What specially stands out for you in Agatha Christie novels?

Question

Why do you like Christie?

Answer 1

the racism, the bourgeois attitudes, the inane writing, the anachronistic values. Avoid Agatha.

Answer 2

Same as Brigid. I recently inherited pretty much all of her Poirot books from my grandmother so I've been re-reading them in "date first published" order. It's fascinating.

My mouth frequently hangs open at the things her characters say. To us in 2008 it's astounding that ordinary people said those things just in passing, rather than sexist/racist scum trying to hurt people or start a fight which is what it would be if someone said them now. I don't know how I'd feel about it if I wasn't white, it's bad enough getting over the sexism.

I love them as history books. Unlike contemporary books where the author has done research and tried to present a view of e.g. the 1920's to her 2008 audience, Christie was writing in the 1920's about the world she lived in. When she wrote her earlier books, I bet she never even thought that people would still be reading them eighty years down the line. She was writing mystery stories for her contemporaries, not to teach a lesson or make a social commentary from a position of perspective.

I also like her characters. There isn't a single book that doesn't have at least one character who I find sympathetic. She can get into the mind of anyone well enough to make them seem real and their actions seem real. She doesn't have to always have the "hero" or the main character be a certain type (contrast with e.g. James Herbert, whose heroes are always himself in not-very-good disguise).

I've never really been that fussed about trying to guess who dunnit. I read somewhere that when she wrote the books she didn't know herself. Then just before the end she'd pick on the most unlikely person, and go back and add significant little bits to earlier chapters that gave it away that it was that person. Once I knew that, it wasn't as much fun somehow.

There are some bits that bug me. Her descriptions are lazy, using outward features to mirror personality traits (his weak chin and cruel mouth, her sheep-like eyes), although I do like the way it saves time, and I dislike her assumption that "badness" is genetic - if it's casually mentioned that someone's grandfather was in an asylum, you can bet that will be significant.

I also can't stand the "will you marry me?", "yes." that's tacked on to almost all of her books almost as an afterthought. I suppose her contemporary readership didn't like the idea of a romantic interest that didn't end in lawful wedlock!

Answer 3

The characters are amazing!  I also love the twists and turns in the plots.  It's interesting to read the books in order and see the progression of 20th century society in her lifetime.  I understand the problems with classism, sexism, etc, but each book is a reflection of what was really going on at the time it was written.  It's better than a history book!

Answer 4

Madam marpel.

Answer 5

I think she was a stand alone when she first started writing. I know they seem a bit cheesy compared to today's standard, but today's standard will become yesterdays and so forth. They were simple, well written, and the better ones did leave you guessing. For some reason they're just a good read, something to take with you anywhere.