Dead Man’s Folly I think I have read twice before – and have seen a TV adaptation too – so maybe it was no real surprise that I began to remember things after about 60 pages. It all remained very muddled in my head though and so I had to read on to see what I had remembered correctly. In Dead Man’s Folly, Hercule Poirot is summoned to Devon by Ariadne Oliver – a character of Agatha Christie’s that is quite obviously a thinly disguised self-portrait. I’ve always really rather liked Ariadne Oliver, she is an eccentric, and like Poirot, something of a stereotype – still Agatha Christie novels are not the kind of novels to take too seriously. Ariadne Oliver is involved in the preparations of a fete in the grounds of Nasse House – as part of the preparations Ariadne is designing a muder hunt – like a treasure hunt with clues hidden around the grounds. Ariadne tells everyone at Nasse House that Poirot is there to present the prize however her real motive in getting Poirot to Devon is because she is convinced that “something is wrong” There are the usual collection of Christie types scattered around Nasse house and the immediate surroundings, a young married couple, a cynical young architect, the former owner of Nasse house living in the lodge, Sir George Stubbs the wealthy new owner and his much younger wife, who is apparently rather suggestible and the bitter secretary come housekeeper. The day following Poirot’s arrival the Fete gets underway – a local girl guide is to play the part of the body in Mrs Oliver’s murder hunt – only Ariadne’s belief that something was wrong proves all too accurate when she and Poirot find the poor girl dead in the boathouse. Within a couple of hours it is also obvious that the beautiful Hattie Stubbs is missing.One of the criticisms often levelled against Agatha Christie – is that she cheats. Well – yes she does – in that Fred Bloggs will later turn out to be Joe Brown who disappeared down the Amazon seventeen years earlier and hasn’t been heard of since. Some people don’t like the fact that the reader therefore doesn’t have all the information – and so can’t solve the mystery themselves. That has never bothered me. The reader can make a shrewd guess to the who without knowing the why and how after all. I think I always prefer to have everything revealed to me at the end anyway, and so I don’t try to work it out – that’s the job of the detective. This was perfect easy reading for me – as I never tire of dear old Poirot.
This is another of those Hercule Poirot mysteries where it's obvious that Christie was tired of her most famous creation. When the Belgian sleuth is there in body but absent in spirit, as he is here, Christie substitutes an authority figure to do the grunt work while allowing Poirot a tidbit of glory with his "little grey cells" toward the story's end. In this case, she employs a well-meaning but narrow-minded inspector with a penchant for blaming foreigners for just about anything. Perhaps feeling that was inadequate, she also throws in the bumbling mystery writer, Ariadne Oliver, one of crime fiction's most annoying characters and not much of a substitute for anything but inspiration. Here, Poirot finds himself on hand for a village fête at a country estate with a much-decried "folly", an architectural nightmare. He is not, alas, on the ball enough to prevent the murder of a young girl playing the part of a corpse in a murder mystery game devised by Mrs. Oliver. The unraveling is a cross between the over-obvious and the impossible-to-figure-out sort of clues that leave the reader feeling both Poirot and Christie pretty much walked through the entire book blindfolded.
What do You think about Dead Man's Folly (2006)?
I'm going to have to discuss spoilers of not only this book but several others in order to review it, so be forewarned! I enjoyed Dead Man's Folly whilst reading it but felt afterwards that there were too many elements Dame Agatha used better elsewhere, despite it being from arguably the strongest part of her long career. I don't mind that she reuses certain concepts because she does it cleverly--looking at an idea from all angles and showing many possibilities. So it is never a criticism to say
—Laurel Young
Organizzare un delitto! Questo è quanto aspetta alla signora Ariadne Oliver, scrittrice di gialli. Un finto delitto; una specie di caccia all'assassino per sostituire l'ormai classica e noiosa caccia al tesoro. Una sagra campestre con qualcosa di nuovo. Un finto cadavere, dei finti indizi e un famosissimo investigatore a consegnare il premio al vincitore: Hercule Poirot. La giornata di festa ha inizio nel migliore dei modi, moltissima gente disposta a pagare per partecipare ai giochi o solamente per poter visitare Nasse House, splendida tenuta situata vicino al fiume Helm nel Devonshire, rimasta disabitata per parecchi anni. Ma nel corso della giornata fra una gara di tiro con le noci di cocco, una di birilli e la "pesca" a premi, con tutte le persone intente a girovagare, a bere e mangiare e a partecipare ai giochi, le cose vanno via via precipitando, fino al drammatico epilogo del ritrovamento del cadavere... ma di un cadavere vero! L'eccentrico investigatore Poirot si trova così ad affrontare un nuovo e difficile caso. Solo grazie alla sua tenacia e all'inaccettabile sconfitta riuscirà a risolvere l'enigma.
—Aries
A murder mystery role play (to put it in modern terms) turns into a real murder which for all practical purposes does not make any sense as the victim is a harmless girl. I dare anybody to solve this one without waiting for Poirot to explain everything in the end of the book; all the clues are there, none of them is hidden. The plot is so complicated you will have my greatest respect if you do. I was lost somewhere in the middle of the book, until this time I was able to follow Poirot. 5 stars to one of the greatest mystery puzzle.
—Evgeny
