Endless Night

Well, that was a mind f*ck.

Sort of. I don't know about anyone else, but the entire time I was reading this I was, in addition to waiting for something to happen, racing down possible scenarios in my head, so at one point or another I'd suspected everyone.

I most consistently suspected Mike, that I was reading a confession after the fact; at one point I started to suspect Ellie because nobody could be that perfect could they? And Mike's reaction to meeting Greta didn't feel authentic, although I was subsequently sold on his hostility towards her. It wasn't until Ellie died and he kept Greta around that I went back to thinking he was just another cliche, falling for the secretary. But boy howdy I did NOT see the very end at all. That show more was very dark indeed and the break with reality at the end was also a complete shock.

I don't know what I'd call this, but murder mystery would not make the top three. Psychological thriller, yes. Horror even. Suspense at the very least. But even if you don't know who the killer is until the end, there isn't any emphasis on the mystery.

A lot of questions went unanswered for me, most of them probably inconsequential: What was up with the impromptu visit by Ellie's uncle at the end - was there a point to that? And was Lloyd really at the pub with his ex-wife? Why? And if the staff were who Mike says they were why didn't they stop the whole thing sooner? Why let it go on for so long?

Objectively speaking, this is a very good book; it requires a commitment from the reader, to stick with it during that excruciatingly slow build up, but it repays it in spades with that ending. It's tight, and well written and I sort of suspect Christie had a lot of fun writing it; I picture her at her desk doing a version of the muwahahaha as she constructed that ending.

But subjectively... I didn't like it. I don't like unreliable narrators, I dislike being kept from the facts and I hate psychological manipulation and the very worst part: I couldn't put the book down. I had to know how it ended. Does that make me more or less crazy than the book? show less

'Endless Night' was a wonderful surprise. It was original, modern, and remarkably cinematic. It felt like watching the most recent film versions of 'The Talented Mr Ripley' or 'My Cousin Rachel'. In a blind test, I wouldn't have guessed this was Christie's work, except for how twisty the plot is, and how blindsided I was by the ending.

This was a very contemporary novel for 1967, written about and from the point of view of Michael Rogers, a young man who is very much of his time. That Christie could, in her seventies, write such a compelling story entirely as a first-person account by a twenty-something Englishman is a mark of her skill.

There are no clever detectives in this book. No interviews with suspects to garner clues to who did show more what. For most of the book, it's not even clear what there is for any detective to investigate. And yet, there is from the start a sense of doom, a feeling that a curse has been unleashed or a geas challenged, perhaps from the moment that Michael Rogers met Ellie Goodman in the woods at Gipsey's Acre. The tone of Michael Rogers' storytelling makes it sound as if he has an albatross around his neck, and all that remains is to discover how it came to be placed there.

Although this tale is told from Michael Roger's point of view, there isn’t much introspection in his storytelling. From the start, he felt to me like a man who habitually puts on a show. He seemed callow, reflexively mendacious and quietly secretive. He's a man who harbours deep longings for things he doesn't have. He can be passionate about art and architecture. He woos the young Ellie Goodman gently but persistently, seeming to see in her something he would like to see in himself but is unable to find. He sees her as living in the light while he is doomed to the endless night.

The sense of a doom yet to be revealed is created partly by extensive foreshadowing, especially of the character of Greta, the capable young woman who manages Ellie's life for her, winning her freedom from the constraints her family places on her. I found myself looking forward to the first meeting between Greta and Michael. I knew there would be fireworks. I'd hoped that the jealous, controlling side of his character that I thought he was trying to hide might show itself and give Ellie fair warning. Greta turned out to be everything that I expected and more.

I won't go into the plot. It's clever and stays the reader's mind, but it's hard to discuss without spoiling the impact of the story for the first-time reader.

I think the thing that most marks this as a Christie novel, despite the variation in style, is how she lays out the whole story on the first page, but does it in such a way that when you re-read the first page after finishing the book, your understanding of the text has completely changed. There's no cheating involved. Just a subtle shift in perspective. Here's the passage I'm thinking of:

"In my end is my beginning … That’s a quotation I’ve often heard people say. It sounds all right—but what does it really mean?

Is there ever any particular spot where one can put one’s finger and say: ‘It all began that day, at such a time and such a place, with such an incident?’

Did my story begin, perhaps, when I noticed the Sale Bill hanging on the wall of the George and Dragon, announcing Sale by Auction of that valuable property ‘The Towers’, and giving particulars of the acreage, the miles and furlongs, and the highly idealized portrait of ‘The Towers’ as it might have been perhaps in its prime, anything from eighty to a hundred years ago?

I was doing nothing particular, just strolling along the main street of Kingston Bishop, a place of no importance whatever, killing time. I noticed the Sale Bill. Why? Fate up to its dirty work? Or dealing out its golden handshake of good fortune? You can look at it either way.

Or you could say, perhaps, that it all had its beginnings when I met Santonix, during the talks I had with him; I can close my eyes and see: his flushed cheeks, the over-brilliant eyes, and the movement of the strong yet delicate hand that sketched and drew plans and elevations of houses. One house in particular, a beautiful house, a house that would be wonderful to own!

My longing for a house, a fine and beautiful house, such a house as I could never hope to have, flowered into life then. It was a happy fantasy shared between us, the house that Santonix would build for me—if he lasted long enough …

A house that in my dreams I would live in with the girl that I loved, a house in which just like a child’s silly fairy story we should live together ‘happy ever afterwards’. All pure fantasy, all nonsense, but it started that tide of longing in me. Longing for something I was never likely to have.

Or if this is a love story—and it is a love story, I swear—then why not begin where I first caught sight of Ellie standing in the dark fir trees of Gipsy’s Acre?"

I think this is one of Christie's best novels. If you haven't read anyt show less

An excellent late Christie, a tale of love and obsession, obsession with a woman and obsession with a piece of land and the house that they build on it. Told through the eyes of an angry, ambitious young man, a true rolling stone in the swinging sixties, this unreliable narration will keep you enthralled, and ultimately shock you. This is anything but cosy. A similar plot is used in the Miss Marple tale "The Case of the Caretaker" published originally in 1942 - don't read that before you read this one.

Endless Night is Agatha Christie's take on the gothic novel (a cursed property, a fortune-telling gypsy, a wealthy young woman manipulated by her extended family, a talented architect wasting away from some blood disease, etc.) but set in the 1960s. Our narrator is Michael "Mike" Rogers, a charming, working-class, ne'er-do-well, who is just floating through life until he meets Fenella "Ellie" Guteman, who just happens to be one of the wealthiest young women in America. They fall in love and build their dream house on Gipsy's Acre, a spot that's said to be cursed. We know from the beginning that things will not end well, but Mike meanders through the story, building suspense along the way. How will it all end? Was there anything he could show more have done differently? As a matter of fact, it was all a set-up from the beginning, to get Ellie's money so that Mike and Greta (who had previously met in Germany) could finance the lifestyle of their dreams. But Mike goes crazy in the end, kills Greta, and goes to jail.

Old Agatha really had a grudge against those hippie kids and it comes out in her writing. This has that same vibe as some of her later Poirot mysteries, where those kids are just too modern and lazy for their own good, with their drugs and their free love. It's entertaining in the same way as listening to Boomers complain about how Millennials could afford a house if they'd just give up their avocado toast and lattes. There's an interesting, but somewhat jarring, juxtaposition between this crotchety take on the main characters and the excellent use of gothic tropes to build suspense. Definitely not the same old thing she'd been doing for 50 years, but not one of her best (even though it was apparently one of her favorites). show less

Superb, one of the best Christie's I've read, far exceeding any of her more famous detective stories.

For a long time it's not at all clear what the 'crime' or the title blurbs "most devastating suspense ever" is going to be. The hero is one Michael Rogers, a bit of a layabout. He's from a poor upbringing with a mother who worked hard to provide the best he could. Michael's never been quite so committed or keen on the hard work bit, and lived pretty much hand to mouth, doing odd jobs for a few months before moving on to something new. He's always had an eye for a bargain and looking smart, and an easy way with the girls. The story starts with Mike having just abandoned his last job, and sauntering through a village somewhere in the SE. show more He see's a house up for auction and wanders along to have a look. The sale falls through failing to reach the reserve due apparently to buyers nervous of a lingering gypsy curse. Mike day dreams what he's do with such a property, and happens to recall that he knows a famous architect who could do the job right proper. He strolls off to have a look at the grounds and there he chances into a young and pretty american girl who has escaped her chaperones for brief while. Ellie and Mike make an instant connection and arrange to meet again. And again. Only after Mike's proposed to her does Ellie reveal that she's a rich american heiress, shortly to be come into her inheritance. She's already bought the house where they met, and Mike arranges for his friend to build them a dream home. Only the occasional warning from the local gypsy sours the mood. Even the rest of Elie's family, condensending to the local bumpkin she's married can't spoil a good thing. Ellie is particularly delighted when her long-time maid Greta comes to stay, although Mike is less keen.

The style is very light and totally different to Christies' other works. Mike has a simple voice he knows what he likes and carefree to admit what he doesn't know or understand. It's a refreshing and easy reading style full of gentle good humour. The setting is never clear, but sometime probably in the 60s boom when the nation was feeling good, but old traditions continued especially in the more remote villages. I don't quite know when the practice of having staff in the house faded away, but both Ellie and Mike take it for granted that there should be some.

You're a more astute reader than me if you spot the antagonist before the reveal. But in many ways it doesn't matter as the lilting style is so enjoyable. show less

A cracking, creepy Christie. With much more tone-building and subtlety than puzzle box mechanics. I understand it was a favorite of hers, and you can see why.

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.

Another poetry title, this one from William Blake.

Every Morn and every Night
Some are Born to sweet delight
Some are Born to sweet delight
Some are Born to Endless Night

This book has a style of building tension different from any other Christie mystery I've read, which is saying something, considering how many she's written. There's also some genuinely repellent material near the end, which was a bit off-putting for me personally, but I thought was well done and also unique for Christie-- and I thought she shows remarkable restraint in her exploration of psychology, given what weird stuff she sometimes cooks up. Hugh Fraser did an excellent job narrating, as always.

The book's main trouble was it had two devices that, in my opinion, show more worked in opposition to each other. The first device was the long wait for the actual mystery to arise-- about 20 chapters into a 24-chapter book-- so that all the clues come before the murder actually happens. In general I think this is ingenious. It really ratchets the tension, since you have not just a whodunnit but a whodunWHAT (as it were). It produces a really subtle creepy atmosphere, a bit like Sleeping Murder.

The second device is having a first-person narrative where the narrator is revealed to be the murderer. This is a great idea, but done much more effectively in another famous Christie, which I won't name here, on the off-chance you haven't read it. In Endless Night, it gives Hugh Fraser some scenery to chew, but doesn't combine well the clues-first approach to revealing the mystery. Because there is only a brief space of time between the murder and Mike's confession, there's no real space for any detective/mystery solver character for whom Mike has to perform, and who can point the reader towards likely red herrings. So Christie is forced to use only Mike's way of presenting the facts to lead you in one direction or the other, and you don't even get to review the clues after you find out what the mystery is, since there's no Poirot-style breakdown-- because of this, if you do guess the murderer, it feels a bit obvious, and if you don't, you feel like the book's cheating. Mike's finale is really interesting and disturbing, but it comes at the cost of the structure of the story. There's more of a focus on "how could someone do something like this?" instead of "how did this person get away with this?", and the latter is what I've come to expect from Agatha Christie, and what I think the structure of the novel makes you expect. The only throughline that I felt really worked with both devices was Mike's relationship with his mother.

I can see why this is one of Christie's personal favorites, since she seems to most like the tense psychological stand-alones. In general, there was some stuff I really liked in it, and I think it's a worthwhile read, but it's not really what I'm here for, and I was expecting it to be something different-- but hey, maybe that's just on me!

Oh, and unfortunately this is another Christie where a recurring plot element involves the repeated use of a slur, a la And Then There Were None. So, that sucks. show less