Agatha Christie wrote sixty-six crime novels during her illustrious career. I have read most, and I keep returning to them at regular intervals. Especially, on those Sundays, when there is a nip in the air, the sun threatens to go down early, and one is not in a mood to get out of the house, I get this irresistible urge to curl up with a Poirot or Miss Maple mystery. There is something about the texture of Christie’s language and setting that matches this state of mind. Her fluid prose—very British, very crisp, warm and flowing-lulls the body and soul into languid repose. And her books are easy reads, the language is never difficult. In fact, she made writing crime fiction look effortless.
For many reasons, among the Christie novels, one of my favorites is the “Death on the Nile”. Christie wrote this book after a trip to Egypt with her husband Max Mollowan, an archeologist. Onboard the steamer Karnak, which was one of the popular cruises to sail down the Nile, Christie met and overheard conversations from a diverse set of travelers, and that became the raw material for her book. In her stories, it is always, the crime, the number of bodies, and the ingenuity of the detection that often take center seat, however, in the Death on the Nile, Christie deliberately pauses and takes time to etch out her characters in finer detail. We get to know them more intimately. Foremost, there is this glorious setting of Egypt and the serpentine flow of the Nile that frames the tale, and secondly, there is Hercule Poirot taking a luxurious vacation onboard a cruise ship – the Karnack, and then thirdly, a rich array of characters populate the guest list of the ship. It is a veritable study of human character: Linnet Ridgeway, the rich heiress, the first body to fall in the plot; Simon Doyle, the lucky fiancée of Linnet; Linnet’s maid Louise Bourget, whose loyalty to Linnet is laced with monetary expectations; Jacqueline de Bellefort, Linnet’s close friend who loses Simon to Linnet and now seeks psychological retribution by following the couple to Egypt; Rosalie Otterbourne, the unwed and beautiful daughter of the aging and alcoholic author of pulpy novels of passion and romance; Cornelia Robson, the companion of a rich American cousin whose family have seen better days, Austrian physician Dr. Bessner whose questionable medical practices puts him in an awkward position; the solicitor Andre Pennington, the scheming trustee of Linnet’s vast wealth, and finally the communist Mr. Ferguson who always carries a copy of Karl Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” and detests the show of wealth on the cruise ship. All of them have had distasteful experiences with Linnet and possess a strong motive to murder.
Agatha Christie was the queen of misdirection, a style of storytelling that attempts to consciously shift the reader’s attention away from the central clue and fix it on others. A casual remark here, a piece of evidence there, keeps the reader guessing and speculating until the pieces fall into place in the final dénouement by the sleuth. In Hercule Poirot mysteries, in particular, Christie would orchestrate a stage for her proud and fastidious Belgian detective to give his performance. An entire chapter is devoted to Poirot’s exercise of his grey cells, connecting the dots, sifting the evidence, and unequivocally isolating and framing the culprit. After closing the book, it would be an insensitive reader who would not be tempted to scream“ Hurrah Poirot!! And wow Christie”.
There have been two adaptations of The death on the Nile for the screen. The 1978 version featuring Sir Peter Ustinov is widely considered the more truthful translation of Christie’s novel. Peter Ustinov was not only a great actor but also a true renaissance man whose interests ranged from arts to science to politics. For Indians, who may not be acquainted with Peter Ustinov’s literary forays, the name may still ring a bell for an entirely different reason. On that fateful day, October 31st, 1984, when the late Prime minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her security guards, she was on her way to be interviewed by Peter Ustinov for the Irish television. It was an interview that never happened. Anyway, getting back to Peter Ustinov’s role as Poirot, he captured the essence of Poirot, even though some critics felt he was a trifle too fat to be conceived in the role of the famous fictional detective. But that doesn’t distract us in any way from his performance. Ustinov was an accomplished Shakespearean actor, and therefore the theatrics in bringing out Poirot’s demeanor came easily to him. I like this 1978 version for sticking to the nuances of the book, and not allowing the commercial necessities of cinema to usurp the focus of the viewer from what is essentially an intense human drama—which is central to this mystery. The brilliance of the tale really lies in its juxtaposition of the ancient landmarks of Egypt that echoes with the aura of timeless tales of power, love, and immortality, with the characters in the story, who constantly brood and fear for their mortality.
The 2022 Sir Kenneth Branagh’s adaptation of the Death on the Nile (available now on Hulu) is lavish and spectacular. It is a tribute to Christie that her stories can be molded, massaged into different perspectives, and gives playwrights and directors a wide latitude and artistic liberty to embellish the material the way they want to. Sir Kenneth, like Peter Ustinov, is an accomplished theatre artist and considered one of the best Irish actors on the scene. His portrayal of Hercule Poirot is that of a slick and agile investigator, sporting an exaggerated and luxuriant mustache covering a scar from the first World War years. The stunning visuals of Egypt, the sumptuous settings of each scene, the austere grandeur of the sphinx and the Pyramids, the azure blue transparency of the stately Nile, and the wonderful costumes of the characters, cause a dizzying effect on the senses. The tale is essentially the same. The murder of Linnet Ridgeway triggers a series of bodies. I liked this adaptation too. It is obvious that Sir Kenneth has a great love for Christie’s work. A couple of years ago, he remade the murder on the orient express, again a visually stunning adaptation of another great Poirot mystery. Critics squirm a bit when they speak of Kenneth’s conception of Poirot, and his mannerisms, but I think, it works. Honestly, Agatha Christie never gave us a detailed description of Hercule Poirot, except for the fact he was Belgian, was with the army, and was very fussy about neatness and order. Therefore, it is up to those who create Poirot for the stage or the screen to use their imagination on how he should look and behave. Sir David Suchet, who played Poirot for the BBC run of the Christie adaptations, is, in the opinion of many, the best Poirot. I agree. There was something about Sir David’s performance that made the character of Poirot palpable for us, just as Jeremy Brett, another Great British actor, immortalized Sherlock Holmes for the television.
If you haven’t had the chance to read the book or watch an adaptation of the Death on the Nile, I request my readers to consider doing so. The Death on the Nile is one of Christie’s finest works. In this story, she plumbs the depths of greed and cunning as she had never done before. When the murderer is revealed at the end, we are horrified. That the motives of human beings are unfathomable, and the most unlikely protagonist can turn out to be the murdered, is a pattern that Christie revels in; but in the Death of the Nile, she takes it a step beyond. Her revelations are not merely dramatic in their effect but resonate as tragic and unfair. Surprisingly, the reader feels a rare sympathy for the killer, even though the crime is brutal and calculated. There are very few murder mysteries that make one think beyond the last page, this book does. Both the movie adaptations mentioned in this essay sensitively capture those nuanced emotions that make a story a classic, a study to be revisited again and again.