Review: The ABC Murders (Agatha Christie)

A serial killer, who calls himself ABC, writes to Hercule Poirot before each murder telling of the time and place where the murder will take place. Poirot and the police start working together to catch the murderer, but they are unable to stop him on the first three occasions. The killer apparently has no motive and kills at random, based on the names of the people. He has killed Alice Ascher of Andover, Betty Barnard of Bexhill-on-Sea, and Sir Carmichael Clarke of Churston and the only connection between the murders is the first letter of the names of the victims and the places are in alphabetical order and beside each victim an ABC railway guide is found.

When Poirot receives the challenge for the 'D' murder, he teams up with the police and the friends and relatives of the first three victims to stop the killer at any cost. Even though they fail to prevent the murder, they manage to catch the killer, who is called Alexander Bonaparte Cust. He confesses to the crimes, but has no idea how or why he comitted them. Poirot's explanation of how a man could kill four people without knowing how he did it forms the ending of what is perhaps the best Hercule Poirot mystery I've read so far.

People who like to solve mystery themselves while they're reading are probably cursing me for mentioning the name of the killer in this review. Don't worry, that's not a spoiler. That name is mentioned right at the beginning of the book and we know all along who the main suspect is. Poirot is the one in the dark throughout this book.

Christie has deviated from her usual style here. Instead the "who did it?" aspect of the mystery, the psychology of the crime has been given more prominence. Usually it's the crime/clues/suspects/motive/alibi formula that is used. Here Poirot doesn't have any suspects and has to rely on understanding the mind of the murderer to prevent the next crime.

Another one of the reasons why I loved this book was because Poirot's famed little grey cells were really stretched to their limit and most of the time he looked totally helpless. Serves him right for ridiculing poor old Captain Hastings all the time. This is one of those rare occasions where Hastings' common sense comes in more useful than all of Poirot's little grey cells. ;-)

My Rating: 10/10.

Review: Silence of the Lambs (Thomas Harris)

"Thrillers don't come any better than this...", says Clive Barker from the back cover of this book. "A virtual textbook on the craft of suspense..." That one's from the Washington Post. Now, I'm not the one to judge a book from the blurbs on the back cover, but having read the book, I must admit that these words of praise are well deserved.

Less than three weeks ago, I finished Red Dragon, the first book of the Hannibal Series that introduced Dr. Hannibal Lecter. Then, I had written that although I didn't find the book outstanding, I still would love to read more from the author. Turns out that I was right. Silence of the Lambs is creepier than the first book, with another psychopath, Jame Gumb taking over from Francis Dolarhyde as the serial killer on the run. And I liked this one better than the first book.

Set ten years after the events of Red Dragon, Dr Lecter is still in his cell in the mental asylum, Jack Crawford is still running FBI's behavioral science unit, but Will Graham doesn't make a comeback. Curiously, the person who investigates the serial killings this time is a trainee, Clarice Starling -- which means you get to see a totally different approach to the investigations as compared to that of the highly experienced Graham. Starling's Nancy Drew-ish methods -- looking for clues, fingerprints, talking to experts -- contrasts sharply with those of Graham's -- less of legwork, more of thinking and getting the feel of the crime. Makes me kind of wonder if consulting Lecter would have been of any use in this case had he not known the identity of the murderer beforehand.

Apart from the style of the investigations, Harris has also changed the way he presents the killers. True, both of them have been shown as extremely evil. But in case of Dolarhyde, Harris explains the troubled childhood that changed him into a monster and there are times when you feel that he might yet give up his "Red Dragon" identity. Gumb is simply shown as a thoughtless killer, whose kind treatment of his pet dog is in sharp contrast with his cruelty towards other human beings -- he calls his dog as "precious" and "darling" while he calls his victims "it" and "that thing" -- which probably makes you hate him even more.

Hannibal Lecter was the character I was looking forward to seeing in this book. But yet again, as in Red Dragon, he is kept in the shadows for most part of the book, even as he manipulates everyone else around him. We are told almost nothing more about his background, which only increased my curiosity about this enigmatic character. And with him on the loose now (he escapes towards the end of the book), I can only expect the sequel, Hannibal, to be as interesting -- no, more interesting than the first two parts.

My Rating: 8/10.

Related Posts:

Red Dragon (Thomas Harris).

Other Reviews:

Between the Covers (Rating: A)

Review: Lord Edgware Dies (Agatha Christie)

The famous actress Jane Wilkinson keeps telling anyone who will listen that she'd like nothing better than to take a taxi to the house of her estranged husband, Lord Edgware, and murder him. She also pleads with Poirot to convince Lord Edgware to divorce her, only for Poirot to find that Edgware had already agreed to divorce. Soon after that Edgware is found murdered and many witnesses claim to have seen Jane Wilkinson actually taking a taxi to Edgware's house and meeting him. Poirot, unable to accept a straightforward solution to this case, starts looking for another explanation.

Poirot finds out that it was a young actress Carlotta Adams who took the taxi to Edgware's house and she was doing so to win a bet. But before he can ask her who challenged her for the bet, she's found dead. Another man, tries to speak to Poirot about his suspicions, but he too is murdered before Poirot can speak to him. Poirot has a nice cast of suspects here -- the wife who's declared that she wants to kill her husband, the nephew who inherits the uncle's property, the daughter who hated the father. And every single one of them has an excellent alibi.

I always try to guess the identity of the criminal when I'm reading an Agatha Christie mystery novel, but this time I was totally baffled. Every time I suspected someone, that person either died or disappeared. The murderer nearly got away, but luckily for Poirot, a remark made by a passer-by to his friend as they walk past Poirot on the road put him on the right track.

My Rating: 7/10

BTT: Let's Review

This week's BTT question (suggested by Puss Reboots):

How much do reviews (good and bad) affect your choice of reading? If you see a bad review of a book you wanted to read, do you still read it? If you see a good review of a book you’re sure you won’t like, do you change your mind and give the book a try?

Well, that depends. If I read a bad review of a book by one of my favorite authors, or a good one for an author I don't really like, I wouldn't take much notice of the review. But when it comes to newer authors, then reviews generally do influence my choice.

Usually, though, it's the other way round with me and reviews. I read reviews on blogs after I've finished reading the book so I can see how other people felt about the book. That way, there's no risk of coming across spoilers and I won't have unreasonably high (or low, in case it got bad reviews) expectations of the book. :-)

Review: The Fourth Protocol (Frederick Forsyth)

Kim Philby is a former British intelligence officer who defected to the Soviet Union in 1963 after he was revealed to have been spying for the KGB. Now a retired KGB officer, he prepares a memorandum for the General Secretary (or the Soviet president) about the possibility of formation of a Marxist-Leninist government in Britain after the general elections of 1987. Philby and the General Secretary then hatch Plan Aurora, which involves smuggling of a small atomic bomb into Britain and exploding it near a US air base to turn public support in favor of the Labour Party. Once the Labour Party is in power, the "hard left" faction in the party would take over from the moderate left leaders.

The "illegal" agent, Valeri Petrofsky is sent to Britain to accopmplish this mission and the parts of the bomb are sent by different couriers so that it can be assembled there. One of the couriers is attacked by thugs and taken to hospital where he decides to commit suicide to avoid questioning about the polonium disc that he was supposed to deliver to the Soviet agent. MI5 agent John Preston, who investigates the case finds that polonium is used in the initiator of an atomic bomb. Preston's search for Petrofsky forms the rest of the story.

The title of the book refers to the protocol of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (1968) that prohibits smuggling of atomic bombs or their parts into other countries and exploding them there. Like in most of his books, Forsyth blends facts with fiction to make the story sound credible. For example, Philby really did exist and the description of his life until the late 1960s is mostly accurate; the rest of it came from Forsyth's imagination.

In the style typical to Forsyth's books, a major portion of the book explains the working of the intelligence agencies involved (KGB, MI5 and MI6) and the politics that leads up to the plot. It is only towards the ending of the book that the pace quickens up a little and the biggest twists in the story are not revealed until the final few lines of the book.

My Rating: 7/10

Other Reviews:

Between the Covers (Rating: B)

Review: Poirot Investigates (Agatha Christie)

The problem with Poirot Investigates is that it takes away the whole point of reading a Hercule Poirot mystery. In a full length Poirot novel, Christie gives us all the clues we'll need to figure out the mystery. The challenge is to recognize these clues, sort out the "real" clues from the red herrings and find the answer before Poirot reveals it. But with a short story collection like this one, we hardly get any time to make up our minds about what's going on and before we know it, the story comes to an end.

One of the stories in this book, The Million Dollar Bond Robbery was what got me interested in Agatha Christie's books back in my school days. We had this reading excercise in which we were given the first half of the story which contains the background of the crime and Poirot's interrogation of all the suspects. By the end of the hour we had to write down whom we suspected and why, after which our teacher read out the last part of the story. The whole thing depended on whether or not we could read the significance of the reply of a suspect to one completely innocent looking question from Poirot. After that I started looking at Christie's books as on long puzzle with the clues scattered across the book. Most of the time I do get it wrong, but it's great fun to try and guess the ending while I'm reading the book.

Unfortunately, on reading the same story in this book, I found that the story we were given back in school was not the original. And worse, the original did not actually contain any clues about the crime. The clue was added into the story we were given in school so we could have a go at solving it. So much for the story that converted me into a Christie fan! :-( Most of the other stories in the collection too are like that; we have to wait until the end of the story to know the details of the crime. There's not much of a chance to solve the crime ourself.

This is the first Hercule Poirot book I've read that is narrated in first person by Poirot's friend, Captain Hastings. Until now, I have been seeing some similarities between Poirot and Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes. But with Hastings as his sidekick, Poirot's and Holmes' similarities become even more glaring. Extreme intelligence, incredible vanity and total lack of respect for his sidekick's intellingence makes Poirot look very much like Holmes. It makes me wonder if Agatha Christie wrote the Poirot/Hastings stories as a tribute to the Holmes/Watson mysteries.

My Rating: 4/10

Other Reviews:

The Relentless Pursuit of Cold Shivers (Rating: 3/5)

Yaaay!!! I'm done with my first book of the new year. Not very impressed with it, though. Now there's a bunch of Agatha Christies waiting to be read; all of them are narrated by Hastings. I hope they aren't as disappointing as this one.

BTT: May I Introduce... & Anticipation

This week's question from BTT:

1. How did you come across your favorite author(s)? Recommended by a friend? Stumbled across at a bookstore? A book given to you as a gift?
   
2. Was it love at first sight? Or did the love affair evolve over a long acquaintance?
   

My earliest favorite author was Enid Blyton. One of my cousins got me five Enid Blyton books when I was nine years old, and those were the first books that I read. And yes, it was love at first sight. I couldn't stop reading until I had finished all five books. Another author that I liked instantly was JK Rowling, and this time I was reading on a friend's recommendation. Others like Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie too fall into the love at first sight category.

There are a lot of authors that I didn't immediately like but over time they have become favorites, John Grisham and Sidney Sheldon, for example. They're authors that I came across in the library and although I didn't like their books immediately, now they are among my favorite authors.

I missed last week's BTT question, so here it is:

What new books are you looking forward to most in 2008? Something new being published this year? Something you got as a gift for the holidays? Anything in particular that you’re planning to read in 2008 that you’re looking forward to? A classic, or maybe a best-seller from 2007 that you’re waiting to appear in paperback?

I hardly ever read according to a plan, so there aren't too many books that I'm specifically looking forward to. But if I were to mention one book that's being realeased this year that I'm looking forward to, that will be The Solomon Key, Dan Brown's next book. I loved his first four books, and am hoping this one's as good as the others.

I also came across an Excel spreadsheet containing the list, 1001 Books You Must Read Before you Die here. It's a list taken from the book of the same name by Peter Boxall. I've read 20 books from the list, and according to the spreadsheet I must read 18 books a year if I want to finish all the books there. Maybe I'll try to read a few books from that list this year.

BTT: Highlights of 2007

This week's question from Booking Through Thursday:

What were your favorite books this year?

Apart from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, there was one other book I read this year that might make it to my all time favorites list -- The Rule of Four by Ian Caldwell and Dustin Thomason. There were a few other books that I really liked, but nothing that I would call really outstanding. Here's a list of ten books I liked best this year. Last week's meme was about books that were published in 2007, so I'm assuming this one's not restricted to 2007 books. (Other than HP7, none of these books were published last year.)

1. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, by J. K. Rowling


2. The Rule of Four, by Ian Caldwell, Dustin Thomason


3. Chasing Cezanne, by Peter Mayle


4. Icon, by Frederick Forsyth


5. Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption, by Stephen King


6. Jurassic Park, by Michael Crichton


7. Three Act Tragedy, by Agatha Christie


8. The Other Side of Me, by Sidney Sheldon


9. N or M?, by Agatha Christie


10. The Guardian, by Nicholas Sparks

So what were your favorite books this year? And did any of these books make it to your list? Please do leave a comment.

Best of 2007: The Nominees

Last Thursday, Booking Through Thursday asked for nominations for the best fiction and non-fiction books published in 2007. I've been going through the nominations in the blogs that have replied. Most people (including me) don't usually read books the year they were published so many good books might be missing from these nominations. Anyway I've put together a list of books that were nominated more than once in the fiction category. There weren't many nominations in non-fiction, and there wasn't even a single book that got more than one nomination. Here are the lists:

Fiction

Forty one people have made 125 nominations in the fiction category with ninety six different books. Of these books, only fifteen books were nominated more than once and only three got nominated more than twice. The most nominated book was... Did I hear you shout Harry Potter? No points for guessing that one. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was nominated by ten people. (Where's my prize for being the first one to nominate Harry?) [grins] Six people nominated A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini and four nominations went to Eclipse by Stephanie Meyers. To list all the books that were nominated will take too much time, so I'm putting up the list of the books that got two or more nominations:

1. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J. K. Rowling (10 nominations)


2. A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini (6 nominations)


3. Eclipse by Stephanie Meyers (4 nominations)




Each of these books were nominated twice:




4. Blood Bound by Patricia Briggs


5. The Blood of Flowers by Anita Amirrezvani


6. Dangerous Games by Lora Leigh


7. Dead of the Day by Karen E Olson


8. Extras by Scott Westerfeld


9. Ice Blue by Anne Stuart


10. Ice Storm by Anne Stuart


11. Lean Mean Thirteen by Janet Evanovich


12. Lord John and the Brotherhood of the Blade by Diana Gabaldon


13. Nineteen Minutes by Jodi Picoult


14. Season of the Witch by Natasha Mostert


15. The Uncommon Reader by Alan Bennett

Non Fiction

Only twenty one people gave nominations in the non-fiction category. Twenty five nominations were made and all of them were for different books. Here's the list of the books:

1. Chrysalis by Kim Todd


2. The Complete Polysyllabic Spree by Nick Hornby


3. Eat Pray Love by Elizabeth Gilbert


4. Flower Confidential by Amy Stewart


5. The Gift by Lewis Hyde


6. Have You Found Her: A Memoir by Janice Erlbaum


7. I Am America (And So Can You!) by Stephen Colbert


8. Long Way Gone by Ishmael Beah


9. Louder Than Words, A Mother's Journey in Healing Autism


10. Mosaic by Amy Grant


11. Mountains So Sublime by Terry Abraham


12. Other Colours by Orhan Pamuk


13. Paula Deen: It Ain't All About the Cookin' by Paula Deen and Sherry Suib Cohen


14. Persian Girls by Nahid Rachlin


15. Pies and Prejudice by Stuart Maconie


16. The Places In Between by Rory Stewart


17. Plato and a Platypus Walk into a Bar by Thomas Catchart and Daniel Klein


18. Proust was a Neuroscientist by Jonah Lehrer


19. Rainbow's End: A Memoir of Childhood, War, and an African Farm by Lauren St. John


20. The Reagan Diaries by Ronald Reagan


21. Taking Things Seriously by Joshua Glen, Carol Hayes


22. Three Cups of Tea by Greg Mortenson and David Relin


23. The Verneys by Adrian Tinniswood


24. The Weather Makers: How Man Is Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth by Tim Flannery


25. Wildwood by Roger Deakin

How many books published in 2007 have you read? And how many of them do you think will make it to your all time favorites list? Do you see any really interesting books missing from the lists? Do leave a comment here, or a link to your reply if you've already answered the meme in your blog.

BTT: Best of 2007

I don't know why I'm doing this week's BTT. I've read only one fiction book published in 2007 so far and non-fiction isn't something I usually read.

1. What fiction book (or books) would you nominate to be the best new book published in 2007?


2. What non-fiction book (or books) would you nominate to be the best new book published in 2007?


3. And, do "best of" lists influence your reading?

Best fiction book is easy enough for me. Being an incurable Potter fan(atic), I would have suggested Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows anyway. And with that book being the only one published in 2007 that I read, there aren't any other nominees. I'll skip the best non-fiction book nominations, because I haven't read any.

Do "best of" lists influence me? I think they do. I usually pick books at random from the library, but if I find a book for which I've seen a lot of good reviews, there's a better chance that I'll pick it up.