Lord Edgeware Dies is one of Christie's most famous stories. The solution to the mystery is elaborate, ingenious and amusing.
Of course, it doesn't actually work.
Jane Wilkinson wants to kill her husband and comes up with a ruse that will give her an apparently unshakable alibi. She gets Carlotta Adams to impersonate her at a dinner party while she commits the murder.
This might well be possible, because Jane is unknown to most of the guests and even her host has only met her very briefly, and that was many months ago. A skilled impersonator, like Carlotta, might well get away with it. To reduce the risk, Jane telephones Carlotta, to check that the deception has worked, before embarking on her murder attempt.
So far, so good: but from this point onwards it all falls apart.
Firstly, Christie is so focused on the alibi that she gives no thought to the actual murder. It requires Jane to go to her husband's house, sneak up behind him and plunge a dagger into his neck. But how can she know in advance where he will be? What if he had gone to bed or had closed the door to his room? What if he simply heard her coming (it is unlikely that she would get a second chance to stab such a big, robust man)? But that only raises the question of why she chose to stab him in the first place. How can she be sure that a single knife thrust in the neck will result in instant and nearly noiseless death? How can she be sure that she won't sever the jugular and be showered with blood?
Secondly, having committed the crime, she has to hope that Carlotta has managed to maintain the deception through to the end of the dinner party. If she does eventually get rumbled, then Jane is sunk.
Thirdly, she now has to commit a second murder (without an alibi) to cover up the first, which doubles the risk. This second murder requires her to impersonate a Mrs Van Dusen. But the police will immediately want to interview this key witness and her mysterious disappearance will throw additional suspicion on Jane.
Finally, there is a fundamental flaw in the alibi itself.
Carlotta's deception might work because the other guests are, at best, recalling a brief acquaintance from many months ago, but Jane herself must meet these people just a few days after the dinner party. Her whole plan now depends on none of these 12 people spotting that she is not the woman with whom they dined so recently.
Much is made of the fact that the dining room was only lit by candles, but how could Jane know that this would be the case? Even if she did, a candle-lit room may be a bit gloomy but it is not pitch black. It was insanely risky for Jane to trust that nobody would notice that she and Carlotta are in fact two different people. Jane has staked her life on a thousand-to-one chance.
A likely story.
The fact that the central premise of the story does not actually work did not affect my enjoyment of the programme. It was a typically well mounted production with another fine performance by David Suchet. I also recognise that Agatha Christie stories must often be taken with a large pinch of salt. I am happy to do this, but I note that many of her most avid admirers on this site do not seem to see that it is necessary.
PS: Just for the record, the elaborate murder plans in 'Evil under the Sun', 'A Murder is Announced' and 'Death on the Nile' don't work either.
Of course, it doesn't actually work.
Jane Wilkinson wants to kill her husband and comes up with a ruse that will give her an apparently unshakable alibi. She gets Carlotta Adams to impersonate her at a dinner party while she commits the murder.
This might well be possible, because Jane is unknown to most of the guests and even her host has only met her very briefly, and that was many months ago. A skilled impersonator, like Carlotta, might well get away with it. To reduce the risk, Jane telephones Carlotta, to check that the deception has worked, before embarking on her murder attempt.
So far, so good: but from this point onwards it all falls apart.
Firstly, Christie is so focused on the alibi that she gives no thought to the actual murder. It requires Jane to go to her husband's house, sneak up behind him and plunge a dagger into his neck. But how can she know in advance where he will be? What if he had gone to bed or had closed the door to his room? What if he simply heard her coming (it is unlikely that she would get a second chance to stab such a big, robust man)? But that only raises the question of why she chose to stab him in the first place. How can she be sure that a single knife thrust in the neck will result in instant and nearly noiseless death? How can she be sure that she won't sever the jugular and be showered with blood?
Secondly, having committed the crime, she has to hope that Carlotta has managed to maintain the deception through to the end of the dinner party. If she does eventually get rumbled, then Jane is sunk.
Thirdly, she now has to commit a second murder (without an alibi) to cover up the first, which doubles the risk. This second murder requires her to impersonate a Mrs Van Dusen. But the police will immediately want to interview this key witness and her mysterious disappearance will throw additional suspicion on Jane.
Finally, there is a fundamental flaw in the alibi itself.
Carlotta's deception might work because the other guests are, at best, recalling a brief acquaintance from many months ago, but Jane herself must meet these people just a few days after the dinner party. Her whole plan now depends on none of these 12 people spotting that she is not the woman with whom they dined so recently.
Much is made of the fact that the dining room was only lit by candles, but how could Jane know that this would be the case? Even if she did, a candle-lit room may be a bit gloomy but it is not pitch black. It was insanely risky for Jane to trust that nobody would notice that she and Carlotta are in fact two different people. Jane has staked her life on a thousand-to-one chance.
A likely story.
The fact that the central premise of the story does not actually work did not affect my enjoyment of the programme. It was a typically well mounted production with another fine performance by David Suchet. I also recognise that Agatha Christie stories must often be taken with a large pinch of salt. I am happy to do this, but I note that many of her most avid admirers on this site do not seem to see that it is necessary.
PS: Just for the record, the elaborate murder plans in 'Evil under the Sun', 'A Murder is Announced' and 'Death on the Nile' don't work either.