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!

Sparkling Cyanide

Moderator1 16 Nov 09 at 10:08 a.m. GMT

Rosemary Barton dies at her own birthday party when she drinks poisoned champagne and it is assumed that she has committed suicide.  However, there are several people who stand to benefit from Rosemary's death including her sister, Rosemary's lover and his wife, not to mention her friend Anthony whose dark secret she knew. When George is the next to die the police have a long list of suspects.

Developed from the short story, Yellow Iris, why do you think Christie omitted Poirot in this version and instead put in Colonel Race?  Which do you think is better - the short story or the novel?

Login or register to add posts and reply

34 replies

Reverse order

Puffinjill 03 Dec 09 at 7:35 a.m. GMT

I prefer the novel any day. Yellow Iris is a short story I've always found unsatisfactory because it seemed confused and hurried - mainly because it WAS in a shortened form. Again, I get the feeling that AC liked the premise of the story and wished she had devolped it further once it had oiginally been used. Thankfully, AC never let this fact stop her as she went on to do this a number of times in her career.

I think leaving out Poirot was the right thing to do. Race was a character who had previously worked with Poirot, and therefore well known to AC readers, but she hadn't used him for almost 10 years when she wrote this one. By using him, she provides a link between the more recognisable, more orthodox novels in which her established detectives feature and the more 'dangerous' and untrodden path of the non-series novels. Even fans of her work get complacent and many tend to stick with the novels and the characters they are 'safe' with rather than try something new and unfamiliar. By using a character like Race, AC was providing a link between these two world and drawing her readers into unknown territory and a new experience.

And actually, Race doesn't really replace Poirot. His isn't the lonely role of the sole investigator, he is involved through his friendship with George Barton and, because of his time in the Secret Service, he is allowed to be privvy to the thoughts and actions of Chief Inspector Kemp. He acts very much as he has in his appearances with Poirot, in a supporting role and offering another point of view. I like the way this is done.

Puffinjill 03 Dec 09 at 7:42 a.m. GMT

(Cont) AC provides us with three 'detectives', all with very different status and way of looking at the problem. Kemp represents the Police and the official line (but also a new official line as he has replaced Battle in the role and is a younger version with his own way of working), Race represents the old order and the solid family friend (a little more stereotypical in his thinking) and Anthony Brown represents the unorthodox and slightly dangerous point of view. It's a really interesting mix and we find ourselves following three possible solutions instead of just the one.

And Race doesn't get there first. It's a combination of the three intelligences at work that provide the ultimate solution and gives us a different ending to the more standard all-suspects-in-one-room-and-one-is-a-killer type. Not that I havbe a problem with these, far from it. But variety is the spice of life we are told and this book adds a certain piquancy of its own.

MariaCaterina 03 Dec 09 at 8:03 a.m. GMT

I agree Puffinjill - I love this book for that reason. I enjoyed the different approach from Colonel Race, a different way of looking at things than Poirot or Miss Marple.

The only problem is that I suggest new readers read "The Man in the Brown Suit" before Sparkling Cynanide - or Cards on the Table. There is more tension in the Brown Suit if a reader doesn't know that Colonel Race is one of the good guys!

Puffinjill 03 Dec 09 at 7:08 p.m. GMT

Good point, MariaCaterina! I find the younger, handsome, brooding Race a good reason to read The Man In The Brown Suit anytime! And, unlike Poirot, we do get to see Race age (or should I say mature?) throughout his appearances. Not quite as much as Tommy and Tuppence, I admit, but it's still interesting to see him at different stages of his life. Shame we het him in so few novels!

Dianala 04 Dec 09 at 12:23 a.m. GMT

I LOVE SPARKLING CYANIDE IS ONE OF MY FAVOURITES, IN THIS ONE, POIROT IS NOT IN THE STORY, AND HE WASN´T AT THEY CAME TO BAGDAD, WHICH IS ALSO A VERY GOOD BOOK.

tudes 07 Dec 09 at 1:39 p.m. GMT

I am re-reading the book and I'm enjoying a lot. It's different from the others books,but it's really a good one, maybe one of the best.About Poirot, in the beginnig I missed him, but now I think it was a good idea to replace him by Race. Colonel Race was the right choice for the story.

Read more about this story: Sparkling Cyanide

Puffinjill 10 Dec 09 at 7:11 p.m. GMT

BIG BIG SPOILER ALERT!!!

Just a small point that has been bugging me about this book. Why is it that Christine Shannon, who sees the hurried little waiter return Iris's dropped bag to the table, DOESN'T realise that when they all return they sit at different places? After all, she's very astute and has noticed every single little detail of what went on at the Barton table. I think she would have noticed that they all sat down in the wrong places after dancing.

Has this bothered anyone else? It's not a criticism, far from it as I really like the book, it's just one detail that keeps irking me.

jane_delawney 15 Dec 09 at 4:53 p.m. GMT

Puffinjill: I agree. I have wondered about that, too. Also, one's orientation does not only depend on where you find your glass at a table. When they were sitting down again after the dancing, they should have noticed they were suddenly facing a different wall.

Tommy_A_Jones 15 Dec 09 at 4:59 p.m. GMT

Think spometimes yopu aren't supposed to quwestion, just enjoy, I get that feeling when watching Today's Drama Too.

Puffinjill 16 Dec 09 at 9:33 a.m. GMT

It doesn't stop me from enjoying the book at all, it just seemed a rather glaring omission. Jane is right, we would normally recoginise our own place at a table from many things but I suppose we can accept that the relief of tension the characters were feeling might make them less aware of where they were.

Nofret 29 Dec 09 at 11:31 a.m. GMT

Yes, I agree about the relief of tension, Puffinjill. Many commentators have said that they found the whole "different places at the table" setup to be unconvincing, but I found it wholly believable.

Firstly, as there were several people at the table, it would be unlikely that anyone would end up looking at a different wall, just a slightly altered aspect of the same one.

Then, as people got up to dance, the chairs would have been pushed back out of position anyway.

Also, those with their backs to the cabaret would have shifted their chairs to face the band and get a better view.

If these points do not convince you, well, they had all been drinking champagne!

bookworm_2010 03 Jan 10 at 4:36 p.m. GMT

What I love about this book is the way the story is told from all the characters appearing. I love them all, Stephen and Sandra, Iris and Anthony, George, Lucilla Drake (altough I always quicken my reading pace when she appears) and even Ruth! They are all thoroughly believable.

I too had my doubts about them not noticing that they sat down in the wrong place - but if the table was crowded with very little space between oneself and one's neighbour I suppose it's possible.

MissQuin 06 Feb 10 at 11:58 a.m. GMT

Ok, I just finnished Sparkling Cyanide last night. I put off reading it for years, believing that it was the same story as Yellow Iris with the same murderer. But it isnt the smae killer, so adds a new twist. I'm pleased with myself as I worked out the motive and whodunnit!  It was a good read.

But I didnt really get why George arranged the whole 2nd dinner gathering? Was he being stupid or did he actually know who the killer was and watch their reaction?

When I read the front page "what can I do to drive away remembrances from mine eyes" it just sounded like it would be a fantastic book.

Tommy_A_Jones 27 Jul 10 at 4:58 p.m. GMT

George Arranged the 2nd dinner to catch the Culprit he must have known the Murderer was present at both dinner's but how could he have known who the Murderer was? I think I have said this before but I didn't like the Book, I didn't like the Plot. The Characters I am glad I don't have to read it again, I apologise if this offends anyone but this is just how I feel.

MissQuin 27 Jul 10 at 5:04 p.m. GMT

I'm not offended Tommy. I enjoyed it, it's not one of the very best, but I found it engaging. I like the chaarcters more than the actual murder method.

Mind you the adaptadtion set in 21 century, was very bad! Taking away the time period it was set took away the essence of Chrisite for me. Ive no idea why Colnel Race was then Reece. The whole think was bewildering and boring.

Tommy_A_Jones 28 Jul 10 at 4:52 p.m. GMT

I like the Adaptation you refer to, I like the Chemistry between between Race and his wife even though Race's Name was Changed (All Name Changes are Unnecessary) and I forgave the Sports Backdrop (I hate Sport), I didn't like the Anthony Andrews Adaptation which I did find boring but good to see the Guy from MASH I have decided to re-read Sparkling Cyanide one day as I think I am missing something even though I am sure it still will not be one of my Favourites just maybe better than I think it is Perhaps.

MissQuin 28 Jul 10 at 5:05 p.m. GMT

Really? I didn't like the modern day adapt, I didn't watch it properly after a short time. I just had it on and was pottering around doing other stuff. I was so bored. I only sat down to watch the scenes with Mark (in the book Victor) who in the is my favourite character.

But I found all the book characters interesting. I liked finding more about Rosemary and the effect she had on people around her.

Miss_Eylesbarrow 29 Jul 10 at 10:43 a.m. GMT

*************HUGE SPOILER ALERT **********

I can't see how George could have suspected who the murderer/s were since he doesn't appear to treat Ruth any differently from the way he's always treated her and if he thought that Vicotr had anything to do with it, he'd have turned him in at once as George thought that Victor was a no-good waster anyway.  I think that George must have suspected someone else (one of the two men?) and set the dinner up to catch one of them out. 

One version of events I did see on TV (can't remember which one now) suggested that the young waiter picking up Iris' bag from the floor put it onto the wrong place at the table and when the 'waiter' came to fill the champagne glasses and add the poison, he'd been told to poison the glass next to the bag belonging to Iris.  So when they sat back down, they did actually sit in their correct places and Iris just moved her bag back to where is should be.  I know that's not spelt out in the book like that, but it seems so me a plausible explanation.  And as Christie says herself, she did occasionally make mistakes in her books which she only spotted years later...

MissQuin 29 Jul 10 at 10:48 a.m. GMT

huge sparkling cyandide spoilers!!

I also think George didn't know who the killers were, but tried to find out. Was the handbag thing in the book? It was in the modern adapt though. I remember that scene, because it became clearer. But in the TV version Ruth did the posioning and Mark (Vicotor) wasn't there.

Tommy_A_Jones 29 Jul 10 at 4:07 p.m. GMT

It was spelt out in the Anthony Andrews version, I can't remember about the Pauline Collins Version, I just remember thinking the use of Computors was Great and it reminded me of Matt Houston, I also remember thinking this Modernising isn't too harmful, I much prefer Adaptations to be set when the Author intended them but if we have to have Mordernizing I would rather this than other changes.