Reading the Detectives discussion

Welcome to our Challenge Read for April 2021: The Man in the Brown Suit published in 1924.

This is the first of the books featuring Colonel Race. The book has some parallels to incidents and settings of a round-the-world work trip taken by Christie with her first husband Archie Christie and headed by his old teacher from Clifton College, Major E A Belcher, to promote the forthcoming 1924 British Empire Exhibition. The tour lasted from 20 January to 1 December 1922.

Dining with the Christies before the trip, Belcher had suggested setting a mystery novel in his home, the Mill House at Dorney and naming the book The Mystery of the Mill House; and had insisted on being in it as well. He is the inspiration for the central character Sir Eustace Pedler, having been given a title at Archie's suggestion. The Mill House also makes an appearance, albeit located in Marlow.

Christie found Belcher "childish, mean and somehow addictive as a personality: 'Never, to this day, have I been able to rid myself of a sneaking fondness for Sir Eustace', wrote Agatha of the fictionalised Belcher, a main character in The Man in the Brown Suit. 'I dare say it's reprehensible, but there it is.'"

This is much more an adventure book, than a mysteyr. The Times Literary Supplement reviewed the novel in its issue of 25 September 1924. The review appreciated the "thriller-cum-adventure" style of the book and concluded, "The author sets so many questions to the reader in her story, questions which will almost certainly be answered wrongly, that no one is likely to nod over it, and even the most experienced reader of romances will fail to steer an unerring course and reach the harbour of solution through the quicksands and shoals of blood, diamonds, secret service, impersonation, kidnapping, and violence with which the mystery is guarded."

The unnamed reviewer in The Observer (7 September 1924) wrote: "Miss Christie has done one bold and one regrettable thing in this book. She has dispensed with Hercule Poirot, her own particular Sherlock Holmes, to whose presence and bonhomie and infallibility the success of her previous books has been mainly due." After comparing Poirot with Harry Rayburn, the reviewer continued by saying that the book, "will be something of a disappointment to those who remember The Mysterious Affair at Styles. It is an excellent and ingenious complexity, in its way, but it might have been written by quite a number of the busy climbers of who now throng this particular slope of Parnassus. One almost suspects that Miss Christie contemplates exchanging the mantle of Conan Doyle for that of Miss Dell; a hazardous manoeuvre, for the two authoresses are very different in tastes and sympathies." The reviewer went on to say that, "The plan of the book is rather confused. There is a prologue which does not link itself up with the rest of the story for quite a long time; and the idea of giving alternate passages from the diaries of the heroine and of Sir Eustace Pedler is not altogether justified by the glimpses it gives of that entertaining but disreputable character. One of the points on which some readers will have doubts is as to the plausibility of the villain: assuredly he is a novel type in that role. The book, like all Miss Christie's work, is written with spirit and humour."

A young woman investigates an accidental death at a London tube station, and finds herself of a ship bound for South Africa…

Pretty, young Anne came to London looking for adventure. In fact, adventure comes looking for her – and finds her immediately at Hyde Park Corner tube station. Anne is present on the platform when a thin man, reeking of mothballs, loses his balance and is electocuted on the rails.

The Scotland Yard verdict is accidental death. But Anne is not satisfied.

After all, who was the man in the brown suit who examined the body? And why did he race off, leaving a cryptic message behind: ‘17-122 Kilmorden Castle’?

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

It is a very fast paced story from Christie. It takes the reader from London across to Africa, with a lot of action happening on the boat voyage and then continues throughout long journeys across that continent. There are some very likable characters, Anne, the main one, being very adventurous for this era. At one time or another, I was suspecting just about all of them.
It was good to meet Colonel Race again, and we get to learn a lot more of his character.

I agree it's very fast-paced. I think the original readers would have seen Colonel Race as a suspect, but we don't do that now that we know he is a series character!

Exactly- I confess, I felt like Christie wanted us to suspect him, but knowing what we do of him, it’s not possible! I really felt like our heroine was attracted to and frightened of him at the same time - kind of icky to a modern woman... It was sad, though, that he really seemed heartbroken at Anne’s rejection.

I must say, I agree with some of the review quoted above - the villain is rather a strange fit! Also, that this was quite a departure for the author (and perhaps not a wise one, according to the unnamed reviewer, since the field of romantic thrillers was crowded at the time.)

This was quite dated now, but I thought that it was a lot of fun. I think, at the time, Christie was keen to write those romantic thrillers but, as you point out, Susan, there were a LOT at the time. Popular and she probably thought it would sell well, but interesting to see that reviews at the time were already pointing out the loss of Poirot as a negative. Wonder how long before she realised she was stuck with her funny little Belgium detective?

I enjoyed the diary entry format and Anne was a great character. Agree that there is some quite rated parts.

I wish Anne had gone off into the sunset with Colonel Race, rather than Harry. Her relationship with Harry seemed rather volatile, to say the least!

Tracey wrote: "I enjoyed the diary entry format and Anne was a great character. Agree that there is some quite rated parts.

I wish Anne had gone off into the sunset with Colonel Race, rather than Harry. Her rel..."

That’s what I thought- I agreed with Suzanne, the wise, older woman, who tried to point that out to Anne, and was rudely rebuffed! That surprised me - Anne’s defensive anger, personal attack at Suzanne as a fat, older married woman, or something similarly bitchy, made me think, “uh oh, she’s got it bad...” couldn’t help wondering, what about when the sex appeal cools?

Tracey wrote: "Her relationship with Harry seemed rather volatile, to say the least!"

I was a bit shocked when Anne revealed how immediately and intensely attracted she was to Harry. I wasn't expecting that. I wish he had been a bit more nuanced. Also people have mentioned that some of Anne and Harry's interaction felt like it was bordering on "domestic abuse" (verbally) even though their conversation was all in good faith.

All in all I really liked the book. I knew Colonel Race turned up later but even so, I was suspicious of him and wondered if there was some kind of twist coming, in terms of him switching from bad to good as a character.

I too was surprised at Anne's falling in "love" so fast with little to base it on beside attraction. Reminded me of Romeo and Juliet---spot each other across the ballroom and POW, they are in love? Interesting to wonder if R and J would have made it as a couple if they had lived.

I asked this in the non-spoiler thread and had to remove it quickly.

Did any one re-read this soon enough to remember who the villain was and did his diary read differently the second time? I was tempted to go back to those sections but the lure, and pressure, of the next book was too strong.

I think Anne and Harry's relationship would only work in a novel. It reminded me of Tarzan and Jane.

Sandy wrote: "Did any one re-read this soon enough to remember who the villain was and did his diary read differently the second time?"

Yes, I'm rereading it knowing the villain and yes, Christie's deftness in the diary is exemplary! She's so clever with her double-speak narrator (not the only one, of course, in the Christie canon but I don't want to spoil other books) as it makes perfect sense both before we know and after.

I love this book and while I wouldn't want a Harry in real life, he's perfect in this book as a tongue-in-cheek hero.

While a fun read, I did find some of the social attitudes-not just to marriage but the whole colonialism and class issues-uncomfortable.

Anne is indeed an enjoyable heroine for the most part (her thoughts on marriage being the one disturbing part) and in the milieu in which she is moving youth and beauty are often a currency of their own-how much does she end up being supported by the wealthy people that she encounters, and how much of this is "earned" by the fact that she is young and beautiful? This would have been a very different novel if she had been older and/or plainer!

Sandy wrote: "I think Anne and Harry's relationship would only work in a novel. It reminded me of Tarzan and Jane."

Yes!

Roman Clodia wrote: "Sandy wrote: "Did any one re-read this soon enough to remember who the villain was and did his diary read differently the second time?"

Yes, I'm rereading it knowing the villain and yes, Christie'..."

True, almost comes off as a spoof of the he-man macho lover, doesn’t he?

Frances wrote: "While a fun read, I did find some of the social attitudes-not just to marriage but the whole colonialism and class issues-uncomfortable.

Anne is indeed an enjoyable heroine for the most part (her ..."

Very true - disturbing, really, how widely accepted it is that she’s young and beautiful, therefore she’ll be all right? It’s such a given that she’ll marry well, be taken care of - I guess her vehement resistance to this assumption makes sense. I understand it, but can’t help thinking her rebellious escape, playing Jane to Harry’s Tarzan, may wear thin after awhile (say, first pregnancy, first baby, any illness that pops up...)

I have found a few of Christie's 'romantic' pairings problematic, bordering on distasteful. Abuse, violence, gaslighting, taking advantage of vulnerable women at low points in their lives ...

Susan in NC wrote: "True, almost comes off as a spoof of the he-man macho lover, doesn’t he?"

Definitely! And there's a knowing line from the diary which while it's a comment on Colonel race, equally might apply to Harry:

'He's good-looking in his way, but dull as ditch water. One of these strong silent men that lady novelists and young girls always rave over.'

I think Christie is having huge fun over this :)

Frances wrote: "While a fun read, I did find some of the social attitudes-not just to marriage but the whole colonialism and class issues-uncomfortable."

Yes, I completely agree. She seems to have those elements in a number of her mysteries. I guess I'm just learning to accept that because she's otherwise so good.

I was a bit taken aback by the villain's identity after we have seen through his eyes via the diary - this breaks one of the "rules" of the Detection Society, about the killer not being anyone whose viewpoint we have shared. But then again it's a rule Christie has broken in another book, though I won't say which one(s) to avoid spoilers!

I found it a slightly disappointing solution, anyway, especially as Sir Eustace is allowed to get away. I'm wondering if he will turn up again in the later Colonel Race books.

Me too - though it would perhaps be more worrying if we weren't jarred by the social attitudes of nearly 100 years ago, as it was published in 1924. I squirmed repeatedly over comments about Anne having the best legs on the ship.

I also shuddered over the mentions of Jan Smuts, an unabashed white supremacist, and the diamond mines, knowing how brutally his police treated striking miners even before the formal implementation of apartheid. Still, I can understand Christie sidestepping these issues.

Judy wrote: "I agree it's very fast-paced. I think the original readers would have seen Colonel Race as a suspect, but we don't do that now that we know he is a series character!"

Just what I was thinking when I revisited last year and again yesterday; If I hadn't 'met' Race before I'd have another suspect. But this is as you said a very different side of him.

Roman Clodia wrote: "Sandy wrote: "Did any one re-read this soon enough to remember who the villain was and did his diary read differently the second time?"

Yes, I'm rereading it knowing the villain and yes, Christie'..."

Yes, this time around I did remember so I did try to read more carefully; but I still enjoyed the humour a lot.

Rosina wrote: "I have found a few of Christie's 'romantic' pairings problematic, bordering on distasteful. Abuse, violence, gaslighting, taking advantage of vulnerable women at low points in their lives ..."

I think this was possibly an influence of The Sheik which was published around the time; there was a more direct reference to it in Chimneys (?) as well.

Although I didn't notice it before, yesterday after reading the comments on the non-spoiler thread, I did happen to realise that this one does 'feel' like Amelia Peabody--and Sir Eustace as the Master Criminal?

Lady Clementina wrote: "I think this was possibly an influence of The Sheik which was published around the time; there was a more direct reference to it in Chimneys (?) as well.
"

Ah, good catch. And the movie came out in 1921, and from what I have read, Rudolph Valentino was insanely popular.

Klowey wrote: "Lady Clementina wrote: "I think this was possibly an influence of The Sheik which was published around the time; there was a more direct reference to it in Chimneys (?) as well.
"

Ah, good catch. ..."

The book was also I think popular despite all the controversy it raised (and continues to).

Now that I look it up, Valentino starred in more than one Sheik film. I didn't realise he died so young.

I was surprised by this book as I didn’t think it was up to her usual standard. It seemed melodramatic & unbelievable. I’m impressed that some people are reading it again.

Rosina wrote: "I have found a few of Christie's 'romantic' pairings problematic, bordering on distasteful. Abuse, violence, gaslighting, taking advantage of vulnerable women at low points in their lives ..."

I so agree. Nemisis is truly dreadful in relation to women and rape. I'm writing about racism, classism and sexism in Christie's novels on my blog and find her guilty of all. At the same time, I think that we need to look to other literature for antidotes rather than censor her writing. I wonder how early in her publication these problems were picked up? I suspect that no-one thought about them, or dared question the domestic violence etc very early.

Lady Clementina wrote: "Rosina wrote: "I have found a few of Christie's 'romantic' pairings problematic, bordering on distasteful. Abuse, violence, gaslighting, taking advantage of vulnerable women at low points in their ..."

Yes, this is very likely. Appallingly I recall my grand mother reading The Sheik - and certainly not being disturbed by it. Indeed, there could have been a pleasurable frisson amongst her and her friends for whom it was quite a source of discussion. Despite having heard all this I am aware of Christie's shortcomings in this area. But still love reading her.

Roman Clodia wrote: "Susan in NC wrote: "True, almost comes off as a spoof of the he-man macho lover, doesn’t he?"

Definitely! And there's a knowing line from the diary which while it's a comment on Colonel race, equa..."

Yes, definitely!

Roman Clodia wrote: "Me too - though it would perhaps be more worrying if we weren't jarred by the social attitudes of nearly 100 years ago, as it was published in 1924. I squirmed repeatedly over comments about Anne h..."

I really like your recognition of the dreadful Smuts, and the diamond mines practices.

Robin wrote: "I really like your recognition of the dreadful Smuts, and the diamond mines practices."

The submerged politics are especially interesting in this book as Sir Eustace seems to be providing weapons for the 'rebels' and striking miners, undermining the authoritarian government. Of course, he may just be doing this for financial gain, not ideological reasons ;)

Roman Clodia wrote: "The submerged politics are especially interesting in this book as Sir Eustace seems to be providing weapons for the 'rebels' and striking miners, undermining the authoritarian government. Of course, he may just be doing this for financial gain, not ideological reasons ;)"

The implication is that he is supplying arms to the rebels in order that they may incriminate themselves - that his 'contract' is with the government, who will be able to come down hard on 'certain people'.

"No, my dear child, I do not believe in this Revolution. I give it a couple of days longer and it will fizzle out ignominiously.”

“Not one of your successes, in fact?” I said nastily.

“Like all women, you’ve no idea of business. The job I took on was to supply certain explosives and arms—heavily paid for—to foment feeling generally, and to incriminate certain people up to the hilt. I’ve carried out my contract with complete success, and I was careful to be paid in advance. I took special care over the whole thing, as I intended it to be my last contract before retiring from business."

ooh, good spot, Rosina! That makes more sense.

Rosina wrote: "Roman Clodia wrote: "The submerged politics are especially interesting in this book as Sir Eustace seems to be providing weapons for the 'rebels' and striking miners, undermining the authoritarian ..."

I remembered reading it, but could never have tracked it down. Well done Rosina!

Thank heaven for villains who give away whole plot points to their victims!

Rosina wrote: "Thank heaven for villains who give away whole plot points to their victims!"

Yes! Like every Bond movie EVER!

Sandy - yes I read this remembering who was the colonel and enjoying Sir Eustace’s diaries in that way. Many whodunnits, as well as Austen’s ‘Emma’ can be enjoyed this way.

I enjoyed the shifting narrator--Sir Eustace certainly played the dolt very well. I wonder how Major Belcher felt about the character that was based on him, and if he recognized all of the negative elements of his own personality.
My favorite character was Suzanne Blair. I wish we had gotten more of her, and I hope she makes an appearance in later books.

I love this one, it’s such fun. Anne is a great heroine, so full of spirit and adventure. My favourite bit is where they buy all the wooden animals.

ChrisGA wrote: "I too was surprised at Anne's falling in "love" so fast with little to base it on beside attraction. Reminded me of Romeo and Juliet---spot each other across the ballroom and POW, they are in love?..."

This happens in romantic fiction all the time - they haven’t got the time for long courtships.

Tara wrote: "I enjoyed the shifting narrator--Sir Eustace certainly played the dolt very well. I wonder how Major Belcher felt about the character that was based on him, and if he recognized all of the negative..."

I just finished The Grand Tour: Letters and Photographs from the British Empire Expedition 1922, Christie's letters and journal from her trip with Major Belcher. From the epilogue it seems Belcher was well aware of his faults and had a sense of humor about them. He and the Christies remained friends although they were barely speaking by the end of the trip.

Sandy wrote: "Tara wrote: "I enjoyed the shifting narrator--Sir Eustace certainly played the dolt very well. I wonder how Major Belcher felt about the character that was based on him, and if he recognized all of..."

Traveling together can tear apart the best of relationships--I suspect this would have been even more of the case when such trips would have taken longer and been more inconvenient than today's options. And with your husband's boss no less!