After the Funeral (Hercule Poirot, #33) (2024)

Funerals Are Fatal = After the Funeral (Hercule Poirot #31), Agatha Christie

After the Funeral is a work of detective fiction by Agatha Christie and first published in March 1953.

The book features the author's Belgian detective Hercule Poirot, but the Murder at the Gallop film adaptation instead featured her amateur sleuth, Miss Marple. A wealthy man dies at home. His relatives gather after his funeral for the reading of his will, during which his sister states that he was murdered. The next day, she herself is found murdered. Poirot is called in to solve the mystery.

عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «بعد از تشییع جنازه»؛ «پس از تشییع جنازه»؛ نویسنده: آگاتا (میلر) کریستی؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: سال2001میلادی

عنوان: بعد از تشییع جنازه؛ نویسنده: آگاتا (میلر) کریستی؛ مترجم رویا سعیدی؛ تهران، نشر کتابهای هرمس؛ سال1379؛ در317ص؛ فروست داستانهای آگاتا کریستی: سری هرکول پوارو شماره سی و یک؛ چاپ دوم سال1384؛ چاپ سوم سال1387، شابک9789647100632؛ موضوع داستانهای کارآگاهی از نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده20م

عنوان: پس از تشییع جنازه؛ نویسنده: آگاتا (میلر) کریستی؛ مترجم رویا سعیدی؛ تهران، نشر کتابهای هرمس؛ چاپ سوم 1387؛ در317ص؛ فروست داستانهای آگاتا کریستی: سری هرکول پوارو سی و یک؛ شابک9789647100632؛ چاپ دیگر نشر هرمس، نشر کارآگاه، چاپ چهارم سال1390؛ چاپ پنجم سال1393؛ چاپ ششم سال1399؛ شابک9789647100632؛

نقل از متن: («پوآرو» با دقت ویژه ای افراد را یک به یک از زیر نگاه خود می‌گذراند؛ نخست نگاهش را به «سوزان» دوخت، که صاف نشسته بود و بشاش و سرحال به ‌نظر می‌رسید؛ سپس نوبت به شوهر «سوزان» رسید، که نزدیک «سوزان» نشسته بود، با چهره ‌ای بی‌حالت، و داشت یک سیم را به دور انگشتانش حلقه می‌کرد؛ نگاه «پوآرو» از روی «گرِگوری» به روی «جرج کراسفیلد» لغزید؛ او داشت درباره حقه ‌بازیهای قماربازان، با «رزاموند» صحبت می‌کرد، و «رزاموند» با بی‌علاقگی و کاملاً بدون فکر می‌گفت: «آه چه جالب! اما چرا؟».؛ نفر بعد «مایکل» بود، با آن نگاههای خسته و در عین حال مطبوع و دلنشین؛ مردی با جذابیتی انکارناپذیر که در آن جمع همتایی نداشت؛ سپس نگاه «پوآرو» به «هلن» خیره شد، که باوقار و اندکی دور از بقیه نشسته بود؛ «تیموتی» نفر بعد بود؛ او در بهترین مبل لم داده بود، و یک بالش اضافی هم در زیر کمرش قرار داشت؛ «مود» در کنار «تیموتی» بود، محکم و مصمم با هیکلی تنومند؛ و آماده خدمت به «تیموتی»؛ آخرین نفر «گیل‌کریست» بود که در خارج از جمع خانواده نشسته بود؛ بلوزی بسیار شیک بر تن داشت، و می‌شد در چهره ‌اش خواند، که از اینکه به آن جمع راه یافته سپاسگزار است؛ «پوآرو» با خود گفت که بزودی «گیل‌کریست» برمی‌خیزد، و بهانه ‌ای می‌آورد، و این جمع خانوادگی را ترک می‌کند، و به اتاق خودش می‌رود؛ «گیل‌کریست» مقام خودش را می‌دانست؛ و این را به طریقی دشوار آموخته بود)؛ پایان نقل

نقل نمونه متن دیگر: (میخواستم اسم آن کافه تریا را «نخل زیتون» بگذارم، شترهای کوچکی درست کنم، و صورت غذا را در آنها جای دهم، گاهی، چینی خیلی قشنگی پیدا میشود، معمولا جزو کالاهای مرجوعی، نمیخواستم از آن ظروف سفیدرنگ مسخره، استفاده کنم؛ کافه را در جایی بازمیکردم، که آدمهای درست و حسابی و با نزاکت، به آنجا بیایند.؛ سپس با خود زمزمه کرد: «میزهای چوب بلوط، صندلیهای حصیری، بالشهای راهراه قرمز و سفید») پایان نقل از کتاب

تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 26/04/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 02/03/1401هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی

For in the long run, either through a lie, or through truth, people were bound to give themselves away…

A Poirot mystery set in the post World War II Era. A sad reminder that Poirot is now old & retired & that the writer has now slowly started moving away from the Poirot character… An era where Christie had started focusing more on Marple than Poirot.

Story: A wealthy man dies & his relatives gather after his funeral for the reading of his will, during which his sister states that he was murdered. The next day, she herself is found murdered. Poirot is called in to solve the mystery.
Without revealing the plot too much, I will get into what works & what doesn’t work in terms of the storyline:

What Works: After the Funeral has the ideal setting for a perfect murder mystery; a dead rich man, plenty of greedy relatives & reading of a dead man’s will. Christie is brilliant at murder mysteries involving multiple scheming & backstabbing suspects ( And Then There Were None & Murder On The Orient Express come to mind), where every member is a suspect and enough clues are left around to suspect every one of the murder. Christie keeps confusing the readers with clues while blinding them to the obvious facts right in front of them. Indeed, hidden amongst the plot are many of Christie’s usual tricks & hints which guide & sometimes misguide you.

What Doesn’t Work: There are a lot of characters at the start which you have to get your head around. The chapters are split into parts each dedicated to a different character with alibis of each character deconstructed. The many characters introduced all at once & their stories, all gets confusing & it slightly distracts you from the main mystery. Although this is a Poirot novel, for about the first two-thirds of the novel the investigation is conducted by Entwhistle, the family solicitor. Poirot is brought in at the end– almost as an afterthought for the final reveal. (as discussed above) Poirot’s solution to the murder mystery is quite logical and satisfying, though it does have a few loopholes, if you think about it.

Overall, though not among Christie’s best works, it is still a very good & enjoyable mystery with a unique twist in the end. 3.5/5

This was the March read and part of the Read Christie 2022 challenge.

I really enjoyed this mystery! I read it in a couple of days and was trying hard to catch the murderer! Alas, I was wrong.

As usual with Christie, there are quite a few characters that become suspects. I did need to take notes of them in the beginning to get a grasp of who was who! I only needed it long enough to get into the story. I love how Christie adds such fun characters and places little clues of misdirection along the way.

After a wealthy family member, Richard dies, the family gathers at his Victorian mansion for the executor to read the will. Then Richard's batty sister, Cora announces, "But he was murdered, wasn't he?" Richard's niece, Rosamund perks up hearing this and exclaims, "It might really be rather fun. Having a murder in the family." She gets plenty of raised eyebrows from the family!

Poirot enters later in the story because yet another murder happens!

Love her storytelling, unforgettable characters, and cleverness. Always a good challenge to solve a Christie mystery (or not in my case)!

This is the website if anyone else is interested adding some Christie this year.
https://www.agathachristie.com/news/2...

Agatha Christie Book Reading Challenge

BOOK 27 :- FEB 2021

4.5 STARS

from my blog, where it is much easier to give links, pictures and half-stars at https://clsiewert.wordpress.com/2015/...

Goodness, but I’m a reading disaster when it comes to Christie books. At one point in After the Funeral, I felt I knew who the murderer was, and when I flipped to check if I was right (oh, the horror!)–yes, I did that—I was. But I got no pleasure out of my powers of deduction, as I’m almost positive I’ve read this at least once before. Possibly twice. So that’s a sad statement of my mental affairs that I’m almost pleased by solving the murderer of a book I’ve read twice before. Sigh–if it doesn’t pertain to biology, it likely doesn’t stick in my brain. So I find I’m unable to advise if it was a ‘fair’ or ‘solvable’ mystery, for those who look for that sort of thing. I rather think it wasn’t. But at any rate, murderer identified, I was able to settle down and concentrate on Christie’s fine storytelling. That Dame sure can tell a tale, because it remained no less suspenseful.

I’m working on a theory that Christie was a master mystery writer. Oh, I know; the British Empire already figured that out in 1971. But really, the woman could write. I am so amazed, sometimes, how she created so much character in a handful of words. I know I’ve said this before, but it’s something that bears examining. Why is it that Rothfuss and Sanderson get heaps of accolades when they describe every single jewel someone is wearing, taking 700 pages to tell their story about a journey of a thousand steps? I think–and now that I spell this out, I think there’s something really quite valid to my instinct here–that I prefer the character of a story, the sense of it. I don’t need the high-def, cinematic version–I want the emotion of it, the presence of it. Max Gladstone recently wrote a fascinating post about action scenes (“Fighting Words”), and at the very bottom, in the comments section, Kameron Hurley comments: “Yup, this is how I think about it: it’s not my job to give the literal then this, then that, then this, but to infer enough of the scene through the emotion I convey for the reader to *fill in the gaps.* ”

^This.

If I may move from the discussion of writing action to the concept of writing, period, Christie doesn’t (exhaustively) describe how each person walks, the sound of their voice, their dress, their mannerisms; she picks out the part that identifies them most, includes that description in an action, and lets the reader draw the conclusion. For me, to mix my metaphors again, it’s the difference between 17th century Dutch paintings and cubism, particularly Braque, one of my favorite painters (although not this one):

versus

I think that’s why Christie works for me. There’s a combination of specificity and ambiguity that gives an impression, with out the need to delineate every shadow. She allows my own interpretation, and yet every single time, I end up exactly where she wants me. More or less.

In After the Funeral, everyone gathers at the estate for the funeral of Richard Abernethie, and imagine the surprise among the clan when dotty, arty Aunt Cora says, “But he was murdered, wasn’t he?” Elderly solicitor Entwistle remains bothered, her remark nagging at him, and imagine his surprise when he receives a phone call the next day from the police. I won’t spoil any more, but Christie does trot in her favorites: the ancient family butler, the motherly wife, the gambler, the hypochondriac, the actress, the scatty matron, the stockbroker of questionable values. And, of course, the Monsieur himself:

“‘Hercule Poirot–at your service.’
Poirot bowed.
There were no gasps of astonishment or of apprehension.”

And such a snicker we all had at Poirot’s expense, did we not? And with virtually no set-up, we laughed. Now try this brief character appearance on for size:

” Mr. Entwistle passed a very restless night. He felt so tired and so unwell in the morning that he did not get up.
His sister who kept house for him brought up his breakfast on a tray and explained to him severely how wrong he had been to go gadding off to the North of England at his age and in his frail state of health.
Mr. Entwistle contented himself with saying that Richard Abernethie had been a very old friend.
‘Funerals!’ said his sister with deep disapproval. ‘Funerals are absolutely fatal for a man your age!”

In four very brief paragraphs, we have the entire sense of Mr. Entwistle’s sister, do we not? And their decades of interaction? And had another little snicker at his sister’s comment? Even more surprising: there were three more paragraphs to follow, all on a chapter heading page. Eat your heart out, Way of Kings!

This book? I recommend it, for fans of both Christie and Poirot. It feels a little routine for her at this point, but it is a well-polished routine, with a nice twist. Even more, I recommend Dame Christie. Period.

Batty old Aunt Cora gets chopped up with a hatchet.
Was she the victim of a marauding psycho or did she say the wrong thing at a funeral?

Or is there some other reason entirely?!
Poirot is on the case once again, so no worries. The little man with the big mustaches will ferret out the criminal and set things right.
Well. Not for Aunt Cora, of course, because she's already been hacked to bits. But everyone else should be ok.
Should be ok as long as they don't cross the murderer, that is.

I can't remember if I'd read this one before or if I'd just seen it on tv. Either way, I kind of knew whodunnit. Or at least the why they dunnit.
But it was still a lot of fun to listen to.
Would definitely recommend Hugh Fraser as a narrator for anything Poirot-related.
Recommended for fans of Agatha Christie.

I had fears for this lesser known and ultimately excellent book by Agatha Christie. This French translation was done by Yves Massip, and he did a perfect job of it. The murders in this book were very relevant.

The denouement of the plot, was abetted by a concise story. The book is imaginative, daring, original (but not entirely), functional, and elicited an inquisitive mood.

This book is criminally(pun intended) underrated. I read that the culprit barely appeared in the book. Wrong. Read for yourselves and find out. There was some humor in the novel, which was a bonus.

Agatha Christie’s #31 Hercule Poirot mystery is the work of a writer that at this point knows her craft so well that she can do it almost in her sleep. And this story has a lot of sleep in it, and dreams. And a couple of funerals. I prefer this original title, After the Funeral, because it speaks to the more serious literary tone of this book (compared to the more comic tone she often seems to be going for, as in the current title, Funerals are Fatal, which isn’t exactly accurate, as you are led to believe that a murder happens at a funeral, which it does not). The tone here in this book is not actually comic but serious, with a touch of madness.

In almost all Christie books there are bystanders who suppose that the crime must have been done by a “madman,” and it almost never is true. Poirot is a psychological detective. He operates by getting to know the possible murderers and thinking—using his little grey cells—and proceeding, not through the available evidence, that’s police work, only technical—but through ratiocination, through step-by-step logic as it applies to the study of human nature. So both Poirot and I think Christie also don't feel that "madness" is a central rationale for murder. Or interesting, really. Madmen are random, and thus boringly illogical, not worth the trouble to Christie and Poirot. Oh, we do have our daffy characters here, one possibly quite mad, Timothy, and one pretending to be mad, Greg, but finally those types are always comic relief, distractions. Which is not say madness is irrelevant to this tale, but . . . you won’t get me to tell, I won’t!

But back to the point: Poirot operates through logic, and talking to people, through what he calls “the dangers of conversation.” As he says, “if you can induce a person to talk to you for long enough, on any subject whatever, sooner or later they will give themselves away. [Name redacted] did.”

One of the features of this tale that finally makes Christie impressive in this particular book and not just ploddingly proficient is that Christie increasingly reveals her love/hate relationship with her little round Belgian, whom she likes to make fun of for his arrogance. No one in this tale, he is disappointed to discover, even has heard of him. She—wickedly—skewers him, as they many refer to him as “Mr. Pontarlier.” His name is his brand, his cache, and they get it wrong! Sacre bleu!

And she makes fun of his way of speaking:

Poirot: “The time has come to tell you all.”
Inspector Morton: “You sound like a young lady in a Victorian melodrama.”

And he kind of does, in this tale of all things Victorian! And at this point, dozens of books done, Christie feels forced to write him in this way! Augh! But she both does what she has to do, she makes Poirot come alive, and then she simultaneously satirizes him. Can he actually be to the masses both adorable and annoying? Looks like it.

And then Morton can’t resist saying what we as readers are thinking, something Christie perhaps might admit herself about her now close to fiftieth book, which she really does want to finish:

“Yes, yes, tell me all! And for the Lord’s sake hurry up and do it!”

Which he does, of course, finally. But here again she is making fun of Poirot for his necessarily meticulous (and sometimes admittedly boring, and long) method, which she is compelled to recreate, book after book, so tongue-in-cheek makes fun of herself for being trapped to write him in this way!

But then the resolution, the ingenuity of which makes you realize that it is all necessary, and moreover (such a Victorian word!) worth it! So in the end, all is forgiven, we love Poirot after all, and so does Agatha! Which is why she is Dame Christie, and not Detective Nobody!

(Spoilers in here, but not THE spoiler, I wouldn’t do that). The facts of the case: Richard Abernethie dies. After the funeral Cora Lasquenet says she thinks it was murder, and for which she is herself murdered. After which Miss Gilchrist, Cora’s companion, who may know the truth about Cora, is taken ill eating a piece of wedding cake laced with arsenic. And after that Mrs. Abernethie, who may know the truth about Cora, is conked on the head, concussed, hospitalized. Will she recover, to reveal the truth?! Oh, have it either way, because we have M. Poirot!

But seriously, what do we get for speaking the truth at odd moments? Or are they lies? What do we really know about Cora? Or about anyone?

You think as you read that details are just details, but Christie will make you pay attention, again and again, because some mundane details that are shared with us actually do figure in to make this a sort of dazzling resolution, among them:

“The visit of an art critic, a smell of oil paint, a picture postcard of Polflexan harbor and finally a bouquet of wax flowers standing on that malachite table. . .”

And a telegram with these four words: "Definitely a Vermeer, Guthrie."

And the imperfect reflection of people in mirrors. Poirot: “To see ourselves as others see us!”

And Victorian stolidity and aesthetics and values and “ladylike” manners being replaced by something rather modern.

And a consideration of the nature of madness.

And, just randomly, I like this line, from Timothy: “I’ve a soul above corn plasters, Entwhistle.” I didn't know what this meant, no, but it made me smile. But one would hope we all would have souls above corn plasters, oui?

Reading along in this book, do you have the temerity to be bored?! You must have patience, mon ami! A bit of advice about method, to which both the Inspector and Poirot ascribe:

"You don't want to fluster your bird too soon. But when you do fluster it, you want to fluster it well." And Poirot does, finally. He patiently builds his case, and then flusters the bird well in a final explosion of flustering!

I had never heard of Funerals are Fatal, and thought for 200 or so of the 224 pages that this was just another 3 starred book, oh, come on, get it over with, but the ending—gathering together all the relevant motifs—brought it to 4 stars. What did I know? What do I ever know? It’s maybe even better than that, really, compared to any other mysteries being written, but alas, I am getting a little tired of Christie in spite of myself. 30 books! Sacre bleu! Only 9 to go!

Evil is not something superhuman, it's something less than human.

😈Agatha Christie👿

A fabulous Poirot. More tomorrow

So I, and a number of other people are now well into the third year of our Group Buddy Read of all of Agatha Christie's Poirot Novels and short stories, and whilst some of the novels fade in my memory, I can imagine this one will stay with me.

Poirot is asked by an old acquaintance and family lawyer to investigate the possible murder of his old friend and also the murder of his old friends sister just days after the funeral. Is there even a connection especially his sister blurts out she thinks her brother was murdered. A number of nieces and nephews as well as the final brother and his wife are the immediate beneficiaries of the will and are therefore prime suspects.

Poirot poses as the leader of a refugee charity interested in purchasing the deceased man's stately home to enable him to investigate the possible suspects, all of whom could be involved.

A wonderful example of Poirot's little grey cells in action, and the epitome of what Christie set out to create with her fabulous detective.

" Moartea este definitivă, nu există nici o viață după moarte. Nici un mort nu se întoarce înapoi pe pământ. Este un vechi adevăr - că orice om are ceva de ascuns. Asta este valabil pentru noi toți."

I used to make fun of Scooby Doo and how the gang would unmask the villain at the end, specifically how the villain would inevitably and hurriedly admit to the crime. Then I started reading Agatha Christie's books and I realized where they picked up the habit.

Now, don't get me wrong, Christie's mysteries are wonderful reads. So much fun! I especially love Hercule Poirot. It's a shame it takes such a long time for him to show up in After the Funeral. Much of the groundwork is laid out by a lawyer before Poirot arrives on the scene to tie it all up neatly.

The body of this book is quite good. The murderer is nicely disguised. The red herrings are well-stocked. But then comes the end. It's a satisfactory end as far as solving a crime goes, however, here again the murderer blurts out the truth. Certainly Poirot has the person cornered and it would just be a matter of a trial to have the person convicted, but then that wouldn't be as dramatic, would it? No. It would be more realistic though, and that's the problem with such endings. They somewhat tarnish an otherwise fairly believable story.

But that is a minor point as far as my enjoyment of the entire book goes. Yes, I have spent a good portion of a rather short review going on about it, but honestly, everything else about After the Funeral is a good read through and through!

I couldn't let Dame Agatha's 130th Birthday pass without reading a Poirot - especially as it's also the hundredth anniversary of his first appearance in Christie's debut novel.

It was a slight shame that this actually turned out to be a Poirot-lite mystery, though the family drama aspect of following the array of potential suspects actually make for a great whodunit with numerous red herrings.

Following the funeral of Richard Abernethie his sister Cora declares that she thinks his death wasn't through natural causes, only to be brutally murdered the next day.

Astue Christie readers will look for all the usual clues that is synonymous with her puzzle mystery's, there was a few occasions I thought I'd worked it out.
But yet again it's not until Poirot's summing up during the conclusion that everything finally clicked into place.

Yet again the queen of crime had fooled me again and shows the longevity of these novels.

I really enjoyed this Poirot story. The sister after the funeral makes the startling statement that of course he was murdered. Then she is murdered. What follows is a classic of misdirection and red herrings.

It stumped me even with the clues. Perhaps it was because all of the family were so unlikeable that the murderer is such a surprise.

Unorthodox storyline. Relatively smaller novel in length than other Poirot novels, it all begins when the deceased's sister makes a comment that her brother was murdered. In true Christie style all family members are suspects. Poirot joins and solves the murder. Interesting read.

Richard Abernethie ist tot. Komisch, denn obwohl der alte Unternehmer nicht mehr ganz fit war, hatte niemand das Gefühl, dass sein Ableben kurz bevorsteht. Aber egal, immerhin wartet auf die Erbengemeinschaft – bestehend aus mehreren Familienmitgliedern Abernethies – ein ganzer Haufen Geld. Doch als Richards Schwester Cora nach seiner Beerdigung wie selbstverstänlich fragt: „Er wurde doch umgebracht?“, läuten bei einigen Anwesenden die Alarmglocken. Tante Cora war zwar schon immer taktlos, aber meist hatte ihre Taktlosigkeit damit zu tun, dass sie unangenehme Wahrheiten in unpassenden Momenten aussprach. Könnte also was dran sein an ihrer unbedachten Bemerkung? Fragen kann man sie leider nicht mehr, denn Tante Cora wird nur einen Tag später selbst Opfer eines Gewaltverbrechens. Ein Zufall? Mr. Entwhistle, der Notar der Abernethies, kann sich das nicht vorstellen. Deshalb ist es Zeit, seinen alten Freund Hercule Poirot einzuschalten…

_______________________________________________________

Das war mal wieder ein Christie nach meinem Geschmack! Nachdem ich in letzter Zeit eher Christies außergewöhnliche Romane gelesen habe (Abenteuer- und Kurzgeschichten), war es mal wieder richtig schön, zurück in England zu sein. Hier trifft eine interessante Familienkonstellation (ich liebe es, wenn in einem Buch ein Stammbaum abgedruckt ist) auf einen komplexen Kriminalfall. Wie immer habe ich eifrig mitgefiebert und dennoch auf das falsche Pferd gesetzt – im Nachhinein ist die Aufklärung natürlich super logisch, aber man ist beim Lesen einfach manchmal so blind!

Besonders interessant zu lesen fand ich, wie deutlich sich in diesem Band die Nachkriegssituation der Briten widerspiegelt: alle haben Geld verloren, alle sind knapp bei Kasse, auch bei den reichen Leuten sind die Lebensmittel sehr begrenzt und deutlich rationiert. Es ist also nicht nur ein guter Krimi, sondern auch ein spannendes Stück Zeitgeschichte.

Große Empfehlung!

Gelesen für die #readchristie2022 Challenge: A book Agatha wrote abroad.

Agatha Christie never runs out on ideas, now, does she? And this is her 31st installment of the Poirot series, among others.

After the Funeral is another great murder-mystery story by her. It is a very interesting story with a strong, intelligent, and original plot. I was quite taken in for a ride with so many turns that I was a little disoriented as to the crime and the criminal. I assure you, the crime was baffling too because after all, one turned out to be a hoax! . I had a certain idea of the true criminal, but the motive and ingenuity in the execution of the crime, I would never have guessed. It would have been impossible.

The solving of the crime was entirely based on analyzing the human mind and character by the close observation of the words and conduct of the suspected characters. This relying more on human psychology than on physical evidence (which I personally enjoy) is more and more common in these later installments.

There are more subtle changes that this series has slowly undergone. One is the changes that have taken place over the years in British society - the generation clashes and the modern thinking and daring living of the young generation. The other is how Poirot has aged. The great detective is still in his prime mind, but he cannot evade the slow physical changes that are coming over him. These carefully thought inclusions make this series live and very real. In addition to the interest generated by the mystery story, these subtleties have added to my enjoyment of Poirot mysteries.

Overall, it was a great read. And this one is definitely one of the best in the series.

Ah Poirot, how I enjoy you with your funny egg shaped head, your sleek moustaches and your willingness to embrace the rampant racism present in the average Englishman all in the pursuit of a tricksy murderer. This lovely hardcover facsimile edition has been sitting on my shelf for a while waiting to be read and it's really a very enjoyable Poirot whodunnit.

We have a stately home reaching the end of it's life along with the owner, a death swiftly followed by a second and a small cast of eccentric and slightly stereotypical family members. Underlying it is a will, a reasonable amount of money and a statement that murder may have been committed. For in this one we're not even sure if there has been.

All very typical Christie and Poirot. Except this book seems more vested in the era than some of the others. Post war Britain, rationing, the fall of an empire, taxation issues and a changing cultural background plant the novel historically and it's richer for it. I found it took a few chapters to really get into but then it sucks you in. Poirot doesn't show up for a while and even when he does he's often in the background, quietly setting people off and observing the outcome. As such we don't get as many of those wonderful character moments he's known for. Still, this one had me guessing and the final resolution was surprising and unexpected, even though a fairly big clue is given to us earlier (for those really paying attention - you'll kick yourself when it's revealed - to date this makes it Agatha 12 : Andy 1).

I really enjoyed this one.

The story starts after the funeral of Richard Abernethie, when his scatterbrain sister Cora makes a wild statement: "But he was murdered, wasn't he?" There is no such scandal, and everybody admonishes Cora - but the seed of doubt has been sown. Because the silly Cora has in the past been known to blurt out unwelcome truths.

Then, the next day, Cora is bludgeoned to death...

-------------------------------------------

This is an exquisitely structured novel with plenty of characterisation. As with all of Christie's novels, it uses the classic technique of misdirection, but it would have to be a very astute reader who can spot it. I suggest all Christie fans to reread the novel and marvel at her craft.

Five stars, without a doubt.

unbelievable one!
------------
my favorite quotes:

...

Αρκετά προβλέψιμο.. Νομίζω πως αν κάποιος έχει διαβάσει πολλά δικά της και έχει κατανοήσει ως ένα βαθμό τον τρόπο σκέψης της, βλέπει προς τα που πάει το πράγμα και δεν θα ενθουσιαστεί και πολύ. Αν είναι από τα πρώτα της που διαβάζει σίγουρα θα του κάνει περισσότερη εντύπωση. Αυτό ισχύει για τα περισσότερα βιβλία της όμως.
Να πω επίσης πως στο συγκεκριμένο βιβλίο, για πρώτη φορά, με ενόχλησαν αρκετά κάποια σχόλια για τις γυναίκες. Ήταν άκομψα, αβάσιμα και επαναλαμβάνονταν συχνά.
Παρ'όλα αυτά είναι πάντα ευχάριστο να διαβάζεις Agatha Christie, όταν έχεις διάθεση για κάτι πιο εύπεπτο..

This is a classic Agatha Christie plot involving intrigue within a family.

When wealthy Richard Abernethie passes away, ostensibly from natural causes, his will divides his estate equally among all his relatives, including a brother, sister, and several nephews and nieces. All the heirs badly want/need the money, to pay off debts. finance a pet project, travel, etc.

After the funeral, Richard's sister Cora suggests the deceased was murdered and hints that she has some inside knowledge about his death.

Soon afterwards Cora herself is killed, and the family attorney Mr. Entwhistle. becomes suspicious.

Entwhistle does a preliminary investigation by interviewing all the heirs and trying to ascertain where they were at the time of Cora's murder. When Entwhistle can't make much headway finding the killer, he enlists Hercule Poirot, who's retired but still very capable of using his 'little grey cells.'

The book is repetitious and plods along very slowly but has the usual Christie twist. Not Agatha's best work, but avid fans will want to include it on their life list.

You can follow my reviews at https://reviewsbybarbsaffer.blogspot.com

Actual rating: 3.5 stars.

I was introduced to Agatha Christie during my teens, by my older sister who was an avid reader.
I’m a huge fan and she’s been my favourite author. I have read all of her works (including the plays and the romance series). She is probably the only author that I don’t mind re-reading.
This is the third time that I read this book, but the first time in English.
In my opinion this is not one of her greatest work.
Don’t get me wrong. It still has all the elements that made her the queen of mystery.
Once again she introduces us to a cast of characters who have all the reasons to commit a murder. And none of the characters are likeable.
But during the first 28%, before Hercule Poirot gets involved, I thought that the language and the dialogues were very stiff and a bit boring.
Fortunately everything changes, thanks to the incredible and unbelievable Monsieur Poirot.
The ending, although plausible and satisfying, felt rushed.
If you have never read Agatha Christie, I would not recommend this one as a starter, but it is still a good read, just not as exciting as the other books.

I've forgotten to write an review since I finished it. I really enjoyed this one. For some reason I got very intrigued with Cora as I character. It's rarely I get so curious and want to more of a specific character and not for the plot line alone but don figure out why she "stood" out so much from other people and why people found her so odd. Unfortunately she was the victim but it was a good read nevertheless. I often feel like Christi's characters don't stand out much except does who should. Perhaps why I find it so difficult figure out who done it

After some of her exotic settings, Christie returns to the classic English country house and the multigenerational cast of suspects. The plot is fiendish, Poirot spots a giveaway clue in full sight, and red herrings are scattered liberally. A murder is particularly violent in this book so the squeamish need to watch out. And that motive...!

Had me guessing until the end. Hugh Fraser does a wonderful job on the audio version.

My second reading of After the funeral this time in English left me not impressed as the first despite not remembering much!

I didn't like the characters of the family and so I couldn't care about who dunnit!
I liked the lawyer of Richard Abernathy who undertook the first stage of the investigation before Hercule Poirot came to resolve the mystery!
Richard Abernathy I would have preferred to be alive since the description of his personality made me like him!

The resolution of the mystery was good but could have been better! The story interesting enough but not Christie's best!

3.5****

Entertaining mystery listening 🎉🎎✨

This kindle e-book novella is from my Kindle Unlimited account book 29 of 35

There is a death in the family and one of them says it is murder. That person is murdered the next day. What is going on? Hercule Poirot is called upon to investigate. He realizes the truth leading to the conclusion.

I would recommend this series and author to fans of Agatha Christie and readers of British mystery novels. 2024

Only read this book if you want to read all of the Poirot books. Otherwise skip it. Seriously.

Some of the most despicable characters and an ending that had to be the dumbest one yet for a Christie novel.

Once again we have very little Poirot to start with. This book starts at the reading of the will of the late Richard Abernethie. The whole family is left money, though his sister Cora mentions that he had to have been murdered. This disturbs other members of the family and the family solicitor, Mr. Entwhistle. Mr. Entwhistle is disturbed because Cora has a knack for noticing things that other members of her family ignores and after she is murdered by someone he feels that Cora was correct and Mr. Abernethie was murdered.

I refuse to discuss any of these people because they were all as shallow as a small puddle formed after a brief rain. Once again I question how Agatha Christie viewed women. Based on her life I always imagined her as independent and sure of herself. She always seems to write women in these Poirot books as either clinging to a man that does not want them or dealing with a man who treats them terribly by cheating and or beating them but they still want to be with.

The flow was really bad. It took eons (it felt like) for the story to get going. We have Poirot going in and stirring up the Abernethie relations and all you find out is more information to either make you loathe or pity these people depending on who the story focuses on.

The setting of post-war England in this one was much more explicit than in the previous two novels. Unlike in prior books, if a wealthy man/woman died most of the servants could be taken care of after the fact, however, in this book it is specifically mentioned because of taxes and how high everything costs to date that a lot of household items must be sold along with homes. I think even Poirot and others remark a time or two that they don't seem to like the new world in which England has entered where there is less of a master/servant relationship among people. In fact I think the ending was in a way taking a look at what the war had wrought in terms of good versus bad servants.

The ending was a joke. I mean it was just the dumbest thing ever. I re-read it twice to make sure that I was not mis-reading anything, but nope that was the ending.

We find out that Cora's companion murdered her all to sell a Vermeer painting she had in order to get money to open up a tea shop. It makes no sense for this woman to have pretended to be Cora, let alone to say that perhaps Richard Abernethie was murdered. Why didn't she just kill Cora and abscond with the painting? It made no sense at all. I honestly think that this was Christie's way of saying that before the war a woman like Miss Gilchrist would have been happy with her lot in life, being a paid companion to a now wealthy woman. Instead she's angry and frustrated that she can't do a lifelong dream of opening her own tea shop.

And then we have all parties just go off and someone just exist unhappily together.