The Mysterious Affair at Styles

by Agatha Christie

With impeccable timing Hercule Poirot, the renowned Belgian detective, makes his dramatic entrance on to the English crime stage. Recently, there had been some strange goings on at Styles St Mary. Evelyn, constant companion to old Mrs Inglethorp, had stormed out of the house muttering something about 'a lot of sharks'. And with her, something indefinable had gone from the atmosphere. Her presence had spelt security; now the air seemed rife with suspicion and impending evil. A shattered coffee cup, a splash of candle grease, a bed of begonias all Poirot required to display his now legendary powers of detection.

• ISBN10: 0002321394
• ISBN13: 9780002321396
• Publish Date: 22 January 2002 (first published 1 October 1920)
• Publish Status: Active
• Out of Print: 13 May 2006
• Publish Country: GB
• Publisher: HarperCollins Publishers
• Imprint: Collins Crime
• Edition: New edition
• Format: Hardcover
• Pages: 208
• Language: English
• URL: http://harpercollins.co.uk

Reviews

[Aidan Brack (Mysteries Ahoy)]

I personally rather enjoy The Mysterious Affair at Styles but I do think the mystery itself is one of Poirot’s less interesting cases. Certainly there is an element of the resolution (the identity of the killer) that I think is quite clever and utilizes Christie’s soon-to-be iconic skills at misdirection well but the cast of suspects are not particularly interesting either in variety or motive.

Read my full review at Mysteries Ahoy!

Poirot was an extraordinary-looking little man. He was hardly more than five feet four inches, but carried himself with great dignity. His head was exactly the shape of an egg, and he always perched it a little on one side. His moustache was very stiff and military. The neatness of his attire was almost incredible; I believe a speck of dust would have caused him more pain than a bullet wound. Yet this quaint dandified little man who, I was sorry to see, now limped badly, had been in his time one of the most celebrated members of the Belgian police. As a detective, his flair had been extraordinary, and he had achieved triumphs by unravelling some of the most baffling cases of the day.

Christie, Agatha. Hercule Poirot 3-Book Collection 1: The Mysterious Affair at Styles, The Murder on the Links, Poirot Investigates (Kindle Locations 308-313). HarperCollins Publishers. Kindle Edition.

I love Hercule Poirot. Such a great detective. Such a character. There's always a great mystery with lots of twists and turns and red herrings, all of which keep me riveted. The characters are interesting and have complex motives for their actions. That said, not a huge fan of Hastings. He's too busy being on his high horse to be likable. I've read many Agatha Christie books before but not all and not in order so I'm in the process of commencing a reread. Highly recommend to crime lovers.

In The Mysterious Affair at Styles we are introduced to our narrator, Captain Arthur Hastings who is on leave from the army and runs into an old friend, John Cavendish. He gets invited to stay with them and not long after his arrival the friend's mother (stepmother actually but referred to mainly as mother) is murdered and it becomes a whodunnit. Poirot is in town so when the doctors imply that Emily Inglethorpe has been poisoned, Hastings suggests Poirot be fetched.

Much like Sherlock Holmes and John Watson, all of our information regarding the crime and Hercule Poirot himself is filtered through our narrator, Captain Arthur Hastings. Although Hastings tries to be objective and unbiased, he tends to be influenced by his own ego and supposed prowess as a detective. He's also pretty quick to be offended by perceived slights and is often frustrated by his own lack of understanding. Although Hastings admires Poirot, he seems to fall down a lot in their friendship - often disregarding Poirot's thoughts and theories and feeling joy when it appears he's failed.

I came across a man in Belgium once, a very famous detective, and he quite inflamed me. He was a marvellous little fellow. He used to say that all good detective work was a mere matter of method. My system is based on his— though of course I have progressed rather further. He was a funny little man, a great dandy, but wonderfully clever.’

Christie, Agatha. Hercule Poirot 3-Book Collection 1: The Mysterious Affair at Styles, The Murder on the Links, Poirot Investigates (Kindle Locations 154-157). HarperCollins Publishers. Kindle Edition.

Poirot is an understanding friend although can be passionate in both happiness, excitement and anger. He prefers method and order to chaos and gets worked up when he doesn't settle his thoughts first. That said, he is not a particularly action based detective. Although he wouldn't disregard physical evidence (footprints, blood, etc) he also doesn't go out of his way to look for it - preferring to puzzle through the crime in his head and tease out the psychological elements.

‘The true work, it is done from within. The little grey cells— remember always the little grey cells, mon ami.’

Christie, Agatha. Hercule Poirot 3-Book Collection 1: The Mysterious Affair at Styles, The Murder on the Links, Poirot Investigates (Kindle Locations 2957-2959). HarperCollins Publishers. Kindle Edition.

I enjoyed the case, even if Hastings annoys me. Frankly the hint of romance between him and Mary Cavendish disturbed me. Because Mary is married. To his friend. That's he's staying with. Like seriously? I was amused by Poirot manipulating him because he's a bad liar. And this doesn't really have anything to do with...well anything really - it just made me laugh.

‘Oh, you,’ I replied hastily.

Christie, Agatha. Hercule Poirot 3-Book Collection 1: The Mysterious Affair at Styles, The Murder on the Links, Poirot Investigates (Kindle Location 586). HarperCollins Publishers. Kindle Edition.

Hastings replied hastily. Hehe.

[nitzan_schwarz]

To read this review and more check out my blog Afterwords!

So, obviously, there is a reason Christie is considered a mother effing QUEEN of mystery.

She manages to make everyone a possible suspect to her reader, so subsequently... no one is. I have suspected--out loud and in my mind--so many people during the course of this novel that by the end of it, I was both shocked and vindicated by the outcome.

If you're looking for a great mystery with a quirky detective at the helm, an interesting cast of supporting characters and fun narration, definitely pick this one up!

Speaking of which... the narration kind of bothered me. Don't get me wrong, it's great. Hastings is a fun character to be experiencing, as he is prideful, condescending, and yet well-meaning and friendly. He thinks he's doing and thinking the right things, even when he's not quite there.

He would have been a perfect narrator, if not for one tiny detail...

By his own admission, on the very first page of the novel, Hastings is writing this account on request of Poirot and the family. That means these people, who are spoken about very candidly in his account, will read this novel.

That made the whole thing rather odd.

Think about it. Let's say you go on a trip with your friends, and they ask you to write about your adventures. Would you admit to thinking those same friends are stupid or lack conversational skills? Would you share how you fancied their wives and offered marriage to their charges? Would you speak of how much better your intelligence, or wit, or cleverness is compared to theirs? Or will you soften all those things? Erase others. All because you know they will read this. This is not a story that will be locked in a drawer, but published or given to these very people.

And what about yourself? Would you write yourself to be the foolish way you were, with your condescending judgment? Would you have no fear of people seeing your flaws and therefore smooth them over; make yourself appear less dense, a little less dumb and prone to jumping to conclusions (since, by the time you are writing this, you already know how things have ended).

It's unrealistic. Hastings would not have needed to change what had happened but simply what he thought as it was happening in order to both make himself look better (because he comes across as extremely foolish, if well-meaning, throughout the story) AND keep his relationships stable (if I was one of his friends I would have thrown a pitcher in his face for some of the things he had written).

It's such a silly thing to be hung up on, and if not for that one small sentence about why he's writing all of this it would have been nothing. I have never thought before about why someone is narrating a story or who is meant to read it in his or her world, since a narration is usually just that; a narration. A means to tell the story, basically. But with one short line, those lines were blurred, and I could not be content to just accept it as it is.

I could not just accept his candid, honest account. Instead, I was confused by why he was giving it like that. Am I the only one in this? Am I crazy??

And then, I felt like the ending fell a little short. I loved the big reveal; the wham bam and shock of it. But I was also left with far too many questions for it to be any form of satisfying?

As Poirot mentions himself; there has to be motive for murder. Why did Evie and Alfred kill her? How long did they plan it? Was Evie such a great actress, to be able to easily cry over the death she has planned herself or was a part of her genuinely sad after so many years with the woman? Why did no one question her hatred of her cousin throughout the book? Like, I literally forgot they were cousins because it was a throwaway comment at the very beginning and then it wasn't touched upon again. And this is something Christie could have used, like letting Evie say something like "I know he killed her; He's my cousin" to both bolster Evie's claims and give the reader a clue.

And then... why? Why did Evie hate her mistress? Why did she wait ten years to call her cousin and do this?

It's just... so many missing pieces with no way to piece them together!

Still, an undeniably strong start to what would become Christie's incredible career, and I am looking forward to both reading more from her and hoping some of the more open-ended and disjointed side plots from this one (ahemahemthespyahemahem) will be revisited in the future!


Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Instagram |
___________________________________

Original Unfiltered Thoughts
So, clearly, there is a reason Christie is hailed as a queen of mystery.

The mystery in this book is phenomenal - she manages to make everyone a suspect to the reader, and consequently... no one is. I have suspected (out loud and in my mind) so many people during the course of the novel, that by the end of it, I was both shocked and vindicated by the outcome.

Still, there were some things that really nagged at me.

The first, is Hastings narration. It would have been perfect if not for one little detail... by his own admission on the very first page of the novel, Hastings is writing this account on the request of Poirot and the family. Which means these people will read this novel. This makes his candid testimony feel extremely odd.

Think about it. If you were tasked with writing an account of a trip you had with friends, you would not admit to thinking those friends to have become stupid with age or to lack conversational skills, or question their intelligence. You would not describe yourself fancying their wives or offering marriages to their prodigies. You would soften all those things because you would know they would read it. More ever, you would... make yourself look better. So many times during this investigation Hastings appears rather dense, a little dumb, prone to jumping to conclusions. He says and thinks things that he knows, from his point of writing the novel, to be wrong or mistaken. And yet... he keeps all of these things in. As if he has no fear of how his friends will accept his (slightly) condescending judgment of them. As if he has no fear of anyone pointing out his flaws. That, in itself, is not realistic to me. It's contrary to human nature. And it would not have bothered me if it hadn't been to the first page because otherwise, I would've eaten up his candid, honest narration. As it was, every time he thoughts something mean or assumed Poirot to be wrong (from his standing point of AFTER the matter was resolved), I was confused.

And then, while I really loved the big reveal at the end, I was left with too many questions for it to be satisfying. As Poirot himself says, there has to be a motive for the murder. Why did Evie and Alfred kill her? How long did they plan it? Why did Evie cry if, clearly, she has planned this murder months in advance? Was she just... a really good actress? And then, why did no one real question her hatred of him throughout the book? I admit to having completely forgotten they were cousins because there was barely any mention of it. I would expect Christie to use this in some manner, like have Evie say something like "He's my cousin, I KNOW him. He killed her." or something like this which would add certainty to her true-false claims and thicken her fake case, since she was playing a woman who hated him and believed he killed her mistress. Which, he did. And she did.

WHY DID EVIE HATE HER?? I am so confused. 10 years in her service to have her married to her cousin and kill her off? Something is missing!!

Anyways, this was a really strong start to my Christie career lol. I'm hoping some of the open ended plots, like the spy one, are revisited later in the series so to give reason to them being there...

Proper review to come

[Nicole Lynn]

This was a nice audiobook to listen to (via the library). This was my first time reading Christie and while I enjoyed the novel overall, the actual mystery wasn't all that interesting to me. The pacing went a little slow for me and the characters seemed lacking in keeping my interest (which is why I think I got confused between the two brothers constantly lol). Still, I was kept guessing throughout the book on "who done it" and really enjoyed Poirot as a MC (more so than Hastings--I do hope he improves in later books if he does appear again). Overall this wasn't a favorite of mine, but it wasn't a waste of my time. I enjoyed reading it and being introduced to Poirot. I'm interested to see how the rest of Poirot's mysteries go.

[brokentune]

The Mysterious Affair at Styles was Christies first published book and is most notable for one thing: it is the first of the Poirot books and explains the background between the famous friendship between the Belgian detective and Captain Hasting.

Hastings is on medical leave in Essex during the First World War and by chance bumps into an old friend of his - Poirot. Poirot is a refugee and managed to settle near his friend, Emily Inglethorp, who owns Styles Court where Hastings is a guest.

Shortly after, Emily Inglethorp is found dead.

The Mysterious Affair at Styles is one of the straight-forward mysteries of Christie's where it is a joy to guess alongside the characters and try and connect the clues to figure out the identity of the murderer.

The only problem I have with this one is that I don't find it memorable in any way other than the meeting between Hastings and Poirot.

[Ace]

Fast paced, captivating and full of twists and turns that I didn't get.

Full review: http://novelthoughts.org/index.php?post=review-the-mysterious-affair-at-styles-by-agatha-christie

[Amanda]

Original review: http://onabookbender.com/2012/08/20/review-the-mysterious-affair-at-styles-by-agatha-christie/

I think my main issue with this book–and a big reason why it was easy to put down–was that the detective in the case, Hercule Poirot, is not the narrator. In fact, we see him through Mr. Hastings’ eyes, and it’s not always a flattering light. I never mind not knowing everything the detective knows (so that the perpetrator is a surprise at the end of the book), but something about being so “distant” from the detective left me feeling quite disconnected from the entire mystery.

The way that Agatha Christie weaves her murder mystery, though, is fabulous. With more suspects than you can shake a stick at (sorry; that was terribly cliche of me, wasn’t it?), the suspect pool is ever changing with each new piece of information. I loved this aspect of the mystery. Just when you think you’ve got everything figured out, something happens that dashes all of your original assumptions and you’re left with wondering who could possibly have committed the murder. It’s not necessarily twisty and turny, but I think it’s more that Christie plays on your assumptions and manipulates them pretty thoroughly.

Overall, while I felt a slight disconnect from the book and characters, the mystery was good enough that I will seek out more Agatha Christie books in the future.

[celinenyx]

This was my very first venture into the world of Agatha Christie. I decided to read all of her books in the order they were published, instead of starting with the most known ones.

The Mysterious Affair at Styles introduces recurring characters Mr Hastings and Monsieur Poirot. Mr Hastings is staying with a friend of his at Styles, where during his stay suddenly the elderly step-mother gets murdered. He turns to retired detective Poirot for help. One in the household is a murderer, but who?

Agata Christie's book is very accessible. Books that are written more than fifty years ago can be sometimes hard to read, filled with archaic words that are hard to decipher for a foreigner like me. I was glad to find out this wasn't the case - The Mysterious Affair at Styles was an easy and quick read.

With its historical setting this is a cozy read. There are no gruesome details, there is no explicit violence. The murderer doesn't get chased but is unmasked by sheer intelligence. Not only does this make it readable for a younger audience, but sometimes for adults it's nice to have a break from all the violence and sex of contemporary books. This would be a perfect read for a gloomy winter's day.

I had no idea who the murderer was until everything got revealed. At some point in the story I kind of suspected everyone. I love how Ms Christie makes sure you don't exclude anyone from suspicion. Poirot was a slightly arrogant but funny little Belgian fellow, that made me think of Sherlock Holmes with a strange moustache.

I'm looking forward to read more Agatha Christie books. I very much enjoyed this one!

[ibeforem]

Another book that I can’t really review because really? What can you say about a master like Christie? I think what I like best about Poirot is not just that so much of what he detects is based on observation, but that he has a real soft spot for love. Someday, I will make it through all of these!