The Mystery of Three Quarters - Sophie Hannah

Rating: ✫✫✫✫✫

Hercule Poirot returns home after an agreeable luncheon to find an angry woman waiting to berate him outside his front door. Her name is Sylvia Rule, and she demands to know why Poirot has accused her of the murder of Barnabas Pandy, a man she has neither heard of nor ever met. She is furious to be so accused, and deeply shocked. Poirot is equally shocked, because he too has never heard of any Barnabas Pandy, and he certainly did not send the letter in question. He cannot convince Sylvia Rule of his innocence, however, and she marches away in a rage.

Shaken, Poirot goes inside, only to find that he has a visitor waiting for him -- a man called John McCrodden who also claims also to have received a letter from Poirot that morning, accusing him of the murder of Barnabas Pandy...

Poirot wonders how many more letters of this sort have been sent in his name. Who sent them, and why? More importantly, who is Barnabas Pandy, is he dead, and, if so, was he murdered? And can Poirot find out the answers without putting more lives in danger?

Blurb taken from Goodreads. 

✼

I initially had reservations when I heard that Sophie Hannah was going to be writing new Poirot stories. I am such a fan of Christie's novels, and I was very aware that, although they could bring the famous detective back to life, they could also be very disappointing, and ruin the image of the character in my mind. When The Monogram Murders was released, I was very pleasantly surprised, and found myself really enjoying the new take on the Belgian detective. Then came Closed Casket, and I loved that even more. It goes without saying that I was incredibly excited for the release of The Mystery of Three Quarters. And it was even better than the others.

Agatha Christie wrote her murder mysteries with a careful balance of drama and sophistication, which is perfectly replicated by Hannah. She has clearly paid careful attention to the small details that make the Belgian detective so recognisable, and this is channelled throughout the book. The plot is also very well thought out - complex yet easy to follow, and a host of characters that carry the story well. Any reservations I had about a new set of Poirot mysteries continue to be relieved, and this book captured the essence of classic Christie beautifully.

✼spoiler alert✼

The Plot

One thing that is always very reminiscent of an Agatha Christie story is the gentle nature of the narration. Sophie Hannah captures this gentle and sleek sophistication of Poirot's world, whilst still adding regular tension and drama to keep the reader's interest. It is incredibly difficult to stay faithful to another author's work whilst still channelling your own voice, and I think the balance was great. It wasn't a copy of one of Christie's novels, but it did remind me of her work regularly, and I enjoyed being able to pick up on the little details Hannah threw in there.

The only part of the book's structure that I wasn't so sure of about was the moment that Edward Catchpool was introduced as the narrator. He starts narrating a few chapters in, which means that the reader has to readjust almost immediately to keep up with what is happening. It felt like the flow of the story was interrupted unnecessarily, because it could easily have been explained away that Catchpool had reconstructed the first few pages of events through information related to him directly by Poirot. This was done slightly later anyway, so I didn't understand why the first few chapters needed to be completely separated from the inspector. This was only a small detail, but it happened so soon that it felt completely unnecessary. I did, however, appreciate that Catchpool was taking on the role of Hastings through this book. The little clues that Poirot drops to Catchpool, and therefore also to the reader, to help him reach conclusions are very familiar to a Christie fan; almost identical to the way the detective would treat his dear friend Captain Hastings. It was a technique lifted from Christie's work, but the introduction of a different narrator kept it fresh and original. I thought this detail was very well utilised.

✼

In terms of the plot as a whole, I thought it was brilliant from the very beginning. The way Poirot discovers that his name has been used on letters to four totally unrelated people, accusing them of murder? That's a great set up for a really intriguing plot. But one thing that really interested me from the very beginning was the way the plot was propelled forward by psychology. Any fan of Hercule Poirot knows that he solves crimes by considering the psychological motives of the characters. This is fundamental to his character, and this was referenced multiple times by Hannah. 

You can tell a lot about a person by their reactions, and the way they respond in pressured situations. I loved that the four characters who had received letters were interviewed with exactly the same set of questions, and that their responses were shown to be vital to Poirot's understanding of the case. He can tell a lot about them by their responses, and this psychology is a theme that is consistent throughout the novel. This is another example of a detail that is included, retaining the integrity of Christie's work, whilst maintaining another, original storyline.

✼

Throughout the rest of the book, the plot continues to be intriguing, with lots of little details and subtle clues scattered throughout. A true murder mystery is packed full of these little additions, so that the reader is left unsure what is crucial to the solving of the case, and what is a little red herring. I love the feeling of getting to the end of crime fiction, and discovering exactly how all of the little pieces come together; there is nothing more satisfying as a reader. This plot was no different, with a whole host of incidents and character exchanges that tease the reader's mind. I knew, for example, that Annabel's dog must be central to the solution, because why else would it be mentioned so frequently, and in so much depth? Yet I couldn't work out why it was so important. 

The ending to this book was also fantastic. I often find the final reveal can be disappointing, either because it's impossible to live up to the tension that has already been created, or because it doesn't come as a surprise. I've read a lot of crime fiction, including most of Christie's work, and I usually find myself so suspicious of every character and every incident throughout the story that the ending is never a total surprise; my imagination covers every possibility. Nonetheless, I did not expect Lenore to be the mastermind behind these events. Looking back, I can't believe I missed it, becaue Lenore's character is generally very cold and calculating; exactly the kind of character who it is feasible would be responsible for the murder. I suppose this is a testament to the book, and to Sophie Hannah. She did such a good job of creating a rounded novel full of different characters that I was too busy looking at everybody else to consider what was right in front of my eyes. 

I also really appreciated the fact that Pandy's death was an accident after all. Logic dictates to the reader initially that his death couldn't have been an accident, because if it was, there wouldn't be a crime to accuse anybody of. Yet this kind of detail is what takes the plot to the next level. Forget what you think you know, and consider every possibility. It was also very logically explained in regards to Lenore's plan, so it wasn't added in unnecessarily just for more interest. The entire plot made sense, and worked really well together. Every little detail was explained and justified, and worked within the confines of the wider story. I loved every moment.

The Characters

"There is a difference, Peter, between an unforgivable act and a person of unforgivable character. What matters is not what people have done but who they are."

You can't create a new Hercule Poirot mystery without capturing the essence of the detective's character. Sophie Hannah really put a lot of emphasis on Poirot's quirks, which I really appreciated. His idiosyncrasies are what makes him so endearing and unique, and I liked that this was kept central to the story. For the most part, Hannah got it spot on, and although it feels slightly forced at  times, I really appreciated that she was so respectful of this well known fictional figure.

"If she had been willing to listen, Poirot might have told her that he would be unlikely to cooperate with any man who considered himslf to be the cleverest man in England for as long as he, Hercule Poirot, resided in London."

Classic Herc.

✼

It is so easy, when creating such a complex story, to have too many characters. Crime fiction needs to be complex, and riveting, and have a vast range of different personalities. This is a careful balancing act, and I've read many novels where it hasn't worked.

This, on the other hand, did it perfectly. There are lots of different people to follow, and if you aren't paying attention, it can be problematic. Yet if you are following closely, as I was (obviously), it's not difficult at all. Each character was relevant and added to the story. It's such a shame when characters are added in just to bulk out a disappointing story, but there was reasoning behind the introduction of every individual in this book, and that really elevates the story as a whole. They also played a part in the final reveal, either because they were central to the mystery, or because their presence served a purpose. It's clear when reading this that Hannah really considered every detail, and I felt the whole cast of characters complemented each other and created the right amount of dynamic intrigue.

The Verdict

I am such a tough critic when it comes to Hercule Poirot, and to Agatha Christie, purely because I'm such a fan of her work. I know this character very well, and therefore I notice immediately if something doesn't sit right. However, it also means that I can appreciate the tiny details that emphasise Christie's stories. The use of psychology throughout, the addition of Catchpool to replace the usual Hastings; each little nod demonstrates that the famous detective is in good hands with Sophie Hannah. She keeps the sophistication and easiness that Christie always channelled in her books, and yet adds that tension and complexity, using her own voice to elevate this original plot to another level.

I loved every moment of this book; the initial idea, the classic style, the intriguing characters. All these elements came together to produce a novel that was challenging, surprising, and ultimately very enjoyable.

Classic Agatha Christie, with Sophie Hannah's voice. A sheer pleasure to read.