I feel there was a big hint of who the killer was when Rogers played the record. It sounded like an accusation and sentencing that you might hear in a court of law...
Potential clues that point towards Wargrave: 1. His death doesn’t really make sense, he was supposedly shot but nobody heard a gunshot. 2. During internal Monologue Scenes if you’re following along with who’s speaking Wargrave isn’t trying to piece the crime together like the others, he’s judging and analyzing the others.
It was a high achievement to be able just to pull it off. What stuck in my mind was how the assembled company became decreasingly human as it dwindled. The tricky part seemed how much got packed into the early portion of the second full day and then time began crawling.
This was the best review I heard so far on this book and thank you Mike because this video helped me with my thesis on Agatha Christie. I owe you a lot for this ^_^
This is an excellent review. I'm a HUGE Christie fan ,and I enjoyed your breakdown very much. I especially agree on two points, the mark of Cain business (and this isn't the only book she uses it in), and Lombard. If you enjoy adaptations, I highly recommend the 2015 BBC version. Fairly true to the book (unlike the one from the 40s, which mucked things all up!), fixed a few plot holes (among other things, Lombard's degree of guilt and Blore's means of death). It's here on UA-cam (three parts), if you don't feel like tracking it down. I look forward to your other reviews!
Thanks so much! And thanks for that suggestion -- I've been enjoying movie adaptations of Christie's works lately, but I haven't watched one for this book yet.
@@mikegseclecticreads You're welcome! As disappointing as the previous adaptations were (understatement), I was a little reluctant to watch the BBC one--and I'm so glad I took the chance. It only made a handful of changes (mostly in the form of making the past crimes much less ambiguous), and all but one of those changes (I felt) worked beautifully. Enjoy!
Just finished reading it and I believe I’ve found my favourite Agatha Christie’s work. I had so many theories. I had my money on Wargrave but then he died and my theories were way off from that point on 😂
Good review. I suspected probably all of them. 😂 My reason for suspecting Wargrave was unconventional. It was his first name. Justice. 😂 And the fact that he was a judge. I really enjoyed this book. The only thing I'll say is that I thought that the whole plan of Wargrave required a bit too much luck for my taste. I mean it could've failed at any point. Yet, despite that, it went smoothly. For example, how could he have known that Blore was gonna leave alone and that Vera was gonna shoot Lombard? Other than that, I think it was a really good book! I also liked the idea of the poem. I thought that the idea was creative.
Wargrave's first name was Lawrence, not Justice. I found the following information: "The judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, and the judges of the supreme courts of several US states and other countries are called "justices". Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States and Justices of other courts are addressed as "Justice (name)"." The judge's complete name was Lawrence John Wargrave.
I thought about this. Blore might have required a little luck, but I think Wargrave won the moment that gun fired. If Lombard had killed Vera, then what would have happened to him? He would have hanged.
The BBC 2015 adaptation is a) freaking excellent and b) adjusts Blore's death to be FAR more believable. I actually think Agatha is floating around somewhere, slapping her forehead and saying, "Ugh! That would have worked!" Even better, it's available on UA-cam. Highly recommend.
Nice review! Just finished reading it right now, it was the first Christie’s novel that I read and I really enjoyed it. Very suspenseful for sure. One thing that didn’t convince me was the supposed alliance between Wargrave and Armstrong...
Glad you enjoyed it! Yeah, Armstrong was kind of a loose cannon. I couldn't really ever tell what he was thinking, especially with that weird dream he was having early-ish in the story
Towards the end but way before the reveal , I did have a hunch that it was Wargrave. That's because, the murderer knew about the crimes of all these people so it would have to be someone they have in common or a 'judge' who knew about their cases. But when he got shot down , so did my theory !!! 😅
The first time I read this novel I forgot to care who was behind it, I was so caught up in the spookiness of it all. The last 3 deaths are incredibly suspenseful. It was a bit of a let-down to find out how it was done. I appreciate the reveal at the end more now that I know, for some reason.
Thanks for the review ! I just finished reading it and to be honest I would have loved it more if the identity of the killer had remained unknown ! The atmosphere and the suspense were just so good that I didn't mind not knowing who the killer was at the end and I also suspected Dr Armstrong (he seemed during the whole time sus) !
@@fkd1963 i have already read the book before watching this video so i knew about the spoilers of the ending !! i just shared my opinion about the reveal of the mystery after finishing reading the book .
Great review.. i just finished the book while reading the only thing i suspected was that someone faked his death just because the story is so iconic and has inspired many works and i've previously watched a movie with the same plot but i never suspected wargrave
I knew the killer from the start. Once the plot is revealed via the recording, they acted just as the alleged host, U.N. Owen, should have done. None of the others was anywhere clever enough to have orchestrated a cookout, let alone this complicated sequence of stagecraft. As typical with Christie, it's necessary to arm-wave some of the detailed logistics of the murder methods along the way. We need to take it as read that the culprit somehow managed to skulk about undetected like a genie and literally execute all plot details. Not the least of those is the breaking of the series of figurines in a central room of the mansion at the apt times. The various adaptations on film and television that give viewers a more redeeming ending are not to be taken seriously. Without delving deeply into the socially troubling text of Christie's original publication, this work deserves to be taken as it was -- warts and all -- without any well-intentioned rewrites to fix Christie's toxic social venom.
Forgive me, but your entire review seems focused on figuring out the mystery, which is surely in the long run the least compelling part of the book. It has some very powerful themes you don't even address. Lombard btw left multiple people to starve to death, thus he qualifies as a mass murderer who frankly feels zero guilt about any of the human beings he set up to die slowly and horribly. Yeah, no wonder the deliberate child murderer is seen as the only one more evil, more guilty (but then, killing non-whites was not considered "that bad" at the time of the book's writing--and its original title as well as the original nursery rhyme were both very, very racist, and I believe deliberately so). And I've always thought the biggest clue of all was that the murderer was a JUDGE.
Yeah that's a great point, more than her other books I think in this one you have to really appreciate the overall experience rather than just hunting down all the clues. And Christie is excellent at exploring broader themes in subtle ways like you mentioned. I hadn't reflected too deeply myself about the original title of the book, but now you mention it I am curious to explore what she was trying to do there. Thanks for the comment.
Ooh, this is very interesting. I’m a big Christie fan, but it never occurred to me that the original title was chosen deliberately to underscore themes of racism. Why do you think that’s the case?
@@haggisa Because Christie actually had a keen sense of how racist so many people were and are. Look at how Poirot is routinely viewed with suspicion or his ideas dismissed. And the mundane way Lombard's murders are dismissed by the others, even though U.N.Owen clearly thought him almost as bad as a child murderer.
@@mikegseclecticreads In that case, his voice could be recognized among the guests and if it is a man's voice, the two women could be eliminated as suspects once it is determined that one of the guests is the killer.
@@renzo6490 Wargrave had the record produced by an advertising / theatrical company. They were told it was for a play that was being produced. So it wasnt him speaking! Just finished it a moment ago, really loved the thrills and tension but I agree with Mike G that I never could have guessed the killer based on the clues.
Interesting that you weren't absolutely in love with this one. This was one of her books ("The Murder of Roger Aykroyd " is another one for me) that blew me away when I read it as a child but was less thrilled with on a recent reread. The book does have a sustained sense of dread but I found it rather repellent.
![The Paradox of Vigilante Justice in Agatha Christie’s ‘And Then There Were None’ [Video Essay]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/c1IDkG3Ca60/mqdefault.jpg)
I feel there was a big hint of who the killer was when Rogers played the record. It sounded like an accusation and sentencing that you might hear in a court of law...
Exactly.
Potential clues that point towards Wargrave:
1. His death doesn’t really make sense, he was supposedly shot but nobody heard a gunshot.
2. During internal Monologue Scenes if you’re following along with who’s speaking Wargrave isn’t trying to piece the crime together like the others, he’s judging and analyzing the others.
exactly he's too calm
Exactly!
It was a high achievement to be able just to pull it off. What stuck in my mind was how the assembled company became decreasingly human as it dwindled. The tricky part seemed how much got packed into the early portion of the second full day and then time began crawling.
This was the best review I heard so far on this book and thank you Mike because this video helped me with my thesis on Agatha Christie. I owe you a lot for this ^_^
That's awesome! Sounds like a really cool thesis :)
This is an excellent review. I'm a HUGE Christie fan ,and I enjoyed your breakdown very much.
I especially agree on two points, the mark of Cain business (and this isn't the only book she uses it in), and Lombard.
If you enjoy adaptations, I highly recommend the 2015 BBC version. Fairly true to the book (unlike the one from the 40s, which mucked things all up!), fixed a few plot holes (among other things, Lombard's degree of guilt and Blore's means of death). It's here on UA-cam (three parts), if you don't feel like tracking it down.
I look forward to your other reviews!
Thanks so much! And thanks for that suggestion -- I've been enjoying movie adaptations of Christie's works lately, but I haven't watched one for this book yet.
@@mikegseclecticreads You're welcome! As disappointing as the previous adaptations were (understatement), I was a little reluctant to watch the BBC one--and I'm so glad I took the chance.
It only made a handful of changes (mostly in the form of making the past crimes much less ambiguous), and all but one of those changes (I felt) worked beautifully. Enjoy!
Just finished reading it and I believe I’ve found my favourite Agatha Christie’s work.
I had so many theories. I had my money on Wargrave but then he died and my theories were way off from that point on 😂
Yeah it definitely threw me for a loop when the people I most suspected kept dying!
Good review.
I suspected probably all of them. 😂 My reason for suspecting Wargrave was unconventional. It was his first name. Justice. 😂 And the fact that he was a judge.
I really enjoyed this book. The only thing I'll say is that I thought that the whole plan of Wargrave required a bit too much luck for my taste. I mean it could've failed at any point. Yet, despite that, it went smoothly.
For example, how could he have known that Blore was gonna leave alone and that Vera was gonna shoot Lombard? Other than that, I think it was a really good book! I also liked the idea of the poem. I thought that the idea was creative.
Wargrave's first name was Lawrence, not Justice. I found the following information: "The judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, and the judges of the supreme courts of several US states and other countries are called "justices". Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States and Justices of other courts are addressed as "Justice (name)"." The judge's complete name was Lawrence John Wargrave.
@@alejandragarciagonzalezmez5046 I see... Thanks for clarifying.
I thought about this. Blore might have required a little luck, but I think Wargrave won the moment that gun fired. If Lombard had killed Vera, then what would have happened to him?
He would have hanged.
The BBC 2015 adaptation is a) freaking excellent and b) adjusts Blore's death to be FAR more believable. I actually think Agatha is floating around somewhere, slapping her forehead and saying, "Ugh! That would have worked!"
Even better, it's available on UA-cam. Highly recommend.
Nice review! Just finished reading it right now, it was the first Christie’s novel that I read and I really enjoyed it. Very suspenseful for sure. One thing that didn’t convince me was the supposed alliance between Wargrave and Armstrong...
Glad you enjoyed it! Yeah, Armstrong was kind of a loose cannon. I couldn't really ever tell what he was thinking, especially with that weird dream he was having early-ish in the story
Towards the end but way before the reveal , I did have a hunch that it was Wargrave. That's because, the murderer knew about the crimes of all these people so it would have to be someone they have in common or a 'judge' who knew about their cases. But when he got shot down , so did my theory !!! 😅
That's pretty good, better than I did!
The first time I read this novel I forgot to care who was behind it, I was so caught up in the spookiness of it all. The last 3 deaths are incredibly suspenseful. It was a bit of a let-down to find out how it was done. I appreciate the reveal at the end more now that I know, for some reason.
i think the whole point was for us to be surprised and for us not to figure out.
Thanks for the review !
I just finished reading it and to be honest I would have loved it more if the identity of the killer had remained unknown !
The atmosphere and the suspense were just so good that I didn't mind not knowing who the killer was at the end and I also suspected Dr Armstrong (he seemed during the whole time sus) !
Oooh that's an interesting take! I hadn't thought about that as a possible ending
you are told from the start that there will be spoilers. who told you to listen?
@@fkd1963 i have already read the book before watching this video so i knew about the spoilers of the ending !! i just shared my opinion about the reveal of the mystery after finishing reading the book .
I’ve just finished reading this one and have now started “ CURTAINS “ . I have acquired 40 of her novels and am steadily get through them
Ooh nice, that's the last Poirot one right? That's more or less my goal too.
@@mikegseclecticreads
Yes it’s the last one, I’m reading my favourite ones first rather than in order . Murder at the vicarage is next.
@@lisaroberts8135 That one I have read -- definitely a good one!
by the way armstrong was in cahoots with wargrave and both of them planned his faked death than wargrave betrays him.
Nice! I only just read this a few months ago
I guessed who it was early on in the book.. still didn't know how he did it till the end though.
Great review.. i just finished the book while reading the only thing i suspected was that someone faked his death just because the story is so iconic and has inspired many works and i've previously watched a movie with the same plot but i never suspected wargrave
Good review I enjoyed the recent BBC version of this story also I wonder if the Dr Armstrong is related to Daisy Armstrong ?
I knew the killer from the start. Once the plot is revealed via the recording, they acted just as the alleged host, U.N. Owen, should have done. None of the others was anywhere clever enough to have orchestrated a cookout, let alone this complicated sequence of stagecraft. As typical with Christie, it's necessary to arm-wave some of the detailed logistics of the murder methods along the way. We need to take it as read that the culprit somehow managed to skulk about undetected like a genie and literally execute all plot details. Not the least of those is the breaking of the series of figurines in a central room of the mansion at the apt times.
The various adaptations on film and television that give viewers a more redeeming ending are not to be taken seriously. Without delving deeply into the socially troubling text of Christie's original publication, this work deserves to be taken as it was -- warts and all -- without any well-intentioned rewrites to fix Christie's toxic social venom.
Great point about the complexity of the orchestration being itself a clue, I hadn't fully picked up on that
Great review!!
Thanks for watching!
Forgive me, but your entire review seems focused on figuring out the mystery, which is surely in the long run the least compelling part of the book. It has some very powerful themes you don't even address. Lombard btw left multiple people to starve to death, thus he qualifies as a mass murderer who frankly feels zero guilt about any of the human beings he set up to die slowly and horribly. Yeah, no wonder the deliberate child murderer is seen as the only one more evil, more guilty (but then, killing non-whites was not considered "that bad" at the time of the book's writing--and its original title as well as the original nursery rhyme were both very, very racist, and I believe deliberately so).
And I've always thought the biggest clue of all was that the murderer was a JUDGE.
Yeah that's a great point, more than her other books I think in this one you have to really appreciate the overall experience rather than just hunting down all the clues. And Christie is excellent at exploring broader themes in subtle ways like you mentioned. I hadn't reflected too deeply myself about the original title of the book, but now you mention it I am curious to explore what she was trying to do there. Thanks for the comment.
Ooh, this is very interesting. I’m a big Christie fan, but it never occurred to me that the original title was chosen deliberately to underscore themes of racism. Why do you think that’s the case?
@@haggisa Because Christie actually had a keen sense of how racist so many people were and are. Look at how Poirot is routinely viewed with suspicion or his ideas dismissed. And the mundane way Lombard's murders are dismissed by the others, even though U.N.Owen clearly thought him almost as bad as a child murderer.
Very Good review
One of the classics. IMO, The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is the first Christie classic. Sorry, Mike.
I think Lombard was a lot worse than anyone else, just because he caused so many deaths and because he's just *so* racist about it.
Does the speaker on the record self identify as U.N. Owen?
I think he does, that's the only place the name is mentioned explicitly as far as I can remember
@@mikegseclecticreads
In that case, his voice could be recognized among the guests and if it is a man's voice, the two women could be eliminated as suspects once it is determined that one of the guests is the killer.
@@renzo6490 Wargrave had the record produced by an advertising / theatrical company. They were told it was for a play that was being produced. So it wasnt him speaking! Just finished it a moment ago, really loved the thrills and tension but I agree with Mike G that I never could have guessed the killer based on the clues.
@@lkvideorang : Thanks for clearing that up.
Interesting that you weren't absolutely in love with this one. This was one of her books ("The Murder of Roger Aykroyd " is another one for me) that blew me away when I read it as a child but was less thrilled with on a recent reread. The book does have a sustained sense of dread but I found it rather repellent.