|
I think you're dead on with the Lotty thing, it was definitely mentioned in the previous chapter that the Inspector thought Miss Marple's "e's" looked like "o's", and with Dora constantly fudging the name it's obvious Marple meant to write "Lotty". I hadn't considered that it was someone named Charlotte, I just assumed Bunny was aware that it wasn't Letitia Blacklock and just kept messing up the name. I have a small theory on the "Delicious Death" thing. It was after eating the cake that Bunny felt ill and needed to take aspirin. My theory was that the cake had something in it to make whoever ate it ill so that they would take the poisoned aspirin. It seems roundabout - why not just poison the cake? - but by doing it this way you could have more control over who exactly to poison (i.e. if someone you didn't expect to eat the cake does you could give them non-tainted aspirin, or you could eat the cake yourself without suspicion, etc). I am still skimming back through and working on a more concrete theory, I will post it here this afternoon. I think we are on the same page thinking it is fake Letty, but I still have some details to work out and want to think about the other clues. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Jan 18, 2013 |
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:24 |
|
|
Okay, final theory time: Or most of one at least. I still think we are gonna find out some shady stuff about the various characters but I think I have an idea of what is going on with "Letitia Blacklock": So after skimming back over and Autumncomet's excellent catch, it seems obvious that I was wrong and the fake Letty isn't Sonia Goedler but Charlotte Blacklock. She was obviously cured by the iodine treatment, based on the text Autumncomet and also a comment Miss Marple made to Blacklock about preferring "the old-fashioned remedy of big black bottles of medicine". I am also going to assume based treatment and Lotty's arthritis symptoms that it was a muscular disease which she suffered from. And the "pearls" clue comes from her condition acting up and causing her to hand to spasm and rip off the pearls. So that covers the Iodine, the pearls, the Letty/Lotty confusion, as well as the "sad affliction bravely borne". It also means that Bunny obviously knew which Blacklock it really was. In a conversation with Miss Marple, Bunny also mentioned that "old age pension doesn't go very far" and then later Marple refers to a case where a lady was drawing double pension from a dead woman. I believe that is what was happening with Letty/Lotty, and I think she let Bunny in on the act, which explains why she would be confused about things. OR, it might just be a parallel to this case, where Lotty is assuming the identity of Letty in order to collect the Goedler fortune. It might also indicate that Bunny was also using the same scheme, she seemed confused about her own age (59 versus 64), and it would be important for Lotty to correct that in the presence of company since she was supposed to be her friend from school and therefor the same age. During the shooting, Lotty used the vase with the violets to pour water onto the defective lamp, which was later swapped out with the other lamp (this is why Bunny mentioned seeing the flash and hearing the crackle before the lights went out). I've already put forth my theory on the "Delicious Death" being used as a catalyst to lead someone to the poisoned aspirin. I am not sure about 'making enquiries', it seems to imply that it was not a formal investigation but just asking questions. I thought this might mean that he was asking Letty herself but she mentions that she only saw him once. It could still imply that Sonia and Letty were closer than it seems, and R.G. was pestering her about it. So Lotty is posing as Letty to draw double pension, or possibly to get at the Goedler fortune (I'll get to why I am not 100% sure this is the case in a second). Rudi Scherz (from Berne, the last clue) shows up and almost spoils the whole scam by recognizing Lotty. So she stages the whole thing (probably through Phillipa Haymes, who I will also get to in a sec) in order to murder him and get him out of the way. I am going to go out on a limb and say that Dora Bunner was Sonia Goedler. I couldn't find anything about Dora opening and closing her hands like a cat, and she isn't short and dark but technically we got that description from Lotty (after she pauses and says she wouldn't recognize her after all these years) and the pictures of her were hidden. Emma says her mother and father split them up, and Phillipa says her mother died several years ago but was probably lying, and she was the one who set up the whole thing with Rudi Scherz. It also fits with Dora being about 5 years younger than Letty would be, her showing up out of the blue, and my previous idea that Letty and Sonia had been close (hence the "enquiries" being important, R.G. was gossiping with his sister's friend, not conducting an investigation). So Lotty had the motive to murder Rudi Scherz. She may have been worried that Sonia was going to slip up since she had already revealed too much (I was originally going to say that maybe she hadn't known about the fortune, but she is the one who brings it up to the Inspector). Phillipa may have agreed because of Sonia's degrading mental condition - this would mean the nurse who euthanized her patients in Marple's story was actually meant to be Lotty and not Dora. Finally, either Lotty or maybe Pip heard Murgatroyd and Hinch working out the case and showed up to kill her. I am still not 100% on Pip either, and she is the one wrench in my Sonia theory. She may be telling the truth and thinks her mother died years ago and came seeking Letty Blacklock. That would explain why she didn't react to her mother being murdered. Or Sonia Goedler may be dead and Pip is planning on splitting the fortune with Lotty, which is why she helped arrange the Scherz thing (the summerhouse scene is still ambiguous in either case). But the main thing throwing me off is that Lotty got upset when Sonia died because she was the only one her knew her true identity, which means Pip probably didn't know (and was maybe helping her mother or oblivious). So that is my theory as of now! I might have some revelations, and if anyone has any other additions or corrections let me know. I am excited to move onto the conclusion! Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
I've been very short on time these past few weeks, so I am going to at least get this post properly started. I still need to check a few more things. When Mrs. Marple was listing people similar to the people in the case to Bunch. She wondered if Miss Blacklock knew something about Mrs. Easterbrook that Mrs. Easterbrook didn't want known, and Bunch said "..that old Tanqueray stuff?" Well, she wasn't referring to gin, she was referring to this play. The list of people Mrs Marple talked about in the conversation: Nurse Ellerton was a kindly-seeming woman who killed for money with morphine. Mrs Pusey's nephew, a good looking young man, brought his aunt stolen goods Mrs Cray's son was spoiled and "got in with a queer lot" Joan Croft was in the bank at the time of a robbery and knocked the robber down The quiet girl at St. Jean des Collines whose husband was a forger Major Vaughn (nothing wrong with either of them.) Colonel Wright (nothing wrong with either of them.) Mr. Hodgson the bank manager who married a woman young enough to be his daughter Bunch associates them as follows: Devoted Dora Handsome Patrick Mrs Swettenham and Edumund Phillipa Hames Colonel Easterbrook and Mrs Easterbrook Mrs Marple tells Bunch she didn't get all of them right. I'm going to come back to this list a little later. Other general information that we don't think of immediately because it is no longer common: Goiter. Note the main cause (which contains its treatment in the same two words). And Charlotte had a "deformity", didn't she? Which Letty said in a letter was not as obvious as Charlotte thought. And "Leticia Blacklock" always wears a necklace. The pearls are choker-style, and I expect the cameos were similar. I don't think Lotty was upset over the pearl necklace breaking, I think she was upset about her "deformity" being exposed. The way it broke, by the way, suggests it WAS costume jewelry because real pearl necklaces have a knot between each pearl to prevent that very sort of accident. More a little bit later Zola fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
Zola posted:
This was exactly my line of reasoning. Everyone assumes she was upset because the pearls were real. If they were real, she wouldn't have rushed out of the room and left them rolling around on the floor. I think she was upset because all the stress was causing her condition to flare up again. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
Good theories all around. Is it absolutely necessary that Bunny is Sonia though? If Rudi could recognize Charlotte and give the game away, why couldn't Pip or Emma/Julia? While I guess it's possible, I feel like it complicates matters.
Mecca-Benghazi fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
Autumncomet posted:Good theories all around. Is it absolutely necessary that Bunny is Sonia though? If Rudi could recognize Charlotte and give the game away, why couldn't Pip or Emma/Julia? While I guess it's possible, I feel like it complicates matters. I mean, I don't know that she is, it was a theory because it seems to me like Sonia is in the mix somehow especially since the Investigator said her hand thing reminded him of someone. Emma claims that her mother split her and Pip up, and Pip says her mother died, so either one/both of them could be telling the truth or lying or in on it and it would fit. I am guessing Pip is in on it but Julia/Emma is telling the truth about never meeting her mother. I admit I don't have anything very solid, except the facts that: 1) I don't think Dora was who she said she was, 2) I think Sonia is in the mix somewhere, 3) it fits my idea of the "enquiries" clue by making Letty/Lotty and Sonia closer than they seemed. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 06:28
|
|
|
I'm going to post my list again for convenience. Nurse Ellerton was a kindly-seeming woman who killed for money with morphine. Mrs Pusey's nephew, a good looking young man, brought his aunt stolen goods Mrs Cray's son was spoiled and "got in with a queer lot" Joan Croft was in the bank at the time of a robbery and knocked the robber down The quiet girl at St. Jean des Collines whose husband was a forger Major Vaughn (nothing wrong with either of them.) Colonel Wright (nothing wrong with either of them.) Mr. Hodgson the bank manager who married a woman young enough to be his daughter Bunch associates them as follows: Devoted Dora Handsome Patrick Mrs Swettenham and Edumund Phillipa Hames Colonel Easterbrook and Mrs Easterbrook Mrs Marple tells Bunch she didn't get all of them right. From the above conversation between Mrs. Marple and Bunch: quote:And then there was that young man on the liner--Mrs. Pusey at the paper shop, her nephew. Brought home stuff he'd stolen and got her to dispose of it. Bunch assumed that was Patrick, but we haven't heard anything whatsoever to suggest that Patrick had two girls in love with him, or that he was a thief. Rudi Scherz, on the other hand, was definitely a thief and had an eye for the ladies and we know of one young lady at least he spent quite a bit of money on. What if Rudi were the one Mrs. Marple had in mind? The other thing that hasn't come up at all is the gun. Chances are good that it was Colonel Easterbrook's gun. So that means that it had to be brought to Little Paddocks. It could have been brought by the Colonel himself, or his wife could have brought it--after all, we only have her word that it was last seen after the murder. If one of them brought it, then it's most likely one of them who committed the murder. However, there is the matter of the flour bin under the table where "things" are left. If the revolver was left there for someone else to pick up, then we have two murderers. I also want to call your attention to a character that we never see but keep hearing about, and that would be Mrs. Butt, who is the cleaning lady for at least two of the group. I thought it was strange that Mrs. Butt was described as having a "super-refined" voice--is this characteristic of upper class servants or is this something important? I simply want to note, though, that Mrs. Butt also had access to the revolver and that she was the one who mentioned to the police that Hinch had been to Little Paddocks. Given that half the people there aren't who they are supposed to be, I'm going to follow the trend and say I think that Colonel Easterbrook is actually Dmitri. Zola fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Major theories posted so far: "Letty" is the culprit, but isn't actually Letty. Letty is Charlotte. Dora is Sonia. Colonel Easterbrook is Dmitri. Are we ready to move on to the grand finale? Quinn2win fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
Zola posted:
Man I had this post all written out before and I apparently didn't submit. So I was thinking about this and something occurred to me. You make a good point about Rudi being the closest young man to matching the story since the other two don't especially seem to be ladies' men. But at the same time Rudi was always a patsy from the start. And, since I think we are at least in agreement that Letty is actually Charlotte, there seems to be a theme developing of reversed expectations. We were hinted several times that people wouldn't recognize family they haven't seen in a while, and at first this seemed to refer to Patrick and Julia, but it turns out it is true for at least Lotty as well. We also have a reversal of expectation from a character we thought was a man but turned out to be a woman: Pip. So what if we are again playing with gender reversal for the role of this character. Phillipa is the only character we have seen to have people fawning over them: we had the extended scene of Edmund trying unsuccessfully to woo her. What if we assume that Rudi was also in love with her, and that is how she hooked him into the whole plot (assuming that what Mitzi heard in the summerhouse is what it seems; someone did have to set up Rudi after all). Also in the scene with Edmund, she mentioned she has "another name" - Joan. Could she be the -J from the letter in the Times at the beginning of the book? Also, I'm not sure this has anything to do with the mystery, but I noticed when going back over the beginning that Edmund is reading The Daily Worker and his mother admonishes him for his politics. The dude is totally a commie! And ProfProf, I am ready whenever you guys are! Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Man I had this post all written out before and I apparently didn't submit. Mrs Cray's son was spoiled and "got in with a queer lot" is definitely Mrs Swettenham and Edumund, because of that very fact. Here is what I'm wondering. Letty went to take care of Charlotte. Is it possible that Letty was in love with Dmitri but that he was also carrying on an affair with Sonia? We have been told that Letty is a good, honest person. Is it possible that Rudi is the real Letty's son? That would certainly be a good reason to set up Rudi! Prof: I'm ready to move forward. Zola fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
If Letty is indeed Charlotte, I think the prospect of Rudi revealing that she's not who she says she is is reason enough to off him. Maybe I just don't like complications.  Likewise, I don't think Dora was Sonia, but admittedly I have no evidence besides gut feeling and some bias.Ready as well to continue. Mecca-Benghazi fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 18:13
|
|
|
Zola posted:Mrs Cray's son was spoiled and "got in with a queer lot" is definitely Mrs Swettenham and Edumund, because of that very fact. Ahh, excellent point about Edmund! You just blew my mind with this. Another thing I had always found fishy was Letty's comment in her letter when R.G. asks her if she would ever fall in love a criminal, she replies something like "I don't think I should fall in love with anyone". Originally I assumed this might be a hint that Letty was in love with R.G. and was embarrassed when he asked her, but it fits with your theory that she actually was in love with Dmitri, and obviously would be embarrassed to tell Goedler after his ranting. I'm a little torn on Rudi because "Dora" recognized him as the young man from the hotel and not as Lotty's nephew. But then again the only details we know are from Bunny's initial outburst (which caused Blacklock to have her rushed out of the room and given brandy, possibly to keep her from blurting out something incriminating?) and then what Blacklock and Bunner told the Inspector, which probably would have been rehearsed. There definitely is the confused comment Letty gave when the Inspector first said his name, which indicates that she thought it would be something else! Autumncomet posted:Likewise, I don't think Dora was Sonia, but admittedly I have no evidence besides gut feeling and some bias. To be fair I only really have a gut feeling. I am fairly sure Dora wasn't who she was supposed to be and Sonia is the only person unaccounted for is my main suspicion. Letty has to be Lotty but I am iffy on anyone else, I just thought I'd throw that idea in and see if it sticks. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
All right, let's call this the moment of truth, then. Everyone, go ahead and read to the end! All spoilers above this one can now be unspoilt. Ending spoilers:Congratulations, thread! Aside from being a bit overzealous on your predictions of who's actually who, you were basically spot on in the end. The culprit was Charlotte Blacklock masquerading as Letitia Blacklock. Now, someone else suggest some followup books - I'd like to actually participate next time. Maybe something by an author besides Christie? Whatever we decide on, I'm gonna start keeping a record of suggested future books in the OP. Quinn2win fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Ahh, excellent point about Edmund! I could be WAY off here, but... I don't think Bunny was Sonia because if what we were told was true, that Sonia had taken Phillipa and Dmitri took Emma, then I think Phillipa would be more upset about her death. I wondered about Letty being in love with Dmitri because of that quote I gave earlier: quote:"...Had two girls in love with him. He spent a lot of money on one of them." If this referred not only to a current person but a past situation, we would have Sonia and Letitia, with the implication due to other parts of the book that Letitia was the nice one and Sonia was the nasty one. This is supported by what Belle said about Letitia, that she was good and needed to be protected, which would also support the idea that Dmitri was able to take advantage of her. Lamp. Violets. Where is bottle of aspirin? Delicious Death. Making enquiries. Severe affliction bravely borne. Iodine. Pearls. Letty. Berne. Old Age Pension The lamps had likely been switched, so that the damage to the lamp wasn't obvious. Violets--the water in their vase was the means to putting out the lights. Aspirin--Bunny had just bought a bottle. What happened to it? Delicious Death-- was the cake poisoned? Making enquiries--what did RG find out about Dmitri? Severe affliction bravely borne--maybe it wasn't referring to Charlotte's illness but rather what happened to Letty with Dmitri. Iodine treats goiter. Pearls hide the goiter or hide a scar from removing the goiter. Letty might be Charlotte. Berne -- Rudi is from there Old Age Pension: Perhaps Charlotte was pretending to be Letty because of the money. Perhaps she and Sonia had a deal to split the money if she masqueraded as Letty. Where does Mitzi fit in? Could she be Dmitri's daughter from another marriage? Edit: I was preparing this at the same time ProfessorProf was giving the okay to reading the end, so let me just add one more thing and then I'm off to read the big reveal. It might be that Letty was shooting at Colonel Easterbrook, and that she got clipped on the ear by a hysterical Mitzi. Now to find out if any of my theories were accurate. Zola fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
Yeah, Phillipa was my one sticking point about the Bunny = Sonia theory. I will read this shortly on my next break and we can discuss the ending!
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:
]Haha, yeah, we did get a tad crazy at the end. I think it is because our prediction of not-Letitia came right on the heels of them revealing who Pip and Emma were. So at that point it just seemed like, why not? We have at least 3 hidden identities, why not go all out! Still pretty psyched we were able to figure out the Lotty connection, good job on that one Autumncomet. I also did like the epilogue with Edmund and Phillipa refusing to subscribe to the Gazette and the Totmans being totally incredulous about it. Edmund is totally still a commie, though. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Jan 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
Well, I got the important bit right.  ProfessorProf, how madly were you laughing at our predictions over the course of the last 3 pages?As for future stories, I have nothing.  I really would like to read more of this type of mystery though, where once you get to a certain point, you can piece together the mystery (sans motive, maybe) as the detective does.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
Autumncomet posted:ProfessorProf, how madly were you laughing at our predictions over the course of the last 3 pages? Massively, for the first two pages - then I was just buttmad that you guys figured it out when I never did! This book kicked my rear end when I read it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
Slightly off-topic: I just got a copy of a book called Raymond Chandler Speaking and it is an excellent read. It is a collection of letters, journal entries, and magazine articles he wrote. An entire chapter is devoted to mystery writing and his thoughts on it and it is an enlightening read. At the end of that chapter he lays out some basic principles for solid mystery writing and it is like my bible when I write this stuff now. Like all of his work the tone remains somewhat light even when dealing with serious topics (including some really frank letters about a suicide attempt following his wife's death) and reading it is a breeze. I highly reccomend you put a library hold on this book and read it through if you care at all about mystery writing. BONUS: It also includes a kind of interesting oddity: a short story of pure fiction, purpotedly one of the only ones he ever wrote, which is not particularly compelling but gives an interesting insight into Chandler's personal emotional landscape.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
Autumncomet posted:Well, I got the important bit right. In some of the old Ellery Queen novels, they'd actually print a page near the end that told you to stop and try to guess the murderer, then the next pages would be the detective explaining whodunit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
Autumncomet, you were dead on about not over-complicating things. It surely looks like we noticed the most important clues, and really, one gets better at this kind of thing with practice so I'm eager to move on to the next book. I haven't read any Agatha Christie at all, nor many other mysteries other than Nancy Drew, The Three Investigators and Trixie Beldon, which, something tells me, aren't likely to show up on the list. I joined because I thought branching out a bit would do me good. ProfessorProf, if need be, I'm sure any one of us would be happy to act as "guide" to be sure you get a turn--whoever was in charge of that mystery could just PM you to update the OP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
Zola posted:ProfessorProf, if need be, I'm sure any one of us would be happy to act as "guide" to be sure you get a turn--whoever was in charge of that mystery could just PM you to update the OP. Even that much shouldn't be necessary - I follow my own threads pretty obsessively. Whoever wants to run the next book is free to do so, and I'll update the OP whenever we move onward.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:Even that much shouldn't be necessary - I follow my own threads pretty obsessively. Whoever wants to run the next book is free to do so, and I'll update the OP whenever we move onward. So... which book shall we do next? I had a friend who was very fond of the Lilian Jackson Braun "Cat Who" series, but I don't even know of they are conventional mysteries meant to be solved by the reader. I really hope more folks will participate in the speculation this time around--it doesn't matter if you're dead wrong, the fun is in the discussion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
Zola posted:So... which book shall we do next? I had a friend who was very fond of the Lilian Jackson Braun "Cat Who" series, but I don't even know of they are conventional mysteries meant to be solved by the reader. I've read the first two Ellery Queen novels and wasn't terribly impressed by them, but maybe some of the later ones are better? I could recommend things because I've read probably hundreds of whodunits, but I don't want to because then I can't speculate. I found a massive list here with some authors one doesn't hear about too much, though their books might be rather difficult to find...
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 07:51
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:All right, let's call this the moment of truth, then. Everyone, go ahead and read to the end! All spoilers above this one can now be unspoilt. I'd like to get in on this too, but I've read (listened to) nearly all the Christie stories. It's really fun watching you guys try to figure it out, but would also be fun to do a book I don't know the end to. So my suggestions for future books are: Murder Is Easy / By The Pricking of My Thumbs (Two of my favourite Christies) Something by Dorothy L Sayers (who I like but haven't read all of) Whatever book we go with I'll definitely be following the thread 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 10:41
|
|
|
So is the basic requirement for running one of these just reading ahead to determine what are good stopping points, and then of course announcing when the final section is coming up to get people's final guesses in? Or should we have fully read the book first? This is the first pure Whodunit I have ever read, but I do read a good deal, so I wouldn't mind running one of these. Probably not the next one because I would like to give myself time to find one and read the story ahead of time and make my own guesses, but if this does continue to be a popular thread I'll queue up one or two books to get ready for future reads. Suggestions are of course welcome, especially from those of you in this thread who have read a bunch before and want to read something new along with us.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 00:00
|
|
|
I think the only actual requirement is to know good stopping points to pace the thread, but it'd be a shame to skim over a book just enough to get that much without the fun of reading it properly. In the interest of getting things moving again, let's just pick one for now and continue the discussion of future book candidates as we go through it. If there are no objections, Maud Moonshine, would you mind walking us through Murder is Easy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:I think the only actual requirement is to know good stopping points to pace the thread, but it'd be a shame to skim over a book just enough to get that much without the fun of reading it properly. Is that going to officially be the book? I'm going to get it on Kindle if it is
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 04:05
|
|
|
I don't have a copy of it where I'm currently living and I'd like to use a paper copy if I'm going to be taking over as clue archivist the way you were. I will check the nearest charity shop on my lunch break. Even if they haven't got Murder Is Easy they're bound to have some Agatha Christie I've read so I can pick up another one if that's alright? In short, hold off on buying anything for a few hours until I see what I can get my hands on. EDIT: Managed to pick up Murder Is Easy. Give me a little time after work to choose the best first stopping place and we'll be good to go. Maud Moonshine fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Jan 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 10:20
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:I think the only actual requirement is to know good stopping points to pace the thread, but it'd be a shame to skim over a book just enough to get that much without the fun of reading it properly. Yeah definitely, thats why I want to give myself time to read a full book and process and enjoy it before running one of these. I was just thinking we could maybe get a list of potential candidates together, that way I could read one myself and get ready for an upcoming read-through. Thanks for taking the lead on this one Maud Moonshine!
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Yeah definitely, thats why I want to give myself time to read a full book and process and enjoy it before running one of these. I was just thinking we could maybe get a list of potential candidates together, that way I could read one myself and get ready for an upcoming read-through. That's a really good idea. If we can pick out several books in advance, I'll volunteer for a specific one too. Off to the Kindle store now!
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
Not too seem too much like I'm copying ProfessorProf, but I think the end of Chapter Three is a good place to stop. I've give everyone a chance to get hold of the book / do some reading and then post some character lists and possibly clues sometime tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
OP updated with the new book. Time to pick this up myself! Big Edit: Done through Chapter 3. So far, mainly impressed with how funny the book is. The dialogue writing in this is brilliant on every character. Clues/characters: Wychwood-under-Ashe Not a character, exactly, but the town. Notable for having a history of witchcraft accusations and the occult. Luke Fitzwilliam Our hero and detective. Retired policeman returning from abroad. He seems very gung-ho about everything. Newcomer to Wychwood-under-Ashe. Mrs. Pinkerton Old lady who Luke met on the train. She was going to Scotland Yard to tell them about the murders - she claimed to know who the murderer was. She is now deceased, probably on account of more murders. Dr. Humbleby Doctor who Pinkerton claimed would be the next victim of the murders. Died, probably murdered. Jimmy Lorrimer Luke's old friend. Got him an excuse to go to Wychwood-under-Ashe through his cousin Bridget. Bridget Conway Jimmy's cousin and Whitfield's secretary. Very mysterious young lady. Gordon Whitfield Owner of Ashe Manor. Egotistical moron who runs a series of gossip rags. Very wealthy. Bridget lists several more (Thomas, Wake, Ellsworthy, Horton), but I'm not inclined to count them until they've actually entered the story. The murders: Mrs. Pinkerton was killed in a hit-and-run car accident, either before or after talking to Scotland Yard. Motive is obvious, if before - killed to protect the killer's identity. Dr. Humbleby died of Septicaemia, apparently. Likely another murder. An unknown number ("There have been a lot of deaths this year") of other victims before Pinkerton. No details on them. "It's very easy to kill - so long as no one suspects you. And you see, the person in question is just the last person anyone would suspect!" Quinn2win fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Jan 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 21:03
|
|
|
Just finished the first three chapters. I like the characters in this one more than in A Murder is Announced. They're more distinguishable so far, at the least.  I'm inclined to think Jimmy's coroner friend might be involved somehow, but that just might be a background detail. Mecca-Benghazi fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Jan 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 09:37
|
|
|
Off to a good start. I am also a big fan of the humor in this one, Luke is a pretty enjoyable smartass. So Mrs. Pinkerton seemed to imply (or maybe even outright state, I may have misread some of her rambling remarks) that the victims were all poisoned, which is how she knew that Dr. Humbleby was next, because he started showing the same symptoms the earlier victims had. Also add to the list of victims: Amy Gibbs - first person Pinkerton noticed with the symptoms before she died Carter - "he drank" Tommy Pierce - bully to smaller kids Those are the ones that Mrs. Pinkerton noticed. For now I am inclined to believe those are our only victims, especially since 5 people in a small town dying over the course of a few months might be considered "a lot" although those might just be the ones Pinkerton first noticed. Guy A. Person fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
This one is starting out fun! Consolidating the current list. Clues/characters: Wychwood-under-Ashe Not a character, exactly, but the town. Notable for having a history of witchcraft accusations and the occult. Luke Fitzwilliam Our hero and detective. Retired policeman returning from abroad. He seems very gung-ho about everything. Newcomer to Wychwood-under-Ashe. Maybe a bit impulsive--he leaves his train to check out the result of a horse he bet on, and he won on a long shot. Mrs. Pinkerton Old lady who Luke met on the train. Luke liked her because she reminded him of a beloved old aunt. She was going to Scotland Yard to tell them about the murders - she claimed to know who the murderer was. She is now deceased, probably on account of more murders. Dr. Humbleby Doctor who Pinkerton claimed would be the next victim of the murders. Died, probably murdered. Jimmy Lorrimer Luke's old friend. Got him an excuse to go to Wychwood-under-Ashe through his cousin Bridget. Bridget Conway Jimmy's cousin and Whitfield's secretary. Very mysterious young lady. Gordon Whitfield Owner of Ashe Manor. Egotistical moron who runs a series of gossip rags. Very wealthy. Bridget lists several more (Thomas, Wake, Ellsworthy, Horton), but I'm not inclined to count them until they've actually entered the story. The murders: Mrs. Pinkerton was killed in a hit-and-run car accident, either before or after talking to Scotland Yard. Motive is obvious, if before - killed to protect the killer's identity. Dr. Humbleby died of Septicaemia, apparently. Likely another murder. Amy Gibbs - first person Pinkerton noticed with the symptoms before she died Carter - "he drank" Tommy Pierce - bully to smaller kids An unknown number ("There have been a lot of deaths this year") of other victims before Pinkerton. Zola fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Jan 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Glad people are enjoying it! I'm always a bit anxious when other people read a book I've proclaimed as a favourite in case they hate it. I was going to do a alleged murders and a character list, but between Zola and Guy A Person, everything I would have posted has been thoroughly covered.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 20:20
|
|
|
Carbon Thief posted:I'd really like to get in on the next book, but I've read that one, too. May I suggest something from Rex Stout, Ngaio Marsh, or one of the other "Golden Age" mystery writers? (There are plenty of other Christie novels I can't remember whodunit for, though, if you're sticking with her.) So I was going back because I remembered there had been suggestions of other books. Maud Moonshine, are there any books from either of these two writers that you have already read? I want to make sure we can get a book everyone can participate in, since it seems like you and Carbon Thief have both read a lot of Christie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
In addition to all the Golden Age classics, I'd be interested in reading some of the more recent additions to the genre, maybe something like Simon Brett's Fethering series. For more obscure books, though, someone'd probably have to read it in advance in order to act as mediator...
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:24 |
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:In addition to all the Golden Age classics, I'd be interested in reading some of the more recent additions to the genre, maybe something like Simon Brett's Fethering series. For more obscure books, though, someone'd probably have to read it in advance in order to act as mediator... Well, pick out the next two mysteries so Guy A. Person and I can get ready to host. It doesn't bother me to have two books going at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 00:02
|
|