Reading the Detectives discussion

Welcome to our May 25 challenge read The Murder of Roger Ackroyd The fourth book in the Hercule Poirot series (the third Poirot book consists of short stories and so we skipped it for the challenge) was published in 1926.

From the Agatha Christie website: Known for its startling reveal, this is the book that changed Agatha Christie’s career.

Roger Ackroyd was a man who knew too much. He knew the woman he loved had poisoned her first husband. He knew someone was blackmailing her – and now he knew she had taken her own life with a drug overdose. Soon the evening post would let him know who the mystery blackmailer was. But Ackroyd was dead before he’d finished reading it – stabbed through the neck where he sat in the study.

Please feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

I've just finished my reread and, this time around, really appreciated just how brilliant the plotting is.

The first time I read this book, I'll admit I was fuming over the twist, but that was partly because it seems old hat these days as it has been copied so often - at the time, it caused a sensation. I still don't really think Christie plays fair with the reader, but does that matter when the writing is so clever?

She did it first. Now it doesn't seem anything but an annoyance, I agree, but the first time readers came across it, it must have been astonishing.

Yes, it must have been amazing to read this when it was first published!

I'm just trying to work out how early on Poirot arrives at the solution - it sounds from his comments at the end as if he suspects the truth early on, and just lulls the killer into a false sense of security.

It looks as if Poirot will hush things up once the killer has 'done the decent thing', but I'm wondering if that is fair on Ralph - wouldn't it mean that people still suspect him, and indeed others who are innocent of any crime too?

PS, also wouldn't the killer's suicide make people, and especially Caroline, realise he did it? So many things to think about at the end.

Susan wrote: "She did it first. Now it doesn't seem anything but an annoyance, I agree, but the first time readers came across it, it must have been astonishing."

Absolutely agree! First time I was stunned, but knew it must be a devastating twist because of the way other readers talked about it.

I also really appreciate the brilliant plotting on my rereads - almost as if once you get past the stunning twist, you’re free upon rereading to appreciate how well it was done.

I thought that by committing suicide Sheppard was sparing Caroline the publicity of a trial and his hanging. Poirot asked that Sheppard clear Paton and finish his manuscript.

It is brilliant in many ways, but I didn't enjoy it as much as the earlier Poirot. This may be because I remembered that the narrator was the murderer and so I didn't like him, and except for Poirot there really weren't any likable characters.

I wish I had listened to the Secret Life podcast before reading it, however, since they seemed to like it so much. I did appreciate the scene where they are supposedly playing Maj Jong but really gossiping!

It's good, but not my favorite Christie by far.

My first read of this was long ago and I don't really remember my reaction to the twist. I expect I was very surprised. It is an unforgetable twist and knowing it has colored subsequent reading. Now I try to guess, unsuccessfully, when Poirot suspects his friend. In my opinion, it does not stand up to rereading once the ending is known, unlike most of Christie's books.

Loved the Mah Jung scene. I listened to the book, and it sounds very true-to-life.

I think when I read it, I was either aware of the twist, or had read something before. I don't recall it being that surprising moment. Whereas, when I first read Orient Express I was very young - still at school - so the twist in that was a real surprise to me.

I remember on my first read I was puzzled by Poirot growing vegetable marrows, what are those, zucchini? And he wasn't as fun in this one as some others, it seems.

Remembering the narrator was the murderer should have made me appreciate the book more, but doesn't seem to have on this re-read.

The first time I read it I had some sympathy for the Doctor since his Sister seemed to run his life as well as his household, but that was gone.

Somewhere (likely the Secret Life of Books podcast) I read there is a theory that his Sister was actually the murderer which is interesting.

Sonia wrote: "I thought that by committing suicide Sheppard was sparing Caroline the publicity of a trial and his hanging. Poirot asked that Sheppard clear Paton and finish his manuscript."

I think that's right, but what confuses me is that Sheppard says in the manuscript that Caroline will "never know the truth" and he can trust Poirot and Inspector Raglan to "manage it between them". I can't see how Paton would be cleared in the public mind if the confession is hushed up. But then again, in reality I'm sure Caroline would work it out whether she is told about it or not.

Jackie wrote: "I remember on my first read I was puzzled by Poirot growing vegetable marrows, what are those, zucchini? .."

Yes, they are basically the same as zucchini, or courgettes as we call them in the UK, but left to grow huge. Growing prize marrows used to be a popular contest at many village produce shows, but I can't see that it would take up much of Poirot's day, and I hope he wasn't wearing his patent shoes while wrestling with marrows in his garden! ;)

Yes, it was definitely a thing wasn't it - growing large vegetables for the summer show! Very competitive, and I think we've seen these things in many a GA book. Who grew the biggest marrow, made the best jam, or victoria sponge.

Susan wrote: "Yes, it was definitely a thing wasn't it - growing large vegetables for the summer show! Very competitive, and I think we've seen these things in many a GA book. Who grew the biggest marrow, made t..."

Sometimes leading to murder!