Evil Under the Sun

Arlena Stuart, gorgeous stage actress and homewrecker, is just the type of woman to get herself killed. And, of course, she does. The bronzed redhead turned men’s heads from the moment she arrived at the upscale Jolly Roger Hotel on Smuggler’s Island on the Cornish coast. “There is evil everywhere under the sun,” detective Hercule Poirot reminds a hotel guest, and it isn’t long before our Jezebel is struck dead.

Dame Agatha Christie piled plenty of twists into Evil Under the Sun, which was suspenseful enough that I read it in a little more than a day. Almost 80 years after it was first published, Christie’s 24th Hercule Poirot novel still proves as alluring as a hot summer day at a vacation resort.

This is my third Christie book, and not for the first time I find myself wondering, and only halfway jokingly, whether she hated women or was just that much of a traditionalist, and also, where's the line there anyway? I know she is of course of her time, and I suspect that while I find many of her depictions of female characters distasteful, they in actuality hold much more depth than many of Christie's male counterparts would have given their female characters.

Basically, I was incredibly disappointed in the ending of the book, even though the character Rosamund Darnley had been established earlier to have the desires in line with a typical house wife living in the country, wed to a veteran (and I think trader, not exactly sure what show more Capt. Marshall's current career is at the time of the book). While I can grant that it is perhaps quite realistic to represent a woman of this time giving up her lucrative and successful career in order to be wife to a man she loves, as that indeed would follow the morality of the day, I still don't quite buy it. Just as Darnley had been shown to desire the family life, she had equally been shown to be passionate about her business and her craft, thinking of the various ways she could better dress the women around her to flatter their figures. We also received precious little characterization of Capt. Marshall, to the point where I'm not sure why his request to his future wife was for her to give up her business, rather than to continue it with him doing the books. Maybe this is a British class thing that is just flying right over my head, indeed I half-suspect it is.

I do sort of want to emphasize here that there is no real judgement from me on the decision itself, it is perfectly fine to want to be wife and (step) mother, and perhaps Darnley is young enough that they may expand their family further down the line. I'm glad that Linda is gaining a mother in this equation with whom she enjoys spending time, and I think that as a couple, Rosamund and the Captain will do well. They have both already shown great loyalty to one another, such that when they suspected the other of being a murderer, they tried to cover for them. Admittedly, that is in itself something of a morally bankrupt thing to do, but as framed by the narrative, all's well that ends well. Christie's books tend to forgive anything apart from actual murder. It's literally just the very last page that I feel falls flat, and not if it were in isolation. In isolation, I can see that the character of Rosamund Darnley takes serious Capt. Marshall's request and may have even required it of him, to prove to herself that he is truly devoted. However, this same books presents its murder victim as first being blamed by everyone who knew her for her murder, stating it was inherent to her 'type' multiple times. And then! We find out no, she wasn't a tiger stalking her poor victims (grown men who can make their own damn decisions), but in actuality she was the 'type' to be fooled by men and so dumb as to be taken in again and again, constantly sending money to those who take advantage of her. Great.

Add to all this the fact thatthe previous Christie book I read was Death on the Nile, where again we see a female victim - in fact, every Christie book I've read thus far has had one, I suspect all the better to sell your mystery novels with - who is characterized as a 'type' of woman, whose beauty and intelligence and charm and wealth means that with enough time passing, she simply was bound to be killed by somebody. The plot there being fully contrived against her, with her only error to take a man to wed, with whom she flirted when she shouldn't, sure, but who responded to her advances positively, and, in lying to her, presented his former girlfriend as a complete annoyance of his past. I'm not one to defend cheaters or adulterers, but when Linnet Ridgeway made up her mind that she wanted Simon, Simon did absolutely nothing in order to convince her otherwise and indeed played along. From Linnet's perspective, she could have simply lost a friend and a chance at love, if Simon had refused her and Jacqueline had taken him and left, never to be heard or seen again. But, according to the book, for her sin of that initial flirtation with a taken man, and then of believing Simon when he said he was only interested in her, she had to die. Ugh. Both of these books also had one of my least favorite tropes, that is, of women hating women based on assumptions and rumor. Again, I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I'm not naive enough to believe that. However, I also think that hatred and jealousy are emotionally draining and most women focus more on being satisfied with their own lives than desiring to live another's. I'd hate to find that that was overly optimistic of me.

For me, these things are building and compounding on themselves to paint a broader picture I'm not enjoying much, though maybe it is a broader picture of the accepted mores of the time. Even still, that there is an explanation for it doesn't make it then fun to read. Also, and I think this is just a commonality of older mystery novels, but I have come to dislike the essentializing way Christie describes people. show less

Entertaining start to finish! Not going to be a favourite of mine, but was a good read, and I really liked Poirot in this one.
Don't love the long chapters, but the whole book is quick to get through. Don't love how misogynistic the whole story feels, but thankfully Poirot wasn't in on that and made me feel a bit better about it by the end. The resolution was a little convoluted and long winded, but also felt a bit clever, and all added up. The beginning and end also didn't exactly match up the way I assumed it would, but wasn't too odd.
All in all, a good, short mystery. Might not be one of the best, but I do think it's worth spending your time on!

Made the mistake of waiting for two days to review this and now I'm already starting to forget how I felt about it. This is the slight downside of listening to many many Agatha Christie audiobooks in quick succession-- they all start to feel kind of similar (even if that similarity is that they're diverting comfort food!) This is not helped by the fact that this book seems to be a rework of the short story "The Triangle at Rhodes", though with a different resolution.

I do like the fact that the "evil seductive vamp" character type is subverted in this story. It feels much more true to life that someone like Arlena Marshall would be preyed upon, rather than preying upon others, and it created a good character-based twist to the mystery.

Agatha Christie is thus far the only female author which I read, and indeed the only other woman besides my wife that I return to again and again for pleasure. Within Christie's writings—such as within "Evil Under the Sun"—we find such unique pleasantries of minutiae as the description of the quality of a man's briar pipe; of the tired old stories of a retired officer—Major Barry—who fought in India; of the dual nature of men; of waxed mustaches...

I first saw, a while back, the Poirot made-for-TV episode, "Evil Under the Sun". The book was reminiscent, but I still was unsure who the murderer was until the end. I dislike viewing anything before I have read it, but in the case of Poirot, it was irresistible. My wife and I too have show more just acquired the Wii video game, "Evil Under the Sun".

Let it not be said that I am without gripes however. The character of the Reverend Stephen Lane stands out as rather lame. The other characters are quite complex; the parson however, simply a fanatic—all too common a fallback in modern fiction, which reveals how misunderstood the Christian religion is. Then again, with what such real-life scandalous reverends that make the news each month, it is only to be expected, I suppose.

My other gripe is that Captain Kenneth Marshall and Rosamund Darnley's morals are quite disturbing. The result of their amorality, at least in the case of Marshall's, manifests in his daughter Linda Marshall, who attempted to kill her stepmother by means of witchcraft, and then attempted suicide, believing she indeed succeeded in matricide. Rather than to face up to the consequences, rather than to talk it out with Poirot, she seeks to kill herself, ending her misery. Here is why I find Ken and Rosamund to be alarming: Each suspected the other of murder. Rather than seeking to allay their suspicions, each swallows them and each tries to protect the other, going to such lengths as to lie to the authorities. Not only this, but they each plan a future together, never mind each suspecting the other of being a murderer. Each is also willing to place the girl Linda in this horrid nightmare of a homicidal home.

Evil under the sun, indeed.

I found most fascinating the psychological profile of Arlena Stuart Marshall—the murdered woman— which Poirot propounds upon. I just happen to be reading C.S. Lewis' "Perelandra" at this time. Arlena is the Lady of Perelandra—tragically and totally transformed into a self-centered materialist. Indeed, Arlena was the victim. We offer ourselves as unknowing Andromeda; as perfumed Jezebels, loath, accursed creatures, blind to our destination of decrepitation. Reverend Lane here was a nutter—was unlearned, with bad theology—he mistook the Whore of Babylon for a literal person, rather than the personification of a materialist self-centered society. show less

“Oh, God, she’s been strangled…murdered.”

She, being Arlena Stuart, a beautiful siren, and wife of Captain Marshall. Who on this island of leisure could have done it? “It all boils down to this - was it an outsider, or a guest at the hotel?” Or a jealous husband? Well, Hercule Poirot just so happens to be vacationing at said island, so the job falls to him! A job he is well suited for!

A fun read, one that kept me guessing until all was revealed and I'd discovered that I was wrong on my first, second, and third guesses! And when Poirot suggests the picnic at the end? Très bien! A thoroughly good read and a fun puzzle to attempt to put together!

“Yes, darling,” said Mr. Gardener. (every time that popped up, it gave me a show more smile!)

“Nothing is needed but physical strength - and the soul of a killer!” show less

Evil Under the Sun threw me through a loop. I wasn't even close when it came to figuring out what was going on. So many tiny details mixed with an abundance of obvious possibilities made this book  a wonderful mystery from beginning to end.

Poirot wasn't the least bit annoying in Evil Under the Sun. You know how he can get with his "little gray cells." This was one of the times when he's on vacation and actually seems to mean it for the majority of the trip.

I wasn't thrilled with the way the victim was blamed for her own death due to the way she lived her life. I was equally unhappy with the defense that she was not the brightest girl in the world, so she shouldn't be held responsible for her actions. I'll admit to strongly disliking show more the victim, but the concept of "she was asking for it" was insulting. It was also stereotypical of the time and must be viewed as such.

Evil Under the Sun was a great mystery with an ending you'll never see coming. This was definitely one of the better Poirot novels. show less