MURDER IN MESOPOTAMIA

edubeltranedubeltran Catalonia, Spain Investigator
I read it again last weekend, years after having done so for the first time. I remembered the murderer very well, though no the motive. As I have been seeing in this forum, this comes as generally, one of the most disliked Christies of all. I did, however, enjoy it quite a lot although the ending did not convice me too much. I think the reason for the first murder is quite light and SPOILER WHY didn't he murder his wife's lover's instead of her. Also I think very very improbable, to not say impossible, that someone would not recognize her former husband after 15 years
«1

Comments

  • Tommy_A_JonesTommy_A_Jones Gloucestershire, United Kingdom ✭✭✭✭
    I find that unbelievable the only Characters I liked were the last Victim and The Wodehouseian Character.
  • tudestudes Rio de Janeiro, Brazil ✭✭✭✭
    I agree with you.
    I like the book. It isn't my favorite one nor I think it's marvelous. But it's great. I enjoyed it.

    SPOILER:

    I think he murdered his wife because  his love for her it wasn't normal. He didn't want any man to marry or be her lover, because she was the "source" of the love. He didn't care about the others. They're not important. He wanted her to love him only and she betrayed him, not his wife's lover.
    And I also think improbable not regognize her former husband. He wasn't anyone that you met in a party!
  • Tommy_A_JonesTommy_A_Jones Gloucestershire, United Kingdom ✭✭✭✭
    Surely the only way you wouldn't recognize your partner is if the Relationship ended halfway threough or just after the Reception.
  • tudestudes Rio de Janeiro, Brazil ✭✭✭✭
    Quite right!
    :))
  • GKCfanGKCfan Wisconsin, United States mod
  • tudestudes Rio de Janeiro, Brazil ✭✭✭✭
    Thanks, GKCfan!
  • tudestudes Rio de Janeiro, Brazil ✭✭✭✭
    GKC, I read your paper.

    SPOILER:
       I understand that it was  a difficult and troubled time because of the war,. And this was the motive that I didn't write it was impossible Louise not to recognize her former husband.
    So I suppose we agree about this.
    And I still thinking he's a kind of obsessive. He wasn't normal. And I think that you understand this point of view, but it's not yours and (probably) it was not A.C. Is that so?

  • GKCfanGKCfan Wisconsin, United States mod
    ***SPOILERS***

    Thank you!   It's my belief that neither party in the marriage was exactly "normal."  Dr. Leidner had an unhealthy obsession with controlling his wife, and Mrs. Leidner was self-absorbed.  All of Christie's villains are damaged in some way, so I think your point of view is very valid.
  • Tommy_A_JonesTommy_A_Jones Gloucestershire, United Kingdom ✭✭✭✭
    I agree.
  • tudestudes Rio de Janeiro, Brazil ✭✭✭✭
    SPOILER:
    GKCfan said:

    ***SPOILERS***

    Thank you!   It's my belief that neither party in the marriage was exactly "normal."  Dr. Leidner had an unhealthy obsession with controlling his wife, and Mrs. Leidner was self-absorbed.  All of Christie's villains are damaged in some way, so I think your point of view is very valid.
    I agree.
    She (Mrs. Leidner) remember me Arlena Marshall from Evil under the Sun. They're both egoistic in a dangerous way. They don't realize that they can hurt someone, in fact, they don't realize someone's feelings, only the things that are good or bad for them.

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.