Dumb Witness

Husbeast and I listened to this audiobook on a long drive this past weekend. Was familiar with the story from the Suchet TV show (though that TV adaptation of this one did some very odd things to characterization and some smaller plot points), but hearing how Christie actually put the story together was entertaining anyway. There's some really funny social commentary (send-ups of various English village types, mostly) and the characterization of a dog who is important to the plot is a delight, perhaps mostly because of Hugh Fraser's reading--which was wonderful all around.

In this Poirot novel, Christie laid emphasis on the transition occurring in 1930's England.. A strong-willed, elderly Victorian, Emily Arundel, is suspicious of what her relatives may be up to. She’s all too aware that they want her money. That said, she is of the opinion that such suspicions should remain within the confines of the closed family circle. Even if the younger generation are foolish and prone to scandalous behavior, that need not be the talk of the village. Emily reaches out to Poirot quietly, but dies before he receives the correspondence that invites him to investigate. Technically, he has no client, but Poirot distrusts the situation and surreptitiously seeks to learn more about the situation in Market Basing. show more Christie makes clear that much of the Victorian mindset (whether good or bad) is passing away, The murder is not what's important here; what is important is the transition that the dying, the passing, represents.

The role of Bob, Miss Arundel’s fox terrier, is to ensure that only the right people gain admittance to the closed social family circle.

While reading, note the descriptions of Littlegreen House and the layout of its rooms. Christie rarely gave this much physical detail about a particular setting and that she does so here is indicative of her theme. The way in which a Victorian household viewed the functions of space was giving way to new attitudes about what was convenient, necessary, and affordable.

Published under the title of [Dumb Witness] in the UK and under the title of [Poirot Loses A Client] in the US. show less

Poirot receives a two-month-old letter in the post. In her correspondence Emily Arundell tells Poirot of her uneasiness because she suspects that her recent fall down the stairs was not an accident at all but a deliberate attempt by someone in her family to kill her. Intrigued, Poirot and Hastings make their way to Market Basing, only to discover that Miss Arundell has been dead for nearly two months. Poirot smells a rat and begins to investigate.

A highly enjoyable and cleverly plotted whodunnit that manages to keep the perpetrator's identity concealed almost until the very end, and the ending, despite Poirot's legendary unveiling of the killer in the company of everyone assembled, is quite unusual. Agatha Christie never lets us forget show more that we're dealing with humans and their complicated emotions and to that end uses Poirot as the mouthpiece for those who can no longer speak for themselves to arrive at the truth. The only thing that grated a little was Hastings putting words into the mouth of Bob the dog, but luckily those instances are rare. show less

I really enjoyed this one! I found the characters more interesting, the overall story more intriguing (starting with the client already being dead), and enjoyed Poirot more than I have in his other books. I really liked him lying, always going somewhere new to talk to someone else, and especially enjoyed his relationship with Hastings, who I loved as the narrator, as I found Poirot more fun with an established friend to play off of.
This isn't the smartest Christie mystery for a few reasons, but I was entertained the entire time and got through it quickly. I enjoyed the cute dog stuff, I didn't guess where things were going, and I was satisfied with the endings for all the characters, including the detectives.
I look forward to reading show more more books featuring Hastings! show less

An old maid dies, but her will just recently was changed. What did Emily Arundell discover before her death that made her change her mind concerning her heirs? What a delicious story of a limited number of suspects like the previous story of Cards on the Table. This story presents a better story and with more understanding. Agatha Christie utilizes many quaint phrases such as “nigger in the woodpile” that would be very incorrect today. Poirot must wade through many piles of mud to uncover the most important source of greed. The killer attempts murder by leaving a thread for Miss Emily to catch her foot and fall down the stairs. This attempt fails. So, a second attempt does work, but the doctor states that Miss Emily died from show more pre-existing conditions and foul play is neglected. Enter Hercule Poirot and all his little tricks and of course, his little grey cells. So utterly delightful. Just wish I could talk with Agatha and find out the significance of the names of her characters. show less

A rich elderly woman suspects someone in her family is trying to kill her to get their inheritance a bit early. She writes to Hercule Poirot but due to the letter being mislaid it isn't delivered until a couple of months later — when Miss Emily Arundell has already died and left her considerable fortune to someone outside of the family. Though investigating a possible attempted murder seems moot to that doofus Hastings, given that the target has died of apparently natural causes in the meantime, Poirot persists. He learns that all of the family members (nieces, nephew and assorted spouses) are desperate for money, giving them all a capital (no pun intended) motive. But did any of them actually initiate a fatal action?

The "dumb show more witness" of the title is Bob, Miss Emily's intrepid wire terrier. He doesn't exactly solve the mystery but his actions and inactions are key to unraveling the case. I don't know much about Christie's personal life but I'm going to wager she was a dog lover, judging by the affectionate way she portrays Bob, even going so far as to give him actual dialogue. It's utterly charming and I'm glad Poirot was able to clear him of any wrongdoing in the case.

The more Poirot books I read the more I dislike the Hastings character. I realize he's there to provide a handy vehicle for Poirot to explain the clues and solution to the reader, but good grief no one can be that stupid and still be able to tie his shoes. Unlike Watson, who has his own charm separate from Sherlock Holmes, this sidekick has no redeeming characteristics that I can discern. I far prefer the Poirot cases where he is absent in Argentina or wherever, but even he can't keep this one from being a winner. show less

If you are anything like me, you know that while the term 'cozy mystery' is pretty accurate and conjures up images of quilts and warm firesides and tea kettles and so on, they should really consider using the term 'comfort mystery' instead. This week I have had the second half of 50 skin - well, let's call them decorations - removed from my neck and chest area, AND have had a colonoscopy, and in the waiting rooms prior to both these procedures I felt no fear, because I had my Kindle. And a very pleasant comfort mystery. I did not feel cozy in the least but I certainly felt comforted.

In short, Agatha (via Poirot in this case, and a slightly less dense than usual Hastings) does it again.