People accuse Agatha Christie of creating shallow characters all the time. Truth to tell, she often worked with character “types,” and one could find variations on the same rakish ex-soldier, hearty doctor, dry solicitor, club bore, self-serving vixen, dimwitted serving girl (usually named Gladys), dithery or incompetent mother, and so on, in many of her stories. Sometimes a character would stand out as a more multi-faceted creature among these types; often, all too often, that character would turn out to be the murderer, so I won’t mention the titles that come to mind.
In 1939, the author experimented with creating characters of greater depth in her seminal mystery, And Then There Were None. Afterwards, she didn’t wholeheartedly abandon her standard stock characters, (later novels like A Pocket Full of Rye and Dead Man’s Folly are full of them), but more and more she infused her writing with men and women (and the occasional child) of greater complexity. Sad Cypress (1940), which, in many ways, resembles a Mary Westmacott romance, contains a fine central mystery set against a gripping murder trial. Along the way, we get to know Elinor Carlisle, Mary Gerrard, and the small circle of people who make up the tragedy that unfolds at Hunterbury, and they are more finely rendered than the typical murder set. 1943’s Five Little Pigs is the novel fans of Christie’s characterization skills trot out whenever they want to counter the naysayers’ arguments. The emotional lives and psychologies of the seven people involved in Amyas’ Crale’s murder (including the victim and his wife, who are dead at the start), are as fascinating as the case itself. It is a tribute to Christie that she has no need to provide a surprise ending here. The author expertly doles out an equal share of suspicion among all her suspects until the revelation, when the killer turns out to be the only proper choice given the method of the crime and our understanding of who these people are.
This attention to character continues with Toward Zero and, to a lesser degree, The Moving Finger (one of my very favorite village mysteries, but one that admittedly contains its share of stock types). When we get to Sparkling Cyanide (a.k.a. Remembered Death) in 1945, which I am reviewing here as part of Rich’s Salute to 1945 on Past Offenses), the superficial resemblances to Pigs – a murder in the past, a small circle of suspects , a focus on the kind of people these were – put these two novels on a sort of par with each other. Oddly, this is underscored by a major difference between Cyanide and Pigs: namely, while the latter is an Hercule Poirot mystery, and the exploration into character develops during the sleuth’s interviews, as well as through written documents about the facts that each suspect has written, Cyanide tells its story a different way, through alternating points of view of each suspect. There is a detective in the form of the inimitable Colonel Race (from The Man in the Brown Suit, Cards on the Table, and Death on the Nile, here making his final appearance in the canon), but he is almost a minor character and he is ably abetted by others who will have more to do than he with reaching the correct solution. No, we really find out about this case from the alternating viewpoints of the six people who dined at the Luxembourg one November evening to celebrate, five of whom had ample reason to kill Rosemary Barton, Like Amyas Crale in Pigs, our victim was a complex woman, beautiful and difficult, capable of great love for her sister Iris or her lover . . . or was that lovers? . . . and of great willfulness.
The suspects, too, are interesting people. George Barton is torn between feelings of love and fury for his wife. Ruth Lessing, George’s secretary, is, of course, in love with her boss, yet her motivations are more multi-faceted than that, as are the secrets that young roué Anthony Brown is hiding, or Iris Marle’s hero worship of her sister, or the portrait of the marriage between M.P. Steven Farraday and his wife, Sandra.
So far, so good. The set-up for the mystery itself is also intriguing, based on one of Christie’s finest short stories, 1937’s “Yellow Iris,” which ironically featured Poirot. Somebody poisoned Rosemary’s glass while the party was on the dance floor. A year later, George becomes obsessed with solving his wife’s murder and invites everyone back to the restaurant, ostensibly to celebrate Iris’ birthday and to put the past behind them with a toast. To nobody’s surprise but the party guests, history repeats itself, and murder once again rears its ugly head. Now our suspects are five – the same number as in Pigs – and Colonel Race leads the charge to discover the truth where George could not.
Just last week, the Puzzle Doctor, in his marvelous blog In Search of the Classic Mystery Novel, ran a poll to find the best non-series Christie title. Wisely, he did not include And Then There Were None because, as he admits, “it would have won by a mile.” You can look at the results here, but for the purposes of this writing, I am here to inform you that the winner was . . . Sparkling Cyanide! Not Crooked House, not Toward Zero, but Cyanide.
Why does this bother me? I like the characters. I like the format of Christie opening up the minds of each major character for our perusal. And since one of these people must be the murderer, it allows Christie to play her usual tricks with wordplay, trapping us into reading the wrong message in what people say, think or do.
Unfortunately, while Five Little Pigs combines first-rate characterization with a first-rate mystery, and Crooked House lays out a fascinating family dynamic before springing a shocker of an ending on us, the mystery part of Sparkling Cyanide is, frankly, a mess. And of course, I can’t really tell you why it is a mess without giving the show away, so I will just say that the second murder’s whole conceit rests on an event so ludicrous that it boggles the mind and that, having spent a few hours pleasure getting to know the six people at the party, the final revelation is very much a mixed success because . . . ohhhhh, I won’t say it. You who agree with me know what I’m talking about, and you who love this tale – I’m pointing at you, Puzzle Doctor – are welcome to discuss below and/or privately.
That’s not to say that Sparkling Cyanide isn’t eminently readable, but I venture to warn those of you who tackle it for the first time to enjoy it for its sublime characterization and then brace yourself for a letdown at the end as far as the puzzle element is concerned.
12 thoughts on “ROSEMARY FOR REMEMBRANCE: Christie’s Sparkling Cyanide”
I did enjoy reading this novel but as you suggest it is not one you get passionately enthusiastic about and I actually preferred reading a number of the other Christie novels you reference such Towards Zero, Crooked House and Sad Cypress. The first two of these are actually quite dark and they have a real sense of matureness in the themes and ideas they include. I voted for Crooked House in Puzzle Doctor’s poll but I think Sparkling Cyanide may have won as it is probably one of the better well known non serial Christie novels and therefore more likely to have been read.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I also voted for CROOKED HOUSE (great minds!!!) But did you notice that Puzzle Doctor had not read it because it had been spoiled for him? I have a feeling that this title, next to ROGER ACKROYD, contains the solution that rats love to ruin for others!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thankfully I didn’t have this title spoiled for me but I can imagine it would really annoying going into the book knowing who did it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ve added a link to this post in this month’s Agatha Christie Reading Challenge Blog Carnival at http://acrccarnival.blogspot.com.au/
Thanks, Kerrie. I’m honored to be a part of the Christie Challenge.
Oddly, it’s the characters whom I find the least interesting or likeable in this one- the solution is pretty unbelievable but I can go along with that for the sake of a ‘Christie’ puzzle. Still I agree it is not one of her best; it’s a rather flat read in the end. Once again, Christie re-used the plot of a short story (Yellow Iris) and changed its rather weak ending so maybe that’s why it failed to convince me.
Brad, I differ from you on this. I regard it as brilliant. Not only is the characterisation superb, but also the mystery is clever.
In fact, a sparkling murder mystery ! I rate it 5 out of 5.
I certainly agree with you on the characterization, Santosh. I just find the, shall we say, placement issue so unbelievable, among other things, that it spoils the puzzle for me.
My main issue with this one was that I completely misread one of the key clues and just as she was about to reveal the workings it suddenly tumbled brilliantly together in my mind…and her solution turned out to be astoundingly weak by comparison! Leaves me free to write that book one day, but the resolution to this definitely doesn’t match the build up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: ‘You waited for anything and everything these days’: #1945book reviews | Past Offences: Classic crime, thrillers and mystery book reviews
I LOVE this book (originally entitled “Remembr’ed Death”) because it is sweetly romantic in addition to being a darn good mystery. Christie’s sleight of hand is never sharper and I really like Antony Brown! Particularly keen was Iris’ character development as she comes to terms with finding out who Rosemary really was. We practically see her grow up before our eyes as she sheds her girlish adoration of “perfect” Rosemary and discovers that her understanding of her sister was shallow and incomplete.
There have been a few adaptations of this story, the American version (penned by Sue Grafton) is OK, reasonably faithful to Christie’s story but with that “M is for Murder” Grafton touch. Acting ok, good denouement.
Pingback: My Book Notes: Sparkling Cyanide (1944) by Agatha Christie – A Crime is Afoot