Have Your Say

Non-series Books and Characters

Other Christie books discussions

Sparkling Cyanide - SPOILERS!

hobbit 05 Oct 08 at 2:13 p.m. GMT

SPOILERS FOR SPARKLING CYANIDE

Okay, I know I'm probably going to upset a few people by saying this, but I personally felt that SC was a very weak effort from Agatha Christie. The murderer is clear pretty much from the outset (they have motive, opportunity to plant the cyanide etc.) but then becomes much less likely when the love of her life George is killed. 'So it can't be Ruth Lessing, then' the reader thinks. But...oh no. The wrong person drank the cyanide by accident - in truly spectacular circumstances.

As a refresher for those of you who haven't read the book in a while, the second murder happens something like this:

Iris, the intended victim, has the cyanide dropped in her glass. They toast to Iris, so she doesn't drink any herself. Then they all get up and have a dance, one of the diners' purses falls off the table and is put back in the wrong place and - as a consequence - all the diners move round one seat. George drinks Iris' champagne and promptly dies.

Okay, a few things. To have a coincidence as extreme as that is a really cheap trick from AC. There is no way we as a reader can really guess what has happened, so she kind of breaks the rules of fair play just so we don't work out who the killer is. Here are three alternatives that are much more likely to have actually happened:

1) The diners all toast to Iris. She smiles but, thirsty, takes a sip of her drink anyway. Iris dies.

2) The bag is put back in the wrong place. The diner, noticing her bag is in the wrong place, moves it and they all sit in the correct seats. Iris drinks and dies.

3) Everyone sits in the wrong places. George dies. But then someone cries out 'Hello - we're all sitting in the wrong places'. 'Oh yes, so we are' cries another, 'how could we all have been so awfully dim to have missed that?' They realise Iris was the intended victim and suddenly Ruth is back in the frame.

Just a few sensible alternatives to a highly unlikely event. I mean honestly, like no-one would have noticed they'd all moved round one seat. They'd all have been looking at the entire restaurant from a different angle. Someone would have noticed that and told the police, surely?

Anyway just a few thoughts.  You're welcome to disagree.

Hobbit

Login or register to add posts and reply

16 replies

Reverse order

Lone_Wolf 06 Jan 09 at 5:19 a.m. GMT

I guess that depends on the proximity of the sitting people to each other and the number of them - the more the proximity and the number, the lesser the change of the angle of the point of view.

If you try to do this trick with 3 people sitting on the table, you won't suceed, while in case of 40 people sitting, you have a much greater chance.

Tommy_A_Jones 10 Dec 08 at 4:43 p.m. GMT

Yes Nausicaa I have a big collection of Audio Books, some as plays and some as readings but I am afraid the only Non-Poirot/MM/T&T; Audio I have is Hugh Fraser reading The Unexpected Guest which I think is odd, I think Audio's shouldn't be read by David Suchet or Hugh Fraser if they aren't Poirot books, but by someone who looks like one of the Characters, I feel the same about James Warwick, he shouldn't non T&T; books.

Nausicaa 26 Nov 08 at 6 a.m. GMT

I wonder if anyone else has a lot of audio books of ACs. Because I do and sometimes I even listened to them before I read the book. I really liked Sparkling Cyanide. One thing I've noticed is that a really good reader will pull you into the book and make it come alive. I have one with a really good reader for this book so maybee that helped. Does anyone else have this experence?

hobbit 12 Nov 08 at 3:48 p.m. GMT

I'm sure no one could ever misundewrstand you, winnebago ;)

Tommy_A_Jones 04 Nov 08 at 4:09 p.m. GMT

Please don't misundewrstand me I love Agatha Christies books but if I was Emigrating and couldn't take all the books with me I would quite happily leave Sparkling Cyanide behind along with Murder Is Easy and Death Comes As The End, I would also leave behind some Poirot's but that is for another discussion, I must also say I haven't read all the books in each Category POIROT'S, MISS MARPLE'S, T&TS;, NON-SERIES BOOKS or SHORT STORY Books so the list might get longer.

squatty 02 Nov 08 at 11:26 a.m. GMT

To be honest, I found the characterisations even weaker than the plot. Normally if the plot is weak, some strong characters compensate that, and vice versa.

go_leafs_nation 01 Nov 08 at 3:44 p.m. GMT

[quote="hobbit"]However I'm slightly confused as to what we class as 'brilliant characterisation' (go_leafs, Dale?)[/quote]

Well, SC is not much of a book plot-wise. It focuses more on developing the cahracters. I found that I really got into their heads, as it were.

Marc_Anton 31 Oct 08 at 1:15 p.m. GMT

Indeed Hobbit, the characters in Sparkling Cyanide are not the best Christie ever introduced in her one of her books. The fact that they never figure on those (i.m.o very silly) 'Most beloved character' and 'Who do you want to be?' lists that float around on this Forum, prove that they don't stay in the memory very long. Though I read this novel twice over the years, the only thing I remember is the 'trick' with the evening bag, because it was so very unconvincing. I have no recollection of the plot (the motive of the murderer), even the names of the character escape me now.

hobbit 31 Oct 08 at 9:09 a.m. GMT

Well I'm glad to see that many of you shared my problem with the book! In response to your comment, Dale, I'd just like to point out that (although coincidence is, I agree, a great story-telling technique when used wisely) my problem here wasn't so much that the coincidence occured, but that no-one pointed it out/noticed it, as Marc Anton said.

However I'm slightly confused as to what we class as 'brilliant characterisation' (go_leafs, Dale?) I have to agree with winnebago (for once!) and squatty - the characters really had little impact on me. Same 1-dimensional cardboard cut-outs AC wheeled out every time, weren't they? :)

Hobbit

P.S. From my recollection of Sleeping Murder, squatty, I thought that she did have very strong memories about the house (the idea being she was drawn to purchasing it by her sub-conscious). I'm not a psychologist so really can't say how plausible that is, but I believe that's what we're supposed to infer.

squatty 30 Oct 08 at 9:48 p.m. GMT

Welcome back Winnebago. I do agree with you about the weak characterisations in Sparkling Cyanide. Before I started to type this reply I tried to remember any of the characters and couldnt remember one. I cant think of any AC book where the characters have had so little impact one me.

Tommy_A_Jones 30 Oct 08 at 4:08 p.m. GMT

I know I said I would probably never visit this site adain but I just had to say I hated Sparkling Cyanide, Not only did it have Colonel Race my least favourite Christie Character but I didn't like any of the other Characteres either, When I had eventually finished this book I thought reading it had been a pointless waste of time although I didn't guess who did it and so wassn't angry at the end like with some other Christie books so it had that going for it.

Marc_Anton 10 Oct 08 at 1:33 p.m. GMT

This reply contains spoiler information. Show reply

We had a similar (interesting) discussion like this on the old website. To read and enjoy crime novels, especially the ones that depend on great plotting and ‘puzzle’, we need to have an open mind and create for ourselves kind of frame in which we can accept certain ‘explanations’ and coincidences. Sparkling Cyanide is one of those novels (Murder in Mesopotamia is another). Also, some explanations work better when you only read them, when go one step further and think how they would work in real life, you have to lower your level of acceptance (Lord Edgware Dies is an example of this). You can see this in the various TV versions, they need to do a lot of creative filming to make this acceptable to the viewer without giving away too much of the plot (it completely misfired in One Two, Buckle my Shoe). Christie is normally quite good in ‘unbelievable plotting’ but sometimes crosses a very thin line and the entire puzzle becomes nonsense. SPOILERS! (Oh, how I miss that For the Knowledgeable map!) I also think it is a bit hard to believe that people will not notice that they took the wrong seat, especially when there is a floor show going on somewhere else in the room. Maybe they will not take notice of it at the moment but some members of the party would at least mention it in their interviews with the police after the murder (‘You know, there WAS something funny after the dance!’). Also, the disguise as a waiter was a bit hard to swallow, various people were familiar with the character and yes, I also look at waiters (and I understood this was quite a handsome guy).

squatty 09 Oct 08 at 7:03 p.m. GMT

Lol - I dont think hobbit is being especially harsh. Perhaps the problem I have with Sparkling Cyanide is the very high standard AC set in most of her other novels. She regularly wrote extremely complex plots with believable solutions, so to rely on an unbelievable coincidence to explain the murder doesnt cut the mustard. I agree Dale that coincidences do happen but I think it is a bit lazy of an author to use them for such a fundamental element of the book. In fairness to AC, the only other occassion that she did this to an extent that it stretches crdibility is in Sleeping Murder, when one of the main characters buys the house she lived in as a very young child and has no recollection of the place.

dale_cooper 09 Oct 08 at 2:55 p.m. GMT

I think you're being a little harsh, hobbit. Christie wasn't saying that such a thing would always happen in those circumstances, but it's not by any means beyond the realms of possibility, is it? At the end of the day AC wrote a fascinating mystery, with great characterisation. Whether it was 'likely to have actually happened' or not is irrelevant. A lot of very good books are filled with astonishing coincidences, after all (Dickens, Hardy etc.)

go_leafs_nation 05 Oct 08 at 8:45 p.m. GMT

I must agree that the solution was far from brilliant. But I like SC so much because of the characterization. The solution is, indeed, rather unfair.

squatty 05 Oct 08 at 3:26 p.m. GMT

I agree with you entirely Hobbit. I'll let you into a secret. Shortly after reading this book, I was out with a few friends and thought I'd try it out for myself (without the poison of course). We'd been up dancing and I deliberatly sat down at the chair next to the one I'd been previously sitting at. All that happened was a very disgruntled friend said "Oi, you're sitting in my chair). To think that the whole detail of a murder could be based on something so flimsy, is probably why this is one of the weakest AC books