(Untitled)

[littlered2]

Agatha Christie insults Harriet Vane. The nerve

Comments

[hedge_backwards]

I always saw the water-jug bit as Dorothy L Sayers having a bit of a game with her readers, on the lines of 'ooh look, this looks like a plausible scenario doesn't it, you're pretty committed to it aren't you? Its nice and neat isn't it?...Nah, I've decided, I'm going to do something compleeeetely different instead.'

(Also it makes me very sad to read about the Golden Age Crime writers criticising each other, it ruins my mental image of their lives as one massive cocktail party where they trade bon mots and collectively solve the crossword.)

[littlered2]

Yes - she likes to mislead people. I'm not sure what the author of the Wikipedia article means by suggesting it's the key to the mystery, though.

On the whole, the essay is Christie being very complimentary to her fellow mystery novelists! She is just far too rude about Harriet.

[highfantastical]

O Harriet and Peter. <333

.....all the feels.

[littlered2]

All of them!

They are the best, and Agatha Christie clearly doesn't know what she is talking about. (Harriet, tiresome? Never.)

[highfantastical]

I'm gathering my strength to read the article. It's sitting there in a tab glaring at me. But I am going to read so I can disagree vehemently! AGATHA, WHAT, WHAT EVEN.

[antisoppist]

I think the empty water bottle is significant in showing that precautions were taken to prove that anything in the house that could have contained the poison didn't contain the poison, which is in itself suspicious, but I wouldn't call that crucial.

I can understand Christie not liking Harriet, seeing as Harriet is the reason I prefer Sayers to Christie.