Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by shanaqui
The Mysterious Affair at Styles by Agatha Christie
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
For someone who loves Golden Age mysteries, I've read shockingly little of Agatha Christie's work. So when I had the random thought to try using the app Serial Reader again, the first serial I picked was Christie's The Mysterious Affair at Styles. In the past I haven't been the greatest fan of Poirot per se (while thinking that The Murder of Roger Ackroyd was pretty genius), and I can't say my mind was changed like a lightning bolt by this one.
Which is not to say it's not a fun mystery, but I disliked Hastings quite a bit. It's the whole trope of a helper to the detective, who is a lot less clever, draws wrong conclusions, and both leads the reader astray and bigs up the detective in comparison. It's a trend that started with Holmes and Watson (though Watson's cleverer than many of the type, including Hastings), and just... not one I particularly enjoy. Perhaps that's why, by and large, I prefer Sayers and Lorac.
Still, the solution is fun, and I enjoyed the read -- it's just inclined to make me think that Christie's enduring popularity is in part due to her sheer prolific output, and thus the memorability of her name. Lorac is, for my money, a better writer, and much less well-known.
This does come across as rather negative, evaluating the book by what it's not, but I find I have very little to say about the book in and of itself. It's a fun mystery, I didn't immediately see the solution, and if you're interested in the Golden Age of crime, it's definitely of interest.
Which is not to say it's not a fun mystery, but I disliked Hastings quite a bit. It's the whole trope of a helper to the detective, who is a lot less clever, draws wrong conclusions, and both leads the reader astray and bigs up the detective in comparison. It's a trend that started with Holmes and Watson (though Watson's cleverer than many of the type, including Hastings), and just... not one I particularly enjoy. Perhaps that's why, by and large, I prefer Sayers and Lorac.
Still, the solution is fun, and I enjoyed the read -- it's just inclined to make me think that Christie's enduring popularity is in part due to her sheer prolific output, and thus the memorability of her name. Lorac is, for my money, a better writer, and much less well-known.
This does come across as rather negative, evaluating the book by what it's not, but I find I have very little to say about the book in and of itself. It's a fun mystery, I didn't immediately see the solution, and if you're interested in the Golden Age of crime, it's definitely of interest.