Taken at the Flood

I enjoyed everything about the story progression, except for the last chapter. It would have great if chapter 16 had been the true ending

Fascinating–not least because of all the other reviews, haha.

I personally enjoy it when Christie does a mystery from multiple POVs (as opposed to just following Poirot). It was interesting following the Cloade family, and honestly, the narrative felt more like a meditation on British society right after WW2; there are a lot of angles on how times have changed, etc.

The mystery itself was intricate. I was able to catch a few of the key clues, but I didn't put it all together until Poirot talked it out at the end.

Speaking of, the end is, indeed, strange. Even a few chapters before the end, I thought Poirot was being just annoyingly vague (which actually is not a frustration I usually have with him!). But then the epilogue is surprising, as others noted. It definitely doesn't read well today. I can almost-sort of imagine why Christie did it, in the context of a post-war novel about safety . . . But also I wonder if she was just shoe-horning in the “romantic” ending? XD

Either way, the puzzle is still a worthy one!

I have been reading through all of Christie's books chronologically and unfortunately found this one to be a dud. The mystery is fairly good and unexpected, but it's hard to like when the masochistic ingenue, Lynn Marchmont, keeps making horrible remarks.

There is only one other of Christie's novels that I've come across with a character as bad as her—Anne Beddingfield in The Man With the Brown Suit. Both only fall for the kind of men that hit them and are abrasive and cruel. This is probably why Christie was (and is) accused of being sexist...

Here is some damning evidence:

“‘Well, there have been dreadful things in the papers lately. All these discharged soldiers—they attack girls.'

‘I expect the girls ask for it.'

She smiled. ” (Ch 14)

And let's not leave out the happy ending...

“I fell for David because he was dangerous and attractive—and, to be honest, because he knows women much too well. But none of that was real. When you caught hold of me by the throat and said if I wasn't for you, no one should have me—well—I knew then that I was your woman!” (Ch 17)

I have sometimes made concessions for Christie when a character says something unbelievably racist or for words that are no longer politically correct because of the era in which she wrote. Even in this book she refers to Irish eyes as “smeared on with a smutty finger” on multiple occasions. None of that is okay, but I understand it in the context of the time and culture in which it was written. I find it hard to believe that abuse towards women was encouraged as attractive even then.