Talk:Agatha Christie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Trubadurix (talk | contribs) at 14:49, 8 December 2006 (→‎How many novels?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBiography Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Template:FAOL you can force links to work by making any substantial change to the page the link appears on; you don't have to change spaces in the link to underscores. In fact, I avoid changing them to underscores because then the term you do that to doesn't show up in a search. You could instead copyedit or change some minor bit of punctuation; or even add an   somewhere in the article. That's html for a space, but the wikiware thinks the change is substantial enough that it quits accessing the cached version without the active links.

Mrs Oliver

The following came from ../wiki.phtml, which was created by some kind of software bug we had briefly. Koyaanis Qatsi --

Despite seemingly replacing Hastings as Poirot's foil only in the later novels, Mrs Oliver was in fact created much earlier.

First seen, albeit very briefly, in 'Parker Pyne Investigates', where she devises plots for false mysteries to amuse bored clients of retired civil servant turned Mr Fix-it, Parker Pyne.

Her first proper appearance comes in 'Cards on the Table' where along with several others, including Poirot, she attempts to investigate the circumstances of the death of the host of a party which she and Poirot attended.

After this novel, it was 16 years before Christie again teamed her up with Poirot in 'Mrs McGinty's Dead', where she plays a peripheral part in the investigation after arriving on the scene as a guest and hitting Poirot with an apple core thrown from her car window!

She also appears in 'Dead Man's Folly' (again creating a murder mystery, but a real murder occurs during the proceedings).

'Pale Horse' (which I have not read) was her next appearance.

She then teams up with Poirot for 'Third Girl', 'Halloween Party' and 'Elephants Can Remember', in all of which she plays an active part in introducing Poirot to the case and in assisting his solution of it.

From the books I have read, Mrs Oliver appears to be a successful crime novelist, having created a Finnish detective beloved by the public. She hates the character and is shy of attention she gets from fans. She is rather overweight, eats large quantities of apples, lives alone in a London flat, tries many different hairstyles and is often vague and absent minded.

Playing fair and love stories

Maybe I read the books too quickly or beacause I read them in French, but I do not agree that Christie was fair with her readers. Often, very often the detective finds the solution with elements that were not mentioned at all before.

One of the best example is found in Murder on the Orient Express. Before Poirot explains that everybody was somehow connected to the killed baby, we had never heard of this baby before. It is truly frustrating.

I would be very surprised it this were the case in the French translation. In my Fontana/Collins English edition of 1974, the full details of the Armstrong kidnapping case are given in chapter seven of section one, there being three sections in total. It is key to all of the exposition. JennyRad 13:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Another example would be: The Mirror Crack'd from Side to Side. Sure we know that the first victim was ill when she met the murderess. But only Miss Marple has heard the name of the disease. Christie never mentions it before the very very end when everyting is told.

True, we don't know the name of the disease, but that would have given the game away completely. We know the victim was ill, and that she had to put makeup on her face to disguise her illness, so I don't think it's beyond guessing. Nowadays it's an even more well-known illness and well-known risk than it was when the story was written. And crucially, it's not the case that Miss Marple knows from the start and it's withheld from the reader - she doesn't know either, she has to make that intuitive leap before she checks it out. Christie's different in that regard from many other mystery writers (Conan Doyle springs to mind), who withhold essential facts before they reveal the solution so that there's no chance of even making an educated guess. Tobelia 08:09, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And other examples could be found.

Please list them. The only example I can think of is The Clocks (novel), and the detective's method of discovering the evidence is that book's gimmick.--Ellissound 01:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have read every Agatha Christie novel at least twice (except for one, which I am saving). I agree with Ellissound -The Clocks (novel) is the only time when Christie truly pulls the solution out of her hat. Both examples cited above -Murder on the Orient Express and The Mirror Crack'd from Side to Side- can be solved by a diligent reader. The Clocks cannot. fshepinc

Another thing could be said about the author: she was romantic! When she could add a love story to her story, she would do it. The examples are countless when Poirot helps a couple to fall in love or when the dark handsome man falls in love for the young rich woman.

This I agree with - several of the novels are thinly-disguised romance novels (Passenger to Frankfurt, Destination Unknown, among others). JennyRad 13:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Christie wrote several romance novels under a pen name.

Hound of Baskerville???

The article mentions "The Hound of Baskerville (twelve short mysteries) (1933)". This is probably a mistake - I think it ought to be "The Hound of Death (and other stories) (1933)". Binand

I agree. [[Why wikipedia will never work]]. fixed. Rich Farmbrough 17:31, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Mousetrap

IS it still running? Rich Farmbrough 23:21, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes :) Turnstep 14:46, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unhappy first marriage

Where did this statement about her first marriage being unhappy come from? From what I read in her Autobiography, it seemed to be quite a happy marriage until Christie left her. It has been a while since I read it, however. The Zaniak 07:04, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Agatha_Christie article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.
Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Agatha_Christie}} to this page. — LinkBot 00:52, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Picture

Can someone put Agatha`s picture on article?

Ten Little Niggers --> And Then There Were None

A well-meaning contributor recently moved the article Ten Little Niggers to And Then There Were None, on the argument that this is the "more common title" for the work. Certainly it gets more Google hits, but those are heavily weighted by the movie. Could the Christie experts on hand please weigh in at Talk:And Then There Were None? I'm sure the debate about "original title" vs. "most common title" vs. "offensive title" has been waged in other forums; we could use more input. Thanks! — Catherine\talk 23:04, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Books' pages - Stub Status

A large number of Christie's books have their own pages here on Wikipedia, but a significant proportion of them are classified as "stubs". While I'd be very willing (an able) to expand them with more plot detail, for example, it doesn't seem to me that the pages which are not classified as stubs are actually giving more detail. Consequently I'm hesitant to expend time filling out details which are not what Wikipedia is designed for. I'd appreciate a more experienced Wikipedian advising me on what details would be considered useful and/or interesting to "de-stub" these pages. (E.g. 4.50 from Paddington, which is a stub, as compared to The Sittaford Mystery, which is not.)

There are no hard and fast rules for what makes a "stub" and what doesn't - the tags are added at editors' whims. It can get a bit arbitrary. So add what material you think is pertinent and valuable and then remove the stub tab. My opinion is that except for a few of her most notable books, such as Murder of Roger Akeroyd (sp?) or Murder on the Orient Express, plot synopsis should be limited to just a couple of paragraphs; concnetrate on other information like whether a movie was made, or shared plot lines/secondary characters with other books. It's easy to get carried away with synopses, but we're not trying to be CliffNotes. - DavidWBrooks 02:51, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

US and alternative titles

As a lot of the books were published under alternative titles in the US, I've added a bunch of US titles to the list of works, using what seems to be the standard format "(also known as X)". I've also amended one of them (Taken at the Flood) so that the UK title comes first, for consistency. Is this OK? Tobelia 01:06, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

William Shakespeare?

"Agatha Christie is the world's best-known mystery writer and all-time best-selling author of any genre other than William Shakespeare."

I am not convinced 'William Shakespeare' is a genre of literature. Any objections to the change to "Agatha Christie is the world's best-known mystery writer and, apart from William Shakespeare, is the all-time best-selling author of any genre"? It does kind of lose some of its focus on Christie. --Mobda 18:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it ought to be changed to "Agatha Christie is one of the world's best-known mystery writer....... and apart from Shakespear and J K Rowling, all-time best-selling author of any genre?". I think this makes it more true and to-the-point. - user:Anandamatthur

I rolled it back, only because I can't find figures that Rowling's total sales, while mind-boggling, are anywhere near Christie's total sales. Can you point us to sales totals? - DavidWBrooks 00:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And having rolled it back, I rewrote the whole intro. Let's see what folks think. ... - DavidWBrooks 00:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Birthday

When was she born? 1890 or 1891? Older sources said 1891, newer ones say 1890. Is there a consensus now? Chvsanchez 07:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources I've come across say 1890, including my AC books and the official Christie website which is endorsed by her family. Tobelia 12:05, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage and Roman Catholicism

"In 1930, Christie married (despite her divorce) a Roman Catholic . . ."

Christie's divorce is what changed her marital status from married to single, so her divorce would in fact be a necessary prerequisite to her remarriage, not an impediment as the sentence implies. If the contributor who added that information is trying to indicate that Christie herself, Mallowan himself, Christie's family, Mallowan's family, the Catholic Church or the press/public had a specific problem with Christie marrying a Roman Catholic because of her divorce, then those objections need to be elucidated. If the contributor is just adding it to say that, in general, the Roman Catholic Church doesn't recognise divorce and doesn't allow its members to remarry after divorce, then it's original research and also, in the absence of it actually causing Christie a material problem, pretty much irrelevant. Binabik80 14:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this qualifies as original research. The Catholic Church's position on divorce is well known. It may be irrelevant, but I see no problem with the line's inclusion.--Ellissound 01:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
actually, it has nothing to do with her and all with him. it's his church that doesn't recognize intermarriage and divorcees getting married. to be married in the catholic church is far different than the legal kind. a marriage to them must be to another catholic and it is forever, barring the rare annulment. i have a feeling they did not have a religious marriage, in that case the parentheses are pointless.

External link

Hi, I would like to add an external link to the World of Biography entry

  • to this article. Does anybody have any objections?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jameswatt (talkcontribs) 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Note: This user has added similar requests to link to biographies hosted on the same site to about 50 different articles. Although I believe that these requests were made in good faith, adding the links to all of the articles would be spamming. In addition, the biographies tend to be not very insightful and/or minimally informative, and the webpages contain Google AdSense links.
A fuller explanation of my own opinion on these links can be found here, if anyone wishes to read it.
Hbackman 23:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christie in Fiction

Can anyone provide justification for the claim that a character in Anthony Berkeley's "The Poisoned Chocolates Case" is based on Christie? Having recently re-read it, I can't see any obvious reason to assume this, based purely on the text (nor for the similar suggestions for Sayers, Carr and Chesterton). Jon Rob 08:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a theory that the amateur detection club in "The Poisoned Chocolates" was based on the Detection Club, the mystery writer's club which many of those writers appear to have belonged to, but this seems unlikely as it doesn't bear much resemblance to the one in the novel. Besides, aren't there only two detective story writers in Berkeley's novel? One of them is also rumoured to be based on Berkeley himself. Tobelia 22:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As no-one has provided justification, I've deleted it. Jon Rob 07:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spoiler tag seems justified

I find the reason "she's a writer, not a narrative" cited by Chcknwnm insufficient justification for removing the spoiler tag. The following paragraph does contain spoilers which would not be expected by all readers. I have therefore reinstated the spoiler tag. My gut feeling is that Chcknwnm removed the tag based on a personal dislike of spoiler tags similar to that of Shanes. Of course, the alternative solution is to remove the spoilers, which probably would mean a major edit (castration?) of that paragraph. TheGoblin 20:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LibriVox Recording link

Just an FYI, I've removed the link to the LibriVox recording of Mysterious Affair at Styles due to there being a possible copyright conflict. LibriVox is working to resolve this and will repost the link if resolved. thistlechick 03:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Video Games section

The entry on And Then There Were None is unencyclopedic in tone - it reads like a press release. If anyone agrees with this, it should be re-written (by someone who knows something about the game) or deleted. Jon Rob 09:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Link - concerning the eleven days dissappearance.

The link

The Agatha Christie disappearance

does not currently work.  ????

24.13.28.158 02:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Charges of Racism

Many modern sources charge Agatha Christie with blatant anti-semitism and racism. Several of her novels have very strong anti-semitic comments (one example is Lord Edgware Dies), and the original title of And Then There Were None, Ten Little Niggers, has been the subject of much debate. I am surprised that this issue is not addressed in the main entry for Christie. Fshepinc 05:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps because similar charges can be made against most western authors of the same period. (They can, in fact, also be made against many non-western authors of the same period - we humans are a nasty lot - but English speakers rarely read those, so we don't know.) Compared to her contemporaries, Christie was extremely mild in this area. - DavidWBrooks 11:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, few - if any - other writers wrote anything like 'Racial Musings', an ode against miscegenation published in Poems.

The "anti-semitism" is usually in the form of references to "a touch of the Levant", oily hair, noses, etc., with the clear implication that these characters might well be Syrians or Lebanese or Turkish, and not just Jewish. "Ten Little Niggers" was the nursery rhyme that most of us learned as "Ten Little Indians", but since the Brits of that era considered people from India to be "niggers", the reference is racist, but not aimed at black people from Africa. Just a little context. Ortolan88 20:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I confess ignorance about the Poems reference - that does sound like something potentially worth mentioning. - DavidWBrooks 21:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Though I find the title "Ten Little Niggers" thoroughly objectionable, and it unpleasantly reflects the racism of the period, in itself it doesn't tell us anything specific about Christie's own racism. It's one of many examples of Christie using a well-known nursery rhyme of the time (like One, Two, Buckle My Shoe etc) to frame her story, rather than a comment about ethnicity - particularly since there are no black people (or indeed Indians) in the plot.
'Racial Musings' indeed sounds like quite another matter. I've never come across it either - probably the reason it's not mentioned is that nobody's heard of it. I believe it's out of print (maybe that poem is why). Tobelia 22:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How many novels?

I counted 66 novels in the works list in this very article, not 80. If you include the co-authored works, it comes to 69. Still far from 80. So where did 80 come from? Combining novels, co-authored works and short story collections makes it 90. So which do you want? I edited it to 66. If anyone can verify the amount of novels, and update the works list accordingly, go ahead, but we can't have such contradictions within one article. Trubadurix 01:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://uk.agathachristie.com/site/about_christie/queen_of_crime.php says "Agatha Christie wrote 80 novels and short story collections." I suspect this is where the number 80 came from. But still not correct, since that figure include the short story collections. And using the list of works in this article, combining short story collections comes to 87. So agathachristie.com is either wrong, or the works list is wrong.Trubadurix 14:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]