Friday, September 18, 2015

Friday Forgotten (or Overlooked) Book: THIRD GIRL (1966) by Agatha Christie


Let me first say that I do not, in general, like books set in the sixties. I lived through the sixties and it was not a romantic age nor a very interesting one (though some may dispute this). Society was changing but not in any way that seemed wonderful AND we had the multiple shocks of several assassinations to contend with. Not to mention an unpopular war. It was a turbulent time in which the ridiculous young thought they'd invented sex and to prove it, did a lot of recreational drugs and frequently died from excess. Tedious. But I shouldn't condemn the whole decade I suppose, after all I did get married in 1965 and shortly thereafter got a great job at Cosmopolitan magazine. So it wasn't all dismal and grim no matter what I might like you to believe.

At any rate, Agatha Christie, an anachronism from an earlier age, was still writing in the 1960's, a fact some may find hard to believe. Her distaste for the era was evident in her writing but I've always given her credit for chugging right along and doing what she did best which was think up puzzles.

She describes the young people in her books of this time as excessively dirty, oily, drug soaked and mostly in need of bathing. Ugh. But that's how she saw them.

THIRD GIRL is not Christie at her best, but I've come to the realization over time that Christie 'not at her best' is better than most mystery writers at their best, so I'm not complaining. I'd read this book years ago and only vaguely remembered it until I saw the botched PBS interpretation, (or is it BBC? I've forgotten who is in charge of the series now) with David Suchet (who, no matter what, is always wonderful) and decided to go back to the source material.

The audio version narrated by Hugh Fraser is topnotch. Fraser, who plays Colonel Hastings in the Poirot series, is a fabulous narrator and it is a joy to listen to his interpretation of Poirot - it is as good as Suchet's - and his rollicking interpretation of Ariadne Oliver. The audio version of THIRD GIRL is thoroughly enjoyable and I recommend it highly.

But when I returned to the hard-copy book, I found that for whatever reason, it didn't resonate with me as well as the audio version. I found it all a bit tedious, Poirot seemed sluggish and the bits of the story that didn't work were more evident. I don't know why this sort of thing happens, but occasionally it does. And may I say that it also works in reverse - but that's a story for another day.

THIRD GIRL is a book in which a very great evil is perpetrated on a young, suggestible girl. The sort of case in which Papa Poirot must step in, save the heroine, fashion a happy ending and catch a couple of murderers.

The basics: 

Norma Restarick is in trouble. Out of the blue, the vague young woman shows up at Poirot's apartment wanting his advice. She thinks she may have committed a murder. But when she meets the detective, she declares him 'too old' to be of any help and departs.

Naturally enough, Poirot is affronted by this, but intrigued he decides to find out more about this strange girl.

In steps Ariadne Oliver (eccentric mystery writer with an obsession for daily changing her hairstyles, whimsically adding or taking away hairpieces) with additional information. It seems it was she, in a passing conversation during a country weekend, who suggested that Norma visit Poirot. I like Ariadne and her eccentricities but I'm glad the apple motif of her earlier appearances had, by this time, dissipated.

What they find out almost immediately is that Norma Restarick has disappeared.

As Poirot investigates the girl's background, he discovers a troubling tale; Norma may be 'disturbed', even mentally ill, at least according to those who know her best. That includes her two roommates with whom she shares a flat - hence the book's title. Her boyfriend, a randy youth in Van Dyke get-up and long curls, thinks Norma a bit ga-ga but still wants to marry her and take her away from all her cares and woes, influenced, perhaps, by the fact that Norma is an heiress.

Norma's father, a business tycoon who'd run off with another woman when Norma was a little girl, but is now back in London re-married and in charge of the family business, wants Poirot to find Norma and keep her from harming herself or anyone else.

Norma's step-mother wishes the girl didn't hate her quite so much.

In THIRD GIRL, Mrs. Oliver has several chapters on her own as she declares herself in on the case and this results in her being coshed on the head at one point even though Poirot had warned her to be very careful.

Unconventionally, the actual murder involved doesn't make itself known until we're well into the book and a second murder doesn't take place until nearly at the end. And as I mentioned earlier, there are a couple of bits that don't quite fit, and some coincidences glossed over, oddities which for whatever reason, are not as apparent in the audio version.

THIRD GIRL also features Miss Lemon and Georges, Poirot's stalwart household helpmates. Though I've always wondered, outside of writing a few letters, what exactly it is that Miss Lemon fills her days with. How much office work could a private detective have - even such a famous one as Hercule Poirot? It's a puzzle. And by the way the Miss Lemon of the books is very different from the Miss Lemon of the television series (she is more likable in the series), in the books she doesn't ever get involved in the cases. And of course, in the series, there is very little of Georges, manservant and valet. Though I've always thought he had more presence than Miss Lemon.

So what am I saying? Borrow the audio and listen to this one. Much more enjoyable and you have the added attraction of Hugh Fraser's voice.

Friday is Forgotten (or Overlooked) Mystery Day, and we usually check in at Patricia Abbott's blog, but this week it's Todd Mason doing the hosting duties at Sweet Freedom, so don't forget to check in to see what other forgotten or overlooked books other bloggers are talking about today.

17 comments:

  1. I love your observations on Christie in the sixties. This is not a book I'm familiar with, but seeing any book through your eyes is always a joy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Jacqueline, always nice to hear from you, m'dear. I hung in there with Christie through thick or thin. She remains one of my very favorite 'comfort' writers. Don't know why since she was writing about murder and mayhem (in her own quiet way), but I think it's the ambience. :)

      Delete
  2. Like you Yvette, I was disappointed with the Suchet version (made not by the BBC but by the commercial ITV broadcaster, which used to be known as 'the other side'). This is not a book i remember well, but really enjoyed your review as always. And I still think working for Cosmo in 1965 was damn cool of you, girl!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Sergio. Yes, it was a very cool job working for Helen Gurley Brown and a great staff. Didn't work directly for her, but close enough. She always was an enigma to me. My own boss, Nancy Benson, the fashion editor, was wonderful and I learned so much. Actually, it was at Cosmo that I first began doing illustration for articles and such. The art director liked my style.

      Delete
    2. Dear Yvette,
      Do you know where Nancy Benson is now? An old friend would like to get in touch with her. I am at ileneleff@gmail.com Much thanks, Ilene Leff

      Delete
    3. Dear Yvette,
      Do you know where Nancy Benson is now? An old friend would like to get in touch with her. I am at ileneleff@gmail.com Much thanks, Ilene Leff

      Delete
  3. Yvette, I did not enjoy this one. Too many threads of the story that seem to lead nowhere. Isn't there a character called Peacock in this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't blame you for being confused, Neer. :) The peacock reference is Ariadne Oliver referring to the girl's boyfriend as 'the peacock'. Because of his flashy 60's clothing. This, by the way, is another Christie book in which she seems to think that 20 years is an extraordinarily long time. Actually, it really isn't.

      Delete
  4. Must admit this isn't one of my favorites either, Yvette. Like too many of her works in the 60s (and beyond), the old magic touch was a little less magical - but, as you say, Christie not at her best was still better than a lot of other authors at THEIR best. And at least the ageless Poirot began trying to deal with his age!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Though in truth he would have been about a hundred by then. :) I thought I disliked this one more than I did so was a bit pleasantly surprised when I listened to it, Les. There are some things in it I do like. But I'll probably not read it again, but might give it another listen at some point down the road.

      Delete
  5. "I lived through the sixties and it was not a romantic age nor a very interesting one (though some may dispute this)" I feel the same way about the seventies. But perhaps my memories are tainted with personal horrors along with the nightmares of Nixon disgracing the White House, the Oympics exploited by terrorists, the rise of mass murder and the "celebration" of the serial killer, and the horrible clothes we all had to wear.

    "She describes the young people....as excessively dirty, oily, drug soaked and mostly in need of bathing" I read the same things TODAY about young people. Seriously. "Unwashed" is a favorite insult word used by writers age 38-78 when talking about youth, especially hipster youth. Times never change.

    I always remember this as "Agatha's drug mystery novel" but you don't mention anything about drugs in this. Maybe I'm misremembering it? I don't remember a thing about the TV version and I *know* I've seen it. Obviously not a compelling story to me at all and one I'm not interested in re-reading. The only ones from the 1960s I re-read are THE PALE HORSE, HALOWE'EN PARTY, BY THE PRICKING OF MY THUMBS and ENDLESS NIGHT which I think are her best from that decade.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, the seventies. You think the sixties were bad, Yvette. Ha. I've more or less blanked out on the seventies - I was a young mother then and busy raising my child and establishing my illustration business. Yeah, the clothes. OMG!

      As far as drugs in the book, yeah, but I didn't want to give away any plot points. There are people out there who haven't read it - hard as it may be to believe. Though admittedly drugs are mentioned freely in the story, almost to the point of absurdity. Maybe I should have mentioned it.

      Sixties Christies I reread HALLOWEEN PARTY (though I am tired of the ending), PALE HORSE, A CARIBBEAN MYSTERY, THE CLOCKS and from the seventies, I reread SLEEPING MURDER. It's funny because SLEEPING MURDER was the last Miss Marple, but it's pretty fresh and not at all dated. I do love buried secrets from the past, mysteries.

      Delete
  6. Yvette, I enjoyed your review (as I always do) and particularly liked your view of the 1960s. I didn't know you worked at Cosmopolitan magazine. Were you a feature writer? What was the experience like? I'm sorry if I'm hijacking your post on a Christie book I haven't read.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No problem, Prashant. I don't mind talking about those days - at least, what I can remember about those days. :) No I wasn't a writer, I was an assistant fashion editor (for a while the only assistant) - a job which began as nothing much as soon became the best job I ever had. I met so many interesting creative people, photographers, designers, models, actors and, of course, went to fashion shows and had lunches and dinners at many great NY restaurants. Hard work, though. Lots of lugging clothing around and running about. But so much fun. I had a great boss too, that always helps. My favorite part of the job were the fashion shoots.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for sharing that, Yvette. A creative job for a very creative person.

      Delete
  7. Hi Yvette,
    Thanks for this post and the inclusion of the cover, I really like it. In my humble opinion, I confess I do like the TV adaptation, but then again, I have not read - or listened to, because I'm a huge listener of Christie's audiobooks - "The Third Girl", so maybe I enjoyed the episode for its own sake. I love anything David Suchet-y and Zoë Wanamaker as Ariadne Oliver is delightful, so maybe sometimes I do not care much about the plot, trying to absorb the costumes, the sets...
    I want to thank for your blog, which is always a pleasure to read, and perhaps draw your attention to something I read today in the Library of Congress' blog, that I thought you would find interesting. The post is about the paperbacks produced for the Armed Services during WW2:
    http://blogs.loc.gov/loc/2015/09/books-in-action-the-armed-services-editions/?loclr=ealocb
    Have a great day!
    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sorry I'm so tardy in replying, Caroline. Thanks for your comment and your link. I think you'll love listening to THE THIRD GIRL, if you get a chance once of these days. But I must admit that Zoe Wanamaker is divine as Ariadne. :) And no time is a bad time to view David Suchet as Poirot. He was born to play the role, let's face it.

    Again, sorry for replying so late. Sometimes I just lose track.
    I'm off to read the article at the Library of Congress blog.

    ReplyDelete

Your comment will appear after I take a look.