Reading the Detectives discussion

Welcome to our October 22 group read of Murder is Easy aka Easy to Kill. This is the fourth in the Superinspector Battle series, first published in 1939. The Superintendent Battle series in full is shown below:

Superintendent Battle
1. The Secret of Chimneys (1925)
2. The Seven Dials Mystery (1929)
3. Cards on the Table (1936)
4. Murder Is Easy (1939)
aka Easy to Kill
5. Towards Zero (1944)

In a quiet English village, a killer is about to strike. Again and again.

Officer Luke Fitzwilliam is on a train to London when he meets a strange woman. She claims there is a serial killer in the quiet village of Wychwood. He has already taken the lives of three people and is about claim his fourth victim.

Fitzwilliam dismisses this as the ramblings of an old woman. But within hours she is found dead. Crushed by a passing car.

And then the fourth victim is found.

Each death looks like an accident. But in Wychwood nothing is as it appears....

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread. Thank you.

I wondered if there was a film of this book, and found out it was filmed for TV in 1982. That version doesn't seem to be available for streaming officially, but is on YouTube.

I've just given up on it after watching the first few minutes, as the picture quality is really bad. Ironically, I think it feels more dated because it has been updated to the 1980s, with Luke as a computer expert!

It does have a fantastic cast, including Olivia de Havilland as Honoria Waynflete, Helen Hayes as Miss Pinkerton (renamed as Miss Fullerton for some reason), Timothy West as Gordon and Jonathan Pryce as Mr Ellsworthy. Bill Bixby plays Luke and Lesley-Anne Down plays Bridget.

There is also a more recent version which was made as part of the "Marple" TV series, with Miss Marple (Julia McKenzie) added to the story, but it sounds as if this version changed the story completely so I don't think I would bother to watch it.

Thanks, Judy - always a crime to “update” Christie, I really don’t think she needed help! Especially reading her as an older adult (57 now), vs first time as a teen, then college student, then 20s, I find I catch a lot more of her nuance, especially the later books, whether Poirot, Marple, or standalone, about the decline of societal norms, expectations, the changes regarding the care and/or punishment of criminal insanity, administration of justice, etc. Very interesting, the difference in tone.

Finished this and while reviewing my prior comments I noticed that the GR description has Miss Fullerton, rather than Pinkerton, as the train passenger. Odd. Maybe a change in the US because of the detective agency?

That's odd, Sandy! I assumed that the TV series had renamed her, but maybe the name was changed in US editions, as you say.

Not a favorite: Luke does not seem to be a very good detective and I actively disliked Bridget. Any relationship that starts with being madly in love with someone you dislike is too dramatic for my taste. I hoped somehow the doctor's daughter would get a chance to experience a bit more before settling down with a man her father disliked.

The mystery was fine, and I didn't suspect the murderer even on my re-read. I'm a bit disappointed that it is a slightly mad frustrated spinster, but there is a lot of credit given to elderly "aunts".

I wish there was more of Battle. He always seems calm and competent investigator. And Hugh Fraser has a great voice for him.

I'm enjoying my reread (though I remember the culprit) - it's interesting to see that Miss Pinkerton used to tell Bridget that the world was a very wicked place... just like Jane Marple. There's actually a lot of Marple in her - except for the fact that she has to be killed off for the plot.

I also liked the clue about the hat paint when Bridget explains to Luke that it's old fashioned to repaint your straw hat, now women just throw them away and buy a new one. It's one of those lovely historical comments that I love picking up in these books.

Roman Clodia wrote: "I'm enjoying my reread (though I remember the culprit) - it's interesting to see that Miss Pinkerton used to tell Bridget that the world was a very wicked place... just like Jane Marple. There's ac..."

That’s what I felt, reading this one, several nods to Miss Marple-type elderly ladies!

And I like the hat paint explanation from Bridget - felt like she contributed a subtle but vital clue.

Sandy, I also didn't suspect the killer - I was well and truly led up by the garden path by Christie and suspected Gordon for much of the book!

I agree it's a shame that it's a frustrated spinster, but I think that is balanced out a bit by the fact that Miss Pinkerton is so good at working out what is happening initially. I agree with RC that there is quite a bit of Marple in Miss Pinkerton.

Judy wrote: "Sandy, I also didn't suspect the killer - I was well and truly led up by the garden path by Christie and suspected Gordon for much of the book!

I agree it's a shame that it's a frustrated spinste..."

I was totally misled, as well, that’s what I love about Christie!

I can't say this was a favourite of mine either, but I was glad that I finally read it. I saw the twist coming, but not immediately.

It's easy to see on a re-read that Luke goes way off track when he takes Miss Pinkerton's 'person' with a killer look in their eye for a man - his whole list of suspects is men and it doesn't even occur to him that a killer could be a woman.

I wondered if readers were quite so single-tracked since, as we know, Christie has many a fine female murderer in her books.

I am also a bit puzzled at why Luke considers Ellsworthy 'abnormal' after a single conversation with him. Is this code for gay, at the time? He's described as effeminate but I'm finding it hard to read Christie's intention here.

Roman Clodia wrote: "It's easy to see on a re-read that Luke goes way off track when he takes Miss Pinkerton's 'person' with a killer look in their eye for a man - his whole list of suspects is men and it doesn't even ..."

I think she was trying to prepare us for the ‘bloody hands, maniacal face, he’s a satanist” red herring to come, but it did come across like she was portraying him as a pervert of some sort, and as we’re all familiar with the horrible anti-gay prejudices of the time, it feels like that’s what was being rather sneeringly implied.

I think some of the red herring author tricks and codes of the time haven’t aged well!

I thought at first that Ellsworthy was supposed to be a gay stereotype, with the "mincing" way of walking, etc, but then it's suggested that he was in a relationship with one of the female murder victims, so I wasn't sure what was being implied.

I've finished and while I can sort of see why some people have a problem with the frustrated spinster stereotype, it's also quite a social indictment as she says that she knew she was clever but wasn't allowed an education: 'I always had brains, even as a girl! But they wouldn't let me do anything ... I had to stay at home - doing nothing.'

And one of the reasons that she gets away with it all is precisely because patriarchal shaping of women has forced them into silence: 'But I never showed my feelings. We were taught that as girls - a most valuable training.'

So I'd suggest this is actually quite subversive - if Miss Waynflete had been allowed to have an education, a career, and had been allowed a voice, she'd never have brooded for about 30 years and turned into a mad killer.

Judy wrote: "I thought at first that Ellsworthy was supposed to be a gay stereotype, with the "mincing" way of walking, etc, but then it's suggested that he was in a relationship with one of the female murder victims"

I was confused about that too, Judy. Even the crazy black mass cult seems more performance than anything else.

Roman Clodia wrote: "I've finished and while I can sort of see why some people have a problem with the frustrated spinster stereotype, it's also quite a social indictment as she says that she knew she was clever but wa..."

Excellent points and maybe Christie's nod to woman's lib.

I can´t concentrate on audiobooks as well as on printed books or kindle, so I didn´t catch every detail. The story dragged a bit, and the relationship in the end was unbelievable to me too.
Funny about Pinkerton having been changed to Fullerton in the US, as it´s somehow important to relate to the detective agency which even I as non-Brit knew.
Miss Waynflete´s excuse for murdering not only people but at first her bird with not having had an education was a bit weak imo.

Michaela wrote: "Miss Waynflete´s excuse for murdering not only people but at first her bird with not having had an education was a bit weak imo."

She didn't murder them *because* she didn't have an education, she killed because she wanted her revenge on Gordon for jilting her all those years ago.

I just meant that having nothing substantial to do all day, feeling thwarted and confined to the house by her female role meant that she had 30+ years of pent up frustration, anger and bitterness that she couldn't even articulate openly and which spilled over when he returned and bought what was her family home. Also he's silly, as we know, yet having the education denied to her enabled him to become a lord, get rich and patronise everyone while she's been left to wither away. I have some sympathy - eek!

Roman Clodia wrote: "I am also a bit puzzled at why Luke considers Ellsworthy 'abnormal' after a single conversation with him. Is this code for gay, at the time? He's described as effeminate but I'm finding it hard to read Christie's intention here."

I do think he was meant to be considered as gay-no stories of any failed romances in his past. I was just listening to the episode of the podast "Shedunit" in which she addresses the presence of gay characters in GA mysteries and how they are often portrayed-mostly as "artistic, fashionable" single men and of women "friends" who have lived together forever and behave as old married couples.

I didn't particularly enjoy this one-I found the way that Luke tried to lead into conversations was clunky and the whole Eugenics thing was off-putting-I know he's trying to draw others out to voice their support of "acceptable" killing but it just bothered me-I remember there was a scientific young woman in another Christie who kept spouting about certain people should be killed off to benefit others and I just can't believe that even at the time this sort of talk would have been acceptable in these circles.

I also agree with Sandy about the romance not feeling right between Luke and Bridget.

I enjoyed the plot twists and red herrings. But I found the relationship between Luke and Bridget odd, distracting, and forced. Nonetheless, I enjoyed the book. The description of the village, the British countryside, and the various townspeople helped to keep my interest throughout.

Just going back to whether Ellsworthy is coded as gay or not, it's fascinating that Christie makes Poirot so 'unmasculine', according to the gender orthodoxies of the time: he's well-groomed, a home body, picky, hates cold and rain, drinks cordials and herbal tisanes and chocolate rather than beer and whiskey blah blah blah. Of course, we know he has a pash for Vera, the Russian Countess but Poirot is an interesting counterpoint in the debates about sexual identities in Christie.

RC, I don't know if you listen to the Shedunnit podcast presented by Caroline Crampton, but I've just listened to the latest episode Frances mentioned - you might find it interesting, as it looks at the whole question of gender in classic mysteries, including the portrayal of Poirot (that bit is near the end of the episode if you don't have time to listen to it all).

I don't, Judy, but that sounds interesting so thank you.

This was a fun visit with Christie. I hadn't read this before, which is really surprising.

In my opinion, this is not one of her strongest. I enjoyed the mystery, and didn't know 'who did it' until the reveal in the woods. I found the red herrings involving Ellsworthy annoying and jarring. They were so obviously red herrings. I also wasn't a fan of the romance, which one reviewer called 'anemic' when the book was released.

All that said though, I'm still glad it was voted in for the monthly read. I would rate it a 3.5*

For a long time I was sure Bridget was the killer and that that would validate the love story…. I was wrong 😅

I agree not her best work but a very entertaining AC nonetheless.

Jessica wrote: "For a long time I was sure Bridget was the killer and that that would validate the love story…. I was wrong 😅

I agree not her best work but a very entertaining AC nonetheless."

I, too suspected Bridget, as she didn't seem at all shocked by Luke accusing Gordon, just saying he refused to believe it, and no feeling frightened.