First published in 1948 and featuring the character, Belgian sleuth Hercule Poirot, the novel is another in the series of crime fiction by Agatha Christie. I enjoy some of these books more than others, but all so far are usually a good yarn that put it together at the end.
I like the characters and particularly the conversations that are perhaps reflective of the period. Despite a theme of murder, the characters, including the baddies, usually remain impeccably polite and handy with words. Humour in characters is often subtle but there all the same.
Toward the end of Taken at the Flood I was surprised to see a happy ending between a couple, Rowley and Lynn. Earlier, the character Rowley, in a rage of possessiveness, almost kills Lynn by strangulation. Another minute or less and she was a goner. Hercule Poirot arrives and politely interrupts with a cough.
Oddly, I think, Mr Poirot dismisses the almost fatal attack as does Lynn a few pages on.
After Rowley’s attempt to prevent her (kill her) from being with anyone else, Lynn ‘knew she was his woman’. Wedding bells were planned, love balloons prevailed, no red flags fluttering.
The strange acceptance of the violence by Rowley, is singularly how I will remember this book. Perhaps, for readers, it was cool and romantic at the time, the caveman approach.
Now my questions: Does an author express their own opinion and attitude through their fiction? Did M/s Christie accept and dismiss the explosive Rowley as did Mr Poirot and Lynn?
Words for today: Fact or fiction?
More to come; same blog time, same blog channel