autora es muy buena hasta el final donde todo se viene abajo, iba excelente este libro pero los finales de la autora siempre tienden a decepcionar un poco, no lográ por completo ese match con toda la historia y solo te enrede o le extiende más de lo necesario.
Comenzó muy bien y el desarrollo fue super entretenido, pero cuando me quedaban 100 páginas me comencé a aburrir, al igual que no esta de más recordar que los libros de Agatha son de no mas de 250 páginas por es la cantidad justa para mantener al lector sumido en el misterio, en caso contrario lo pierdes y enredas o aburres :(
Me gustó y lo recomendaría pero no me gustó el final.
A diferencia de otros libros e Agatha o de la misma autora más bien Sophie Hannah, disfrute mucho este libro, basicamente me lo acabe en un día y no esta corto, pero siento que la escritura de la autora es muy buena hasta el final donde todo se viene abajo, iba excelente este libro pero los finales de la autora siempre tienden a decepcionar un poco, no lográ por completo ese match con toda la historia y solo te enrede o le extiende más de lo necesario.
Comenzó muy bien y el desarrollo fue super entretenido, pero cuando me quedaban 100 páginas me comencé a aburrir, al igual que no esta de más recordar que los libros de Agatha son de no mas de 250 páginas por es la cantidad justa para mantener al lector sumido en el misterio, en caso contrario lo pierdes y enredas o aburres :(
Me gustó y lo recomendaría pero no me gustó el final.
August 22, 2018
I was amazed when I found this book. "A new Agatha Christie? How can this be?" I thought. This isn't the first time someone has taken over the reins in writing a popular series when the original author is unable to continue writing it themselves (Douglas Adams and Steig Larsson are both examples of such revered authors who are no longer with us). However, it's always a scary prospect and the results do vary. When I came across this book by Sophie Hannah, I was immediately excited and trepidatious at the same time; I love Agatha Christie's novels, particularly the Hercule Poirot mysteries. Would I be overjoyed or disappointed at reading what this new, unheard of (to me, at least) author would do with such an iconic character? Well, as you can imagine, I absolutely had to find out.
In the book, four individuals are sent letters signed in the name of Poirot, and accusing them of murder. They all approach Poirot and plead their innocence, only to discover that Poirot did not actually send the letters. And therein lies the mystery that Poirot must solve; who sent the letters and why? Who is the real murderer? Or has there even been a murder at all?
All in all, this was an okay book. The mystery was okay, the writing was okay, the character of Poirot was...okay. You can tell I'm disappointed, slightly. It started off well, but in the end I didn't feel like the mystery was clever enough for a Christie book. There was far too much assumption and not enough proof for my liking. It certainly wasn't up to the high standard of ingenuity I expect from this series.
I think if it was a standalone mystery with a different character, I would have enjoyed it more. I have probably judged harshly because I think it's nigh on impossible to live up to such legends as Agatha and Hercule. But that's the task Sophie Hannah had been set, and it didn't quite get there for me. It was a little bit too twee and not elegant enough.
If I was to recommend this book, it would be to someone who hadn't read much (or any) Agatha Christie, and certainly not a die hard fan because I think, like me, they might be slightly disappointed.
In the book, four individuals are sent letters signed in the name of Poirot, and accusing them of murder. They all approach Poirot and plead their innocence, only to discover that Poirot did not actually send the letters. And therein lies the mystery that Poirot must solve; who sent the letters and why? Who is the real murderer? Or has there even been a murder at all?
All in all, this was an okay book. The mystery was okay, the writing was okay, the character of Poirot was...okay. You can tell I'm disappointed, slightly. It started off well, but in the end I didn't feel like the mystery was clever enough for a Christie book. There was far too much assumption and not enough proof for my liking. It certainly wasn't up to the high standard of ingenuity I expect from this series.
I think if it was a standalone mystery with a different character, I would have enjoyed it more. I have probably judged harshly because I think it's nigh on impossible to live up to such legends as Agatha and Hercule. But that's the task Sophie Hannah had been set, and it didn't quite get there for me. It was a little bit too twee and not elegant enough.
If I was to recommend this book, it would be to someone who hadn't read much (or any) Agatha Christie, and certainly not a die hard fan because I think, like me, they might be slightly disappointed.
April 4, 2019
Πρώτη φορά που επιχειρώ να διαβάσω βιβλία με χαρακτήρες της Κρίστι γραμμένα από άλλον συγγραφέα, και μάλλον η τελευταία. Το θέμα με την Άγκαθα Κρίστι είναι το εξής: ενώ όλα τα συστατικά των βιβλίων της είναι στην καλύτερη περίπτωση μέτρια, με εξαίρεση την πλοκή, η ποιότητα της οποίας κυμαίνεται από απαράδεκτη έως ιδιοφυής, με κάποια μυστηριώδη αλχημεία το αποτέλεσμα σχεδόν ποτέ δε απογοητεύει τον αναγνώστη. Το συγκεκριμένο βιβλίο είχε όλα τα συστατικά των βιβλίων της Κρίστι, ήταν γραμμένο στο ύφος της, οι χαρακτήρες ήταν αναγνωρίσιμοι από τα βιβλία της, αλλά η συνταγή δεν δένει και το αποτέλεσμα είναι χλιαρό και ξενέρωτο. Ίσως γιατί πρόκειται για ξεκάθαρη μίμηση, ενώ η Κρίστι, αν και ομολογουμένως δεν ήταν αυτό που λέμε μεγάλη συγγραφέας από λογοτεχνική άποψη, είχε μια άκρως αυθεντική φωνή.
July 12, 2019
El misterio de las cuatro cartas me ha parecido una novela de misterio genial, al más puro estilo de Agatha Christie, y ahora ando deseando leer el resto de ellas.
Reseña completa: https://fiebrelectora.blogspot.com/20...
Reseña completa: https://fiebrelectora.blogspot.com/20...
July 22, 2018
In Sophie Hannah’s third “new” story featuring a certain little Belgian detective with magnificent moustaches and an egg-shaped head, Poirot finds himself confronted by four people who have all received a letter accusing them of murder - a letter signed by one Hercule Poirot. Who is Barnabas Pandy, and has he or hasn’t he actually been murdered? Poirot’s investigations, assisted by Scotland Yard detective Edward Catchpool, encompass a country house complete with aged retainer, a boys’ boarding school, a solicitor with a passion for the death penalty known unaffectionately as Rowland Rope, and - in a very Christie-ish touch - a typewriter with a dodgy letter ‘e’.
You wouldn’t actually mistake it for Christie - it’s definitely Sophie Hannah’s own take and while set in the past, has a more modern feel - but Poirot is very recognisably Poirot (and apparently protects his moustaches with a net at night. Did we know this?) Captain Hastings is nowhere to be seen, but Catchpool is a worthy substitute, as is waitress Euphemia (Fee) Spring, though she doesn’t have a great deal to do here.... though her Church Window Cake (Battenberg, surely?) provides a source of inspiration.
Liked the chapter titles.... Proper chapter titles aren’t really a thing any more in most modern novels. Stuff like “Poirot Returns to Combingham Hall” and “The Typewriter Experiment”. They should be. Bring back the chapter title, modern authors!
I enjoyed the various renderings of Poirot’s name (Porrott, Prarrow) which reminded me of first reading the books as a child back in ye olden days and not knowing how to pronounce it ( I think Pworrot was as close as I got, and I had no idea what the M. - for Monsieur - stood for. I asked my mum, but she didn’t know either).
I think this is my favourite of Sophie Hannah’s three Poirot novels so far... neatly plotted and characterised, and though nobody can entirely recreate the spirit of the originals (and nor should they), Sophie does a very good job. I really enjoyed it.
March 16, 2019
2-2,5 αστεράκια
Δεν ήμουν σίγουρη πώς να το βαθμολογήσω. Μόλις το τελείωσα δεν ήξερα αν έπρεπε να κλάψω ή να γελάσω. Να κλάψω επειδή ξόδεψα 14,00 ευρώ περίπου για αυτό ή να γελάσω επειδή τελικά ήταν κάπως «έξυπνο» -από ψυχολογικής σκοπιάς- σαν υπόθεση.
Ήταν ένα καλούτσικο βιβλίο, κάπως τραγελαφικό σε φάσεις, με ενδιαφέρουσα υπόθεση απλώς οι αιτίες και οι αφορμές που οδήγησαν στο να διαμορφωθεί αυτή η υπόθεση κάποιες έχουν μια βάση και κάποιες όχι τόσο πολύ όσο η συγγραφέας ήθελε να δείξει.
Ένα πράγμα που εκτίμησα σε αυτό το βιβλίο ήταν ότι έχει κάποια ηθικά διδάγματα έμμεσα μεταδιδόμενα. Το ένα είναι ότι πρέπει να συγχωρούμε σε αυτή τη ζωή (ειδικά όταν ο άλλος φαίνεται ότι έχει μετανιώσει για τις πράξεις του και το έχει δείξει πολλές φορές), δεν είμαστε θεοί, μα ούτε και δικαστές (εκτός αυτών που ασκούν αυτό το επάγγελμα). Και το άλλο είναι ότι δεν πρέπει να είμαστε απόλυτοι σε αυτή τη ζωή γιατί η μοίρα παίζει κάτι «όμορφα» παιχνίδια μερικές φορές. Άλλο που εκτίμησα ήταν ότι τα παιδιά είναι πιο έξυπνα, πιο δυναμικά και πιο αποφασιστικά από τους ενήλικες εδώ.
Από μεριάς χαρακτήρων ο Πουαρό είναι ο γνωστός Πουαρό που έχει «αναπλάσει» η Hannah και στα δυο προηγούμενα βιβλία της σειράς αλλά πολύ πιο ήρεμος από το πρώτο βιβλίο. Ο Κατσπουλ είναι ο γνωστός αδύναμος επιθεωρητής. Και εδώ θα σας ζητήσω μια χάρη αν βρείτε πουθενά την αυτοπεποίθηση του Κάτσπουλ ,εκεί τριγύρω, πείτε της να σταματήσει το διάλειμμα και να έρθει εδώ που τη χρειάζομαι. Βαρέθηκα να διαβάζω για το πόσο αδύναμος είναι ο Κάτσπουλ διανοητικά. Όλοι οι υπόλοιποι χαρακτήρες έχουν ο καθένας από κάποιο κουσούρι. Και περισσότερο ο δολοφόνος. Τα μόνα φυσιολογικά εδώ ήταν τα παιδιά.
Και τελικά φτάνω στο συμπέρασμα ότι θα τα κλάψω τα ρημαδιά τα λεφτά μου που πήγα και τα έδωσα σε αυτό το βιβλίο. Και μην μου πεις να σταματήσω να διαβάζω αυτή τη σειρά βιβλίων του Πουαρό γιατί θα σου πω ότι δεν θα το κάνω. Η ψυχαναγκαστική μου φύση δεν θα το κάνει. Αλλά και επειδή έχω μια ελπίδα μέσα μου ότι κάποια στιγμή η Hannah θα κάνει το μπαμ και θα έχω το απολυτό μυστήριο με λιγότερα πράγματα για να το καταδικάσω.
May 13, 2021
I know, I know. I swore — swore! — after Closed Casket, the second in the Hercule Poirot reboot being taken over by Sophie Hannah, that I would never read another book in the series. But I checked The Mystery of Three Quarters out of the library, and No. 3, while not a charm, was a lot better than Closed Casket. It’s probably the best in the series: less convoluted than the reboot debut, The Monogram Murders, and not as downright terrible as Closed Casket. Is this book up to the standard of Agatha Christie herself? Of course not. But it was an OK read, and that constitutes a big improvement.
Four persons receive a letter purporting to be from Hercule Poirot that claims that he is going to denounce them for the murder of a 94-year-old man if they don’t go to the police first. Can Poirot allow his reputation to be besmirched in such a way? Of course not. Hannah plays more fairly with her audience than she did in the first two books, and Scotland Yard detective Edward Catchpool (the Captain Hastings surrogate) is much less irritating than he has been up to now. In The Mystery of Three Quarters, he was nearly likable.
Don’t set aside anything really good to read this book, but it won’t be a total waste of time. And, for this series, that backhanded compliment is as good as it gets.
Four persons receive a letter purporting to be from Hercule Poirot that claims that he is going to denounce them for the murder of a 94-year-old man if they don’t go to the police first. Can Poirot allow his reputation to be besmirched in such a way? Of course not. Hannah plays more fairly with her audience than she did in the first two books, and Scotland Yard detective Edward Catchpool (the Captain Hastings surrogate) is much less irritating than he has been up to now. In The Mystery of Three Quarters, he was nearly likable.
Don’t set aside anything really good to read this book, but it won’t be a total waste of time. And, for this series, that backhanded compliment is as good as it gets.
February 14, 2019
This novel was by far my favourite from the New Hercule Poirot Mysteries. I don’t know why, but I seemed to enjoy this one a little more than the rest.
Hannah never disappoints with her writing style. To take on Agatha Christie, and succeed in doing so, is a big accomplishment within itself. For me, this novel was hooking right from the start. Accusing Hercule Poirot of writing accusatory letters? Don’t mind if I do!
At first I thought Catchpool wouldn’t be in this one but he is and I was so happy to see that him and Poirot are back together! The plot of this book was just so original and I loved everything about it from characters, to plot. I don’t know know how Hannah does it but she manages to top every novel she writes with the next one.
Of every Poirot novel, I love the endings especially when we get a whole section dedicated to the murder being solved. It’s so interesting to watch it all unravel in a way only Poirot can do. I have to say that I haven’t figured out the past three mysteries and it does sort of make the novel a lot more enjoyable once you don’t know who the killer is.
This one had many surprising twists that I didn’t see coming but I’m not one to complain. The more the better! The characters were so fishy, and it’s clear that everyone one had something to hide and everyone was connected with each other in one way or another.
I cannot wait for the next novel, please keep them coming!
Hannah never disappoints with her writing style. To take on Agatha Christie, and succeed in doing so, is a big accomplishment within itself. For me, this novel was hooking right from the start. Accusing Hercule Poirot of writing accusatory letters? Don’t mind if I do!
At first I thought Catchpool wouldn’t be in this one but he is and I was so happy to see that him and Poirot are back together! The plot of this book was just so original and I loved everything about it from characters, to plot. I don’t know know how Hannah does it but she manages to top every novel she writes with the next one.
Of every Poirot novel, I love the endings especially when we get a whole section dedicated to the murder being solved. It’s so interesting to watch it all unravel in a way only Poirot can do. I have to say that I haven’t figured out the past three mysteries and it does sort of make the novel a lot more enjoyable once you don’t know who the killer is.
This one had many surprising twists that I didn’t see coming but I’m not one to complain. The more the better! The characters were so fishy, and it’s clear that everyone one had something to hide and everyone was connected with each other in one way or another.
I cannot wait for the next novel, please keep them coming!
November 11, 2018
Το τρίτο-και καλύτερο- βιβλίο του reboot του Πουαρώ με τις ευλογίες του Ιδρύματος της Αγκάθα Κρίστι.
Μόνο που όπως συνήθως χαρακτήρες, κίνητρο, εκτέλεση, δεν βγάζουν κανένα, μα κανένα νόημα, είναι απλά εικασίες και όχι αποδείξεις όπως επισημαίνει ένας ήρωας στον Πουαρώ όταν κάνει το καθιερωμένο λογύδριο του στο τέλος, σε καμία περίπτωση δεν θα στέκονταν πχ σε ένα δικαστήριο, έλα όμως που στέκονται στο δικαστήριο του φινάλε, και για να είμαστε ειλικρινείς τέτοια jumps to conclusions είχε άφθονα και η πραγματική Κρίστι, οπότε οι φανς της να χαλαρώσουν λίγο.
Κατά τα άλλα όμως το βιβλίο παρά το αστήρικτο φινάλε είναι μάλλον απολαυστικό, όπως το απολαυστικό κέικ Βιτρώ με τα τετραγωνάκια που απολαμβάνει ο Πουαρώ.
Όσο για το σπούκυ μικρομέγαλο που ξέρει (;) μυστικά της οικογένειας του, και ειδικότερα της μάνας του, το έχω δει ριαλ λαιφ και εγώ (όπως θα έλεγε και η Ηλιάνα), οπότε τι να μας κλάσεις μωρή Χάνα ;
Edit : τι φάση που το όνομα της Αγκάθα Κρίστι στο εξώφυλλο της ελληνικής έκδοσης (αλλά και ξένων εκδόσεων από ότι βλέπω) είναι 5 φορές μεγαλύτερο από την πραγματική συγγραφέα του βιβλίου ;
Μόνο που όπως συνήθως χαρακτήρες, κίνητρο, εκτέλεση, δεν βγάζουν κανένα, μα κανένα νόημα, είναι απλά εικασίες και όχι αποδείξεις όπως επισημαίνει ένας ήρωας στον Πουαρώ όταν κάνει το καθιερωμένο λογύδριο του στο τέλος, σε καμία περίπτωση δεν θα στέκονταν πχ σε ένα δικαστήριο, έλα όμως που στέκονται στο δικαστήριο του φινάλε, και για να είμαστε ειλικρινείς τέτοια jumps to conclusions είχε άφθονα και η πραγματική Κρίστι, οπότε οι φανς της να χαλαρώσουν λίγο.
Κατά τα άλλα όμως το βιβλίο παρά το αστήρικτο φινάλε είναι μάλλον απολαυστικό, όπως το απολαυστικό κέικ Βιτρώ με τα τετραγωνάκια που απολαμβάνει ο Πουαρώ.
Όσο για το σπούκυ μικρομέγαλο που ξέρει (;) μυστικά της οικογένειας του, και ειδικότερα της μάνας του, το έχω δει ριαλ λαιφ και εγώ (όπως θα έλεγε και η Ηλιάνα), οπότε τι να μας κλάσεις μωρή Χάνα ;
Edit : τι φάση που το όνομα της Αγκάθα Κρίστι στο εξώφυλλο της ελληνικής έκδοσης (αλλά και ξένων εκδόσεων από ότι βλέπω) είναι 5 φορές μεγαλύτερο από την πραγματική συγγραφέα του βιβλίου ;
May 1, 2020
3/5
“Yo, Hércules Poirot, he llegado a Combingham Hall y no me marcharé antes de haber resuelto el misterio de la muerte de Barnabas Pandy .”
El misterio de las cuatro cartas es una buena novela de misterio, diga sucesora de Agatha, entretenida e interesante. Seguiré leyendo este nuevo Poirot, sin duda.
Reseña completa: http://addicionaloslibros.blogspot.co...
“Yo, Hércules Poirot, he llegado a Combingham Hall y no me marcharé antes de haber resuelto el misterio de la muerte de Barnabas Pandy .”
El misterio de las cuatro cartas es una buena novela de misterio, diga sucesora de Agatha, entretenida e interesante. Seguiré leyendo este nuevo Poirot, sin duda.
Reseña completa: http://addicionaloslibros.blogspot.co...
April 28, 2020
Sophie Hannah'nın yazdığı Poirot romanları malesef 3 yıldızdan öteye gidemedi benim için. Her yazarın kendi tarzını konuşturması gerek bunu biliyorum ama buradaki Poirot orijinalinden daha gıcık nedense. Bir de hiç tarzına uymayan hareketler yazılmış, orası da garip. Çok ilginç başlamıştı, oh be eski tadı alacağım sanırım demiştim ama sonlara doğru yavanlaştı. Demek ki neymiş, bu işi en iyi Agatha başarabiliyormuş.
August 26, 2018
Book reviews on www.snazzybooks.com
I eagerly await any new releases from Sophie Hannah, whatever series they may be, and her Hercule Poirot books are no different. This new offering feels very Christie-like, with its setting in the countryside, centred around the death of Barnabas Pandy, who drowned in the bath - but was it an accident, or in fact murder?
Poirot feels, to me, close to the original character in Agatha Christie's novels - he's entertaining, odd at times, and as excellent at sleuthing as ever - but with Sophie Hannah's own excellent twist. The story is clever and intriguing (though you need to pay attention properly at the start, as there are lots of different characters and names across multiple families who are related in different ways). I'd definitely recommend this for anyone missing the original series - it doesn't feel like a direct fit, as Sophie Hannah has injected her own style into these Poirot novels, but it strikes the perfect balance between intrigue and light-hearted entertainment, as Christie always did so well. Highly recommended!
Many thanks to HarperCollins UK for providing a copy of this novel on which I chose to write an honest and unbiased review.
I eagerly await any new releases from Sophie Hannah, whatever series they may be, and her Hercule Poirot books are no different. This new offering feels very Christie-like, with its setting in the countryside, centred around the death of Barnabas Pandy, who drowned in the bath - but was it an accident, or in fact murder?
Poirot feels, to me, close to the original character in Agatha Christie's novels - he's entertaining, odd at times, and as excellent at sleuthing as ever - but with Sophie Hannah's own excellent twist. The story is clever and intriguing (though you need to pay attention properly at the start, as there are lots of different characters and names across multiple families who are related in different ways). I'd definitely recommend this for anyone missing the original series - it doesn't feel like a direct fit, as Sophie Hannah has injected her own style into these Poirot novels, but it strikes the perfect balance between intrigue and light-hearted entertainment, as Christie always did so well. Highly recommended!
Many thanks to HarperCollins UK for providing a copy of this novel on which I chose to write an honest and unbiased review.
January 7, 2021
A pesar de no ser escrito por Agatha, esta aventura protagonizada por Hércules Poirot, escrita por Hannah mantiene la esencia del personaje; empecé a leer los libros de Ágatha el año pasado (2020) y las historias con Poirot son mi favoritas. La lectura es muy amena y engancha desde el principio; en esta ocasión Poirot recibe la visita inesperada de varios personajes que lo acusan de haberle enviado cartas firmadas por él, en la que los acusa de un asesinato. Poirot se sentirá obligado en resolver este misterioso caso puesto que no ha sido él quien escribió esas cartas.
March 27, 2019
Over long and dragged. It seemed like the author was being paid by the word. Characters were unlikeable. Entire scenes like the 2pm everyone-late-to-the appointment where Poirot will reveal all were both unrealistic( why didn't anyone care about the big reveal?) and dragged out unnecessarily. I listened to this on Audio and OMG it was irritating.
December 18, 2019
This one is quite hard to rate: if I could, I would give a separate rating for the overall atmosphere (4 stars), mystery itself (3 stars at most), and moral points its making (probably 1 star).
First of all, it is frustratingly unclear whether there is a murder at all in this book, which makes the beginning drag on and on. It also makes me question why this book is even written. Somewhere in the middle the pace picks up and I'm actually really intrigued with family secrets and many possible culprits. I noticed myself making up different scenarios in my mind and going back to reread some passages for evidence. Great! Some characters in this book were also really interesting, like Annabel, although some did lack all substance and point (why where they even there?).
Then the ending. That's the problem with all of Hannah's books. The culprit is just announced, with no shock value or misleading clues (even though there are like a hundred people there in the room, ready to be the centre of Poirot's attention, and instead they have no point). What's equally bad is that after we know the murderer, the book goes on for about 60 pages more! I'm glad many points were explained and not left unanswered, but after you know the murderer, it just isn't as exciting. In addition, all the "evidence" Poirot had... Well, to put it nicely, it was extremely unconvincing.
Then we come to the values. First of all, I think it's great that Catchpool is probably gay, but I'm getting really tired of Hannah hinting it all the time and then not confirming it. Second of all, this book advocates strongly for the death sentence, which I'm 100 % against. Thirdly, there is a weird plot about abortions, and having an abortion is referred to as murder many times....
Now that I've written this review, I think that I cannot, in good conscience, give this book more than 2.5 stars, even though at some point things looked very promising. Still, I think I will read the next parts of the series, too, because I really miss Poirot.
First of all, it is frustratingly unclear whether there is a murder at all in this book, which makes the beginning drag on and on. It also makes me question why this book is even written. Somewhere in the middle the pace picks up and I'm actually really intrigued with family secrets and many possible culprits. I noticed myself making up different scenarios in my mind and going back to reread some passages for evidence. Great! Some characters in this book were also really interesting, like Annabel, although some did lack all substance and point (why where they even there?).
Then the ending. That's the problem with all of Hannah's books. The culprit is just announced, with no shock value or misleading clues (even though there are like a hundred people there in the room, ready to be the centre of Poirot's attention, and instead they have no point). What's equally bad is that after we know the murderer, the book goes on for about 60 pages more! I'm glad many points were explained and not left unanswered, but after you know the murderer, it just isn't as exciting. In addition, all the "evidence" Poirot had... Well, to put it nicely, it was extremely unconvincing.
Then we come to the values. First of all, I think it's great that Catchpool is probably gay, but I'm getting really tired of Hannah hinting it all the time and then not confirming it. Second of all, this book advocates strongly for the death sentence, which I'm 100 % against. Thirdly, there is a weird plot about abortions, and having an abortion is referred to as murder many times....
Now that I've written this review, I think that I cannot, in good conscience, give this book more than 2.5 stars, even though at some point things looked very promising. Still, I think I will read the next parts of the series, too, because I really miss Poirot.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,898 reviews