Wednesday, April 21, 2021

Deceptions: Christie'sTaken At The Flood

 


Agatha Christie. Taken at the Flood (1948) In postwar England, the Cloade clan dislikes the widow of their rich relative Gordon, whose death in the Blitz deprives them of the money they had come to expect. A stranger appears with news of Robert Underhay, the widow’s first husband, supposedly still alive after all. Which would make her marriage to Gordon invalid, and so relieve the Cloades of their financial difficulties. The stranger turns up dead with a nasty bash to the back of the head. Poirot’s involved because Mrs Philip Cloade had asked him to find Underhay a week or so prior to the murder. 
     The usual complications ensue, and we are treated to nicely done puzzle but an uncharacteristically muddled narrative. The novel I think began as a romance about a returning WREN and her stodgy suitor, etc. The murder puzzle had to be solved somehow, the Inspector charged with the inquiry could have done it all, but I suppose Christie knew that inserting Poirot would satisfy her fans. So that’s what she did. Or so it seems to me. 
     The 2006 TV adaptation with David Suchet as Poirot offers a more coherent and nuanced tale. A couple of major differences reshape the plot so that it flows more naturally from the characters’ passions and flaws. Poirot is presented as the godparent of a major player. A couple of major plot points are completely changed, for the better I think. At any rate, I reread the book after watching the show, which paid more attention to the widening stain of evil, and how fate is the name we give to accident and coincidence. ** for the book, *** for the video.
     The book cover above will make sense only if you read the book.

No comments:

Time (Some rambling thoughts)

 Time 2024-12-08 to 11  Einstein’s Special Relativity (SR) says that time is one of the four dimensions of spacetime. String theory claims t...