I haven't read it but |I don't think there is anything brave about writing a Book from scratch Featuring a Character already Created considering The Novelist who created him killed him off, If she had done it with a different Character who hadn't been killed off I would agree with you, Didn't the woman who who wrote Wimsey Books after Sayers Death do it from Notes left the Author? Now that is brave.
Maybe I haven't expressed myself clearly Tommy. I am also not in favour of Sophie or any other author writing an AC murder mystery. I don't agree with the rest of the Observation made biy The Observer.
Yes, this is a new novel written from scratch. It is placed in the period of 1929, when Christie was developing the 'new' character Miss Marple, so there was no annual Poirot novel. The idea of The Monogram Murders was to reach a new audience for Agatha Christie's work. You might say that the story is not Agatha Christie's work and that's totally true, but if readers like the work, it could be that they pick up other novels by Christie and enjoy the experience. Launching a new book always attracts a new audience. The Monogram Murders presents another case for Poirot to solve in his inevitable style, using his 'little grey cells' and is very successful in doing just that. Speaking to friends over Christmas, I was surprised that there are people out there that have not read a Christie novel, but the launch of The Monogram Murders has brought the name of Agatha Christie to the fore and some have bought the new book; I have recommended some of my favourites to them and I hope that some of them will go out and buy a Christie book, read it and enjoy the experience.
Are you somebody who thinks that The ITV Series could encourage people to read Christie Novels? I personally think if anyone does read Christie as a result of Watching ITVs Marple they will be disapointed, someone on her who has read the book said that if people do read Christie books as a result of reading this book they will be doing themselves a disservice.
I have finally read The Monogram Murders and found that there was something missing, it struck me as soon as I finished it ; it was not written by Agatha Christie. So many authors are trying to imitate other authors; Benjamin Black tried it with Raymond Chandler and that failed as well.
I love reading Agatha Christie novels and plays (Let's leave out The Monogram Murders for a minute) and I enjoy them all, but accept that some individuals like some of the stories and not others, that's the choice. On Tuesday I will be attending the first night of 'And Then There Were None' in Windsor and lucky enough to attend the after the show party, however, I know that some aspects of the production will be different from the play I have just finished reading, and the film I watched just before Christmas, but it does not stop me enjoying the play, which is an Agatha Christie story line. I don't get cross that Agatha Christie Ltd wanted to review an interest in her books and that another author had a great plot for Poirot. I accept the novel, or play for what it is; A rollicking good murderer mystery.
Is it a Professional Production? If so who is in it? I have 3 versions stored on my Machine, I am seriously considering buying the Non-Russian (Or is it Indian) versions, one version I have stored has Richard Attenborough another has Fabian, I can't remember about the 3rd
The Play is being performed by 'The Agatha Christie Theatre Company' (http://www.theatreroyalwindsor.co.uk/details.php?id=303) and Tuesday is the first night of the season as it tours round the UK. The film on BBC was a 1945 film adaption directed by René Clair.
La novela me parece buena en sí misma, el personaje de Hercule Poirot está bien desarrollado, coherente con el Poirot que conocemos, lo que me pareció fuera del estilo de Christie es que el detective protagonista de la novela aparezca más como uno de esos detectives haird boilled de las novelas norteamericanas, y no un detective de Scotland Yard, de acuerdo a los cánones de la literatura detectivesca inglesa
La novela me parece buena en sí misma, el personaje de Hercule Poirot está bien desarrollado, coherente con el Poirot que conocemos, lo que me pareció fuera del estilo de Christie es que el detective protagonista de la novela aparezca más como uno de esos detectives haird boilled de las novelas norteamericanas, y no un detective de Scotland Yard, de acuerdo a los cánones de la literatura detectivesca inglesa
The novel seems good in itself, the character of Hercule
Poirot is well developed, consistent with the Poirot that we know, what found
me out the Christie style is the detective protagonist of the novel to appear
more as one of those detectives hard boiled of American novels, and not a
detective of Scotland Yard, according to the canons of the English detective
literature.
Exeter University are holding their second conference centred on Agatha Christie in April, Titled: Agatha Christie: Hidden Horizons. One of the key note speakers will be Sophie Hannah, where she will be talking about the book The Monogram Murders.
I wasn't going to bother with this book, since I am of the opinion that AC and only AC can write a Poirot story and that this book is just another attempt by the Christie estate to make yet more money. However, since it has now made it's way from the lofty heights of the best seller lists to the bargain bins from whence I picked up a copy for £7, I decided to give it a try.
What a load of drivel!
Hannah utterly fails to bring Poirot to life in any way, shape or form. It may as well be the ghost of Hercule stalking the pages of the book, although I should think that even the ghost of Poirot would be more alive than the character as she has written him. It takes more than having her Poirot utter phrases such as "mon ami" or "n'est-ce pas" at every verse end to step into AC's shoes. Nor does using the most unusual name (Dorcas) of one of the characters from another AC novel make you believe that this story is written by Agatha herself.
The story gets off to a poor start and does not get any better. Are we seriously to believe that when Poirot desires some peace and quiet to refresh his little grey cells, he ups sticks and and moves a few hundred yards across the street into the lodging house of Mrs Blanche Unsworth, with it's "flounces, frills and trims" and it's "excessively lavender fringes"......No, No and thirty six times No as the great man himself might have said. Such a setting would drive the little man UTTERLY crazy. What Poirot would do is to instruct his excellent manservant Georges to announce to all callers that he was not at home, and have the ever efficient Miss Lemon continue with her secretarial duties with the least disturbance to himself possible. If that was not peaceful enough he might possibly take himself off to a suite at The Savoy, The Ritz or even the great Bertram's Hotel! But then, how would the poor author manage to contrive a meeting between Poirot and the rank-less policeman Catchpool to discover that there had been the said Monogram Murders?
And what exactly is the point of Catchpool's constant references to his childhood experiences of death and the fear and discomfort those memories bring him? Would a person with such hangups ever conceivably enter into a career as a policeman in a major city where he would knowingly have to deal with dead bodies in an official capacity on an almost daily basis? If Hannah was going to make Catchpool the murderer I could see the point of the repetitive phrase "Hold his hand, Edward" , but as it is it appears to be just a poor attempt at trying to flesh out a new character's background. Logically, since Poirot is being allowed to investigate the case with the full consent of Scotland Yard, we should have expected to see Japp if there were to be any police presence in the book at all. But based on what we do have, I think that Hannah would never have been able to recreate the rapport between Poirot & Japp that AC created so it's probably for the best.
There is to my mind an awful lot of padding in this book, and towards the final third it gets very woolly and repetitive indeed, as if the author was struggling to bring it to a successful conclusion. AC was a master of creating a fairly simple plot, and weaving a great story around it managing both to give the reader all the information needed to solve the puzzle and yet leaving them utterly surprised when the ending was actually revealed. Hannah seems to have done the opposite, taking an unnecessarily complicated plot and then being unable to weave a strong enough story around it to hold the reader's attention. How many times and by how many people do we need to be told who killed who and in what order? Surely once is enough, and that should be left to the end for Poirot himself to declare. We know that Poirot likes to deliver his denouement on a grand scale whenever possible, and that there is usually an element of surprise involved, but exactly why does he require the attendance of the entire hotel staff at 4pm in the hotel's lavishly ornamented dining room for this? On the first occasion this gathering happened there was a logical reason for it, but this second occurrence is pointless. And at 4pm every hotel resident and there granny would be requiring afternoon tea!... unless every guest had already left in fear of becoming a victim. You only need the presence of the handful of hotel staff (manager, waiter, reception) who are actually involved in the story to attend together with the remaining characters and all these could fit quite comfortably into a private side room.
Charles Osborne novelised three of AC's works some twenty years after her death, and so successfully did he do it that when you read them you really do forget they were not written by her own hand. He may have had a little more in the way of basic stock to work from than Hannah did, but it does show what can be achieved when you have someone who actually has a knowledge and a genuine interest in their subject rather than someone who is simply seeing a potential source of income.
An interesting review of The Monogram Murders, you cover a number of points that many readers will agree with.
I wanted to comments on the Charles Osborne books. The reason they seem like an Agatha Christie story, is that he took the words from the play, word for word, adding almost nothing of his own, even when he had the chance to; for example, in Spider's Web, when the characters meet in the golf club, or when they walk from the house to the gate at the bottom of the garden. There is no description of characters, the room or atmosphere. Very disappointing.
One of The Keynote speakers at the Agatha Christie - Hidden Horizons Conference at Exeter University was Sophie Hannah. About 100 delegates attended day 1 of the conference to discuss Christie approach to writing murder mystery novels. Speakers were from Italy, USA, Germany, Scotland and England. Sophie discussed how she came to write The Monogram Murders, particularly for those who were unable to attend the launch of the book. A lively and interactive discussion took place after her talk.
It's always a pleasure to hear Sophie talk and manage the sceptics to the new Poirot novel. What was particularly interesting was the insight that her outline plot for the story, which had to be approved by Harper Collins and Agatha Christie Limited, grew from six pages to just over 100 pages and meant that she had only to expand on the outline when completing the story. She found the detailed planning such an enjoyable experience that she had since used it in developing her own psychological thrillers.
The Sunday Times has listed its Books for Summer Reading (5th July). Under the section 'Best Reads on the Beach' - the finest holiday fiction - is The Monogram Murders. Now it's out in paperback its sales should pick up and it should reach a wider audience.
The Monogram Murders has sold over 76,000 books in the UK, and been translated into 34 languages. CEO of Agatha Christie Ltd, Hilary Strong, said that "The publication of The Monogram Murders has introduced a new audience to Christie's works."
@Dr. Sheppard: If what the CEO said about the effect of the Monogram Murders publication is true shouldn't she have mentioned the increase in sales of AC"s original work? Is there a rush on AC's own writings? No mention about that, unfortunately.
What the Estate did in my opinion, is introduce Sophie Hannah to a big audience. I, for instance never heard of her before this. Wonder how much Hannah's own work has benefited in sale's from the prestigious podium she got, thanks to the AC Estate.
Dr Sheppard it isn't how many people bought The Book that is important but whether they liked it, Many people probably bought it out of curiosity but the question that is important is Did they LIKE it? Would it ENCOURAGE them to buy another Sophie Hannah book featuring Poirot? those are they key things to go buy, About the time The Book came out I saw a Series of one of her books Dramatized on Television, I liked it, I haven't read The Monogram Murders for reasons I have stated Umpteen Times so can't comment on the Book apart from saying that by allowing and Writing a Poirot Book, The Estate and Sophie Hannah did the Books a disservice in my view.
Dr Sheppard do you work for her Publishing Company or her Agent or The Agatha Christie Estate?
I am a long time Agatha Christie fan, and attend as many reviews / conferences / book festivals that promote Agatha Christie's work. My passion for Christie novels has brought me into contact with Mathew Pritchard and Agatha Christie Ltd and I am delighted to support the work that they do in promoting my favourite authors work. The publication of The Monogram Murders has done exactly that, promoted an interest in Agatha Christie's work. For example, The International Agatha Christie Festival this year, had readings from a different Christie book at 10 am and 4 pm each day, and these were attended by over 50 individuals at some sessions. Many of the audience were delighted to be introduced to a story that they had not read before and went and bought the books from the shop in the Book Tent. It was great to see that Christie events attract people from all over the world to discover her work and share their enjoyment.
Well @Dr Sheppard , that's the kind of data which has relevance here. Why doesn't the Estate come with figures that support their intended goal: interesting new readers in AC's work?. And why didn't the Estate involve the faithful, old readers of AC novels in reincarnating AC?
They could have held a poll as to who would be the best choice for writing AC-like novels. What made them choose Hannah, I am curious to know.
And also, is it because of the many not so favourable reactions to this undertaking on this forum that there is no more visible activity from administrators or Matthew Pritchard himself??
Dr Sheppard have you got cast Iron Evidence that The Sophie Hannah Book has attracted new Fans, They might just read the book then start reading Christies Work and think that The Sophie Hannah book is better and so not read AC again in the same way fans of the Marple series might start reading the books as a result of seeing a the series and not like the books because they don't seem as racy.
You say you are happy to support the Estate in promoting Agatha Christies Work but does that mean you support EVERYTHING that the Estate has agreed to? If so that is a shame amnd would not call you a real fan as that suggests to me you agree to The Marple series and putting Miss Marple in stories she shouldn't be in which in my view was an appalling idea, with other Adaptations people might have a problem with like the updating of Sparkling Cyanide and the 2nd Film of Murder On The Orient Express it is a matter of taste, there are some AC Books I hate but I still consider myself a Fan of her Work
Comments
The novel seems good in itself, the character of Hercule Poirot is well developed, consistent with the Poirot that we know, what found me out the Christie style is the detective protagonist of the novel to appear more as one of those detectives hard boiled of American novels, and not a detective of Scotland Yard, according to the canons of the English detective literature.
What a load of drivel!
Hannah utterly fails to bring Poirot to life in any way, shape or form. It may as well be the ghost of Hercule stalking the pages of the book, although I should think that even the ghost of Poirot would be more alive than the character as she has written him. It takes more than having her Poirot utter phrases such as "mon ami" or "n'est-ce pas" at every verse end to step into AC's shoes. Nor does using the most unusual name (Dorcas) of one of the characters from another AC novel make you believe that this story is written by Agatha herself.
The story gets off to a poor start and does not get any better. Are we seriously to believe that when Poirot desires some peace and quiet to refresh his little grey cells, he ups sticks and and moves a few hundred yards across the street into the lodging house of Mrs Blanche Unsworth, with it's "flounces, frills and trims" and it's "excessively lavender fringes"......No, No and thirty six times No as the great man himself might have said. Such a setting would drive the little man UTTERLY crazy. What Poirot would do is to instruct his excellent manservant Georges to announce to all callers that he was not at home, and have the ever efficient Miss Lemon continue with her secretarial duties with the least disturbance to himself possible. If that was not peaceful enough he might possibly take himself off to a suite at The Savoy, The Ritz or even the great Bertram's Hotel! But then, how would the poor author manage to contrive a meeting between Poirot and the rank-less policeman Catchpool to discover that there had been the said Monogram Murders?
And what exactly is the point of Catchpool's constant references to his childhood experiences of death and the fear and discomfort those memories bring him? Would a person with such hangups ever conceivably enter into a career as a policeman in a major city where he would knowingly have to deal with dead bodies in an official capacity on an almost daily basis? If Hannah was going to make Catchpool the murderer I could see the point of the repetitive phrase "Hold his hand, Edward" , but as it is it appears to be just a poor attempt at trying to flesh out a new character's background. Logically, since Poirot is being allowed to investigate the case with the full consent of Scotland Yard, we should have expected to see Japp if there were to be any police presence in the book at all. But based on what we do have, I think that Hannah would never have been able to recreate the rapport between Poirot & Japp that AC created so it's probably for the best.
There is to my mind an awful lot of padding in this book, and towards the final third it gets very woolly and repetitive indeed, as if the author was struggling to bring it to a successful conclusion. AC was a master of creating a fairly simple plot, and weaving a great story around it managing both to give the reader all the information needed to solve the puzzle and yet leaving them utterly surprised when the ending was actually revealed. Hannah seems to have done the opposite, taking an unnecessarily complicated plot and then being unable to weave a strong enough story around it to hold the reader's attention. How many times and by how many people do we need to be told who killed who and in what order? Surely once is enough, and that should be left to the end for Poirot himself to declare. We know that Poirot likes to deliver his denouement on a grand scale whenever possible, and that there is usually an element of surprise involved, but exactly why does he require the attendance of the entire hotel staff at 4pm in the hotel's lavishly ornamented dining room for this? On the first occasion this gathering happened there was a logical reason for it, but this second occurrence is pointless. And at 4pm every hotel resident and there granny would be requiring afternoon tea!... unless every guest had already left in fear of becoming a victim. You only need the presence of the handful of hotel staff (manager, waiter, reception) who are actually involved in the story to attend together with the remaining characters and all these could fit quite comfortably into a private side room.
Charles Osborne novelised three of AC's works some twenty years after her death, and so successfully did he do it that when you read them you really do forget they were not written by her own hand. He may have had a little more in the way of basic stock to work from than Hannah did, but it does show what can be achieved when you have someone who actually has a knowledge and a genuine interest in their subject rather than someone who is simply seeing a potential source of income.
One of The Keynote speakers at the Agatha Christie - Hidden Horizons
Conference at Exeter University was Sophie Hannah. About 100 delegates attended
day 1 of the conference to discuss Christie approach to writing murder mystery
novels. Speakers were from Italy, USA, Germany, Scotland and England. Sophie
discussed how she came to write The Monogram Murders, particularly for those
who were unable to attend the launch of the book. A lively and interactive discussion took place after
her talk.
It's always a pleasure to hear Sophie talk and manage the sceptics to
the new Poirot novel. What was particularly interesting was the insight that
her outline plot for the story, which had to be approved by Harper Collins and
Agatha Christie Limited, grew from six pages to just over 100 pages and meant
that she had only to expand on the outline when completing the story. She found
the detailed planning such an enjoyable experience that she had since used it
in developing her own psychological thrillers.
Dr Sheppard it isn't how many people bought The Book that is important but whether they liked it, Many people probably bought it out of curiosity but the question that is important is Did they LIKE it? Would it ENCOURAGE them to buy another Sophie Hannah book featuring Poirot? those are they key things to go buy, About the time The Book came out I saw a Series of one of her books Dramatized on Television, I liked it, I haven't read The Monogram Murders for reasons I have stated Umpteen Times so can't comment on the Book apart from saying that by allowing and Writing a Poirot Book, The Estate and Sophie Hannah did the Books a disservice in my view.
I agree with you shana.
Dr Sheppard have you got cast Iron Evidence that The Sophie Hannah Book has attracted new Fans, They might just read the book then start reading Christies Work and think that The Sophie Hannah book is better and so not read AC again in the same way fans of the Marple series might start reading the books as a result of seeing a the series and not like the books because they don't seem as racy.
You say you are happy to support the Estate in promoting Agatha Christies Work but does that mean you support EVERYTHING that the Estate has agreed to? If so that is a shame amnd would not call you a real fan as that suggests to me you agree to The Marple series and putting Miss Marple in stories she shouldn't be in which in my view was an appalling idea, with other Adaptations people might have a problem with like the updating of Sparkling Cyanide and the 2nd Film of Murder On The Orient Express it is a matter of taste, there are some AC Books I hate but I still consider myself a Fan of her Work