having read more than 5 Agatha books I wanted to take a break. But having read the first chapter of 'crooked house', it set me back on track once more to why I love reading. once started, I could not stop.
Crooked House according to the author's foreword, had been one of her own special favourites. out of one's output, 5 books are work to one that is real pleasure and Crooked House had been that pleasure. She felt that instead of developing the ideas and plot, the characters namely the Leonides family grew and portrayed themselves independent of the writer, Agatha was only, as she put it, 'their scribe'
Below would be an excerpt from the book which I find really intriguing:
"What are murderers like? Some of them"-a faint rather melancholy smile showed on his face- "have been thoroughly nice chaps."
I think I looked a little starled.
"Oh yes, they have," he said. "Nice ordinary fellows like you and me- or like that chap who went out just now- Roger Leonides. Murder you see, is an amateur crime. I'm speaking of course of the kind of murder you have in mind- not gangster stuff. One feels, very often, as though these nice ordinary chaps had been overtaken, as it were, by murder, almost accidentally. They've been in a tight place, or they've wanted something very badly, money or a woman- and they've killed to get it. The brake that operates with most of us doesn't operate with them. A child, you know translates desire into action without compunction. A child is angry with its kitten, says 'I'll kill you,' and hits it on the head with a hammer- and then breaks it heart because the kitten doesn't come alive again! Lots of kids try to take a baby out of a pram and 'drown it,' because it usurps attention- or interferes with their pleasures. THey get- very early- to a stage when they know that that is 'wrong'- that is, that it will be punished. Later, they get to feel that it is wrong. But some people, I suspect, remain morally immature. They continue to be aware that murder is wrong, but they do not feel it. I don't think, in my experience, that any murderer has really felt remorse... And that, perhaps, is the mark of Cain. Murderers are set apart, they are 'different'- murder is wrong- but not for them- for them it is necessary- the victim has 'asked for it,' it was 'the only way.' "
"Do you think," I asked, "that if someone hated old Leonides, had hated him, say for a very long time, that that would be a reason?"
"Pure hate? Very unlikely, I should say." My father looked at me curiously. "When you say hate, I presume tou mean dislike carried to excess. A jealous hate is different- that rises out of affection and frustration. Constance Kent, everybody said, was very fond of the baby brother she killed. But she wanted, one supposes, that attention and the love that was bestowed on him. I think people more often kill those they love than those they hate. Possibly because only the people you love can really make life unendurable to you.
"But all thise doesn't help you much, does it?" he went on. "What you want, if i read you correctly, is some token, some universal sign that will help you to pick out a murderer from a household of apparently normal and pleasant people?"
"Yes, that's it."
"Is there a common denominator? I wonder. You know," he paused in thought, "if there is, I should be inclined to say it is vanity."
"Vanity?"
"Yes, I've never met a murderer who wasn't vain... It's their vanity that leads to their undoing, nine times out of ten. They may be frightened of being caught, but they can't help strutting and boasting and usually they're sure they've been far too clever to be caught." He added: "And here's another thing, a murderer want to talk."
"To talk?"
"Yes; you see, having committed a murder puts you in a position of great loneliness. You'd like to tell somebody all about it- and you never can. And that makes you want to all the more. And so- if you can't talk about how you did it, you can at least talk about the murder itself- discuss it, advance theories- go over it.
I like the way she managed to penetrate into the human mind, even though there might not be any real psychological basis for her.. but it does satisfies the layman like me. Everyone normal or 'abnormal' is being classified under different categories. Be it social stigma, class ranking, general terms. The common factor linking these categories would be the 'common denominator' mentioned. The specific qualities that people in that category share. E.g General term: teenager/adolescent: age between 13-16. something like that. general terms itself are well, general hence they do encompass more 'detailed' sub-categories if I am allowed to put it. For example within the adolescents, some might be geeks, jockeys, the populars etc. Agatha has managed to group murderers under a specific habit which they display. That is something I really like about this chapter and book (in the bigger light).
I told him then what Sophia had said about the ruthlessness in the family- the different kinds of ruthlessess. He was interested.
"Yes," he said. "Your toung woman has got something there. Most families have got a defect, a chink in their armour. Most people can deal with one weakness- but they mightn't be able to deal with two weakness of a different kind. Interesting things heredity. Take the de Haviland ruthlessness, and what we might call the Loenides unscrupulousness- the de Havilands are all right because they're not unscrupulous, and the Leonides are all right because, though unscrupulous, they are kindly- but get a descendant who inherited both of those trait- see what I mean?"
**
She had had an authoritarian ruthlessness of her grandmother's family, and the ruthless egoism of Magda, seeing only her own point of view. She had also presumably suffered, sensitive like Philip, from the stigma of being unattractive- the changeling child- of the family. Finally, in her very marrow had run the essential crooked strain of old Leonides. She had been Leonides' grandchild, she had resembled him in brain and cunning- but where his love had gone outwards to family and friends, hers had turned inward to herself.
**
In poor little Josephine all the worst of the family came together. In you, Sophia, I fully believe that all that is bravest and best in the Leonides family has been handed down to you.
Genetics, Biology. It is funny how Agath has brought in the subject of heredity...of course I do know that personality is not encoded in the genes... they are after all not physical traits. But the way she toys with the idea surprises me and she has managed to developed a character that has received.. all the 'recessive personalities' and one who 'inherited' the amicable ones.
Crooked House definitely receives two thumbs up from me. It gave me goosebumps and I could not stop having praise for it once after I closed the cover. it has been a long time.. since ' And then there were none' the Agatha Christie has done it again. This book has also made me pay attention to the author's foreword, giving a hint on whether it would be a good read or not.
A little side track , I cam across this webbie on FB:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/18/best-wedding-photos-of-2014_n_6343872.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063
I really do think that the photos there are amazing. Especially this:
Take a look, take a read and have a blessed weekend!
God Bless
=do something right=
No comments:
Post a Comment