Peril at End House

The sparkle of Dame Agatha's writing and the verve of her plotting in her absolute peak years, the 1930s, is a sheer joy to read. Poirot and Hastings, on their way to Cornwall's fleshpots, meet Miss Nick Buckley. She is a lovely local landowner, a bit short of the ready (to borrow Sir Plum's locution for Bertie Wooster) but possessed of a glorious ramshackle seaside house. She inveigles Poirot and Hastings into her world to help her deal with mysterious attempts on her life. Since she has no money, no prospects of getting any, and a mortgaged house, who's trying to kill her and why?

The plot hinges on a shared family name, a unique coincidence that could not be foreseen, and a cold and calculating soul looking out for Number One. Nothing show more is quite as simple as the surface suggests; the threads of the subplots do gum up the works a bit; but in the end, there is a happy resolution and ma'at is maintained. No one profits from their crimes. No one suffers injustice. There is a single example of the Old Boy's Network in action, and that wasn't quite so nice. But it's the chain of coincidence that bugs me the most. It's clearly intentional, and I suppose you could argue that the coincidences are seized upon by the ruthless killer as a further example of astute quick thinking in service of one's own survival. Maybe a bit like The Usual Suspects with Our Kind of People.

Still. Not quite the top drawer, Dame Agatha. show less

Summary: “Nick” Buckley has several “accidents” which Poirot believes are attempts on her life by someone in her inner circle.

Poirot and his old friend Captain Hastings are united for a stay at a Cornish resort. During an encounter with a young actress, Magdala “Nick” Buckley, something buzzes past them that they take for a wasp–until Poirot spots a hole in Buckley’s hat and a bullet on the ground. Then she confides that this is the latest in a string of “accidents.” Poirot suspects there is more to them than that. And his investigation confirms his fears, though Nick seems determined to defy death. Poirot believes someone in her inner circle is trying to kill her. In typical Poirot fashion, he takes on the mission show more of defending the lady and finding the murderer.

The inner circle are gathered around End House, the property Nick has inherited and struggles to maintain–a house with a questionable history. Charles Vyse is the lawyer cousin who arranged a mortgage for her to keep the house. She is hosting several friends. Her closest is Freddie Rice, a wife in an abusive marriage and closet cocaine user. Jim Lazarus, an art dealer is in love with Freddie. He also offered to buy a painting from Nick well above market value. Captain Challenger is a military officer with affections for Nick that she has indulged but not returned. Mr. and Mrs. Croft are transplanted Aussies renting a nearby lodge. They encouraged Nick to make a will before surgery six months earlier. They mailed it but Charles claims it was never received. Finally, there is Ellen, the housekeeper, who closely watches all the goings on at End House.

Poirot suggests Nick have the company of a trusted friend. Nick invites her cousin Maggie, a minister’s daughter. Shortly after her arrival, Maggie hosts a garden party. At one point, Maggie borrows a scarlet wrap of Nick’s. Masked by fireworks, gunshots take her life. Meanwhile, Nick had absented herself to take a phone call.

Next morning, Poirot notes the story of the death of a wealthy airman, Michael Seton. He surmises that Nick was his secret fiancée and stood to inherit the flyer’s wealth. So, for her safety, Poirot arranges her seclusion in a sanitarium with no visitors allowed. Yet somehow a box of chocolates laced with cocaine gets to her and she nearly dies from an overdose. The card said they were from Poirot.

Motive, and the contents of the missing will from Nick are on his mind. Freddie seems a prime suspect, having sent chocolates. And she is a cocaine addict. But Poirot is not so sure. So he stages a gathering at End House after Nick’s will turns up. The “official” word is that Nick died from the overdose. There will be a reading of the will. Poirot then suggests a seance, with Hastings as medium. And here, Nick stages her ultimate performance, triggering all sorts of mayhem and the exposure of the murderer.

To sum up, I thought this one of Christie’s near greats. The ingenious plot leaves you guessing and scratching your head and asking at the end, “why didn’t I see that?”. But we’re not the only ones, as you will see. show less

Hercule Poirot (really, really retired this time) and his old friend Arthur Hastings take a vacation in the fictional Cornish beach town of St. Loo, where they meet a cast of characters straight out of an F. Scott Fitzgerald novel. OF COURSE I LOVE THIS ONE!!!!

"Monsieur Poirot is--er--was--a great detective," I explained.
"Ah! my friend," cried Poirot. "Is that all you can find to say? Mais dis donc! Say then to Mademoiselle that I am a detective unique, unsurpassed, the greatest that ever lived!"
"That is now unnecessary," I said coldly, "You have told her yourself."
"Ah! yes, but it is more agreeable to have been able to preserve the modesty. One should not sing one's own praises."
"One should not keep a dog and have to bark oneself," show more agreed Nick with mock sympathy. "Who is the dog, by the way? Dr. Watson, I presume."
"My name is Hastings," I said coldly.
"Battle of 1066," said Nick. "Who said I wasn't educated? Well, this is all too, too marvelous! Do you think someone really wants to do away with me? It would be thrilling. But of course that sort of thing doesn't really happen. Only in books. I suspect Monsieur Poirot is like a surgeon who's invented an operation or a doctor who's found an obscure disease and wants everyone to have it."

Nick (real name Magdala Buckley) is a modern girl: "Too many cocktails, too many cigarettes--all that sort of thing." (She reminds me of Jordan from [b:The Great Gatsby|4671|The Great Gatsby|F. Scott Fitzgerald|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1490528560l/4671._SY75_.jpg|245494] and her best friend is a languid Daisy type.) After several apparent attempts on her life, Poirot steps in to prevent the next attempt from being successful. But who wants Nick dead, and why? Her best friend or her rich boyfriend? Her lawyer cousin? The maid, the butler, or their creepy kid? The overly friendly Australian tenants?

Solution: It was Nick all along, faking attempts on her own life to cover the murder of her cousin Maggie (also named Magdala Buckley), who was secretly engaged to a missing aviator. When the aviator was found dead, having inherited a fortune from his uncle and left it to his fiancée Magdala Buckley, Nick needed to bump off Maggie so she could inherit the money to save her beloved house. I love that Dame Christie threw in the scamming faux Aussies who made a forgery of Nick's will, trying to inherit the fortune when they thoughts she was dead (Poirot's little drama).

Overall, a very fun little period mystery. I want more like this! show less

Hercule Poirot claims to be retired but is easily pulled back in to solve a mystery while on vacation with his friend Hastings.

The plot is clever as is most of the Agatha Christie books that I have read. It revolves around his suspicion that someone is attempting to murder a young woman, Nicki, who owns End House. She has had what appears to be three near death experiences.
Hercule uses his standard strategies, such as listening suspects and points about them, to solve the case. This one is more difficult for him than most others, and, which increases the enjoyment of the mystery. Mystery book lovers, especially Hercule Poirot fans will most likely find this novel to be enjoyable.

The problem for me is my dislike of Hercule Poirot. He show more comes across as egotistical and condescending towards others to me. I could move past that.

Overall, the plot makes this novel worth reading but it is only mildly intriguing show less

This is such an outstanding example of when the Poirot books work, they really work. You do get some overly description deductions, but honestly I didn't mind. I recall being floored as anything when the final solution came since I honestly didn't see it coming. Re-reading this for the second time was fun. I thought I had a paperback of this, but ended up just shelling out for the Kindle version since it's not in the Christie section on my bookshelves (probably in a pile of books somewhere in the living room).

I always say that "The Murder of Roger Ackroyd" is my favorite Poirot book with "Murder on the Orient Express" right behind it. This book is probably my third favorite Poirot.

Poirot and Hastings are off vacation in Cornwall. We show more start off with Poirot going on and on about how he's retired (whatever dude) when they come across a woman named Magdala "Nick" Buckley that Poirot is instantly drawn to. We find out that Poirot has taken note of Nick due to the fact that he has determined that there is a bullet hole in her hat and goes off Nick's home (End House) and meets her friends who may have something to do with the many accidents that Nick has had of late.

We have Poirot in this and of course we have Hastings narrating. We also have an appearance by Inspector Japp too. I really did enjoy all of the characters that Christie introduces us to in this one. Besides Nick we have her supposed best friend (who calls her a liar) Freddie Rick and a man that is in love with her called George Challenger. Nick's cousin Maggie comes to stay with her since Poirot doesn't want Nick alone. Of course misfortune falls again and we have Poirot and Hastings wracking their brain in order to figure out who wants to murder Nick.

I have to say that the writing was top notch in this one for me. I do have to say that Poirot writing everything out (via Christie) gets a bit much at times. The flow works perfectly from chapter to chapter until we get to the end. I do wonder though if Poirot feels any guilt about what transpires when the guilty party is accused.

End House is a great setting for this book. I can picture in my head. It feels ominous the entire time when you are reading the book. Though Nick tells us throughout the book she has no money and only the house to leave a relation, you wonder if it would be enough for someone to kill anyway. Is there something about End House that equals money that Nick is unaware of? You have a ton of questions going through your head the whole time.

The ending comes as a total surprise. When Poirot reveals all you feel a bit staggered in the end since I didn't see it coming. show less

A blithe and snappy Christie in a classic configuration: Poirot and Hastings take a holiday on the Cornish coast and become involved with a young socialite, Mademoiselle "Nick," who has survived multiple murder attempts. Poirot takes it upon himself to protect her from further misfortune but (somewhat uncharacteristically) fails to be vigilant during a loud fireworks display, allowing someone else to be shot in the young woman's place. With the killer still at large and frustrated by his mistake, Poirot focuses his efforts to keep Nick from an untimely end that could come from any corner.

This is Christie by the numbers, at a point in her career (1932) when she could really first be said to have patterns and tropes emerging in her work. show more It's probably around this point that Christie starts considering phasing Captain Hastings out - he'll be gone from the novels in another five years - and Japp is already relegated to little more than an extended cameo. Still, this is very much the Poirot of the popular perception, fussy and a bit exaggerated, without the "Papa Poirot" speeches or tangents into Catholicism that occasionally show up in the earlier books. As such, Peril at End House is probably a strong candidate for the first "regular" Poirot novel - even coming, as it does, seventh in the series, and well after the runaway success of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd. It's a strong formula, and if it seems a little familiar in retrospect, that doesn't stop it being entertaining. The book practically glides along: it's incredibly "readable."

Christie will stick to the same basic framework and tone for the Poirot mysteries for almost another decade, an unusually prolific period in her career; there are no less than fourteen Poirot novels between this one and Five Little Pigs in 1942, with several of them regarded as classics. It's only after the war - and Christie's own fears of being killed in the Blitz, which led to the writing and ferreting away of Curtain - that the stories start to take a far darker turn. This is, effectively, the Poirot everyone remembers, and the Poirot everyone wants to revisit. It's like your favorite childhood candy: nothing terribly substantial but full of nostalgia and pleasant memories. There are far worse ways to spend a couple of afternoons poolside than with Hercule Poirot, his friend Hastings, and the mysterious goings-on at End House. show less

Poirot and Hastings are enjoying a week's holiday at the Cornish coast and Poirot (in his usual humble fashion and, as it turns out, somewhat prematurely) proclaims that the passive life suits him admirably and that there's nothing better than to sit in the sun, secure in the knowledge that he stepped from the pedestal at the zenith of his fame. Right on cue he meets a young lady who tells him that only this week she has already had three narrow escapes from death this week; realising the seriousness of the situation, Poirot is determined to prevent a murder, but already two nights later he and Hastings come across the body of a young woman at End House ...

This was a fun and easy read with a slightly different angle, in that Poirot is show more actually trying to prevent a murder – but of course readers know that Agatha Christie sets him up for failure in this attempt as there would be no story without a crime being committed. For all the clues that the author puts in his way, I thought that Poirot would have been able to solve the mystery a lot sooner, but I guess his little grey cells were taking a holiday too, and it's probably more interesting this way.

In some ways the novel appears very dated as there are a few rather questionable statements relating to women and Jews (it first appeared in 1931). show less