“From seat No.9, Hercule Poirot was ideally placed to observe his fellow air passengers. Over to his right sat a pretty young woman, clearly infatuated with the man opposite; ahead, in seat No.13, sat a Countess with a poorly-concealed cocaine habit; across the gangway in seat No.8, a detective writer was being troubled by an aggressive wasp. What Poirot did not yet realize was that behind him, in seat No.2, sat the slumped, lifeless body of a woman.”
When I read a lot of Agatha Christie tales in the latter half of the 70’s, the
editions I read were the ones released by Berkley Books, an imprint of Penguin
Books. At the time, I don’t think I caught onto some of the subtleties of her social
commentaries going on throughout the books. I mean, there is a scene at the
Inquest, were all the potential killers are giving their views, with reporters
listening on. She makes it very obvious that reporters see things in
sensational views. Not only do they make headlines in their heads about the
murder, how sensational it is, and how it was done, but when it came to
describing the women’s POV, especially the ones from high society, the
reporters are more concerned with communicating their fashion than their take
on what happened on the plane. Christie was a feminist, so I think this is a
jab at the tabloids of the time, where any women of high society being caught
up in a murder investigation has to take a backseat to looks and their stations
in England during this period (though nearly 90 years later, this continues in the
press). As a matter of fact, even a few male characters voice the same thing
that being caught up in this unsavory murder is detrimental to their public
appearance, both in their work and private lives.
I also found it interesting the
changes Berkley Books made to some of the prose. In the UK version of the
paperback, which was released by Fontana Books (a division of Harper Collins) in
1935, they kept the word “bitch” in when describing a person, but Berkley
changed it to “hag” in the American edition. Also the word “toilet” was changed
to “bath room.” There are also some “meta” moments in the book, along with
other doses of social commentary, like when Inspector Japp reflects on mystery
writers who spend their time researching death: “I don’t think it’s healthy for
a man to be always brooding over crime and detective stories, reading up all
sorts of cases. It puts ideas into his head.” Christie was well known for doing
a lot of research for her novels, but she was also a woman who was making a
fortune writing these whodunits.
Death in the Clouds (AKA as Death in the Air) is set in 1935,
and it’s interesting to note the use of psychology of the crime, which was in its
infancy then. It’s sort of made fun here by the police, but Poirot seems to
subscribe to it. That’s why so much is made of the boldness of the crime, how
it was committed in such an enclosed environment and how it must’ve been
witnessed by many people who didn’t realize it or unaware they were seeing a
murder. When he talks to the maid of the dead woman (a women of “lower class”,
I guess?), she seems unwilling to reveal much to a police, who know how to
manipulate those servants (seemly something that remains consistent today, some
90 years ago later), Poirot, as a private detective, tells her (in another meta
moment, as this is a plot device of all murder mysteries seemly have) that “In
every a case of a criminal nature ones comes across the same phenomena when
questioning witnesses. Everybody keeps
something back. Sometimes –often indeed- it is something quite harmless,
something, perhaps quite unconnected with the crime; but –I say it again- there
is always something.”
I did look up the Irish Sweep
–the character of Jane Grey’s Paris trip was funded by this. I had never heard
of it, so was curious if it was a real thing. It was: The Irish Free State
Hospitals’ Sweepstakes, was a lottery established in 1930 to fund Irish
hospitals. Lotteries of any kind were illegal in the UK at the time and by
1934, an act prohibition on the import and export of lottery related materials
was enacted. But it didn’t stop some English from taking advantage of it.
There are a few racist moments
within the book, as well, including the word “Ikey”, which was slang to refer
to Jane’s Jewish boss. Also, Norman and Jane also discover their mutual dislike
for “negroes”. The French also come under fire, with Jane thinking to herself
“he’s French, though. You’ve got to look out with the French, they always say
so.” Even Poirot gets insulted: “Foreigners, you can’t trust foreigners, even
if they are hand in glove with the police”. It all seems unseemly, tacky and
okay. One
can see why in later editions of these books and others, some of this stuff is
toned down, I guess. It’s like what happened to the original Nancy Drew titles
published in the 1930’s. By the 1950’s a lot racist passages those books contained
were completely re-written or certain some passages were dropped from those
books and then re-issued to American’s who’s views had changed since WWII.
It’s a fun read, maybe not as brilliant as say Death on the Nile or Murder on the Orient Express, but its still a great whodunit.
No comments:
Post a Comment