Cards on the Table audiobook

Cards On The Table (Hercule Poirot #15), Agatha ChristieMeeting by chance at an art exhibition, the flamboyant collector Mr Shaitana tells Hercule Poirot of his personal crime-related collection, and invites him to a dinner party to see it. Scoffing at the idea of collecting mere artefacts, Shaitana explains that he collects only the best exhibits: criminals who have evaded justice.Poirot's fellow guests include three other crime professionals: secret service man Colonel Race, mystery writer Mrs Ariadne Oliver, and Superintendent Battle of Scotland Yard; along with four people Shaitana believes to be murderers: Dr Roberts, Mrs Lorrimer, Anne Meredith, and Major Despard. Shaitana taunts his suspects with comments that each understands as applying only to them.The guests retire to play bridge, the crime professionals playing in one room while the others play in a second room where Shaitana relaxes by the fire. As the party breaks up, Shaitana is found to be dead – stabbed in the chest with a stiletto from his own collection.None of the suspects can be ruled out, as all had left their places at the table during the evening. Leading the police investigation, Superintendent Battle agrees to put his "cards on the table" and to allow the other professionals to make their own enquiries. Poirot concentrates on the psychology of the murderer.The investigators look into the suspects' histories: the husband of one of Dr Roberts' patients died of anthrax shortly after accusing the doctor of improper conduct; and a botanist that Despard had been guiding through the Amazon was rumored to have been shot. Anne's housemate Rhoda Dawes tells Mrs Oliver in confidence about an incident that Anne has been concealing, when an elderly woman for whom Anne was acting as companion died after mistaking poison for syrup of figs. Mrs Lorrimer's husband had died twenty years earlier, though little is known about that. ...عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «ورقها روی میز»؛ «شیطان به قتل میرسد»؛ «اتفاق بعد از شام»؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: یکی از روزهای سال1993میلادیعنوان: شیطان به قتل میرسد؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ مترجم: جمشید اسکندانی؛ تهران، نشر روایت، سال1372، در535 ص؛ چاپ دیگر: تهران، ثالث، سال1392؛ در414ص؛ شابک9789643808860؛ موضوع: داستانهای پلیسی و کارآگاهی از نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده ی20معنوان: اتفاق بعد از شام؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ مترجم: محمدحسین عباسپور تمیجانی؛ تهران، تمندر، سال1374، در320 ص؛ چاپ دیگر: تهران، سبز آرنگ، چاپ دوم تا چهارم سال1378؛ در320 ص؛ شابک9649176888؛ چاپ دیگر: تهران، راه کمال، سبز آرنگ، سال1385؛ در320ص؛ شابک9649686940؛ چاپ دیگر: تهران، محیا، سال1390، شابک9789645577962؛ عنوان: ورقها روی میز؛ نویسنده: آگاتا کریستی؛ مترجم: مجتبی عبدالله نژاد؛ تهران، هرمس، کارآگاه، سال1395، در278ص؛ شابک9789643639778؛آدم با چشم وجدان، خیلی چیزها را، به مراتب بهتر از چشم اصلی میبیند؛ پوآروشیطانا، فردی ثروتمند، با حالت و چهره ای اهریمنی، که دوستدار گردآوری کلکسیون اشیای ارزشمند است، او در دیدارش به «پوآرو»، میگوید: «چه جالب بود اگه کلکسیونی از انسانهایی که جنایت کردند را گردآوری میکردم»؛ و «پوآرو» در پاسخش میگوید: «اینکار به نظرم جالب نیست»؛ شیطانا، هشت تن از جمله «پوآرو» را، به خانه اش دعوت میکند؛ سه کاراگاه، و رمان نویسی به نام خانم «اولیور»، و چهار تن دیگر که گمان میکند، یکی از اینها مرتکب قتل شده است؛ سپس چهار کاراگاه، و رمان نویس با هم، و چهار تن از افرادی که یکی از آنها مرتکب قتل شده، مشغول بازی بریج میشوند، و پیش از بازی؛ شیطانا، قاتل واقعی را، تحریک میکند؛ پس از بازی، جسد «شیطانا» پیدا میشود، و «پوآرو»، با یاری جستن از سلولهای خاکستری مغز خویش، پرده از راز جالبترین پرونده ی خویش برمیدارد؛ جالب اینکه هیچ چیز، که به قاتل مربوط باشد، پیدا نمی‌شود، و «پوآرو»، در آغاز، از امتیازات بازی بریج، استفاده کرده، و فکر قاتل را دنبال میکند، و سرانجام میفهمد، چه کسی به قتل دست زده استتاریخ بهنگام رسانی 14/12/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 02/10/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی

I consider this case, Hercule Poirot, book #15 as a modern classic. Four detectives and four murder suspects invited to a dinner party, with a predictable result... murder! A well crafted story with some great denouements towards the end. This case also saw the debut of the irrepressible detective fiction writer Ariadine Oliver. 8 out of 12.2013 read

Another great Christie mystery.Colonel Race meets Hercule Poirot! Not only that but Ariadne Oliver arrives and crunches on a few apples, foreshadowing what happens in Hallowe'en Party. Another Christe regular, Superintendent Battle, also shows up to make this a pretty large party of recurring characters.When slimy collector, Mr. Shaitana, invites Poirot to his home to see a collection of murderers, our little Belgian detective can't resist. Colonel Race (secret service), Ariadne Oliver (mystery writer), and Superintendent Battle (police detective) are also all there as unwitting observers to Shaitana's impressive assembly.On the other side of the table are four seemingly respectable guests - Dr. Geoffrey Roberts, Mrs. Lorrimer, Major John Despard, & Anne Meredith.A few odd comments (taunts?) are made by the host to some of the guests at dinner, but as they retire to play bridge all seems well.That is, until Shaitana is found dead in his chair from a stabbed through the heart with his own stiletto at the end of the evening.Whodunnit and why?To solve the murder of Shaitana, Poirot & Co. will have to investigate the history of these four guests who may have gotten away with murder in the past.I don't want to ruin anything, so I'll just say this one is another great cozy mystery that any fan of Agatha Christie will probably love.

“Cards on the Table. That’s the motto for this business. I mean to play fair.”So says the chief investigating officer in this novel, who also says he is a:“Great admirer of yours, Monsieur Poirot. Little gray cells – order and method. I know all about it.”Such a thought can be fervently echoed by millions of fans of the diminutive Belgian detective, Monsieur Hercule Poirot, worldwide. The 1936 novel, Cards on the Table, is the fifteenth novel by Agatha Christie to feature her perennially popular detective, and Superintendent Battle of Scotland Yard is the investigator with a brain to (almost) match Poirot’s own.Superintendent Battle features in other stories by Agatha Christie, as does Colonel Race, who is a British secret agent. A third recurring character is Ariadne Oliver, an endearing crime mystery writer, who makes her first appearance in Poirot’s company here. However, this is not Mrs. Ariadne Oliver’s debut. She did have a brief earlier role in the Parker Pyne short story “The Case of the Discontented Soldier”. Sadly the amiable and ever-helpful Captain Arthur Hastings does not appear in this novel, but as can be seen, we do have plenty of other favourite characters to fill the gap.Amateur sleuths among Agatha Christie’s readers will have realised that we already have four detectives in the novel, which is surely curious. In fact they form part of a carefully chosen set of guests, invited by the mysterious Mr. Shaitana, who is hosting an unusual dinner party. Mr. Shaitana seems to be a bit of a dandy:“The whole of Mr. Shaitana’s person caught the eye – it was designed to do so. He deliberately attempted a Mephistophelian effect. He was tall and thin; his face was long and melancholy; his eyebrows were heavily accented and jet black; he wore a moustache with stiff waxed ends and a tiny black imperial. His clothes were works of art – of exquisite cut – but with a suggestion of the bizarre”Interestingly, “Shaitana” is a Hindi word, meaning “Devil”. Mr. Shaitana does seem to be universally disliked:“Every healthy Englishman who saw him longed earnestly and fervently to kick him!”Is this because of his extravagant sense of style? Or his supreme confidence? Or is there perhaps a touch of envy in those who know him?:“He existed richly and beautifully in a super flat in Park Lane … and gave wonderful parties – large parties, small parties, macabre parties, respectable parties and definitely “queer” parties.”Nevertheless, “He was a man of whom nearly everybody was a little afraid. Why this … was so can hardly be stated in definite words. There was a feeling, perhaps, that he knew a little too much about everybody. And there was a feeling, too, that his sense of humour was a curious one.”Ah, there we have it. Each invited guest must be wondering why they have been given such preferential treatment, and perhaps too, they also might wonder what Mr Shaitana knows about them.In her foreword, Agatha Christie has told us the sort of detective story she does not like:“Spot the least likely person to have committed the crime and in nine times out of ten your task is finished …“I prefer to warn them beforehand that this is not that kind of book. There are only four starters, and any one of them, given the right circumstances, might have committed the crime. That knocks out forcibly the element of surprise … They are four widely divergent types, the motive that drives each one of them to crime is a peculiar to that person, and each one would employ a different method. The deduction must, therefore, be entirely psychological, but it is none the less interesting for that, because when all is said and done it is the mind of the murderer that is of supreme interest.”This could almost be Poirot thinking. And so, we see the author’s thoughts made concrete, for our entertainment.Mr. Shaitana was a man of great taste, and he was also a great collector of rare objects. When he met Hercule Poirot, seemingly by accident, he mentioned that one of his strangest collections was of people who had committed murder. Moreover, because he only collected “the best”, he only collected the ones who got away with it. “The successes!” An idea suddenly occurred to Mr. Shaitana. He would host a dinner party, where Poirot would be able to meet these “exhibits” for himself. Was Poirot interested?How could Poirot resist? What an opportunity to get his little grey cells working. And so we move to the actual dinner.There are eight guests. Four are people who had once been suspected of murder, and four are the detectives. All the guests are pleasant and charming. There is Doctor Geoffrey Roberts, a cheerful and successful middle aged medical practitioner, and Mrs Lorrimer, a widow of sixty, who is an expert bridge player. There is Miss Anne Meredith, a shy young woman who used to work as a companion to various elderly ladies, and Major John Despard, a lean handsome man who is an explorer and safari hunter. The conversation seems varied enough, covering conventional topics such as films, books and politics, but also – and perhaps more significantly – poisons, and how to cure sleeping sickness.After dinner, the guests retire to play contract bridge. All the four sleuths play cards in one room, while the others play in another room. Mr. Shaitana declines to play, and meanders between the rooms following the games of bridge being played. He finally settles down to relax, in a big chair by the fireplace in the smoking room, where the suspects play their game, as the light gradually fades at the end of the day. After the sleuths’ game has ended, Colonel Race goes through to where Mr. Shaitana is sitting in the shadows, and then quietly calls Poirot over. Poirot and Colonel Race see that the flamboyant Mr. Shaitana has been silenced for ever: stabbed in the chest, with a weapon from his own collection. Mr. Shaitana had tempted Providence, and he had lost.As Poirot said:“Shaitana was a man who prided himself on his Mephistophelian attitude to life. He was a man of great vanity. He was also a stupid man – that’s why he is dead.”As Ariadne Oliver had noticed, Mr. Shaitana mentioned “the black angel” which Inspector Battle picked up:“A neat little reference to poison, to accident, to a doctor’s opportunities, to shooting accidents. I shouldn’t be surprised if he signed his death-warrant when he said those words.”The blurb tells us the name of the victim in the first sentence, which is not usually something we would welcome knowing in advance. However, Agatha Christie’s set-up for this murder mystery is both audacious, and yet brilliantly simple:“In the opinion of Mr Shaitana, each of these four people had committed murder. Had he evidence? Or was it a guess.”Surely the host would not have expected himself to be a victim? Suicide whilst putting the blame on another, also seems to be precluded, by the vicious method of the crime. It is an intriguing murder puzzle in itself – and then the many layered complexity of this case hits us. We realise that we also have four other possible murders to solve, and that these are reverse murders, where we know the identity of the murderer, but not necessarily the victim, or the crime.We have been subtly invited by the Queen of Crime to solve five murder mysteries in one!The four detectives agree to take one each of the other four guests, to investigate as the possible murderer one-to-one. Since each happens to suspect a different guest, the allocation of guests is straightforward. As Ariadne Oliver herself remarks:“The four murderers and the four sleuths – Scotland Yard. Secret Service. Private. Fiction. A clever idea.”To help his own part of the investigation, Poirot decides to take the score sheets which each of the guests made in their bridge game, in case it should reveal something untoward. His approach, as he says, is always from the psychological angle; looking for the motive and psychology behind the murder, to ascertain the truth. Yet he knows others might think some of the details he focuses on to be foolish:“I never think your questions foolish, M. Poirot,” said Battle. “I’ve seen too much of your work. Everyone’s got their own way of working.”and when he is asked by Poirot to describe his own style, Inspector Battle replies:“A straightforward, honest, zealous officer doing his duty in the most laborious manner – that’s my style. No frills. No fancy work. Just honest perspiration. Stolid and a bit stupid – that’s my ticket.”But Major Despard sees through his act, and when another guest describes the Inspector as “rather stupid”, comments:“That, I should imagine, is part of Battle’s stock-in trade … He’s an extraordinarily astute man. A man of remarkable ability.”This is, in my opinion, one of the best Poirot novels. Even the title is a riddle, with a double meaning. Superintendent Battle says that Cards on the Table was to be their motto, but the entire plot of novel is based on the theme of playing cards. All the potential murderers played the card game, contract bridge, as the main murder was actually committed. A third interpretation of the title is another metaphor. To play contract bridge demands a certain level of skill, and ability to take risks. This also forms part of Poirot’s method: a close analysis, and study of the psychology of each individual.Cards on the Table is multi-layered, with at least five separate possible murders to solve. Yet because it is so well structured, it is straightforward to read. As Agatha Christie herself remarked, we have a small set of characters to choose from, and each is completely different in their personality and motives. We readily engage with each, and because they are attached to different sleuths, we follow their cases without difficulty. This is not to say, however that they are easy to solve. Quite the reverse.Despite the genuine clues, Agatha Christie deftly leads us along false trails and feeds us many red herrings. There are bodies galore, with several murders in the past as well as the present one – plus a future murder, a future suicide and a future accidental death. There is romance – and deceit. A hired actor is employed by one of the detectives, to great effect. And, astoundingly, the entire plot turns on the game of bridge, and the bids made, alongside the guests’ memories of the room they were in. Poirot’s bases his theory upon the murderer’s recollection of the bridge game. (view spoiler)[The murderer could remember very little about it, except for the grand slam that they made, yet they could remember a lot about the layout of the room they played in. This was significant, and was in direct contrast to what the other suspects recalled. (hide spoiler)] The solution to the murder is an analytical one – quite brilliant and a complete surprise.The writing is subtle, and the humour is delightful. Poirot is as vain as ever, and we love him for it:“The question is,” he said, … “can Hercule Poirot possibly be wrong?”“No one can always be right,” said Mrs Lorrimer coldly.“I am,” said Poirot. “Always I am right. It is so invariable that it startles me. But now it looks, it very much looks, as if I am wrong. And that upsets me!”All the detectives spark off each other, and we get in-jokes which refer to other Poirot novels (which I will not quote, for fear of “spoilers”). We get a good impression of Mrs. Ariadne Oliver’s detective novels, with her hero “Sven”. She has authored thirty-two detective novels, and the part where she describes the difficulties of her craft is very droll. Take this exchange:“Women,” said Mrs. Oliver, “are capable of infinite variation. I should never commit the same type of murder twice running.”“Don’t you ever write the same plot twice running?” asked Battle.”And Poirot proceeds to identify two of her novels which are essentially the same plot. There is a good-humoured teasing relationship which exists between her and Poirot, which is a joy to read about. I feel there is part of Agatha Christie herself in both of these characters.Cards on the Table was adapted by Leslie Darbon as a stage play in London’s West End in 1981, although without Hercule Poirot! Gordon Jackson played Superintendent Battle and the cast included Derek Waring, Belinda Carroll, Mary Tamm and Patricia Driscoll. Agatha Christie herself had liked to adapt her novels as plays, but never included Poirot as the detective, as she did not feel that any actor would be able to portray him successfully. It is a shame she did not live long enough to see David Suchet’s incarnation, which seems well nigh perfect.David Suchet starred in the entire canon of Poirot stories for ITV, over many years, and the adaptation of Cards on the Table was broadcast in 2006. As usual, David Suchet starred as Hercule Poirot and Zoë Wanamaker as Ariadne Oliver. However, Nick Dear’s adaptation differs from the novel in so many respects, that it is like a completely different story. The method of the murder, and who committed it, are the same, but otherwise it is really only loosely based on the novel. Several motives are different, two of the detectives are replaced, and there are even different deaths. However Cards on the Table has also been adapted for radio by BBC Radio 4, featuring John Moffatt as Hercule Poirot, Donald Sinden as Colonel Johnny Race, and Stephanie Cole as Ariadne Oliver. This adaptation is much more faithful to the plot of the novel.Agatha Christie had warned us in her foreword that the novel has only four suspects and the deduction must be purely psychological. Amusingly, she also said that this was one of the favourite cases of Hercule Poirot, while his friend Captain Hastings found it very dull. She then wonders how her readers will feel.I find myself agreeing with Hercule!

Agatha Christie Book Reading ChallengeBOOK 19 :- JUNE 20204 STARS

Cards on the Table, Poirot #15“Real life’s a bit different,” said [Scotland Yard Superintendent] Battle.“I know,” said [mystery novelist] Mrs. Oliver. “Badly constructed. . . . I could make a better murder any day than anything real. I’m never at a loss for a plot.”Not a household name, Cards on the Table, yet it has things to recommend it. First, it involves a—first time—introduction by “Agatha Christie,” speaking for Hercule Poirot as a “real person,” whose case we will read as one of his favorites. The core of this case is the murder of a mysterious “foreign” (always exoticizing the other, this Christie) snuff box collector, a Mr. Shaitana who organizes a bridge party to exhibit yet another “collection”—of murderers—(four people he knows who have committed murderers and gotten away with it. Shaitana also invites Scotland Yard Superintendent Battle, Colonel Race of the Secret Service, Ariadne Oliver, a famed mystery novelist, and Hercule Poirot, a semi-retired Belgian detective. “It is impossible not to give oneself away—unless one never opens one’s mouth! Speech is the deadliest of revealers”—Poirot The presumption is that between the four of these latter types we will see who is the best sleuth, and though we already know the answer to this one, the four actually work together pretty well. Battle in particular is a more than able participant in the solution to the crime, not a joke like former Poirot sidekick Hastings, and I like this arrangement better. It's less insulting to the Scotland Yard. That the mystery novelist Oliver is also in the hunt is a kind of joke Christie plays on herself in a homey, self-deprecating way. She’s the comic relief in the story, and sort of a star of the show, a really memorable character.Shaitana is killed with a knife during the bridge game, so it is clear one of the invited murderers (wait! was that a good idea, inviting four murders to dinner, or not?) have done him in. Poirot’s primarily psychological analysis (the mind at times can see more clearly than the heart) focuses on bridge moves, the extent to which each suspect recalls items in the room, and the past—did the suspects actually kill someone, and if so, how? People reveal who they are to Poirot, and they rarely surprise him, finally, after he figures them out. Logic rules. You will not figure this one out, but if you want to stay close to a solution, pay attention to what Poirot pays attention to, and largely ignore the rest. The rest isn't boring, but it is a fair number of pages you know are not completely relevant, of course, but necessary detective work. One feature of this one is that a confession takes place roughly fifty pages from the end (250 pages into it), a confession I completely buy, but that is just the beginning of a series of crazy surprises and pretty ingenious reversals. This is a pretty average Christie tale, for the most part, but the way it turns out reveals that “average” for Christie is spectacular for most mystery writers. I might nitpick that it goes on too long as they will often do, but in the end, mais oui! Some interesting features:*Shaitana is referred to as Mephistophelean by several characters, with his flair for the dramatic.*As is often the case characters are racist about Jews, but here “Dagos” are in for their share of abuse. *But white men? Colonel Race dismisses Major Despard of suspicion: “He’s a white man, Battle.” “Incapable of murder, you mean?” “Incapable of what I’d call murder, yes.” [by which he means justifiable homicide isn’t murder, and white men usually have perfectly good reasons for killing people. This is Race's racist view, not necessarily Christie's view.] !!!Writer Oliver, at the (apparent) moment of Poirot’s revelation of the murderer: “Least likely person! It seems to work out in real life just the same as in books. . .” and later, when she sees it is now someone else, she says, quite untruthfully, “I always said he did it!”Fun times, 3.5, rounded up to 4 for the last, 5-starred, fifty pages, for the puzzle-maker non pareil. Funny and head-shakingly clever. And I had never even heard of this one!

I believe that this is Dame Christie 23rd novel.In this book, released in 1936, we have Hercule Poirot, Colonel Race, Superintendent Battle and the crime writer Ariadne Oliver, making her first appearance in a Poirot novel. All four sleuths and four possible suspects were invited for dinner and a game of bridge. The host is found murdered.This is Agatha Christie at her best!The writing and the development of the storyline are superb. The plot is a work of a genius, a fruit of an incredible imagination.Although I have read this book (a Portuguese translated version) before and recently watched the adaptation for the TV (Poirot Series, with David Suchet), I was still completely hooked and I did not want to put it down.What a pleasure I had revisiting this book, but I must confess that talking about the cards game (bridge) was a bit tedious, especially for someone who has never played cards and doesn’t know the rules.

“Least likely person! It seems to work out in real life just the same as in books. . .” - Mrs. Oliver Cards on the TableThe fact that this is a quote in the book absolutely delights me. That it’s played with multiple times after the quote makes it even better. Mr. Shaitana is throwing a party. There will be drinks, bridge and a bit of murder. You see, Shaitana is a collector and one of things he’s collected is murderers. Not just any murderers, but the ones who have gotten away with it; the ones you can’t quite prove are murderers. Upon a chance meeting with Hercule Poirot, he comes with a funny (to him at least) idea. He will invite some guests over, eight people in total and four of them murders. The other four? Hercule Poirot of course, Superintendent Battle if Scotland Yard, Colonel Race of the Secret Service and Mrs. Oliver a writer of mystery novels. Four murderers and four sleuths. It’s a great little joke on his part, until one of them realizes this little game and murders him. With little in terms of clues, the only way to solve this crime, is to solve the crimes of the past and find out which, if any of the guests, really did commit them. This is honestly one of Christie’s cleverer Poirot novels in my opinion. It’s a little slower moving then some of them, with much of the book being built up piece by piece (much like a house of cards), as we slowly piece together the past in order to understand the present. In her (very tongue in cheek) forward to the book, Christie says that this is one of Poirot’s favorite of his own cases, but that his friend Captain Hastings found it a rather dull affair. With this little joke, she actually sets the tone quite well. This is a quiet murder mystery with very little flash about it, but a great deal of analyzing the psychology of our potential murderers. There’s also a good deal of humor in this one, much of it supplied by Mrs. Oliver. This is her first appearance in the series, and it will not be her last. She is a frequently returning character to the Poirot novels (and at least one book outside of the series) and in a rather interesting development, I actually liked her in this one. Mrs. Oliver is the anti-Captain Hastings, in that Hastings was extremely annoying in his first couple of books, but as Christie evolved as a writer, he got more tolerable. In this case Mrs. Oliver started off a rather amusing foil to Poirot, but later would become such an annoyance that I frequently hoped the cases would involve solving her murder.Here though she plays an almost meta character, with whom Christie voices her own frustrations with writing mysteries. She claims not to care about the “facts” involving real investigations, but gets caught up in the details so much that she writes herself into corners and then has to do research to found out which type of beans would be in season so as not to be inconsistent with her books. She has gained popularity writing a foreign detective (who is Finnish rather than Christie’s Belgian sleuth) and she can’t stand him but continues writing his books because he’s popular. Given Christie’s well-known dislike of Poirot this comes off as absolutely hilarious. All around, this one just works for me. The case is clever, the characters are entertaining, and this time around the side bits of comedy actually come off as humorous rather than groan worthy. While it doesn’t stand as one of the greatest of Christie’s books, it is certainly right below them and well worth a read to any mystery fan. A solid 4/5 stars.

The idea is brilliant. The beginning is quite orthodox. Also this is unique novel because all four of Christie's creations- Ariadne Oliver, Col Race, Poirot and Superintendent Battle join hands to solve the murder. There is reference to a book Body in the library which Agatha later used for Miss Marple mystery. The plot is unique and investigation depends more on the psychological profiling than any other solid clue. From the beginning we know that the murderer is from among the four suspects and yet there is no clear clue. Interesting read

I’m so torn on this book. On the one hand, how often can you say that you have four — yes, four! —of Dame Agatha Christie’s sleuths in one book? On the other hand, the task they take on turns out to be a bit thin — at least at first.A cruel globetrotter and art collector named Mr. Shaitana gathers eight people for a party. In hindsight, it turns out that he has invited four sleuths — no less than Hercule Poirot, ditzy mystery writer Ariadne Oliver; Scotland Yard’s finest, Inspector Battle, and spy/troubleshooter for the Empire, Colonel Race. Shaitana has also gathered four people he believed to be people who had gotten away with murder. One of them commits yet another murder, poisoning Shaitana with a shirt stud. (Yes, I had to look it up, too.) That means that Shaitana’s murderer has to be bridge wizard Mrs. Lorimer, successful Dr. Roberts, big-game hunter Major Despard, or pretty sweet young thing Anne Meredith.Dame Agatha had a bee in her bonnet about being able to detect a murderer based on the psychological profiles of the various suspects, and she explores that idea in this 1936 novel. Perhaps, in this day of FBI profilers, other readers will think Dame Agatha was ahead of her time; however, to me, it seems like a faddish idea like eugenics or John Harvey Kellogg’s crackpot health regimen that seem crazy a century later. I was all ready to slap a three-star (maybe even two-star) review on Cards on the Table and rank it second only to The Big Four in awfulness.But — curse you, Dame Agatha! — two-thirds of the way in, she deviates from this crackpottery and delivers enough twists and turns for a rollercoaster. She really knows how to surprise and beguile her readers. So I’ll ignore the tediousness of the middle of this novel and award four stars to the grand dame of the Golden Age, who managed to rescue and elevate this novel.

** spoiler alert ** Genial como siempre.En esta ocasión aparecen 4 de los personajes o detectives de las novelas de A. christie, pero los actores principales son Poirot y Battle.Les invita un excéntrico personaje a cenar y durante una partida de bridge ocurre un asesinato.A la velada también había invitado a 4 supuestos asesinos, cuyos crímenes no habian sido descubiertos. Así pues había 4 detectives, o fuerzas de la ley, vs 4 asesinos en teoría, ¿quien será el asesino?Magistral desarrollo de la historia con las sospechas llendo y viniendo de unos a otros.Cuando parecía el caso ya resuelto la novela da otro giro sorprendente.8/10# 3. Un libro con un corazón, un diamante, un basto (garrote-de la baraja de cartas española) o una espada en la portada. Reto popsugar 2021.