The Big Four

Hercule Poirot and Arthur Hastings, just arrived from Argentina, are on the trail of a group composed of four criminal masterminds bent on world domination.

This is a very strange book, which reads more like an early thriller than a traditional mystery, and just like The Man in the Brown Suit, published in 1924, it has not aged well. From the outset there is eye-rolling melodrama, hair-raising coincidences, atrocious accents, ludicrous disguises, mysterious science, preposterous props (a tiny arrow tipped in curare inside a cigarette!) and exotic criminals. It would almost read like a deliberate farce if it didn't take itself so seriously, and we encounter some rather crude racial stereotyping, casual racism and Chinese characters show more speaking only broken pidgin English; I flinched more than once.

Instead of a smooth linear narrative the book follows a series of almost self-contained tableaux that contain their own mysteries as the intrepid duo follow leads from location to location (Poirot at one point likens himself to a 'human foxhound') but invariably come too late. Unlike in Christie's later and more accomplished novels, readers are told about the clues, not shown them carefully hidden inside the exposition or dialogue, and so there is no chance for the reader to track down the perpetrator alongside (or ahead of) the detective, which is half the fun.

The one detail that stood out for me was the fact that the murderer in one of the mysteries drove up in a butcher's cart and was carrying a leg of mutton, thereby going completely unnoticed by the village residents, a plot device Agatha Christie used in Death in the Clouds.

I find it curious that so many of Christie's early (and decidedly mediocre) novels appear to revolve around espionage/a criminal mastermind, and I wonder how much of that decision was due to pressure from the publisher, because they thought that's what the reading public wanted, and how much her own plotting.

One for completists only. show less

The Big Four by Agatha Christie was first published in 1927 and features Hercule Poirot with assistance from his friend Hastings and Inspector Japp. Instead of being a work of detective fiction, this story is much more about espionage and international intrigue.

Poirot and Hasting become involved in tracking down a crime consortium that calls itself The Big Four and appears to be focused on “world domination”. Headed by four international criminals, Poirot must first uncover the identities of each of the four. As the hunt commences, the book becomes more of a sensational adventure piece with Poirot as the action hero and Hastings as his trusty sidekick. The Big Four was written during a difficult period in Ms. Christie’s life, and show more began as a series of stories that were then mashed together as one. She herself has called it “that rotten book”.

The Big Four really has none of the qualities that I look for in a Poirot book. Instead of sitting back, examining the evidence and putting his “little grey cells” to work, in this book he is donning disguises, faking his death and detonating smoke bombs, entirely too much action for the little detective. Luckily this book with it’s silly plot was a quick read and now can be shoved to the back of my mind and forgotten about. show less

If you ever have the misfortune of reading this book you can at least rest assured that no matter which Hercule Poirot story you read from here on, it will be significantly better than the Big Four.

Published in the late 1920s, the Big Four revolves around a shadowy cabal asserting control over academia, finance and world politics in an attempt to bring down western civilization and achieve world domination. If you know anything about the political climate of the 20s and 30s this premise may ring a few alarm bells but don't worry; it's not the Jews -it's the Chinese (which in a sense makes it ahead of its time I guess).

The remarkably racist premise aside, the novel forsakes the traditional Hercule Poirot format of moderately intricate show more detective fiction in favor of a series of slapstick spy thriller vignettes -each with a twist so banal a 5-year old would be insulted by it. The story has less in common with the classical detective genre than with some sort of James Bond protofiction. The best thing you can say about the reading experience is that it occasionally reaches so bad it's good-quality, but for the most part it's a complete waste of time. show less

Easily the weakest of the Christie novels I've read. While she has tried her hand at both the Poirot-style mysteries and adventure books starring various other characters, this is an awkward attempt at melding the two together in a way that never felt satisfying. The mysteries are underwhelming thanks to their short buildup and quick solutions while the adventuring is held back by the need to rationalize it all to a greater extent than the novels where that's the sole focus.

Knowing the context behind the books explains its issued, but doesn't make them disappear. Even if you're only interested in the Poirot stories the this one can still be skipped without much of value being lost.

The Big Four is quite the departure for Hercule Poirot books - a little more James Bond in flavor than we've come to expect from an Agatha Christie novel. Instead of one contained mystery, this is a series of mysteries linked by a secret cabal that is running the world.

Purportedly, this format is due to Christie having reworked a series of short stories into a larger narrative to publish them as a novel. The new structure of having a new small mystery every few chapters is a nice change of pace. I don't think an entire series like this would be great, but I enjoyed it as a one off.

Hastings continues to be very dense and aggravating, but it was more tolerable when there was a new mystery for him to fail to have any insight into show more regularly. Overall a fun read. show less

This early Poirot novel is pulp fiction and not really a whodunnit. Poirot and Hastings go on the hunt for the members of the Big Four, a criminal syndicate led by a Chinese man who is the master planner, an American industrialist who provides the wealth, a French woman who provides scientific know how, and a mysterious number 4, the Destroyer, who seems to be able to adopt almost any disguise at will. This syndicate is supposed to be behind every riot, labour unrest and political upheaval across the world, including the Russian revolution, and even behind some natural disasters using the French woman's expertise, aiming at world domination and the collapse of civilisation. Yes, four master criminals with thousands of agents supposedly show more in every country at their disposal. This is so ridiculous I could scarcely suspend my disbelief at points, but I guess was kind of enjoyable hokum.

One contemporary review, in The Scotsman of 17 March 1927 sums it up perfectly for me: "The activities of Poirot himself cannot be taken seriously, as one takes, for example, Sherlock Holmes. The book, indeed, reads more like an exaggerated parody of popular detective fiction than a serious essay in the type. But it certainly provides plenty of fun for the reader who is prepared to be amused. If that was the intention of the authoress, she has succeeded to perfection". show less

What a strange book this is. But then, so far I've found all of Christie's "international intrigue" plot lines strange. I do enjoy the relationship between Hastings and Poirot, but this one is hindered by an anti-Asian bias that, while probably true to the time and location, is still jarring and unpleasant to read, especially the accent/pidgin Christie has her Chinese characters speak. Or I guess maybe one could argue that it's Hastings's bias?