Book Club

Non-Series Novels & Stories

For those of you wanting to discuss Agatha Christie's standalone books, such as And Then There Were None. 

Beware spoilers and remember we'll be able to add the most insightful comments to the stories section. 

If you can't find your favourite one, don't worry, we'll be adding them in the coming weeks.

Warning: These discussions may contain spoilers!

Ordeal by Innocence

Moderator1 16 Nov 09 at 11:41 a.m. GMT

Jacko Argyle was convicted of the brutal murder of his mother and died in prison.  But the return to England of geophysicist Arther Calgary shows that Jacko was in fact innocent.  In that case who was the murderer?  The case must be opened again and the family all come under suspicion.  But not all the family seem to care about finding out the truth.  What are the Argyle family hiding?

Is Arthur Calgary the right person for Christie to have chosen to investigate in this book?  Is it a clever story?  Would it have made a good case for Poirot?

Login or register to add posts and reply

35 replies

Reverse order

MissQuin 20 Dec 09 at 1:32 p.m. GMT

Spoilers: It got off to a slow start but I really enjoyed Ordeal by innocence.  The solution is a very simple, but effective one. The characters personalities are explored in greater depth than most of the Poirot stories. I dont think that Poirot could have replaced Dr Arthur Calgary, as Poirot would have to have given Jacko a lift, also Poirot would end up marrying Hester!!

Puffinjill 28 Dec 09 at 8:26 a.m. GMT

It would indeed have been difficult to have Poirot in the book instead of Arthur Calgary. The main detecting character had to be absent from the country for a couple of years in a place where newspapers were non-existant so he could not have intervened earlier. However much Poirot liked travel, I can't see him going to the Arctic or any other difficult and remote spot that cut him off from society altogether! Even if he HAD been the one to give Jacko a lift and then get a clump on the head followed by concusion, once recovered he would read of the arrest and trial and act sooner.

No, no - this is a fantastic stand-alone book, with a well spun story, that didn't need any of the more recognisable faces within it's pages to make it work. It's very heavily character-lead and she uses the device of a family made up of very different adopted children very, very well. It's certainly one I would recommend and I know it's one that AC herself thought highly of.

Read more about this story: Ordeal By Innocence

Nofret 28 Dec 09 at 4:19 p.m. GMT

This was one of the books that most satisfied its creator, and Dame Agatha drew a convincing picture of the family once again torn apart by the murder in their midst.

 However, the end of the book leaves me unsatisfied - the question I keep asking myself is this - Jacko was an unprincipled little beast who killed his foster mother for a few pounds. When his alibi failed to surface at his trial, and he was convicted, don't you think that a little worm like him would have turned round and implicated his co-conspirator, and taken her down with him? Or am I missing something?

MissQuin 29 Dec 09 at 12:03 p.m. GMT

Nofret, I think that Jacko was such an arrogant character, he would have always thought that Kirsten who loved him, would come forward and save him. He didnt know she had found out that he was already married. It might have been hard for Jacko to prove that Kirsten had anything to do with the murders. It seems he died before he could take any action.

Attica76 03 Jan 10 at 3:56 p.m. GMT

Jacko's silence also puzzled me in this otherwise excellent story. Nofret, I also think that he would have come clean about him and Kirsten, but may be the punishment would have been harsher - he would have been executed rather than jailed for life. Perhaps he hoped the witness would come forward eventually (as he actually did), or there would be an appeal or something.

aquaflute 31 Jan 10 at 10:04 p.m. GMT

I read the book and later watched the Marple series that is loosely based on the same story. I had to say that introducing Marple in this story as Gwenda's friend actually worked very well in the beginning. But the story went so bad when they decided to change so many aspects of the original. The whole suspensions between Leo and Gwenda, Tina and Micky, Mary and Philip were all extremely poorly conducted. And that Bobby character was useless. Not to mention they removed the lovely little romance between Calgary and Hester. In two words: "extremely dissappointed" by the TV adaption.

Back to topic, I just read both Crooked House and this book, I can easily see why AC was most satisfied by these two books. None of the killing method was too complicated, but the sins in both books were so well hidden and it takes a very sharp mind to see through the mist of all could-be murderers and find the true murderer. It's kind of unlike the other books and much more characters exploration in both cases. Interestingly neither of her famous sleuths appeared in these 2 books, that did gave other characters more developments in both cases. All in all these 2 are not just AC's favorites, but also my favorites! 

MissQuin 04 Feb 10 at 3:50 p.m. GMT

aquaflute- I thought Ordeal by Innocence got off to a great start. The first half hour was excellent. Burn Gorman who played Jacko was made for the part. All of the acting was very good except the ones playing Micky and Tina. They were either over acting or wooden. I dont think Bobby was in the book was he? I'm pretty sure he wasnt. The actor played him ok, but he was a spare part that wasnt needed as you say.

I felt that things went downhill after Marple arrived. There was a cringeworthy scene where Marple and Gwenda picking a lock and giggling! The tone Of the OBI bbok is a sombre one, so I can see they might try for a bit of humour. But that is one of my least favourite parts in Marple ever!

Gwenda was murdered whilst wearing her wedding dress, which was heartrending and I wanted her to have a happy ending with Leo. She didnt die in the book. But Richard Armitage's characater is the one who shouldve been killed, but wasnt!

HeiseiHolmes 04 Feb 10 at 4:31 p.m. GMT

I'm trying to read this now, but I can't get around to it... I also think it starts slowly. Every time, I say to myself: "The only one I have left to read! (that I own) Come on, you can do it..." But then I get distracted and completely forget it. It's frustrating, because I want to be able to enjoy it, if you know what I mean... I'm not great at expressing my thoughts.

MissQuin 04 Feb 10 at 9:28 p.m. GMT

Iknow what you men Conan, Ive had books that I havnt been able to finnish. I might not be in the mood. I just put them away for a few days (or weeks) then go back when I feel like reading it. After all, theres no hurry or preasure to read them at our lesuire!

HeiseiHolmes 26 Feb 10 at 4:28 p.m. GMT

I FINALLY finished it! It was really slow at the beginning but the end was great. I felt the character of Tina was my favourite and got all worried when she was stabbed. Towards the end the pace really picked up and it became far more dramatic... I loved it!

MissQuin 28 Feb 10 at 10:47 a.m. GMT

I really enjoyed this one, the end was excellent. I thought it was shocking that Tina was stabbed, I hoped she'd recover. It just shows the killer was really desperate.

In the TV programme Tina and Philip werent stabbed, instead Gwenda was! That was even sadder as she died, I wanted her to marry Leo. I don't think they should have changed it at all.

Nofret 24 Mar 10 at 4:45 p.m. GMT

Yes, I agree, there seemed no reason for the TV adaptation to make these changes. Actually, in doing so they removed what could have been a great dramatic scene - where Tina, although she had been stabbed by the murderer, still manages to walk out of the house and into the garden, and also that significant clue "the cup was empty!"

Also, I felt that lovely, bubbly Camille Coduri was miscast as the older woman who Jacky had conned out of her savings. In the book she was a plain, dowdy middle-aged woman, making his betrayal of her so much sadder.

MissQuin 24 Mar 10 at 4:52 p.m. GMT

I thought that Mrs Argyle was far too glamourous. She was just wrapped up in running other peoples lives in the book, I don't think she was fussy about her appearance.

Strangely I thought it was a good apatation to start with. I just think Burn Gorman was made to play Jacko In fact he was too good, he outshone alot of the others.  I didn't think about the older woman too much, I had kind of lost interest by that stage. But I just think Jacko made her feel younger. I just felt Geraldine McEwan was out of place, i fact anyone playing Miss M would have been.

Lone_Wolf 24 Mar 10 at 5:14 p.m. GMT

I was initially meh about that book, but the phsychology of the disfunctional Argyle family slowly grows on me.

The character that annoyed me the most was Phillip Durrant. I realized he was a goner quite soon, and was annoyed with him for not realizing the fact (since he was supposed to be quite smart). Although him wanting to bring some excitement in his life somewhat makes sense, considering his active past and his smothering wife.

AndreaWilkins 25 Mar 10 at 10:08 a.m. GMT

I saw the television adaptation and didn't really enjoy it - i haven't really enjoyed many of the new adaptations, some are ok but no more that that. I watched Nemesis with Geraldine Mekewan(prob spelt name wrong lol) and that was a big disappointment!! I don't think that they should be able to distroy stories like that, it's not AC at all  

MissQuin 25 Mar 10 at 4:47 p.m. GMT

I don't know anyone who liked McEwan nemesis. The nuns are the butt of many jokes on here.

As I said Ordeal by Innocence started well, then it just became dull when Marple appeared. I hate that lock picking scene so much! Ordeal By Marple.

The McEwans' are a mixed bag. I enjoy the first series with body in library, murder is announced, vicarage. If I think of them as different to the books, I can enjoy them. But the later ones were too annoying. The Hickson nemesis is v good.

HeiseiHolmes 25 Mar 10 at 4:50 p.m. GMT

Yeah! I don't see how they can just think, "Well, here's a TINY change- what about we replace these people with nuns, and add some more lesbians?" It totally ruins the mood of the book!

MissQuin 25 Mar 10 at 4:53 p.m. GMT

Thankfully, no one sexuality was altered in Ordeal. I was watching Hickson At Bertam's hotel, there were 2 nuns at the beguining, as background people! I wondered if with some Marples, they didnt read the book, just watched the Hickson's and adapted them from there.

HeiseiHolmes 25 Mar 10 at 4:59 p.m. GMT

I didn't think the Miss Marple version of this was too bad, but the changes were very confusing. Also, the lock picking scene was ridiculous. And I don't think Arthur Calgary would have been quite so stupid...

MissQuin 25 Mar 10 at 5:06 p.m. GMT

Was Arthur the doctor? He did provide some light humour, he was quite nervous so I think he messed up. He I though he was quite sweet, but he wasnt anything like the books character. Compared to the other very  bright and glossy Marple's, this one had less humour, more dark. It could have been good, but it just went so badly wrong.

I just don't think this was the right for Marple. The one I hate the most is Murder is Cheesey aka Murder is Easy. Terrible, shame that Julia MCKenzie hasnt been given a really good episode.