Endless Night was one of Agatha Christie's own favourite novels, and one which received the most critical acclaim on its publication in 1967. It is her 58th detective novel. The title is a reference to William Blake's "Auguries of Innocence","Every night and every morn,Some to misery are born,Every morn and every night,Some are born to sweet delight.Some are born to sweet delight,Some are born to endless night."One of the characters sings and plays this at pertinent points during the book, and it becomes evident that it refers to two of the characters. Endless Night has been filmed, adapted as a play and also a graphic novel. It featured in a TV series about Miss Marple (in 2013), although the character of Miss Marple does not appear in the novel. The novels featuring Miss Marple have quite a different feel, so this is an odd inclusion.Unusually for Agatha Christie, Endless Night has a single viewpoint character, who has a heavy presence in the novel as its narrator. Michael Rogers is a working-class lad whose origins seem to be from a "poor but proud" family with a strong work ethic - which he does not share. He cheerfully admits that he cannot stick to anything. He is unsettled and lazy, having had a variety of jobs. He also appears to the reader to have a chip on his shoulder, and is quite a many-layered character.Very early on in the story, we learn that he has fallen in love with a painting of a house, and has idealised this in his mind to be a "perfect house" which he dreams of owning. He also finds the perfect location for his house in a (fictitious) village called Kington Bishop, near the town of Market Chadwell. In one of his jobs he had worked for an architect, Rudolf Santonix, who has now become a friend. He imagines Santonix designing his perfect dream house, although he knows that acquiring it it is an impossibility. Santonix knows of Michael's strange fantasies and his passion for the imaginary house,"When I was in a fanciful mood I used to think that piece of land had laid a spell upon you. You were a man in love with a house that you might never own, that you might never see, that might never even be built."The other main character in the story is almost Michael's complete opposite; a rich American heiress, Funella or "Ellie" Guteman. The two fall in love... but it is as well to remember that this is Agatha Christie, and not her romantic novelist alias "Mary Westmacott", so the course of true love is unlikely to run smooth.This is better written than some of Agatha Christie's novels. The two main characters have far more depth, which the reader learns as the story develops. Sometimes Agatha Christie piles on the characters in order to increase the complexity of the plot, and they inevitably come across as flat stock "types". She will describe their appearance, maybe name their job and a detail or two about their history and feel that she has done enough. She tells us about them. This novel is different, and far better than her average fare, as she reveals Mike and Ellie's characters through their experiences, as told by Mike. Also, to some extent, the characters of Ellie's close companion, Greta Andersen, his mother, the lawyer and guardian "Uncle" Andrew Lippincott, and the terminally-ill architect Rudolf Santonix are more fully fleshed out than usual. But there are secondary characters - the step-mother Cora van Stuyvesant, a friend Claudia Hardcastle, a local bigwig "God" Major Phillpot, the local "witch" Esther Lee and others, who are more akin to Christie's usual cardboard cutouts. The plot itself is satisfying with at least two neat twists near the end, to make the reader gasp. Agatha Christie's strength as a writer is based almost entirely on her ingenious plots. On publication, the newspaper "The Guardian" commented, "the crashing, not to say horrific suspense at the end is perhaps the most devastating that this surpriseful author has ever brought off." And the novelist Robert Barnard calls it, "The best of the late Christies... A splendid late flowering."However the literary critic James Zemboy, in his analysis of Agatha Christie's detective novels in 2008, says she was "by then seventy-seven years old and clearly in steep decline as a writer... "Endless Night" is a silly story filled with unlikely events and dull characters... not typical of Agatha Christie... [it is] rather embarrassing."Strong words indeed, about quite an enjoyable read. There are deliberate gothic overtones, with the cursed land of "Gipsy's Acre" and the old woman Mrs Lee, with her muttered premonitions of doom. The land is thought to be unlucky, because several accidents have taken place there, particularly on the dangerous curved road approaching the house. The talk of superstitious villagers, resentful gypsies, Mrs Lee, with her dire warnings, who, "Doesn't like the insides of houses. Them as has got gipsy blood don't", the young couple never being happy, the threats against them and "their kind", the evil site which should never be built on; all these are themes which run throughout the story, unsettling the reader and underpinning the story with a feeling of threat. It is all pure hokum, and the reader feels this is the author's deliberate intention, but it is entertaining and fun."I'd always known that I'd meet one day a beautiful woman. I had met her. I'd seen her and she'd seen me. We'd come together. A wonderful woman. I'd known the moment I saw her that I belonged to her, belonged to her absolutely and for always. I was hers." Also read April 2004
The inaugural Agatha Christie Collection’s 41st instalment is the critically acclaimed Endless Night. Widely viewed as one of Christie’s best, it centres around the narrator and his new wife Ellie building and living in a house on the supposedly cursed Gipsy’s Acre. Being a Christie, tragedy soon falls.One of Christie’s more mature pieces, the story develops a number of themes around the topic of social class, affluence and worldview. A lot of comment is passed on the suitability of a marriage between working and upper class people and the idea of keeping to one’s “station” in life.The structure was very atypical. Unusually, the inevitable death didn’t come until very late on and was in fact resolved before long had passed. There were none of the usual Poirot-esque questionings, nor dramatic revelations of the murderer being in this very room. The change of format is well thought out and suitable on this occasion, though Christie should have spent more time developing the characters throughout the build-up. None of the main characters were particularly rounded or interesting, and when the death came, there was no time to be shocked or saddened.The dénouement, however, makes up for the shortfalls. The climax is very carefully crafted, with particular emphasis on the killer’s emotional state post-reveal. An area Christie doesn’t often explore, she very eerily allows us to peek into the mind of an utter psychopath that gives a chilling finale to the tale.Comparisons will no doubt be made with The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, and it is possibly because of the runaway success of Ackroyd that Endless Night is found wanting. Although it is a creepier, harsher tale, it lacks the characterisation and complexity that Ackroyd has so much of. It feels less developed and the twist, though similar, less astonishing. A slight tense change makes the narrator less participative and the reader less engaged, not observing what unfolds but learning what has unfolded. Endless Night is a poor man’s Ackroyd for sure.The other parallel is the treatment of the American lawyers, which is reminiscent of Christie’s other runaway success from the series’ early days ten years ago. Death on the Nile shows the group in a very similar light, and Endless Night develops that much further. Perhaps there is too much emphasis on this, and less on the relational aspects which would have driven a stronger narrative.Following some of the poorer output from The Agatha Christie Collection of late, Endless Night does, to its credit, restore some of its credibility and is a decent offering in its own right. It’s just unfortunate that much of it has been done before, been done better, and leaves Endless as something of a poorer rehash. A clever, well crafted, convincing poorer rehash, granted, but a poorer rehash nonetheless.
What do You think about Endless Night (2015)?
Agatha Christie has done it again! No matter how many theories I had going while reading this book, I didn't see the end coming. She truly is an expert at creating mysteries that provide all the clues, but still surprise the reader at the end. Though many mysteries don't stand the test of time and seem more obvious to modern readers than they may have to contemporary readers, Christie's retain their unpredictability even today. I cannot say too much about the story itself without giving elements away, but suffice it to say it has to do with a cursed spot of land called Gypsy Acre and the murder of a young woman when she and her husband come to live there. There are elements of the gothic throughout which give it a creepiness that is not often present in Christie's stories but which she handles beautifully. Though the narrator can at times get on tangents, everything appears to have a reason in the end. The only odd thing to me in reading this was that it feels so much more modern that most of Christie's works. I don't know the entire span of time during which she wrote, but I know that this book - which appears to have been published in the 1960's felt very different in that sex was discussed as well as some curse words. The cussing and sex referenced was minute - not even worth mentioning as it is unlikely to offend; the only reason I do mention it is because it seems to break the style of all of the previous works I have read of hers. In a way though, this breaking from her usual style made it even more interesting to me as a new side of her writing. Endless Night is written with a surprising and completely chilling ending and is a quick read. Forget Gone Girl, this is the real McCoy.
—Stacy
2.5 stars - A Strange taleI want to start by saying I love Agatha Christie, I have read pretty much all of her books and Poirot is on my list of fictional characters I would love to have dinner with.But I have to say that I really did not enjoy this story nearly as much as I hoped I would. The story is told by Michael, a young man with little money and big expectations who marries Ellie (an innocent young rich girl). The story surrounds 'Gipsy Acre', a large house and plot of land in the English countryside which is supposedly under a Gypsy curse. Well of course this young married couple buy the land and build their dream house. So why was I disappointed? Well the story was slow, the actual crime doesn't take place until page 163 of a 224 Page book (I was so shocked I actually took a mental note of the page number). The majority of the book is the courtship of Michael and Ellie and their family matters with the occasional crazy gypsy lady appearing to warn them of the curse and to tell Ellie that she predicted bad things. I have to say by about page 140 I was pretty much begging the gypsy lady (or anybody really) to DO something, but I persevered as I know that Agatha Christie is famous for her twists and turns. Finally as I say a crime is finally committed and the rest of the book is actually pretty good. It is written with Christie's usual level of suspense and wrong turns so it gives plenty of opportunity for guessing and thinking.I have to say that although I didn't like the story much, I loved the writing. The imagery was brilliant, and I could envision the setting perfectly. The characters were well written and their characters were easily definable (although you do have 163 pages to sort this out).As I said before I love Agatha Christie's work and will not let this little disappointment stop me from reading more of her books. I just wish that this story had a little more opportunity for thinking, I do like to exercise 'The little grey cells'.
—Amy *Waitforit*
Well, this is an interesting little oddity. If I’d picked this novel up blind, not knowing who the author was, then I think I could have got through the first few chapters without being able to guess. Here is a narrator who is just so un-Christie. For a start he’s very much working class, your callow and unpolished drifter. A good looking and smooth-talking boy, who at points seemed to me like he’d strayed in from a Joe Orton play. The tone is very un-Christie too, and Michael Roberts – the narrator in question – reminded me of some of Jim Thompson’s more gauche protagonists. (Dusty Rhodes in ‘A Swell Looking Babe’ came to mind.) This is a not very bright lad who thinks he’s smart at points, but doesn’t have as keen a grip on the world as he believes he does.Michael Roberts – a sometimes chauffer, waiter and bouncer – meets a young American heiress, one of the richest women in the world, and the two fall in love. After an elopement, they move into a house which has a gypsies’ curse upon it and there tragedy strikes. It’s a well set-up and delivered tale, although the ending – which I didn’t guess until I was almost upon it – does feel a tad too rushed and unconvincing.Part of me is quite fascinated by Dame Agatha’s oeuvre, as I find her work hypnotically compulsive even as the flaws scream out at me. But here, those flaws aren’t as much in evidence (although when the dialogue begins, my of my, you can really tell that Christie is the author). Without a doubt – of the ones I’ve read – this is the best and certainly the most intriguing of her books. (I’ve just seen on Wikipedia that Miss Marple will be crow-barred into this tale for the next TV Series – much as they did for ‘The Pale Horse’. Now that just seems a way to take something that’s genuinely interesting and make is as bland as cabbage soup. Sigh.)
—F.R.
