Reviewing "The Sittaford Mystery" by Agatha Christie

Originally titled The Murder at Hazelmoor, The Sittaford Mystery possesses all the needed factors to make a quintessential Agatha Christie whodunit:

• Locked room” murder situation
• Small English village in the country
• Variety pack of suspicious characters
• Distracting fear of foreigners
• Level-headed police investigator
• Charismatic and beautiful young woman
• Ace reporter helping said young woman with an independent investigation
• Lots of random red herrings

In this novel, a bunch of the characters are gathered in Sittaford House on a dark and snowy afternoon. They decide to do a séance, during which a strange message is communicated—apparently from the spirit world. The message is that Mr. Trevelyan, a miserly old sportsman who owns Sittaford House but is staying in town during the winter Hazelmoor, is being murdered.

Everyone is shaken, but most assume that one of the people at the party was playing a joke (even though it is in bad taste). One of the attendees, Major Burnaby, is a friend of Trevelyan’s and—although a skeptic about the whole table-turning thing—decides to travel down to Hazelmoor to check on his friend just to set his mind at ease.

But then, of course, Trevelyan is dead, bashed over the head by a sandbag. Investigation of the murder is stalled a bit due to the weather, but soon an inspector is interviewing all the possible suspects, tracking down whoever may benefit from Trevelyan’s death or have had some grudge against him.

The police arrest Trevelyan’s nephew James Pearson, who had visited him that afternoon and needed money. This brings Emily Trefusis into the story. The Charismatic and Beautiful Young Woman is James Pearson’s fiancée, and she’s determined to prove his innocence by finding the real murderer.

The Sittaford Mystery is a standalone novel, apart from Christie’s usual sleuth series of Poirot or Marple. I usually prefer these novels, but with Sittaford I was a bit underwhelmed by the end. Not that the solution is obvious, but the climax lacked the usual excitement, and the plot twists Christie employs seem a bit forced. It was as if she was anticipating what her readers would expect out of the ending, and in order to surprise them did the opposite…even if it was not as satisfying or logical.

The other quibble I have with this mystery is that it doesn’t reveal quite enough for the reader to deduce the solution. To elaborate, let’s look at the “categorical trinity:” Motive, Means, and Opportunity.

Motive – This is what was possible for the reader to deduce.

Means – In this case, the means of murder were obvious.

Opportunity – This is where Christie holds out on the reader. She allows Emily to find a vital clue, along the lines of “Emily went downstairs and looked…her eyes widened, and she said ‘I know who the murderer is, and I know how they did it.’” What she sees is not described, so unless the reader takes a wild guess (I didn’t) there isn’t a way to deduce this part.