Book Club

Poirot Stories

Poirot is Agatha Christie's most famous and popular detective.  No doubt he would agree that he deserves that accolade!

Here is the place to discuss all of his stories in detail with other fans.  The most insightful comments will be added to the Stories pages.  But remember to beware spoilers!

If you can't find your favourite Poirot story here, don't worry - we'll be adding them all soon.

Warning: These discussions may contain spoilers!

Death on the Nile

Moderator1 10 Nov 09 at 8:11 a.m. GMT

Jacqueline de Bellefort was so happy with fiance Simon Doyle until her good friend Linnet Ridgeway stole him away.  Jackie is now following them around on their Egyptian honeymoon, however another traveller is Hercule Poirot and he is not happy with the behaviour of these young people.  He is happy to stand back though - at least until Linnet is found shot dead.  Now he's involved....

Opinions are mixed on this story: one of Christie's best or a flimsy and unlikely plot?  Which camp do you fall into?  It's certainly one of her most popular novels: is this justified?

Login or register to add posts and reply

129 replies

Reverse order

xxchristielover123xx 26 Nov 11 at 7:02 p.m. GMT

i love this book alot, its very detailed! but sometimes i think all of the charactors can be confusing.

SeaView 11 Nov 11 at 11:14 a.m. GMT

Omigosh, how I love Peter Ustinov and Sir David Niven in this glorious movie. I've watched the video in my bedroom to fall asleep at night. Seen it hundreds of times. Christie is so rich! I love her quote from Montaigne? that a woman's whole goal in life is to "inspire love". I like how Poirot (Ustinov) stands on the boat in the Nile and tries to warn Mia Farrow (Jacqueline de Bellefort) to not launch into the deep of evil, she was headed in a perilous direction. She swears to follow her destiny even "to hell itself". I guess that's why Christie named her "Bellefort", doesn't that mean beautiful and strong in French?

rossana 10 Nov 11 at 8:33 p.m. GMT

It was one of the first book by Agatha Christie I read. I was about 10 years old, when I read it in Italian, and I read it in English some months ago. I feared that, already knowing the murderers, it could be a little bit boring, but I found it really interesting: I was able to appreciate details better.

de_misteri 30 Sep 11 at 6:13 a.m. GMT

One of my favourite AC plots- it's easy to see mwhy it's so famous. The setting was good and the murder was complex, and the ending was unexpected as to who committed the murder.

3rdGirl 23 Sep 11 at 10:02 p.m. GMT

Easily one of my favourite AC books and I absolutely love the David Suchet film as well. So much so that I found the vessel they used on the internet and want to go on a holiday on it one day. They even have a Poirot and Agatha Christie suite!!

I'm a time poor mum, so have been listening to the BBC radio book read by Mr Suchet, and it is fantastic. I love the complexity of this plot even though I don't think it''s one of hre best.  I think this is one of the novels where AC gives you a fantastic sense of place and the exotic. Her details on the sightseeing and life on the Nile are just wonderful, and I think this has a lot to do with it's popular appeal. It's certainly why I love it so much. Also, she goes into great detail to 'set up' the characters in this one, so you really get to know them more than in other novels of hers.

Two thumbs up from me!!

mariely 09 Aug 11 at 2:02 p.m. GMT

I agree with Lone_Wolf Tim was gay. and in a relationship with Mrs. Allerton, who wasn't really his mother, a kind of gigolish thing

MsBuckley 24 Jul 11 at 2:21 p.m. GMT

This is certainly my favourite book of hers! The plot is awesome! It is just fascinating the way Agatha planned Jacqueline and Simon's plan. I was just surprised at the end! Agatha is such a mastermind, I love all the things in this book, from the falling rock, until the murder and, it is a brilliant plot, really, I LOVED IT!

ErkutSoyer 14 Jul 11 at 2:26 p.m. GMT

This book is in my favorite books.Nile and Christie's writing are fascinating.

I want to hint to you about crime:

Spolier

1-There are two killers in this crime

2-Nobody is innocent

3-And thief isn't killer.

Apologize.My English not well.I'm from Turkey

Epsilon14 02 Jun 11 at 4:41 p.m. GMT

I finished this book a week ago. What an alibi!!!!! You can think of a hundred alibis but not like this one. Alibi A(Siman Doyle) supported alibi B(Jacqueline) and vice-versa. But maybe any kinf of evidence should have been added in the end. But hey! as long as the admit it who cares. The worst part is Jacqueline kills herself and Doyle. This is 100 percent in my top 5 books for now.

me_onthenile 02 May 11 at 9:59 a.m. GMT

this is one of my favourite novel by agatha... an interesting complex she uses to make us all suspect who really did it to begin with, and then she lures us away with red herrings throughout the book, only to jerk the rod back on land at the finale...

svcodeman 30 Mar 11 at 6:23 p.m. GMT

oh I'm sorry...didn't know...I'm new on the site...thanks for letting me know!

Mr_west 27 Mar 11 at 2:26 p.m. GMT

Just for you to know svcodeman, those discussions are for people who already finished reading the book because it contain huge spoilers.

svcodeman 26 Mar 11 at 2:48 a.m. GMT

I started reading Death on the Nile last week, and am now on Chapter 12, and will read a few more chapters tonight! Jackie seems like she suffers from some mental disorder to me.

Tommy_A_Jones 21 Mar 11 at 4:49 p.m. GMT

I finished the book today and I loved it, It made me like Colonel Race, when I once mentioned he didn't do anything but hadn't yet read DOTN someone said he didn't do much in this one either but he does, he Organizes a search of the Jewellery and Commondeers nPoirot on to the case.

I admit I was momentarily miffed that not everyone like Tim's Mum and Mrs Otterbourne and her Daughter don't have Motives but I think I was being influenced by the Peter Ustinov version, If I am not mistaken nit all Characters have Motives in the books they are in do they, it didn't annoy me the Doctor didn't have a Motive because Dr Constantine doesn't in Death On The Nile does he? I excused Bowers for not having a Motive as she was the wrong type to be a Murderer in my view.

Yes Simon shooting himself in the leg is a bit unrealistic as if he could have died and that is a risk too far for your average Christie Murderer but apart from that I loved it, I can't say if I would have guessed who the Murderer was if I hadn't seen the film but perhaps I would when Louise was saying that she might have seen the Murderer if she was wandering about but perhaps not, anyway I am glad I finished the books on a High as I have read them all now, I am now going to read a Chapter of The Notebooks and will re-read Styles and Curtain before saying what my Top 10 are because I haven't Rated those, I thought I had. 

sugacutie 10 Mar 11 at 5:13 p.m. GMT

I do find that Simon shooting himself in the leg was a bit unrealistic but the plot still kept me on the edge!! 

sugacutie 10 Mar 11 at 5:10 p.m. GMT

An excellent book. I would defo recommend Agatha Christie fans to read this if they haven't already!

Film is just OK though, but don't let this put you off one of the most popular Agatha Christie books 

Masha_Gayne 06 Mar 11 at 9:57 p.m. GMT

My second favourite Agatha Christie novel and the film starring Peter Ustinov was actually my introduction to the world of Poirot, though I do consider David Suchet to be the definitive Poirot.

Wonderfully written, strong characters, and I find the boat to be alive and bustling, as it were due to the vivis descriptions. After Murder on the Orient Express I find this to be one of the best and surprising conclusions to a dective novel I have read so far

Agathasmykid 25 Nov 10 at 6:33 p.m. GMT

Hi, I am still reading, and/or rereading through the entire Christie collection in order and just finished Death on the Nile.  One of Agatha's best in my opinion.  To me this book reads as a story of greed and power, and how those things serve noone in the end.  The story involves a great set-up, and once the murderer is revealed, you are anxious to read Poirot's description of how the impossible was made possible.  If anything it is kind of hard to consider any of the others on the boat as real suspects because the book gives you the feel that this story is all about Simon, Jackie, and Linnet...nonetheless it works well as a murder mystery.    Poirot gets a bit of luck as there is seems to be not much proof to convict the murderer with, however due to an emotional breakdown Poirot gets his killer.  Grade A-

Zwitsa 29 Sep 10 at 8:31 p.m. GMT

Oh well its one of my favourite movies!!! I loved Peter Ustinov, I really loved him in that role!!!

Just a fantastic movie.....

Oh well I quite enjoyed some of the scenes!!! "You are Mrs and miss Otterbourne.... righty???"

"Wrongy!!!" haha i loved bette's davis face!!!

and Angela Lansbury..... Oh she was hilarious!!! I liked so much the scene when she was dancing with Colonel Race....

She was flirting with Poirot or do I imagine things??? I thought that because she was asking him to "escort her to her cabin" with a strange face and....she was a bit disappointed when Poirot chose her daughter to dance with him....

antonia1990 16 Sep 10 at 7:15 p.m. GMT

This was the first Agatha Christie novel I had read and I've been a fan ever since. It's still my favorite book of hers and it gets better with every re-read. I saw all the adaptations (I enjoyed the Ustinov one a bit more, but I loved JJ in the other one) and I also played the hidden objects game based on the book. Really wonderful book.

MissQuin 14 Sep 10 at 4:13 p.m. GMT

There's no Oedipus complex in the book! Rest assured.

I don't like sensationism actually Tommy. I'm just making a glib remark about about Mr Feild. I didn't say I liked the scene, just JJ!   I once said on here, that I don't like that opening scene as it looks down on the couple in bed and it's like voyerism! It's unsettling. I prefer them to be true to the original tone of the story. It's understandable to show passion between Jackie and Simon, but it doesn't need to show them kissing in bed to convey that. There can be electric chemistry between on screen couples who don't even kiss.

I think some of the time the adapts just dumb down plots. Like the physical abuse replacing only mental cruelty, in Appointment with Death. It's lacsk subtlety. 

But on the other hand, there have been some changes to adapts but haven't been spoilt. Like 5 little Pigs.

Tommy_A_Jones 14 Sep 10 at 3:24 p.m. GMT

You obviously like sensationalism which is fine as everybody is different but why have an adaptation if you have to include issues not raised in the book, On british Television Drama's seem to want sensationalism in everything, It seems to me these days it is rare to watch Drama without Incest or Homosexuality or Adultary or I don't think it is wrong but I do think Television is over-doing it these days so there are plenty of programmes where these issues can be tackled without putting them in an adaptation of a book that doesn't mention them.

I apologise if there is an Oedipus angle in Death On The Nile as I haven't read it yet but if the Adaptations are faithful than there isn't so there shouldn't be one.

MissQuin 14 Sep 10 at 9:56 a.m. GMT

Simon Doyle was played by the very attractive JJ Feild. I don't remeber who plays Jackie, maybe Emma Malin? I didn't like her much. I remeber being a little suprised by the start. Can I forgive them for having JJ Feild with no shirt on?! Maybe

I would have preferred the adapt if they hadn't gone adding a Oedipus comlplex! But Ive seen a few of the adapts and there's good and bad out of the recents one.

Cicely 14 Sep 10 at 1:36 a.m. GMT

Yes, I think the producers/writers or whoever for the movies add salacious themes for shock value.  They expect today's viewers to lose interest if there isn't something suggestive or provocative added.  How shallow do they think we are?  That is the very thing that turns me off about the newer movies.  The TV series and most of the earlier 2 hour movies are fantastic and very family friendly.  The new producers/writers are the ones who are shallow!

I liked the actor who played Simon, but I didn't care for the girl who played Jackie.  The story is great...one of AC's best!

MissQuin 08 Aug 10 at 10:21 a.m. GMT

It's OK Yunakitty, can I call you Kitty?

 In the book the relationship between Tim and his mother as a perfectly natural, healthy one. It's only the Suchet version that cast in a compleltey different light it! It's the same in Taken At The flood, an incest relationship was added, for who knows what reason. Just ignore it!

I diskled Tim and his mother in the Suchet adapt. Tim was annoying, he voices grated my nerves, his "ooh er" bothered me and he was slimy! He mother was as AC characters say, a cat! Not at al motherly and warm liek in the book.

Lone_Wolf 08 Aug 10 at 2:06 a.m. GMT

There are four ways to interpret the Allerton Suchet thingy:

1) Rosalie just wasn't in Tim's taste.

2) Tim was gay.

3) Tim was in a relationship with Mrs. Allerton, who wasn't really his mother.

4) Tim was in a relationship with Mrs. Allerton, who indeed was his mother.

Make of it what you will.

Yunakitty 08 Aug 10 at 1:06 a.m. GMT

Ew, so the Suchet version paints Tim and his mommy as lovers?  Ew ew ew.  I was going to say that the first time I read this (as a teenager) I didn't really get Tim's devotion to his mother and breezed over it, but on my most recent reading, a few months ago, right after my husband's grandmother (who raised him and was practically his mother, and he was absolutely devoted to in a completely non-sexual way) passed away, I was very touched by their close relationship as it reminded me of how my husband was about his grandma, and how she welcomed me into their family ("folded her into a loving embrace" I believe they said).  My own mother was an alcoholic and very emotionally unstable and the tension between Rosalie and Salome always hit very close to home.  Granmomma was the mother I always wished I had, just like Rosalie always felt about Mrs. Allerton.

Now I feel kind of dirty.

MissQuin 01 Aug 10 at 3:13 p.m. GMT

http://austen.4fan.org/forum/index.php

Someone asked about if the Jane Asuten site was there? It's back again now, so I hope to dicsuss books of any kind on there.

Mr_west 01 May 10 at 7:52 p.m. GMT

i love this, everything that happen look so real!

and when i do a work about the book for school i got A+

Lone_Wolf 28 Apr 10 at 4:45 p.m. GMT

EotS was written later then DotN, so technically speaking, it's EotS which is like DotN. Frankly, the DotN-EotS parallel was a rather bad move by Christie, especially since DotN is better written.

yamifannetje 28 Apr 10 at 3:20 p.m. GMT

I can't help but always mistake this story for "Evil under the sun". I have read both books but the sories are too alike. I guess my impression is caused by the fact that Linnet is very alike Arlene Stuart.

MissQuin 31 Mar 10 at 3:30 p.m. GMT

They didn't know Poirot would solve it. The murderers thought they were too clever and would get away with it. The weapon complicates things, but it is part of the story, working it out is part of the puzzle.

No one was ever supposed to know that J had an extra pistol. She had been sedated, was given a nurse to watch over her, so she had a albi. It l ooked like she couldn't have done it.

Simon was supposed to shot in the leg, where he couldn't reach the gun. So if theres no gun it looks like someone else picked it up. Simon went and added the J in blood, which wasn't planned and was spur of the moment. It was meant to look like someone else was incriminating Jackie.

weekekkoon 31 Mar 10 at 3:01 p.m. GMT

@MissQuin

The missing pistol actually made Poirot suspicious. If the idea is to incriminate Jacqueline, why throw the pistol away?

Then there was the revelation right at the end that Jacqueline actually had not one but two pistols! If that's the case, the whole rigmarole of digging the bullet out of the chair, replacing an extra round in the pistol that was thrown overboard (so as to show that only two not three shots were fired) wasn't really necessary.

MissQuin 30 Mar 10 at 5:10 p.m. GMT

This is what I think with the murder weapon:  it made it look like someone else had taken the weapon away and used it on Linnet. If the gun was left near Simon, it would just plant the blame onto him. That's what I feel alot of the story is about, the murder weapon.

weekekkoon 30 Mar 10 at 12:35 a.m. GMT

Last paragraph of Chapter 28: '...To me [Poirot] the stumbling block was the pistol...Why had that pistol not been left on the scene of the crime?...The murderer took it away because he had to take it away - because he had no choice in the matter.'

I wonder if Simon Doyle really had 'no choice in the matter'? What difference would it have made if, after shooting himself in the leg, he threw the pistol back under the settee instead of overboard into the Nile?

MissQuin 21 Mar 10 at 11:13 a.m. GMT

I remember in at least one book, the murderer was absent- Dumb Witness for instance. But I think with the TV adapts the murderers have always been present. Except Deth on the Nile, when one of the murderers is absent.

sjoerdbol 16 Mar 10 at 7:12 a.m. GMT

I think in every episode of Poirot the murderer is present when he or she is revealed by Poirot.

go_leafs_nation 10 Mar 10 at 11:22 a.m. GMT

Nobody said the guilty party had to be present in the final lecture. It's not always the case.

sjoerdbol 10 Mar 10 at 7:54 a.m. GMT

I think the Ustinov movie is brilliant, of course Suchet is a 'better' more realistic version of Poirot, more like in the books, but the movie and the actors are great , it is one of my favorite movies off all time.

I found the last scene with Ustinov a brilliant one, with the Suchet version there are to few people present, so it couldn't have been anyone except Simon Doyle, Cornelia or Doctor Bessner. That is a big minus for the Suchet version.

majarvvv 10 Mar 10 at 3:06 a.m. GMT

I found it interesting to compare the last scene in the two versions - in the Ustinov one, with everyone present when Poirot exposes the murderers.

Simon MacCorkindale's Simon Doyle seemed a lot more composed in the last scene than JJ Feilds - eg. "Oh Mr P, you've really made a fool of yourself this time and no mistake". It was different from the book, but I did enjoy the way McCorkindale and Farrow reacted to being found out, and how they almost wistfully recounted their experiences - "Simon, do you remember what you said?" "I said, if this was a book, I'd marry Linnet and she'd die within a year" - before Jackie shot both of them while they were in their final love embrace. Quelle tragique!

Ustinov's reaction to Farrow telling him she was glad the cobra didn't kill him was priceless - maybe she almost looked on him like a father figure!

sjoerdbol 09 Mar 10 at 7:19 a.m. GMT

We have noticed that!

It still is weird, the TA storyline. WIth Joanna saying: 'The only woman in TA's lief is his mummy' and TA saying: 'Why do I need Joanna if I got you.'

It still is gros to think about such a relationship.

MissQuin 08 Mar 10 at 6:48 p.m. GMT

I think everyones now distrurbed by Tim Allerton! He probably send's Mrs Allerton a mother's day card, plus a Valentines one! ughh..

I could ramble on about Chrisite for hours. I do actually!

stylestocurtain 07 Mar 10 at 5:36 p.m. GMT

Yeah Miss Bowers was a sort of nurse-companion to Miss Van Schyler - in the Ustinov version she was brilliantly played by Maggie Smith as very put-upon by a demanding elderly widow! It's a shame they missed her out in Suchet's version - she was the one who in the book attends to Jackie after she "shoots" Simon and gives her morphine and her alibi. In the Ustinov version I think they merged Tim Allerton and Jim Fanthorp into one (making him just Jim Fanthorp) so Rosalie ended up with him ... actually they cut out Tim Allerton, his mother, and Cornelia in that version! But kept Van Schyler and Bowers. I'm surprised they cut Tim Allerton out too ... although I was a bit disturbed by the way he was kissing his mother's hand in the Suchet version (everything else you can explain away as just being devoted, but that was something else!) Lol.

I guess I'm a traditionalist in terms of keeping the characters in, although if they did I suppose we;d be looking at a 4hr feature length film as opposed to 2! Apparantly they used the same boat in both the Ustinov and Suchet versions, but even though I've wound it back trying to find similarities they do seem like different boats! (in the suchet one they removed all the paint and everything...). I did love the music in the Suchet one though ... such a tragic-cum-romantic melody!

Gosh, I could go on about DOTN for hours. I do love how it's so detailed ... even down to the description of Wode Hall in the beginning.

MissQuin 07 Mar 10 at 2:52 p.m. GMT

I was ok with them taking some of the characters out, as it takes them time to indroduce each one. But the book is really unbeatable.

 It's seems its just a time saving thing. I'm suprised they cut Tim Allerton from the Ustinov. He's one of the main suspects. I supose if they'd have done that with the Suchet version, we'd all not have had this lengthy discussion about it! Everyone has their own theories!

Poirot's a super brain, yet he didn't seem to know there was possible  dodgy goings on with the Allertons?! Plus it would be a crime.. so why would he let it go unpunnished? It doesnt make sense, which is what happens alot with the adaptaions. (rant alert!) they chnage things to make them more "racy", but often the plot unravels and becomes too far fetched..

I cant remember Miss Bowers. Is she a nurse?

stylestocurtain 07 Mar 10 at 2:45 p.m. GMT

Nope ... I've just double-checked and it was just Cornelia, Race and Bessner he reveals it to (he says at the end "And now Doctor, I will go and have a word with your patient") - then he speaks with Jackie ... where she makes references to him having broken down (though we the readers aren't present for it) ...

Lol I dunno I'm a stickler for the grand finale of Poirot assembling everyone and then revealing it all .... I like it, like in the Ustinov version, because everyone waits with baited breath and looks nervously at each other. That's why I was a bit surprised they not only hadn't gone for that but they inserted this ending with Simon in it ... oh well. They were faithful to the book on most other counts (although I found the weird relationship between Tim Allerton and his mother a bit strange!)

Didn't both film versions do away with Richetti as well? I must say I really do love the book because of its wealth of subplots .... I know they can only do so much but I think it's a shame they axed a lot of characters. Miss Bowers is classic in the ustinov version! And they did away with her in the Suchet... just like they got rid of Tim Allerton in the Ustinov!

MissQuin 06 Mar 10 at 8:15 p.m. GMT

I thought Simon may have been present when Poirot reveals the killer? He was lieing in bed and when revealed he breaks down... it's very emotional. Jackie would have kept her cool, which is why Poirot goes to Simon, the weaker of the two. I think Cornelia and the doctor are present? I like the fact the suspects werent all gathered, it can just concentrate on Simon's character.

stylestocurtain 06 Mar 10 at 5:17 p.m. GMT

I agree Miss Quinn - Simon is played brilliantly by JJ Fields. Though I loved Simon McCorkindale (?) in the Ustinov one too

Oh I don't know that Linnet was so spoilt ... she did have the houses pulled down but she did make sure the people in them got better accommodation! And I know she went for Simon but ... she must've been very lonely. They were very cruel tricking her like that!

goleafs, I personally prefer Mia Farrow as Jackie ... she really portrayed the character as fiery and explosive ... but I think Emma Malin did a great job as the "brains" of it - cool, calm collected (she also looked a lot more like how Jackie is described). But there was no fireiness ... I love the scene with Mia Farrow in where she "shoots" Simon ... her rage is brilliantly acted

Suchet was good as Poirot (although I think he has lost a bit of his haughtiness) ... but I do prefer Ustinov in DOTN. Even though it wasn't in the book, his summing up scene is brilliant ... I don't know why they took it upon themselves for Poirot to sum it up to Simon (wasn't it to Colonel Race and Cornelia in the book?) ... it would've worked so much better with everyone present.

go_leafs_nation 06 Mar 10 at 3:43 p.m. GMT

Both productions have great parts about it, but to sum it up briefly, the Suchet preserves practically the entire plot, but really crams it into 90 minutes- an extra half-hour might've done it some good. The Ustinov, meanwhile, is an hour longer but has far less plot attatched. They're both interesting to watch.

I think that the Jacqueline of the Suchet (Emma Malin) was far superior to the Ustinov Jackie (Mia Farrow). Malin seemed to me to be the more intelligent, cool, and better actress (they both had to play a person who faked passionate rage, and Farrow's facade was far easier to penetrate).

MissQuin 06 Mar 10 at 2:54 p.m. GMT

I prefer the Ustinov version though to the Suchet one - even though the latter is very good in itself. I think Jackie and Linnet had better suited actresses playing them - especially Jackie, in Ustinovs she was so much more fiery and high-spirited, in Suchets she was a bit too calm for me.

I agree styles, on some points. I dont think the actress who played Jackie in the Suchet version was very good. Her face remained blank, when it should have been emotional. She wasnt convincing for me, during the murder scenes. I thought Linnet's American accent sounded dodgy and put on. She doesnt do much more than raise her eyebrows! Tim Alleton's characater was annoying too

Simon (JJ Feild) was perfect, in fact everyone else was very good. I really liked Frances De La Tour? As Ms Otterborne.

Back to the book... I'm mixed over Linnet, as she wasnt to know that Jackie and Siomn were plotting togteher. Linnet did steal her friends boyfriend, the man Jackie loved. I think that was just so unkind and selfish. Linnet was a spoilt little rich girl. She also had some houses knocked down at the start of the book. Because they overlooked her swimming pool! Also she was engaged to a man who loved her, but she dumped him for Simon.

Ive seen bits of the Ustinov version. I think Jackie is better, but I prefer Suchet as Poirot.

stylestocurtain 06 Mar 10 at 1:26 p.m. GMT

... although yes Miss Quinn it was very sad at the Suchet end of DOTN - especially when Jackie says to Simon "Goodbye my darling ... you know how much I love you" ...

stylestocurtain 06 Mar 10 at 10:46 a.m. GMT

I can't tell you how much I love this book, for me it's definitely the best of all the Christies!!

I think everything about it just has so much depth - the plot, the characters, there are so many intreguing subplots, the exotic location ... and the marvellous contrast between the rich and level-headed Linnet and the fiery and penniless Jackie... In fact I love all the characters in it - they really jump off the page to you. Mrs Otterbourne is a legend in particular!! (and wonderfully done justice by Angela Lansbury in Ustinovs version).

Am I the only one who feels sorry for Linnet here? lol. Poor thing ... yeah she had all that money but to be tricked into thinking somebody really loved her and then be murdered in cold blood ... really quite horrible.

When I read this book for the first time I did not see that ending coming at all - the whole thing is pure genius, I was completely taken in by the "watertight" alibis. I love how everything fits together at the end, when previously thought insignificant (Miss Van Schyler's stole, for instance)

I prefer the Ustinov version though to the Suchet one - even though the latter is very good in itself. I think Jackie and Linnet had better suited actresses playing them - especially Jackie, in Ustinovs she was so much more fiery and high-spirited, in Suchets she was a bit too calm for me.

MissQuin 05 Mar 10 at 9:40 a.m. GMT

Welcome monkeyjess, I consider Death On The Nile to be one of the best Agatha Chrisite books.

monkeyjess1999 04 Mar 10 at 9:30 p.m. GMT

is this story good because im thinking of reading it next

HeiseiHolmes 04 Mar 10 at 3:44 p.m. GMT

Ah... I forget if stuff is a thing a lot. Possibly the worst way of phrasing it, but I am a big idiot sometimes anyway. I lent my copy of this to my friend, since she likes Egyptian things and I don't have "Death Comes as the End" yet, but she hasn't finished with it. Annoying, but she is enjoying it.

MissQuin 04 Mar 10 at 3:37 p.m. GMT

Dewy eyed is indeed a well known phrase. I go dewy eyed over Simon Doyle!

HeiseiHolmes 04 Mar 10 at 3:25 p.m. GMT

Awwww, yeah~ :( Like what they do in that Cold Case show on Sky 3. Stuff like that... it makes me all dewy-eyed. (Is that even a phrase, or did I make it up?)

MissQuin 04 Mar 10 at 2:43 p.m. GMT

Did anyone else feel really sad at the end of the Suchet Death in the Nile?

Jackie and Simon had just died, but at the very end their dancing, happy and enjoying themselves?  

sjoerdbol 04 Mar 10 at 2:18 p.m. GMT

yes, she really makes you undicive because everyone had a reason to do it. Everyone hated her except for her husband, at least it looks like that. When you read it for the first time you think that everyone could have done it except poirot, race and simon doyle. So it is more exciting when it turns out that simon doyle did it. And of course the movie is brilliant.

fernande42 04 Mar 10 at 1:30 a.m. GMT

I must admit: I was utterly baffled by this book. I could not see how anybody could have done it. Christie has a way of making you completely undecided until the very end.

MissQuin 01 Mar 10 at 3:21 p.m. GMT

I was lucky, I was going to give the JA link to my friend but I forgot! Good thing to. I don't know if she's that interested in the books, it's just the photos on there of the actors...

Bundle_ 27 Feb 10 at 1:44 p.m. GMT

Yeah there is some virus. I am so sorry, MQ. Arwen and I had no idea. It must be something wrong w/ the web hosting site.

MissQuin 27 Feb 10 at 11 a.m. GMT

Is there any reason why? I'm curious, perhaps I'm driving everyone mad with my daft comments. No, seriously if theres virus on there I'd like to know so I can take it of my links page.

Bundle_ 27 Feb 10 at 12:54 a.m. GMT

Sorry to change to subject guys, I just wanted to tell you all not to go back to that Austen site/forum that I posted on the forum, especially you MissQuin.

MissQuin 26 Feb 10 at 3:34 p.m. GMT

I know this person's annoying and an airhead so not worthy of any more notice! I don't even know which epsiode it was they watched.

HeiseiHolmes 26 Feb 10 at 3:29 p.m. GMT

How can it be boring? It's so cool! If I knew a person like that... I'd be plotting a murder. It's one of my favourite things to watch on TV ever!

MissQuin 25 Feb 10 at 2:56 p.m. GMT

Your forgiven, but it led to me thinking...

I know someone who said "I can't stand Poirot, it's completely boring!"

No it isnt!

No, I don't get on with that person at all..

HeiseiHolmes 24 Feb 10 at 7:19 p.m. GMT

I'm sorry! Please accept my humble apologies... I have what we call in the business "an overactive imagination". I'm going to officially go with "has a boyfriend at home". And avoid scary posts like my previous one.

MissQuin 24 Feb 10 at 7:12 p.m. GMT

I'm so creeped out by what you said Conan! Not that it's your fault, it's how the producers have made our minds work overtime. I don't know what the producers were thinking of. It's scary. Best if we don't think of it!

Once his mother died, then thats it. I can''t believe how caught up in this we all are! It's funny though. I don't think hs mother showed much interest in him, apart from the odd scene at the end. But I thought she was grinning because she doesnt like Rosalie, he rejected her. ughh

Simon, well he wouldnt have been one of the most tragic lovers of AC novels otherwise.

HeiseiHolmes 24 Feb 10 at 6:59 p.m. GMT

Maybe he'll be given a worse fate, like some terrible... deed that his mother wants... done. *shudders* Also, maybe he's learned to disguise his, um, desires? Or maybe he has someone special at home... 

Bundle_ 24 Feb 10 at 6:56 p.m. GMT

MissQuin

I really don't like Tim in this version. I don't blame the actor, although the way he talks grates my nerves.. I did want to through Tim overboard into the Nile.

It's a shame that a handsome, strapping, and lively young man like Simon Doyle had to be the culprit...It should have been Tim instead

MissQuin 24 Feb 10 at 6:54 p.m. GMT

Strange, wonder what my computer was playing at. I suddenly thought, Tim surely can't be homo. If he was he showed no interest in the male passagers. Not even Simon Doyle!

Bundle_ 24 Feb 10 at 6:52 p.m. GMT

Yeah I just checked it out. But it's fine now. You should be able to see it. Thanks for letting me know, though!

MissQuin 24 Feb 10 at 6:48 p.m. GMT

Hello Bundle, did you know the Jane Austen sites not working? ok maybe it's just my computer?

I really don't like Tim in this version. I don't blame the actor, although the way he talks grates my nerves.. I did want to through Tim overboard into the Nile.

Bundle_ 24 Feb 10 at 6:45 p.m. GMT

MissQuin

Daniel Lapain- thats his name. He'll think he's getting fan mail, but it's just inquiries from a bunch of AC fans!

LOL

HeiseiHolmes 24 Feb 10 at 6:45 p.m. GMT

Heh heh heh... maybe he SHOULD be made to feel like that! For confusing us all! For not looking at all like my vision of Tim! For directing Hollyoaks! Which I hate! *pants, out of breath* Maybe we should just try to figure it out ourselves... All that seems like too much work for a lazy guy like me.

Wikipedia says : "...the romantic pairing of Tim Allerton and Rosalie Otterbourne: instead of the pair ending up happily together, Tim gently refuses her, it being implied that he is either homosexual or having a sexual relationship with his mother." Not much help here, but it accurately reflects our suspicions...

MissQuin 24 Feb 10 at 6:39 p.m. GMT

Daniel Lapain- thats his name. He'll think he's getting fan mail, but it's just inquiries from a bunch of AC fans!

HeiseiHolmes 24 Feb 10 at 6:33 p.m. GMT

Aha! Then we will send many a postcard to him, all asking the same question: "What's going on with Tim Allerton?" If we change our handwritings and send them from many different places he will think a large amount of people want to know... And hopefully we will get a reply.

MissQuin 24 Feb 10 at 6:29 p.m. GMT

Ahhh, well it's given us something to talk about. He was ok in the book, it's ssut this TV version. Maybe the actor who plays him knows!

HeiseiHolmes 24 Feb 10 at 6:23 p.m. GMT

I think Tim is perhaps one of the most confusing characters. If only there was some way to unmask his true intentions for definite!

HeiseiHolmes 24 Feb 10 at 3:17 p.m. GMT

I don't know what is Conan the Barbarian, but I chose my name after Edogawa Conan from Detective Conan.

sjoerdbol 24 Feb 10 at 9:07 a.m. GMT

I believe that happens in the movie to, when they sit in the hotel, at the beginning, just before Poirot enters down the stairs.

MissQuin 23 Feb 10 at 3:49 p.m. GMT

sjoerdbol

Yes, she said something like that, when linnet askes about him as an optional husband for joanna, I believe, I think she says: 'Oh No to much under the wings of his mummy', or something like it. It sure sounds as if she wouldn't have a relationship with him because of his relationship with his mother.

I think in the book Tim compared Joanna to a horse? That was quite funny,  he doesnt really like her. Not sure how they had a jewel racket going.

Lone_Wolf 23 Feb 10 at 7:15 a.m. GMT

Conan the Barbarian?

Ah well, at least it's not Gringr.

sjoerdbol 23 Feb 10 at 7:14 a.m. GMT

Yes, she said something like that, when linnet askes about him as an optional husband for joanna, I believe, I think she says: 'Oh No to much under the wings of his mummy', or something like it. It sure sounds as if she wouldn't have a relationship with him because of his relationship with his mother.

BTW. Deco sounds a little bit to much like the Chelsea football player.

MissQuin 22 Feb 10 at 5:05 p.m. GMT

De Co or Deco? Or maybe just Conan?

HeiseiHolmes 22 Feb 10 at 4:20 p.m. GMT

Conan is fine, I can't think of anything else anyway ^_^

MissQuin 22 Feb 10 at 10:38 a.m. GMT

Ive registered on there. I didn't call myself MQ as it's not suitable. I look forward to some in depth Austen chats!! I only just realised Ive reversed the initials!! What a strange twist of fate.

Contiuning th Allerton saga- Joanna said something about Tim? Was it mummy's boy or something else?

Bundle_ 21 Feb 10 at 8:12 p.m. GMT

Thanks, MissQuin.

Anyone else can join too if they want. It could be like a second "home" for us AC fans.

MissQuin 21 Feb 10 at 11:11 a.m. GMT

Bundle, When I come up with a user name I will register. I'm really uncreative thinking of names.

I quite like your theory Conan (can we call you Conan?) I always thought Tim was Option 2, he is very camp!

Bundle_ 21 Feb 10 at 12:46 a.m. GMT

Thank you Miss Quin!

And (no pressure) but it would really be nice if you registered on the JA fansite!

HeiseiHolmes 20 Feb 10 at 10:06 p.m. GMT

Oh, yeah. "Barking up the wrong tree"... Definitely not that kind of phrase. I will even ask my English teacher. When I read the book, I was like, "What's the deal with this guy? I think he might be a little that way inclined..." He really is an enigma. Maybe when his mama talks about Pennington, she's actually teasing him because she knows he likes him? So he is embarrassed and shouts "Mother!" because she's picking on him? Yeesh, I'm confusing even myself. A gay jewel thief... Sounds like a creepy Kaitou Kid fantasy of some weird fangirl. Anyway, back to AC! I'm going to have to say #2 with edging toward #4... And watch again, analysing everything he does.

MissQuin 20 Feb 10 at 10:50 a.m. GMT

Thanks for the link Bundle! I was check that out. I love Jane Austen. I began reading her books a few years ago. Northanger Abbey is my joint fave with P&P. My fave Austen character is Willoughby. I love the film version with the lovely Greg Wise as Willoughby.

Back to Chrisite, I totally agree Bundle. I don't think you use the phrase "barking up the wrong tree" if you just not interested.

Bundle_ 19 Feb 10 at 9:43 p.m. GMT

MissQuin

Bundle, have you see JJ Feild in Northanger Abbey? He was playing a vicar, so I have a picture in my mind of his Church services being very popular!

Only about a million times

Which reminds me. I have an announcemnet to make, a friend of mine and I have created a new Jane Austen fan website. It's in the beginning stages so not everything has been uploaded to the site yet, however the Forum is open and ready for any who wants to register. There are other topics on the forum as well beside Jane Austen, for example there is a book section.

I hope everyone on here will check it out and register!

Here is the link to the main website:

http://austen.4fan.org/?p=1

And here is the link to the forum:

http://austen.4fan.org/forum/

Bundle_ 19 Feb 10 at 9:33 p.m. GMT

I still think it suggests that Tim is more than indifferent to Rosalie.

I've seen DOTN literally about 20 times! No kidding. Go leafs and I, in fact, if he'll recall used to mention how many times we've seen Suchet's DOTN. Though of course go leafs watched DOTN for different reasons then me.

MissQuin 19 Feb 10 at 9:16 p.m. GMT

Bundle and I will carrying on discussing subject as much as we should wish to.  Anyone else is welcome to give their opinions on the Tim Allerton mystery!

How many times have you seen Death On the Nile Bundle? Iveseen it twice, but as you are big fan of Simon, I imagine you may have watched it a few times :)

go_leafs_nation 19 Feb 10 at 7:23 p.m. GMT

Oh for the love of Pete. You guys have dug way too deep into two scenes! There's nothing of the kind going on! The entire theory is conjecture based mainly on the following:

1) Tim's sharp "Mother!" when she talks about Pennington

2) His line "barking up the wrong tree, I'm afraid"

3) His mother appearing in the door and calling him when he says that.

And here is the simple solution:

1) He's a priggish little mother's boy.

2) He doesn't give a hang about Rosalie.

3) Mother doesn't want to see her 'baby' "fly away from the nest" with some girl.

MissQuin 18 Feb 10 at 7:38 p.m. GMT

Bundle, have you see JJ Feild in Northanger Abbey? He was playing a vicar, so I have a picture in my mind of his Church services being very popular!

Bundle_ 13 Feb 10 at 6:40 p.m. GMT

Just focus on the scenes w/ Simon Doyle...that's what I do

MissQuin 13 Feb 10 at 4:50 p.m. GMT

I getting more and more put off watching my Death in the Nile DVD ever again!!! I think I'm going to have to fast forward the Tim Allerton bits. Or else I'll squirm and feel uncomfortable! I don't want to think whats going on. It's sounding worse with every post.

 I don't think AC would approve, I certainly don't! I know she had written in one book about one sided incest, but I think it was written in a subtle way. It wasn't in you face and sleazy. Anyway, it wasnt in the Death in the Nile book! It's not the only case- Taken at the flood TV adapt had a simular theme with a brothers warped feelings.

Mrs Allerton is so kind and motherly in the book. The TV version she's really catty and not motherly..

Bundle_ 13 Feb 10 at 4:10 p.m. GMT

I initially thought that #2 was the correct choice. But then I rather think it's #4 for a few reasons. One of them being that Tim was really uspet (in the adapt, of course) when his mother started going over the list of passengers on the ship and she metioned Pennigton saying, "That's someone I'd throw my cap in the ring for. That ruthless jaw..." and Tim exclaimed "Mother!" Now at first I thought he was just embarssed by hearing his mother talk about other men around him, but now I'm wondering if it was because he was Jealous! If they really are lovers then that is sick and twisted! and the producers --what have you -- should be ashamed of themselves for incorporating something so vulgar into AC's work!

MissQuin 13 Feb 10 at 1:43 p.m. GMT

sjoerdbol

 So you think about it afterwards and like us, talk about it on a forum.

Well we've certainly done that! I suspect option 2, as there was alot of episodes in the smae seris that changed people's sexaulity. But I might be wrong. Tim wasn't allowed to be a nice young man having an innocent cruise with his mother, no it had to be more interesting. It seems the fact he was a jewel thief wasn't exciting enough for the TV version.

sjoerdbol 12 Feb 10 at 8:05 a.m. GMT

I Still think options 3 and 4 are more likely than 1 & 2, because, as you say it: not exciting enough. OR it is option 1 but they implie another option for excitement. So you think about it afterwards and like us, talk about it on a forum.

MissQuin 10 Feb 10 at 5:45 p.m. GMT

Ok, so I'm certain that in the book, Mrs Allerton was Tim's mother. He wasnt homsexual, he wasnt having any unusual realtions with his mother.

The TV version could have 4 meanings

1 not interested (I dont think  exciting enough for the producers)

2 Tim's homo

3 She's not really Tim's mother

4 It is his mother and a D H Lawrence, Sons and Lovers style plot!!

Remember near the start Tim and Mrs A are sitting at the table, Tim showers her hand with kisses! Salome Otterbourne say's "she's old enough to be his mother!"

none of us know the answer, only the producers/actors know. So when we watch it, we'll all have to see our own views of how it is.

go_leafs_nation 09 Feb 10 at 12:58 p.m. GMT

Interesting idea, but I don't think it's correct. I say he just wasn't interested in her. Mrs. Allerton calling him does not appear to be any insinuation whatsoever. What filthy minds we all have!

sjoerdbol 09 Feb 10 at 7:08 a.m. GMT

no, I don't think you are beng too optimistic, I also thought when I saw it that she wasn't really his mother, perhaps she is just an excuse to go on trips like this so it is easier to steal the jewelry. I really loved the movie, with all the great actors, so I was a little bit afraid I wouldn't like the suchet version, but this version is a really good adaptation of the book, while the movie is just great entertainment.

biggles_aristide 09 Feb 10 at 2:25 a.m. GMT

I totally disagree on both!!! He was not gay or having an affair with his mother. He was just not interested in her! The movie might of implied it...but Agatha Christie would never do that!

go_leafs_nation 04 Feb 10 at 1:14 p.m. GMT

This is one of AC's longer novels, and a criticism that's been levelled against it is "nothing happens for the first 100 pages". I wouldn't say that. The buildup of tension and the romantic undercurrents all lead to the explosive scene between Jackie and Simon where it all boils over. It's a masterful bit of writing, and the ingenuity behind the solution is a real delight.

The film adaptations are interesting. While Ustinov's version is highly entertaining, it is over two hours long and has far less plot than the Suchet, which condensed practically the entire book into 90 minutes, which was just a bit too short, IMO... The Ustinov has an all-star cast of actors at their finest, and while the names in the Suchet aren't huge, there are some really memorable performances as well (Frances de la Tour was incredible!).

16178 03 Feb 10 at 4:03 a.m. GMT

This is one of my favorite AG's novels, she really is a genious, I love how everything was planned so perfectly, even the smallest details, it was great!!! I really have the best time of my life reading it!!!

MissQuin 26 Jan 10 at 4:44 p.m. GMT

Ah, Andrea I'm glad you found it clear. Me and Bundle certainly didn't!

Tim was very camp though... I don't know what was going on.

If it didn't happen in the book, I don't think they should add it. I would have prefered (being a hopeless romantic) Tim to live happily ever after with Rosalie!

AndreaWilkins 26 Jan 10 at 3:21 p.m. GMT

I really enjoyed the television adaptation - i think that it was clear enough, they were implying that Tim and his 'mother' were having relations - my only conclusion was that they weren't relly related, i'm i too optimistic ?? or was it really as seedy as it suggests?? lol

HeiseiHolmes 25 Jan 10 at 5:20 p.m. GMT

This was to be a Marple book at first, you know. I also like Mrs Otterbourne's reference to Agatha's first ever novel "Snow upon the Desert", she hsa a book named "Snow on the Desert's Face" or something like that.

MissQuin 16 Jan 10 at 4:46 p.m. GMT

Who knows what will be added next?! No characters are safe. I remember Murder is Easy had an added an incest plot as well...I just think the producers are going for shocks. Although I can't even tell what was even going on with Tim! Possibly he was pretending to be her son, but wasnt..  though I doubt it.

Its not like the Sleeping Murder book, where the inappropriate element was part of the main plot. Plus I felt that was dealt with sensitively by AC.

Bundle_ 16 Jan 10 at 3:07 p.m. GMT

Yes it is very shocking! Especially considering these are ruffly the same minds that made Miss Marple have had an affair w/ a married man!

And the smilies work now Yea!

MissQuin 16 Jan 10 at 11:08 a.m. GMT

 That scene was very strange and unclear. I did percieve that Tim, in the programme was a homosexual. But I wouldn't put it past the programme makers to imply otherwise! We are shocked, arent we Bundle!?

Bundle_ 15 Jan 10 at 8:50 p.m. GMT

That's what I thought at first.

But it was the way in which he told Rosalie that he wasn't interested in her and his mother called him into her cabin in a very odd way, if you remember.

go_leafs_nation 15 Jan 10 at 8:43 p.m. GMT

How about the simple solution that he just wasn't interested?

Bundle_ 15 Jan 10 at 7:02 p.m. GMT

This interesting: I went to Wikipedia to read the synopsis of DOTN since I read the book about 3 years ago and didn't remember a few things, and then I compared the changes made to the Ustinov and Suchet version of DOTN to see which one was more faithful. And when I read about the Suchet version I read about the scene when Rosalie more or less tells Tim that she has feelings for him and he of course says, "Barking up the wrong tree, I'm afraid." Mrs. Allerton then opens up the cabin door and calls for Tim to come here. Now, Wikipedia says that this scene either implies that Tim was gay or that he has an inappropriate realtionship w/ his mother! So what does everyone suppose the adapters meant to imply by this?? That Tim is gay or that he is having an affair with his own mother!!!??

Bundle_ 13 Jan 10 at 4:54 p.m. GMT

MissQuin

What did everyone think of Simon and Jackie in the Suchet version? I thought JJ Fields as Simon, looked the part and the way he broke down at the end when Poirot confronted him was incrediably realistic. He was an excellent choice. On the other hand I didnt like the woman playing Jacqueline de Bellefort. I thought she was too restrained. Her voice didn't vibrate with emotion it stayed quiet and level. Her face was blank, not enfused with passion.

Oh I loved JJ Feild as Simon Doyle! He brought such intesity to the character, not to mention how absolutely Handsome he is!!

I liked Emma Malin as Jackie. Someone on the board said recently that she didn't look half latin but I disagree; at any rate, she certainly looks more latin than Mia Farrow did. And Malin also looks more like how AC descibed the character anyway.And that's interesting that you found her restrianed, MissQuinn. I felt just the opposite, I felt that her perfomance was theatrical and that she put a lot of rage into the part when it required it.

MissQuin 13 Jan 10 at 4:32 p.m. GMT

What did everyone think of Simon and Jackie in the Suchet version? I thought JJ Fields as Simon, looked the part and the way he broke down at the end when Poirot confronted him was incrediably realistic. He was an excellent choice. On the other hand I didnt like the woman playing Jacqueline de Bellefort. I thought she was too restrained. Her voice didn't vibrate with emotion it stayed quiet and level. Her face was blank, not enfused with passion.

I thought Tim and Rosalie were meant to be a new hope after J&S died. I know Rosealie acting like a brat at times, but her mother would drive anyone mad! They cut the Tim and Rosalie plot from the Suchet version. I think it was implied that Tim was a homosexual? as he told her "your barking up the wrong tree" and his mother gave him a knowing smile.

Theres nothing like a tragic romance to capture the imagination! I know some people might not like the "romantic" subplots. But I enjoy most of them, though there not always needed.

Bundle_ 04 Jan 10 at 2:04 p.m. GMT

I like these conversations too!

GKC once again you have made valid points. I nearly forgot that Sion didn't like Linette. So perhaps that it why he never thought of staying w/ her. However it would be interesting to know if Linette made him sign a pre-nub...If she didn't then he could always have divorced her.

Jill you make very valid points too and I agree w/ you that Jackie would think about what she did for Simon a lot. And I'm going to stick w/ the notion that they would have arguments because I think they didn't see past the rewards which were getting all that money and being together forever.

I think that once they bought a mansion ,and purchased lots of things, perhaps have child, and were well established in their lives they would have time to think back at what they did. Jackie would probably feel more sorry about it all then Simon, because Simon isn't as emotional as Jackie is and being a man he wouldn't really come out right and admit that what he did was wrong. Jackie would probably ask him something like, "If you had to do it all over again, Simon, what would you do?" Then being selfish Simon would resent her asking him this and they'd get in fights.

Amd I do think Simon is in love w/ Jackie but not as passionately as she felt about him. I think that even still caring for her, after quite some time in their marriage, he would have an affair it would probably seem strange to hi that he should not: considering how rich and handsome he was: I'm sure wome would be ga-ga over him. Jackie being very clever would find out about them and they'd get into even more arguments! But I think they'd stay together forever: bonded by their past, and by the love that formed their realtionship.

Puffinjill 04 Jan 10 at 8:18 a.m. GMT

I think Simon is too unimaginative to fear Jackie. I doubt he would even have considered the future at all. All he can feel is his want for money, which far outweighs any wish for human love. He knows Jackie adores him beyond all reason, but he is unable to see how damaging this could be, He wants what he wants, but would never of had the intelligence to put together a plan that would see him rich without having to remain married to a woman he disliked for the rest of his life.

Unfortunately, their plans don't run smoothly and, as they are in far too deep to stop, others lose their lives too. I think Jackie feels the strain of this and, had they managed to escape detection, would have been haunted for the rest of her life by what she had done. These murders would lie between them for the rest of their lives. With all her imagination, I feel Jackie would have struggled to live with these memories constantly on her mind - memories of murders she was willing to commit to give the man she loves all he wants. All she ever wanted was Simons love, and I can see her struggling to live with the realisation that, no matter what she did, he simply can't love her as she wants. Perhaps detection and a quick death was preferable than a future together filled with the realisation that what you have done actually distances you more from the one you love than binds you.

GKCfan 04 Jan 10 at 12:08 a.m. GMT

Great observations!  I love seeing this kind of discussion on the boards!  I do want to point out that Simon disliked Linnet personally– he considered her beautiful but bossy and possessive, and he hated that!  He wanted Linnet's money and couldn't bear staying with her longer than necessary.

I do wonder, what would've happened if they hadn't been caught and Simon's leg hadn't healed properly?  Simon would've been crippled for life, and I don't know if he would have considered the wealth a fair trade.  Plus, he would've resented Jackie forever for coming up with the plan, even though he did injure himself willingly for it to succeed.

Also, I think that Simon might have been too afraid to actually throw over Jackie for good– he'd gotten a glimpse of just how vengeful she could pretend to be– just imagine how crazy she could get if she wasn't acting!  He might've stayed with her purely out of fear, and just think how THAT might have poisoned the relationship!

Bundle_ 03 Jan 10 at 8:59 p.m. GMT

That was wonderfully put, J.A. And I never really thought about Simon not staying w/ Jackie, that's interesting....But in my humble opinion I think he would have stayed w/ her because after all it would have been much easier for him to have remained married to a beautiful woman whom was wealthy, therefore deciding to do away w/ the plan and just forget about Jackie.

Of course Jackie would still have followed them around but all he would have to do was get a restraining order against her and she' be arrested or put in some sanitarium. So I do think he loved her- and that he would stay w/ her, though their relationship would be strained, like you said, because Jackie would constantly try to make him happy because she had gone to such lengths before that she might figure that he would always need her to do things to make him happy. And they'd probably get in arguments about what they did to Linette, and her maid, and Mrs. Otterbourne, always blaming one another for it all.

Their realtionship would be Hell! But I'd expect they'd get through it, they seem to love living on the edge. The crazy fools!

Puffinjill 03 Jan 10 at 7 a.m. GMT

Very true, Bundle. Jackie was more ruthless and able to detach herself from any fondness she may have had for Linette. Yes, she loved the fellow - but her love was a selfish love as it took no heed of how it affected anyone else. All she could see was what she wanted and that was Simon. As he wouldn't settle for love without the money, she was willing to plan the murder of her best friend to give him what he craved. Even if it had worked, and the pair of them had got away with it, I doubt any true happiness would have lain in store for them. Jackie would have spent the rest of her life deperately trying to keep Simon and give him all he wished. I'm not so sure Simon would have been able to love any one person more than he loved money.

Such a waste and a shame. Part of me feels sorry for them but, mostly, I feel they were greedy and selfish and, together, dangerous. Alone, they may have never turned to crime but the mixture of Simons' single-minded, childlike greed mixed with Jackies' cunning intelligence and lack of proportion meant they were doomed from the start.

Bundle_ 03 Jan 10 at 12:01 a.m. GMT

You're right about that, GKC: Simon was the more greedy one between them, but she went along w/ his idea of bumping off Linette; she could have found some way of talking him out of it, after all she was clever and a first rate liar, but she didn't because she not only wanted to protect him but she wanted the money too.

But if I may also say, I think that Jackie is the more ruthless one between the two of them because she was cunning enough to think of the wicked way they could murder her, and after all Linette was her best friend and Jackie had the allegiance to Linette, whereas Simon had not.

GKCfan 02 Jan 10 at 9:09 p.m. GMT

This is one of Christie's best.  The only flaw is that it is the only Christie book to withhold a vital clue– the hole in the salon table.  Not to pick a fight with you, Bundle, but I think that Simon was the only one who let greed overwhelm him.  Jackie only went along with the scheme because she knew that Simon was determined to marry Linnet and inherit her money, and he would have used some stupid and obvious murder method, like arsenic poisoning.  As Poirot observed at the end, "[Jackie] had not coveted Linnet's money, but she had loved Simon Doyle, loved him beyond reason and beyond rectitude and beyond pity."  I think that Jackie could have lived without the money as long as she had Simon, but Simon was so desperate to have lots of money that he first embezzled himself out of a job, and then married and murdered himself into the grave.

Bundle_ 02 Jan 10 at 3:21 p.m. GMT

Yes one does feel sort of sorry for Jackie and Simon. I feel this way because both of them let greed stand in the way of what really mattered to them most of all, which was: Love. And they had each other and at the end of the day that's all they really needed. I think they just got cocky and figured why couldn't they have their love and money. Very sad story for them and the victims.

MissQuin 01 Jan 10 at 8:42 p.m. GMT

I love this book, yes, I think its one of Agatha Christies best. I admit I did suspect the murder(ers) but couldnt see how it was done. There are some great characters. I think there could be the Poirot book with the most murders at one time! Its strange how you can feel oddly sorry for Jacqueline de Bellefort, despite her actions.

Lone_Wolf 24 Nov 09 at 2:40 p.m. GMT

One of the best, definitely. One of my favourites. And AC wrote waay more unlikely plots then the one here.

Read more about this story: Death on the Nile