More re-reading of Christie continues. I'm reading the original 1st edition. (I'm tending to avoid paperback reprints since I just learned many of them have been edited, re-punctuated and expurgated, esp. the versions published from 1990 to the present.) Agatha was quite funny in this one. Ilaughed out loud several times. Of course Mrs. oliver is in this one and she's meant to be a parody of Agatha herself. So there's bound to be a few laughs at the outset. And in the subplot Ariadne Oliver is collaborating with Robin Upward, the insufferable egotistical playwright, who wants to re-write one of her novels as a marketable action-oriented entertainment with a matinee idol playing her middle-aged Finnish detective. Hysterical scenes. Also, Poirot must stay in a chaotic guesthouse run by a scatterbrained woman who serves up inedible meals. She bleeds into a bowl of green beans and says, "Still it won't matter... Things are always all right if you boil them, aren't they?" Poirot replies: "I think that I shall not be in for lunch." LOL! This also has the insanely constructed mixed metaphor of Poirot's that concludes Chapter 6. As far as the mystery story goes it's intricately plotted with lots of shifting between suspects and uses as a framework Christie's trademark motif of the nearly forgotten crime in the past. In this case, actually several crimes committed by several women. For a novel writtten in 1951 with the bulk of her work behind her and only 22 more books left to go this one is a nice throwback to the masterful and devious plots she concocted in her heyday of the late 20s - mid 40s. I think it's one of the best Poirot books from her middle period. People who crab about the "unfairness" of the solution simply weren't paying attention. More than 30 years after I first read this book as a teen I clearly saw the two main clues pointed out very early in the book that would lead anyone to the correct identity of the murderer.

What "improvements" have been made for the Berkley edition? There are already major differences in punctuation, word choices, and scene breaks between the original Collins and Dodd Mead editions of this novel. There are further differences between the Dodd Mead editions republished by Random House/Avenel and the Dodd Mead editions republished by Simon & Shuster/Pocket. There are further differences still in the Signet, Bantam, and Black Dog & Leventhal editions. For every publishing house putting out her works, there seem to be a new batch of editors altering Agatha Christie's words and the sound of her voice. What's the matter with these publishers? Whose voice do they think we want to hear when we sit down to a novel by Agatha Christie? And what will she sound like twenty years from now? It's frightening that her estate has failed to see the importance of guarding her words as she wrote them. Please tell me I'm not the only one here who senses that a crime has been committed.

Written in 1950, MRS. MCGINTY'S DEAD was published for the first time in 1951. I like a lot this novel because Hercule Poirot appears at last as a human being in it. So we learn that the illustrious detective feels very old and that he appreciates the haute cuisine, particularly cooked snails. Look also for the character of Ariadne Oliver, Agatha Christie's literary double. The thoughts she formulates about Sven Hjerson, the detective appearing in her own novels, leave a bitter taste in the mouth considering the fact that Agatha Christie could say the same words speaking of Hercule Poirot.

I love it; perhaps not at the top of tree, as some experts would say.

But I still think it is wonderful how the Scotland yarder comes to Poirot after "winning" the case on evidence, but still uncertain if he had the right man.

Hercule Poirot is bored, so he is delighted when he is visited by his old friend Superintendent Spence of the Kilchester Police. Spence has recently conducted an investigation into the murder of an old charwoman Mrs McGinty, in the village of Broadhinny. her lodger, James Bentley has been convicted of the murder and is due to hang, but Spence is convinced Bentley is innocent, and wants Poirot to investigate.

Poirot goes to stay in the village of Broadhinny, and soon begins to uncover reasons why other people might have wanted Mrs McGinty dead. While investigating the murder, he has to cope with staying at the dreadful guest house run by the Summerhayes, a couple who have no idea of how to keep house or cook an edible meal.

The scenes where the sufferings of Poirot at the guest house are described are among the most amusing in this very amusing book. There are many interesting characters, particularly the scatty but charming Maureen Summerhayes, whom Poirot likes in spite of her atrocious cooking. And there is the maddening James Bentley, the convicted murderer, whose unprepossesing character only makes Poirot more determined to prove him innocent.

One of the most amusing exchanges in the book occurs near the end: ' "Mon Dieu, how stupid I have been," said Hercule Poirot, "The whole thing is simple, is it not?" It was after that remark that there was very nearly another murder - the murder of Hercule Poirot by Superintendent Spence.' Enjoy it.