What do You think about Sad Cypress (2001)?
Published in 1940, this is one of Poirot’s most intriguing cases. Elinor Carlisle stands accused of the murder of Mary Gerrard and the first part of this book looks at her looking back at the events which led her there. It begins with Elinor receiving an anonymous letter, warning her that someone has been trying to take her place in her Aunt Laura’s affections. Her aunt is an invalid, having had a stroke, and is cared for at her house by two nurses and Dr Peter Lord. Mary Gerrard is the daughter of servants, but Elinor’s aunt has always taken an interest in the girl and paid for her education and the young girl acts almost as a companion to the older woman in return. Elinor comes across as a slightly cold and controlled young woman, but she is passionately in love with Roddy Welman, who she has known since they were young children and who are both related to Aunt Laura. The couple plan to marry and expect that Aunt Laura will leave one or the other of them the house and money in her will. However, Elinor’s future is suddenly changed forever, when Roddy falls head over heels in love with Mary. Before long, Aunt Laura has died and her lack of a will means that Elinor inherits. However, when Mary is poisoned, Elinor’s is accused of killing her out of jealousy.This is an unusual Poirot novel, in that there is a possible miscarriage of justice, which is something hardly ever suggested in an Agatha Christie book. The evidence all seems to point to Elinor as the murderer, but Poirot is never wrong – as he himself assures us - and he promises to get to the truth. With interesting characters, a complex plot and some great courtroom scenes, this is a wonderful mystery. It is said most murders happen because of love or money and this has greed, jealousy and repressed emotions in abundance.
—Susan
I just finished re-reading Sad Cypress & I loved it as much as I remembered. Agatha Christie is one of the few authors I can generally count on for that : what I loved at 16, I still love at....well, my current age.Sad Cypress begin with the elegant, frosty Elinor Carlisle on trial for the murder of the gardener's daughter, Mary Gerrard, one of Christie's fey heroines, "she was like a flower." Both blonde, both beautiful, both beloved by Elinor's aunt, the wealthy owner of the estate both girls grew up on, Elinor's engagement to Rodney is called off after Elinor's aunt died leaving her wealth and land.Is it because Rodney is uncomfortable living off of Elinor's newly acquired wealth? Or is it because he glimpsed a golden goddess in the woods, a gardener's girl?And as cliched as this sounds and is, Christie once again pulls off her magic.This is one of my favorites of the Christie oeuvre, for the characters and relationships and descriptions. It has the feel of a fairy tale and is one of the more magical Christie books.I love all her Poirot but in truth Poirot's role in this is surprisingly marginal-critical of course in the unveiling of the full truth of what happened at a lethal luncheon but minor from the perspectives of relationships and point of view.I strongly recommend this mystery for Christie lovers and grown-ups who love fairy tales cum mysteries.
—Ellie
Save for Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, there is no mystery writer that I love more than Dame Agatha Christie. When I picked up Sad Cypress it was like going back to an old friend. It had been years since I last read a Christie story. For those of you that read my The Sherlockian review, it should come as no surprise that I’m very fond of Hercule Poirot. Like Sherlock Holmes, Poirot is a marvelous character. His idiosyncrasies are both charming and insulting. Mentally superior to the majority of people and not afraid to say so, it’s a thrill to watch the detective work. But it’s that same superiority that makes me cringe in empathy when someone his put in their place by either Poirot or Holmes. I was excited to see him at work again when I picked up this book. Unfortunately, he was slow to appear. I’d have to go back and re-read another few stories to be sure but I think I had forgotten how Christie writes her Poirot stories. The first part doesn’t include the detective at all. She introduces the players in this mystery, focusing on character development and spinning the intricate web that Poirot is to entangle. In this case it had to do with an elderly lady, the nurses taking care of her, her niece, a young lady she’s supporting and a whole host of other minor, or seemingly minor, characters. The old and the young lady both die and, eventually, Poirot is brought in. But he’s not brought in to find the guilty person but rather prove the seemingly irrefutably guilty niece is innocent. That’s where the second part of the story starts.Poirot goes through the cast of characters and interviews them all, counting on them to all lie. They don’t disappoint. They all lie for different reasons and in a particularly poetic thought, Poirot says that lying can tell you as much about the reality of the situation as the truth can. It was little gems like that that save the story. I wasn’t particularly thrilled with the story. The characters were rich, but not really that interesting to me. Christie proves once again her grand prowess with dialog. The book is short and the dialog heavy pages make the read especially quick. But dialog is a tricky skill. I speak from experience when I say it’s incredibly hard to write dialog that remains both true to the characters and doesn’t come across as stiff and more suited for the page than the spoken word. That’s perhaps the saving grace of this story. It isn’t a particularly strong story but the back-and-forth between Poirot and the characters and the summary of facts that he gives one of them at the denouement gives you enough spark to keep you from getting bored.
—Brad McKenna
