The hazard of finding an author you like whose work is prolific is that sometimes you find yourself disappointed. I’ll explain by giving a specific example: Agatha Christie. With 66 novels, 156 short stories, about two dozen plays (though some were based on aforesaid novels and short stories), and even a few nonfiction books, the odds are that even though I may love many of her novels, there are a few that will fall through the appreciation cracks.
It’s easy to understand how this happens. As a rule I’m not drawn to an author once I know
they’ve written over a hundred works, figuring such a behemoth of work has
probably resulted in a dilution of style, characterization, and plot. Quality is sacrifice for quantity. In fact if I see a book whose author’s name
is larger than the title, I usually steer clear of it. A novel should rest on the merits of its
title and plot alone, not on the name of the author. Marketing around an author’s name excludes
new readers who may not know Agatha Christie is a master mystery novelist as
opposed to some woman with two first names.*
The other reason this tends to happen is because an
author gets “typecast” and stuck writing the same types of things, and when
they start to get sick of it their prose suffers as a result. Christie notoriously got sick of writing
Hercule Poirot, just as Arthur Conan Doyle got sick of Sherlock Holmes. The creative writer in them may have longed
to try something else, but these series were what put food on the table so they
were compelled to continue long after their excitement of writing these stories
was depleted.
Now given the choice between the two just knowing this
much, I’d have expected to like the Poirot mystery more.
Firstly, because both these detectives are eccentric “unlikely hero” types, they can veer into annoying habits sometimes, and I find Miss Marple more annoying than Poirot when this happens. I also knew Ariadne Oliver, a recurring sidekick of Poirot’s who shares suspiciously similar parallels with Agatha Christie’s real life.
Secondly, The Moving Finger was an audio book, and I usually am annoyed by the voice actor who snips and simpers their voice to do an old lady impression.
Thirdly, I actually bought Elephants Can Remember at a bag sale this summer at a library along with several other Christie conquests, and hoped to like it in order to make the purchase worthwhile.**
Firstly, because both these detectives are eccentric “unlikely hero” types, they can veer into annoying habits sometimes, and I find Miss Marple more annoying than Poirot when this happens. I also knew Ariadne Oliver, a recurring sidekick of Poirot’s who shares suspiciously similar parallels with Agatha Christie’s real life.
Secondly, The Moving Finger was an audio book, and I usually am annoyed by the voice actor who snips and simpers their voice to do an old lady impression.
Thirdly, I actually bought Elephants Can Remember at a bag sale this summer at a library along with several other Christie conquests, and hoped to like it in order to make the purchase worthwhile.**
However it turned out I preferred the Marple over the
Poirot in this rare instance. To my
surprise the audio book reader was a man, and The Moving Finger is
practically one of the stand-alone mysteries , as Miss Marple appears almost as
an afterthought and really could have been left out of the plot. This was almost the clincher of my loving
this novel, because in general I tend to like Christie’s few stand-alones (such
as And Then There Were None and The Man in the Brown Suit) better
compared to her many series. The Moving
Finger is the story of a man convalescing from a plane accident, who moves
with his sister to a small town that seems so innocent and friendly at first…until
they begin to receive obscene and threatening anonymous letters, and find out
the entire town has been getting them. The quaint country village takes on an air of paranoia, showing that fear
and suspicion can get the better of even the kindest human natures. Miss Marple stories tend to focus more on the
nature of evil in humanity, not only the emotional but also the spiritual roots
of wickedness, whereas Poirot tends toward the more psychological analysis of
crime.
Elephants Can Remember is an awesome title in my
humble opinion, but sadly my copy suffers from a rather overdone 70’s style
cover that does little to arrest the interest of the reader:
...Although I suppose I should be thankful it wasn’t this
cover:
I stand corrected. I would gladly cover this cover with puzzle pieces if it meant I didn't have to look at it anymore. Also, both these covers claim to be "the first time in paperback." Come now. One must surely be lying. Call Hercule Poirot to investigate post-haste! Source: http://www.detective-fiction.com/4salepix/christieelephantspb.jpg |
Another reason why this felt inferior is because it was missing thematic weight: where The Moving Finger delved into how an idyllic community can be torn apart and corrupted by anonymous accusations and the whispers of gossip. Elephants Can Remember repeats over and over people’s ability to remember “like elephants,” but doesn’t go much deeper. Christie is famous for incorporating literary quotations or nursery rhymes into her titles and themes, and Poirot himself sometimes solves mysteries by imposing these rhymes onto the crime (as with Five Little Pigs), but this “Elephants Remember” comes off as clumsy and stilted.
So while I may not end up keeping Elephants Can
Remember on my shelf, I will at least take comfort in the knowledge that
its absence will make room for The Moving Finger.
*Seriously.
Sometimes library filing systems are confusing. “Christie, Agatha,” “Alexander,
Lloyd,” “Hugo, Victor,” are all examples of how it can be hard to find an
author when the reader is not yet fully familiar with even their name.
**Though as a very small paperback amongst about 24 other
books in a bag for $20 a bag, this was almost a freebie more than a “purchase.”
No comments:
Post a Comment