Customer Reviews

Postern of Fate

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(10)
1 star:		(18)

 

 

Since its publication, POSTERN OF FATE has received largely execrable reviews, with some labelling it "tedious" and others finding themselvs unable to follow its byzantinely boring plot. Look at the reviews on Amazon for samples. Now comes new evidence that the version of POSTERN OF FATE which we have was severely edited and that Christie's original may be a very different (and more cogent) work than the one we all know and abhor.

Sotheby's was offering the "complete Dictaphone recording of Agatha Christie dictating her last novel" including the original dictaphone belts she used (sixty of them). This was evidently put up for sale by her secretary, Mrs. Jolly. Did you know that "Postern of Fate" was Christie's sub=title for the novel and that the real title is "Doom's Caravan"? Sotheby's catalogue, from which I quote here, reveals that "the text incorporated here differs substantially in very many instances from the final, printed version . . . Among the most striking differences might be noted the following. [WARNING -- SPOILERS AHEAD.] The group responsible for Mary Jordan's murder is here more clearly identified as a Fascist cell amd many more details of, and clues about, them are given in a substantial section eventually cut. The motivation for the murder of old Isaac by a descendant of this group who is endeavouring to bring Fascism to England is, accordinly, more substantiated in the present version; moreover, in the way this material is here worked, clues are thrown out so as apparently to implicate a different murderer. The rearrangement of the final, printed version, in which some of these chapters are placed earlier, also leaves a few threads hanging loose, evidently because of poor editing, there remain in the printed version a few references to certain of these sections which had either by then been moved in such a way that the references are inappropriate or else cut alttogether . . ."

Perhaps it is the case that Christie's last novel isn't the sad, woolgathering, near-Alzheimers experience it presently seems to be, but instead it was the victim of "poor editing"? Wouldn't it be great if a critical edition of POSTERN OF FATE--or should we call it DOOM'S CARAVAN--could be prepared by the Christie estate which would clear up some of these inconsistencies and restore the blot from her reputation?

I give this book only 4 stars because, well, it isn't all that good, and until her original version is restored, this is all we're going to have.

I am an Agatha Christie fan, and although her books don't have the deep character development of some authors, she's generally ingenious in the construction of the mysteries, and such a good writer that each book is a pleasure to read.

BUT.....this book is boring, boring, boring. There is no mystery to speak of, and such as it is, is solved pretty much without any particular input by the Beresford couple, Tommy and Tuppence, nor is it a mystery the reader gets to try to solve.

Tommy and Tuppence continually, page after page and chapter after chapter, speculate on what might be the solution to the mystery. In the first place, speculation is not exactly detection. In the second place, about the sixth or eighth time Tuppence brightly wondered what might be the solution and Tommy fondly said he didn't know either, I wanted to strangle both of them. I prefer for SOMETHING to be happening in a book. NOT for the characters to be sitting around saying "Gee, there seems to be a mystery. I wonder who did it?"

This might have made an amusing short story. But it was strung out to tedious length and actually made me angry with myself for not just throwing it away instead of slogging all the way to the disappointing end.

I am a tremendous Agatha Christie fan, and you will be too so long as you don't start with this book. It's true, she wrote it when she was in her 80s, and it shows. However, start out chronologically with her books - The Mysterious Affair at Styles, 1920, and go on from there, and you will probably love her. Mysteries, action adventure (rather tame by todays standards but there's nothing wrong in that !) and well written. Her later books must be read by devoted fans who just want to see her old characters again. Her earliest books are the best - and I mean, the best!

As a die hard Christie fan, and loving the previous four T&T books, I felt I had to slog through and finish this one, and although the whodunnit is answered after a fashion, I still don't know whydunnit. Christie wrote this one as an aged writer and it shows, with the main characters, themselves in their seventies, prattling on about nothing interesting or germane, and "witness" characters sounding like a visit with an aged relative who talks about people you have never met and they can't seem to quite remember. Although in the end we do find out who did the actual dastardly deed(s), it doesn't seem to matter; I won't type out a spoiler here as far as motive, suffice it to say it was very unsatisfying and confusing. Perhaps an English reader would get more out of it as there are references to what I think are actual historical events that happened in England, but I can only guess. If you are a fan of T&T by all means read this one as it is the last, but for all other Christie readers I say skip it.

Worst Agatha Christie, hands down. Standing on the distant periphery of a very low-octane spy/murder mystery, one listens helplessly as the two yawn-inducing retirees exchange Quaint Old Married Couple repartee, prattle interminably about greengages and speckled laurels and old children's books, and dash off blithering into pointless digression at the first threat of tangible plot development. Found a vital clue cunningly hidden, have we? Actually examining it would be too obvious. Instead, let's spend 5 minutes discussing Hannibal the dog, who--shock!--likes to bury bones and chase rabbits.

No, "progress" in this work consists of Tommy or Tuppence meeting some new octogenarian whose aunt's nephew's youngest boy _may_ know a chap who _might_ have heard something or other important about something to do with the victim. They may not learn anything concrete from him when they track him down, but it's another great opportunity to discuss vegetable gardening. The hoary specter of some atavistic fascist terror-cell looms periodically but never comes into focus: the ending "reveal" is a cop-out, vague and two-dimensional.

Imagine watching The 39 Steps or The Man Who Knew Too Much spooled backward with the soundtrack replaced by clucking hens and the projector lens liberally smeared with Vaseline, and you'll just about have the flavor. Ultimately one is left with the urge to exhume either Christie or her errant editor--one can't quite be sure which is to blame, apparently--and shake said mortal remains violently in some vain hope of recapturing the seven hours wasted on this senescent muddle of a book.

This was her last book, and was probably dictated, which accounts for its rambling nature. It's a shaggy dog story without any clear resolution. However, it's as well written as her best, and full of good ideas. For example: that you can get at the truth by listening to old people and disentangling their stories. That bad ideas and organisations never die, they just change their shape, colour and name. Watch out, too, for the intertextuality - there are references to past stories of hers (the poisonous leaves that are planted next to the spinach). In the cellar of T&T's house is some old photographic equipment that's never mentioned again - was it left behind by the murderer from the story Philomel Cottage? The most Alice-in-Wonderland element, though, is the way Tommy and Tuppence have actually bought Agatha Christie's old home in Torqay, enabling her to revisit the house in her mind. Tuppence leafs through Agatha's best-loved children's books and finds in a greenhouse the child Agatha's old toys. She even gets to play in Agatha's old go-kart and wander round her garden. Check with Christie's autobiography if you don't believe me - in fact, READ her autobiography. Now!

'Postern of Fate' was, overall, not very exciting. It was the first of Agatha Christie's books I have ever read, and it was not a good way to start out with an author. She contradicts herself in more than one place, and the plot is hard to follow. If you're a Christie addict, go ahead, but otherwise, read something else.

Perhaps I can shed some light on a hazy subject. Flip on the lights, take a quick, furtive glance around, and set about storing this major bummer away...just so no innocent victims get in the way.

First of all the problem with the book (a big one it is, as well) is that it has no mystery. Considering it is a mystery book, you would think Agatha would remember that point. Well, when Tommy & Tuppence fall upon an inscription in a book that slightly resembles a fuzzy scandal-murder, they chase after a hare's nest like wildfire. It turns out this gigantic goose chase is virtually the novel you see before your eyes. You go through red tape, pointless discussions, and the tracking down of something that--get this--doesn't exsist (anymore, at least)!

Well, after a long and tedious journey, you've reached virgin territory--the end. You find yourself praying for a fulfilling ending...but like the plot, there is none. Instead you get a hazy, boring, confusing resolution that looks more like a cleverly put trap of beloved de ja vu. So, in short, DON'T READ IT!

Tommy and Tuppence's final appearance is sadly weak: although Christie endows the couple with considerable charm, the story itself becomes increasingly vague and confused as the novel progresses, and there is no satisfying conclusion to the piece. Avoid this one.

I was excited to begin my first Agatha Christie book after hearing so much about her. My 1973 hardback was picked up at a book sale. I'm so glad that I read some reviews here to find that this is not representative of her work. The plot has a resemblance to the TV show "Cold Case" in that it tries to figure out a crime from the past. However, unlike the TV show, there are no flashbacks; so the past remains removed from the reader. For each clue and discovery that either Tuppence or Tommy make, they seem to communicate it very imprecisely to the other, exactly the opposite of what I would think would make good detective work. I kept hoping that the ending of the book would tie it together. Although there was somewhat of an explanation about who the criminals were in the past and in the present, none of it was particularly clear or interesting. Hannibal the dog was fun. I think I will try to find an earlier work of hers, but my recommendation on this book is to pass. Taxi!