HWACHONGINSTITUTION(HIGHSCHOOLSECTION)

HUMANITIESRESEARCHPAPER2014
________________________________________________________________

Topic:AnalyzingtheEvolvingRelationshipbetweenAgathaChristieandHerculePoirot
Slant:Literature
TotalWordCount(excludingappendixes,footnotes&references):5508

Students(official)Name:ShaunLeeYiXian
Class:4H1
NameofTeacherMentor:MrsJennyWong
Declaration
Ideclarethatthisassignmentismyownworkanddoesnotinvolveplagiarismorcollusion.Thesources
ofotherpeoplesworkhavebeenappropriatelyreferenced,failingwhichIamwillingtoacceptthe
necessarydisciplinaryaction(s)tobetakenagainstme.
StudentsSignature:
DateofSubmission:

Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1
General Background
1.2
Rationale
1.3
Research Questions
1.4
Thesis Statement
1.5
Methodology
1.6
Scope of Research
1.7
Significance of Research
1.8
Limitations

04
05
05
05
05
06
06
06

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1
Agatha Christie

08

2.2

09

2.3
2.3

Agatha Christie and Hercule Poirot

New Historicism

11
13

Author-Character Relationships

Chapter 3: Discussion
3.1
3.2

Ego
Dandification

16
20

3.3

Romanticization

22

Chapter 4: Conclusion
4.1 Conclusion

25

Bibliography

26

Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background/Framework
Agatha Christie is the best-selling author in history and a renowned and established name
in the genre of mystery fiction. A large part of her body of work was the Hercule Poirot
series, featuring Hercule Poirot as the main detective.
It is undeniable that Poirot is characterized in a way that clearly shows that Poirot is a
very unique individual. This can be seen from the way he carries himself. Poirot holds
himself to extreme standards of neatness, especially in the way he dresses. Indeed, his
close friend and aide in several novels, Captain Hastings, comments that a speck of dust
would have caused [Poirot] more pain than a bullet wound (The Mysterious Affair at
Styles, p. 19) and refers to him as a great dandy (Styles, p. 8). He combines this
dandified nature with an ego which becomes a key characteristic of the series, like when
he proclaims in Mrs McGintys Dead , in reference to the polices difficulties in solving a
particularly complex case, that it should be different for me...I am Hercule Poirot.
It is this unique caricature of Poirot, however, that eventually strained Agatha Christies
perception of him. Even though Poirot was the creation of Christie, she eventually grew
to detest her main character, calling him a detestable, bombastic, tiresome, ego-centric
little creep (James, 2006). Indeed, Christie went to the extent of introducing a Mrs.
Ariadne Oliver, a detective fiction writer, in Mrs McGintys Dead, and speaking through
this character her own dim view of Poirot when Mrs Oliver remarks, I must have been
mad! Why pick a Finn when I know nothing about Finland?
1.2 Rationale
3

This paper aims to examine the reasons why Poirot was characterized in the eccentric and
special way he was, taking into account the historical context of the time and Agatha
Christies feminist views. This paper will further examine the reasons for Agatha
Christies eventual disdain for the character. In doing so, I aim to allow the reader a better
understanding of the complex relationship between authors and their characters.
1.3 Research Questions
1.

Why did Christie portray Hercule Poirot as a dandified and eccentric individual?

2.

How far did the historical context of Britain in the 1930s affect the
characterization of Poirot?

3.

Why did Christie eventually dislike Poirot?

4.

How far did Christies personal beliefs as a feminist affect her eventual
perception of Poirot?

1.4 Thesis
Agatha Christies characterization of Poirot was predominantly affected by
the British perceptions of Europeans and war refugees at the time and her own views as a
feminist eventually affected her treatment of her main character, Hercule Poirot.
1.5 Methodology
I intend to examine the the characterization of Poirot through the lens of New
Historicism, analyzing the sociohistorical context of Britain in the 1930s through journal
articles written about the time and linking this to the way Poirot is characterized. I will
further analyze the relationship between Christie and Poirot by looking at the role and

purpose that Poirot plays within the series, and also by looking at feminist literary theory
from the point of view of the author and the characterization of Poirot as a dandified and
effeminate character. I will draw on four of Agatha Christies books, as mentioned in 1.6,
for textual evidence to support my analysis.
1.6 Scope
I will examine four books: The Mysterious Affair at Styles (1921), which is the first book
in the Hercule Poirot Series, where an extensive characterisation of Hercule Poirot takes
place; Murder on the Orient Express (1934) and Death on the Nile (1937) which is
generally recognized as a golden age in detective fiction (Collins, 2004) and the period
when Christie wrote some of her best works; and Mrs McGintys Dead (1952) where
Christie introduces Mrs Ariadne Oliver who acts as her alter ego where her own personal
voice could be heard criticising her own main character Hercule Poirot.
1.7 Limitations
A possible limitation of this research has to do with the nature of the project. The aim of
understanding the authors personal attitude towards her own main character through the
analysis of her thought process and opinions would mean this project could be rather
speculative, and may not accurately discuss her evolving views of Poirot.
1.8 Delimitations
In order to prevent the discussion from becoming too speculative, I intend to ground my
research on examining how her motivations and perceptions of Poirot are reflected in her
written work. For example, the xenophobia of Britain in the 1930s , which Christie

arguably subscribed to, is reflected in Mrs McGintys Dead when Poirot references a
character calling him only a damned foreigner (p. 191). This provides an insight into
the kind of world that Christie was trying to portray in her writing. It is through such
analysis of her works that I will evidence the claims that I make about Christies
perceptions of Poirot throughout the series.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Agatha Christie
Agatha Christie was one of the greatest writers of the 20th century, and still holds the title
of being the worlds best-selling author. Her work and her personal beliefs that are
manifested in her work have been subject to intense analysis and criticism by many
literary critics since.
Christie has often been labelled as a racist for her characterizations of non-white
or British characters in her books, such as Lord Edgeware Dies where Jews are portrayed
as figures of comedy and contempt (Odone, 2011) . McArdle (2013) furthers this by
referencing her offensive portrayal of characters from Jamaica and Africa, among other
countries, in Hickory Dickory Dock, and critiques Christies imperialist
worldview; any character not British or European is often relegated to being a mere
human backdrop, especially in her novels that are set outside Britain. This view is
indeed supported by textual analysis of the books selected for this research, with Poirot
being referred to as part of a pack of foreigners whose views on British customs were
unimportant (Orient, p. 149), among others. Christies negative portrayal of minorities
also can be seen from the accusation that her work is homophobic (McArdle, 2013), with
the homosexual main character in Murder is Easy being portrayed as an effeminate and
gay Satanist, while the rest of her body of work, including the texts selected for this
research, makes little to no mention of homosexuality.

At the same time, however, Christie is also lauded in many circles as a feminist, which
may seem surprising given her apparent disdain for other disenfranchised groups like
racial minorities. Gillian Gills, the author of Agatha Christie: The Woman and her
Mysteries, recognizes her for conveying the message that women are extremely smart
and very energetic, which she argues is brought about by Christies equal focus on men
and women in her oeuvre Christie has two important sleuthsone female and one
male, and men [are] as likely to be victims as women, and just as likely to be murderers
as women (Mehren, 1990). At the same time, however, Bargainnier (1980) criticises
Christies Tommy and Tuppence as being sexist, as Tuppences only skills are her pluck
and her intuition. It is clear that Christie was a person of many contradictions, with
many differing beliefs about the key social issues of the time, and arguably her complex
character deeply affected her writing.
2.2 Agatha Christie and Hercule Poirot
Christies strained relationship with her main character, Poirot, has been welldocumented and briefly highlighted earlier in this paper. McArdle (2013) suggests two
main reasons for Poirots characterization. First, she quotes Christies grandson Matthew
Prichard as saying that the primary motivation for Christies uniquely
peculiar characterization of Poirot was a fit of patriotic fervor upon seeing a busload of
Belgian refugees, including a small, dapper man with an egg-shaped head. If taken to
be true, this justifies the specific characterization of the physical characteristics of Poirot,
although this does not explain the eccentric personality of Poirot that really makes the
character come to life.

McArdle further attributes the characterisation of Poirot to Christie being influenced by

the legendary Sherlock Holmes. She suggests that the similarities between Holmes and
Poirot, like their vanity in the exceedingly high view they hold of their own intellect may
have formed the basis of Poirots character, even as she acknowledges distinct differences
between Holmes and Poirot, like the contrast between Holmess focus on forensic clues
like dirt on a guests shoe and Poirots analysis of peoples personalities and actions in
their investigations.
While I agree that Christie was undoubtedly influenced by the character of Holmes, I feel
that Poirot differs from Holmes in many ways, such as Poirots focus on
fastidiousness contrasts with Holmes being one of the most untidy men that ever drove a
fellow-lodger to distraction (The Musgrave Ritual, p.1). Hence, even if it was true that
Christies inspiration for Poirot was based on her society and the famous predecessors in
her genre, much of Poirots character of Poirot was still her creation.
Why then did Christie grow to dislike Poirot? Prichard suggests that this is largely
because Poirot restricted Christies style (Joint, 2010); that because of the unique nature
of Poirot, Christie got restricted by having to remain faithful to her own creation of Poirot
and was unable to fully express her evolving ideas and beliefs in her books. The fame and
popularity of Poirot also meant that publishers rather Christie churn out more novels
about Poirot than to experiment with what she had wanted to write differently, causing
her resentment towards Poirot.
While we cannot conclusively determine what about Poirot that had caused Christies
disdain, what is undeniable about Prichards claim is that Poirot certainly constrained

Christies work due to his popularity. Poirot, whom Christie termed her bread and
butter, is a very special character who behaves in an eccentric fashion, and in order to
stay true to Poirot, Christie had to continually write in a certain manner to satisfy her fan
base. Hence, it is conceivable that the pressure to extend the life of Poirot would have
incited Christies hatred. However, this does not seem to be the root cause as to why
Christie disliked Poirot, and is at best a reason that compounded Christies hatred for
Poirot.
2.3 New Historicism
New historicism is a theory that became increasingly prominent in the 1980s through the
use of the term by Harvard professor Stephen Greenblatt (Hart, 1991), suggesting the
mutual permeability of the literary and the historical (Greenblatt, 2005). What
Greenblatt refers to is the idea of how literature is inherently affected by the sociohistorical context of the time. For example, political subversion in Shakespeares works is
said to reflect political subversion present in society at the time (Petkovic, 2004).
Proponents of New Historicism generally recognize it as having a unique ability to set
texts in their historical setting. Liu (1989) claims that new historicism opens the door
between text and context in a spirit of seeming equivalence such thatthe context is the
text and vice versa. This suggests that the significance of New Historicism is its ability
to recognize the importance of the historical context of the text in analysing the text itself,
instead of analysing the text in a vacuum, hence leading to a better understanding of why
texts are written in a certain manner.

10

New Historicism is however a highly controversial theory. Critics of New Historicism,

like Harold Bloom and Camille Paglia, assert that New Historicism makes literature a
footnote to history (Greenblatt) that by prioritizing the analysis of the historical
context in understanding works of literature, we de-emphasize the importance of the text
itself, and that this hurts the study of literature.
On the whole, however, I believe that New Historicism is still a viable means to analyse
the relationship between Poirot and Christie. This is because I believe that literature and
history cannot be seen as mutually exclusive. Christie would obviously have been
affected by the society around her during the period when she was writing, in the way
that our views are affected by media discourse of major issues today. Given that Christie
was a writer whose views clearly manifested themselves in her writing, understanding the
society Christie lived in is vital to understanding Christies oeuvre.
This is especially significant given that the character of Hercule Poirot seems to have
been rather instinctively conceived. This can be seen from various inaccuracies within
Christies body of work, such as the fact that Poirot would have been over 120 by the
time he finally dies in Curtain. Indeed, Christie admitted as much in her autobiography
that she had made a terrible mistakein starting with Poirot so old (Christie, 1977).
This, combined with her inability to remember specifics about Poirot like the origins of
his name, suggests that Poirot was a character who was created instinctively, rather than
having been carefully researched or planned. Hence, this suggests that Poirot was very
much influenced by Christies own experiences and perceptions of other people in her
society; formed beliefs which eventually engendered her famous Hercule Poirot.

11

New Historicism is also significant in analysing Christies work because of the large
extent to which the socio-cultural mileu of the early 20th century permeates Christies
writing. Christie is often seen to include many character archetypes of the time into her
writing; from Colonel Arbuthnot in Murder on the Orient Express, being referred by
Poirot as that pukka sahib (Orient, p. 275), and who indeed embodies many of the
stereotypes of the British pukka sahib in his crisp, official manner and gentlemanly
chivalry, to the wealthy and aristocratic Linnet Doyle in Death on the Nile, representative
of the rags to riches stories of the pictures (Nile, p.10), and the Victorian ladylike
manners of Miss Marple in the Miss Marple detective series. All these reflect and
highlight the significant role that the society Christie lived in had played in shaping her
work.
2.4 Author-Character relationships
The relationship between authors and their characters is a very interesting one. Even
though characters are inherently creations of their authors, the extent to which authors
find it possible to exercise authorial control over their characters has been a subject of
much debate within literary circles (Ismail, 2014).
Numerous writers have argued that authors do not always have complete control over
their characters. Oatley (2011) suggests that within the writers work, characters often
seem to naturally act in ways that befit the situations that the characters are in, without
the need for writers to pull the strings. What Oatley means is that as authors create
characters with their own traits, beliefs and actions, characters become independent
individuals within the book, and the authors attempt to control the actions of characters

12

would make the characters and their plots appear unnatural. Dionne (2014) similarly
argues that authors often find their characters speaking to them, and that channelling
this independence of characters allow authors to write a more natural plot.
Yet it is evident that giving up authorial control over the character does not favour every
author, especially given Christies notable frustration over the characteristics of Hercule
Poirot which she felt compelled to maintain. Forster (1927) posits that allowing
characters free rein to run away and effectively develop their own character arc risks
[kicking] the book to pieces. This, presumably, is the dilemma that writers face: the
inability to allow their characters to develop organically in order to maintain the integrity
of the plot, and yet the compulsion to do so in order to maintain the integrity of the
character. Due to the extraordinarily eccentric and sui generis nature of Poirot, Christie
felt coerced to continue writing in a manner which reflects the one of its kind Poirot
which she had created in Styles in order to cater to the readers who had grown to love
Poirot, even as she grew to dislike the nature of the character she had created. This lack
of authorial control, as she was forced to continually write about a character whom she no
longer cared for and indeed detested, and to tolerate his frustrating idiosyncrasies, seems
to have compounded the resentment Christie felt towards her main character.
However, the notion of having to write characters in a certain manner cannot in and of
itself be taken as a sufficient reason for Christies resentment towards Poirot. Throughout
her career, Christie also wrote another series with Miss Jane Marple, an elderly Victorian
lady sleuth , as the main character. Despite Christie faithfully sticking by her
characterization of Marple as a prim and proper Victorian village insider through twelve
novels, Christie never seemed to grow tired of Marple in the way that she did of Poirot,
13

commenting that Miss Marple was her favourite character in the book with reference to
the Miss Marple series and likening her to her own beloved grandmother (Bargainnier,
1980). The effect of this is that it shows Christies relationship with Poirot did not sour
simply because of the cramping nature of having to stick by a singular characterization of
a character, but rather the specific traits of Poirot, which Christie herself had created but
which she grew to resent.

14

Chapter 3: Discussion
In analysing the conception of Poirot, and his relationship with Agatha Christie, I will
focus on four significant traits of Poirot: his ego, his dandified nature, his overtly
expressive manner and his sentimental nature.
3.1. Poirots Ego
Poirot is undeniably extremely egoistic. His ego is exhibited repeatedly throughout the
series; from the gravitas with which he announces, I am Hercule Poirot, expecting
recognition and then expressing his frustration at not being recognized, as seen in Murder
on the Orient Express when he bemoans that being mistaken for a womans dressmaker is
incredible! (Orient, p.61), revealing his assumption that his fame is significant enough
for him to be a household name. And in The Mysterious Affair at Styles, Poirot tells
Hastings that he would not reveal all the information he has to him because he feels
Hastings has no instincts (Styles, p.123), his usual reluctance and refusal to reveal
information to his colleagues in the belief that their comparative lack of ability would
compromise his investigation.
A possible reason for Poirots ego is its reflection of British anti-Belgian sentiment during
the First World War. With the onset of World War One, numerous Belgian refugees fled
Belgium to the United Kingdom to escape the advancing German army, and were housed
in villages throughout the UK. The British were initially tolerant of the influx of Belgian
refugees, even embracing them as an embodiment of the reason they were fighting the
war (Winterman, 2014). However, that relationship between the Belgian refugees and the
British soon soured due to the perceived ingratitude and self-entitlement of the Belgian
15

refugees towards the hospitality of the British(Gatrell,2012). The better living conditions
that Belgian refugees enjoyed in Britain, including access to running water and electricity
during widespread rationing throughout Britain, caused resentment towards the Belgian
refugees (Winterman, 2014).
The egotistical nature of Hercule Poirot hence fits the description of the overriding and
common perceptions that the British held towards the Belgians. Poirots ego is reflective
of a belief that he is entitled to enjoy the privileges of British life and the blind loyalty of
his sidekick Hastings, especially in The Mysterious Affair at Styles where he angers
Hastings to the point that Hastings swears to keep any important discoveries he makes to
himself, for it is [his] duty to assert himself (Styles, p.123). This not only appears to be
a microcosm of sorts of British attitudes towards Belgian refugees at the time, but further
shows how Christies work reflects popular opinions, given the aforementioned character
archetypes employed by Christie in her works.
It is also true, however, that Christie was following in the footsteps of literary precedence
set by the great Arthur Conan Doyle in his creation of Sherlock Holmes. Holmes is
similarly seen to be egoistic. Watson remarks with annoyance in The Sign of Four that
Holmes appears to view his pamphlet as being entirely devoted to his special doings
(Four, p. 4). In recognizing the ego of other famous detectives, who, as Christie herself
admitted, significantly influenced her writing (Christie, 1977), it is plausible that the
egotistical nature of Poirot was no more than a determined attempt by Christie to follow a
tried-and-tested formula in creating a popular and likeable main character.

16

Ultimately, however, I believe that Christie was far more significantly influenced by the
society around her. This is because even as Christie was influenced by the Sherlock
Holmes series, she consciously aimed to differentiate her writing from Doyles. From the
expressive and dandified nature of Poirot to the vastly different means of solving crime
Sherlock Holmes being far more preoccupied with forensic science than Poirot, who
vastly preferred to use his little grey cells Christie largely jettisoned the Dr Watsonlike character, Hastings, after just two novels. Christie must therefore have looked to
other significant influences, like her society, for inspiration in creating the different traits
and characteristics of her detective.
Poirots ego, however, was a key reason for Christie turning against him; indeed, it is the
trait that she specifically mentioned in her famously quoted criticism of Poirot as a
detestable, bombastic, tiresome, ego-centric little creep.
This could be because Christies personality was extremely different from the egoistic
Poirot. Unlike Poirot, who seeks and expects publicity, Christie was extremely reclusive,
almost never granting interviews or photo opportunities to the press, especially when she
became increasingly famous (Thompson, 2009). The significant contrast between Poirot
and Christie is especially obvious given Christies affection for Miss Marple, who, as a
quiet and unobtrusive elderly lady, acts almost as a foil to Poirots egotistical nature. This
suggests the extent to which Poirots egotistical nature could have been a reason for
Christies resentment towards Poirot.
Christies hatred of Poirots ego is subtly reflected throughout her works. An example of
this is the reaction of other characters to Poirots self-praise and criticism of others.

17

In The Mysterious Affair at Styles, Hastings is exceedingly tolerant of Poirot, and is easily
mollified by him even when offended (Styles, p. 186). This however is extremely
different in Mrs McGintys Dead, where the word wrath is repeatedly used to describe
Superintendent Spences reaction to Poirot when Poirot withholds information from
Spence and mocks Spence for not already being privy to this information (McGinty,
p.300). Similarly, in Death on the Nile, Colonel Race responds to Poirot by declaring that
he is full of conceit and [shifting] a little in his chair (Nile, p.385), to show his
disapproval and discomfort at Poirots egoism. Given that Spence, Race and Hastings
play very similar roles in the two novels to act as a colleague through which, via
conversation with Poirot, the reader is informed of some of the clues or missing links in
Poirots investigation the different extents to which the characters in the different books
tolerate Poirot is reflective of the extent to which Christie tolerates Poirots ego is
significantly waning, a frustration which she expresses through her secondary characters.
Spence and Race are especially significant as as representatives of the British
government, they are portrayed as unambiguously good characters, unlike most other
characters in Christies writing who are often rather morally arbitrary; Mary Cavendish in
The Mysterious Affair at Styles and Mrs Upward in Mrs McGintys Dead, for example,
both withhold information from Poirot and therefore, despite not being the murderer,
cannot be said to be entirely good. The effect of this is that it reflects the way morally
unambiguous characters like Spence and Race are symbolic of British establishments that
Christie was proud to upkeep, and also act as a form of authorial voice as to a certain
personality and manner which Christie was especially supportive of. Their discomfort at
Poirots egotistical nature implies a disjunct between Poirot and the characters that, to

18

Christie, appear to symbolize the bastion of officialdom, and by extension a disjunct

between Poirots behaviour and Christies personal beliefs. This suggests that Poirots ego
was a key reason for Christie turning against Poirot.
3.2 Dandification
Poirots dandified nature is one of the first impressions we form of him in the series, from
Hastingss recollection of meeting Poirot in Belgium and describing him as a great
dandy (Styles, p.8) even before we meet Poirot himself. This suggests that, as a trait
specifically mentioned by Hastings, Poirots characterization as a dandy is extremely
significant to Christies perception of him.
A possible reason for this could lie in the characterization of Poirot and his position in
society. This recognizes the origins and associations that are made to the idea of a dandy
Kusisch and Taylor (2012) present the dandy as historically having originated as an
emblem of an aristocratic class vilified by the middle and lower classes, while Crowell
(2007) similarly suggests that the dandy is an aristocratic figure representing a form of
perceived cultural supremacy above the lower social classes.
This is reflective of Poirot as he enters England and his social status over the course of
his career. Poirot enters England as a refugee, living on the charity of Mrs Inglethorp in
Styles. Yet he carries himself with great dignity (Styles, p. 19) in spite of his refugee
status, and grows to be revered by many powerful people to the point that even highprofile individuals outside the criminal justice system, like M. Bouc in Murder on the
Orient Express, are sufficiently well-acquainted with him to promise him seats on the
Orient Express and trust him to take charge of investigating the murder of Cassetti. This
19

suggests that Poirots fame has made him not only a celebrity, but a celebrity well
respected by the upper social classes, almost considered to be a part of these higher
classes. In this way, the dandification of Poirot serves as a means of establishing his
social status.
Christies attitude to fame, however, was significantly different from Poirots. Far from
aiming to capitalize on her fame to move into a far more recognized aristocratic class,
Christie was happy to live almost as a recluse, being perfectly willing to divorce up-andcoming businessman Archie Christie and marry below her social class to archaeologist
Max Mallowan. This stands in stark contrast to Poirots carrying himself in an overtly
dignified manner to stand himself in higher social company. These differences between
Poirot and Christie may hence have manifested themselves in Christie growing resentful
at having to continually write a character who she was not only completely unable to
identify with, but whose lifestyle she disapproved of.
Another interesting reason for Christies resentment of Poirot lies in the clash between
the caricature of a dandy and Christies beliefs as a feminist. Christie has always been
regarded in literary circles as a feminist, as explained in the literature review. This would
come into conflict with Poirots dandified nature if we accept the way the dandy has been
characterized; variously as being tied to womens need for sexual fulfilment (Lusty,
2007) to being the exact opposite of a woman (Baudelaire, 1863). Neither of these views
would square with that of a feminist like Christie; the first seems to reduce women to
nothing more than sex objects, while the second enforces the gender binary and suggests
that the aristocratic nature of the dandy is at odds with what the natural woman should

20

be like. Hence on both counts, the caricature of the dandy stands at odds with Christies
personal beliefs.
Christies frustration with Poirots dandified mannerisms was notably featured in Mrs
McGintys Dead. Mrs McGintys Dead was one of the first of Christies books to
significantly feature the writer Mrs Ariadne Oliver, who has since been interpreted by
numerous literary critics to be a mouthpiece for Christies thoughts about her writing.
Oliver interestingly is featured complaining about her main character, Sven Hjerson,
chief among which are her frustrations with his idiotic mannerisms (McGinty, p.201).
This is significant as it most clearly portrays Christies frustration at the mannerisms of
the character she invented to the point that she complains, through Oliver, that if I ever
met thatFinn in real life, Id do a better murder than any Ive ever invented. This
reflects the way Christies perceptions of the mannerisms of Poirot led her to resent him.
3.3 Romantic
Poirots romantic nature is also a key factor in humanizing Poirot in the series. His
romantic nature is expressed both through his idealized view of crime solving and his
eccentric views on love and his involvement in ensuring the love and happiness of the
people he interacts with.
On two separate occasions within the works chosen for study, Poirot chooses to
circumvent judicial authority in order to do what he thinks is right or what he thinks is
best for the parties involved. In Murder on the Orient Express, Poirot chooses to
deliberately present a logically flawed solution in order to protect the guilty parties,
because he believes in the moral justification for their actions; and in Death on the Nile,
21

Poirot allows Jacqueline to kill herself and Simon rather than be subject to the legal
system, because of his sympathy for Jacqueline.
Poirot further shows his willingness to tamper with, or abuse, the justice system to
achieve the romantic goals that he views as being best for the characters. Notably, in The
Mysterious Affair at Styles, Poirot allows John Cavendish to be arrested and put on trial
in order to reinforce his marriage with Mary Cavendish, and claims credit for arranging
for Lawrence and Cynthia to get together. Similarly, in Mrs McGintys Dead, Poirot
claims credit for having arranged for the coupling of Deirdre Henderson and James
Bentley, even as he works on the murder of Mrs McGinty. This squares with Poirots
views on extrajudicial morality; beyond what is morally right and wrong, Poirot has a
certain eccentricity about how he carries out his work, making his work appear
romanticized.
This draws inevitable comparisons to the Sherlock Holmes series. Sherlocks romantic
views of crime are sensationally featured in The Adventure of Charles Augustus
Milverton, where Holmes refuses to assist the police in the murder of blackmailer Charles
Augustus Milverton despite already knowing the identity of the murderess, similarly
because of his belief that the crime was justifiable.
A possible reason for both Doyle and Christie working their trait into their detectives is
because this significantly humanizes the character. Christie clearly was not satisfied with
writing normal police detective novels, given the effort she put in to creating a character
separate from the police force. This is significant because it increases the relatability of

22

Poirot for readers to read about him as an independent member of the public rather than
as a member of the establishment.
Poirots romanticism and extrajudicial morality hence empower him as a character.
Rather than being on the side of justice, Poirot is on the side of the truth (Overdose of
Death, p.156). He is hence not solving crimes for the sake of vengeance, or as a
contractual obligation to the force, but rather out of an innate desire to establish truth. For
all of Poirots faults, this makes Poirot far more likeable as someone who readers can
identify with, both with his character and with his personal beliefs. Empowering Poirot
with his extrajudicial morality is hence important to establishing him as a character
independent of the establishment, with the agency that allows him to make decisions that
form his eccentric and intriguing character.
Indeed, the extent to which Poirots romanticism would have driven Christie away from
Poirot is questionable. Christies oeuvre, after all, contained a surprisingly significant
proportion of romantic works, such as her series of romance novels written under the
pseudonym of Mary Westmacott or the short story The Arcadian Deer where Poirot aids a
jilted lover to locate a foreign girl he is infatuated with. Both these counts show the way
romance appealed to Christie. In this way, the romantic nature of Poirot, while eccentric,
may have appealed to Christie and mitigated the extent to which she disliked Poirot.
Unlike traits like Poirots ego and dandified nature, both of which are handled far more
reluctantly in Christies later works, as seen from the way they either become less
prominent or are written within the context of almost open contempt from other
characters, Christie never seems to tire of writing about the romantic side of Poirot, with
this being a consistent aside in the stories all the way through to later works such as Mrs
23

McGintys Dead and Death on the Nile. This reflects the multi-faceted nature of Christies
relationship with Poirot; even as Christie claimed to hate him, there were undeniable
traits and aspects of Poirot that must have resounded with Christie and motivated her to
continue writing about him.
Chapter 4: Conclusion
The relationship between Poirot and Christie is undeniably multi-faceted, with Christie
being driven to create a character at odds with her views on fame and feminism in order
to pander to the need for Poirot to be special and yet relatable. However, it was this clash
in personalities that ultimately caused Christie to grow to resent Poirot.

24

References
Bargainnier, E.F. (1980). The Gentle Art of Murder. Bowling Green University Popular
Press.
Baudelaire, C. (1863). The Painter of Modern Life. Phaidon Press. Retrieved 17 August
2015, from
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/architecture/ockman/pdfs/dossier_4/Baudelaire.pdf
Christie. A. (1921). The Mysterious Affair at Styles. Harper.
Christie, A. (1934). Murder on the Orient Express. Harper.
Christie, A. (1937). Death On The Nile. Harper.
Christie, A. (1952). Mrs McGintys Dead. Harper.
Christie, A. (1977). An Autobiography. Collins.
Dionne, K. (2014). When Characters Talk, Writers Listen. The Huffington Post. Retrieved
23 June 2015, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karen-dionne/whencharacters-talk-writ_b_4993933.html
Doyle, A.C. (1890). The Sign of the Four. Lippincotts Monthly Magazine. Retrieved 26
June 2015, from https://sherlock-holm.es/stories/pdf/a4/1-sided/sign.pdf
Doyle, A.C. (1893). The Adventure of the Musgrave Ritual. The Strand Magazine.
Retrieved 23 June 2015, from https://sherlock-holm.es/stories/pdf/a4/1sided/musg.pdf

25

Doyle, A.C. (1904). The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton. The Strand
Magazine. Retrieved 25 June 2015, from https://sherlockholm.es/stories/pdf/a4/1-sided/chas.pdf
Forster, E.M. (1927). Aspects of the Novel. RosettaBooks LLC, New York. Retrieved 23
June 2015, from
https://d3jc3ahdjad7x7.cloudfront.net/bHl9Pl0voWl8xuaUQDove2grx7KZGHFgt
EWH2OB905qdfhjQ.pdf
Gatrell, P. (2012). Europe on the Move: refugees and World War One. British Library.
Retrieved 31 March 2015, from http://www.bl.uk/world-warone/articles/refugees-europe-on-the-move
Greenblatt, Stephen (2005). The Greenblatt Reader. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell
James, P.D. (2006). The Strange Case of Hercule Poirot. The Telegraph. Retrieved April
3, 2015, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/3654904/The-strange-case-ofHercule-Poirot.html
Kucich, J. & Taylor, B.J. (2012). The Oxford History of the Novel in English: Volume 3:
The Nineteenth Century Novel 1820-1880. OUP Oxford. Retrieved August 14,
2015, from https://books.google.com.sg/books?
id=gTxdAQjEmt4C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=The+Oxford+History+of+the+Nov
el+in+English:+Volume+3&source=bl&ots=5kNKW-e9BU&sig=d2pj_TEPXgNWjc4SGaU1UcmNEU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDEQ6AEwBGoVChMI8J
Pxie2mxwIVzAqOCh2yJwGs#v=onepage&q=The%20Oxford%20History%20of
%20the%20Novel%20in%20English%3A%20Volume%203&f=false
26

Lusty, N. (2007). Surrealism, Feminism, Psychoanalysis. Ashgate Publishing. Retrieved

August 16, 2015, from https://books.google.com.sg/books?
id=6iJktLE48L0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
McArdle, M. (2013). A Time-Lapse Detective; 25 Years of Agatha Christies Poirot. Los
Angeles Review of Books. Retrieved May 15, 2015, from
http://lareviewofbooks.org/essay/a-time-lapse-detective-25-years-of-agathachristies-poirot
Oatley, K. (2011). Such Stuff as Dreams; The Psychology of Fiction. Wiley. Retrieved 5
April 2015, from https://books.google.com.sg/books?id=DcnxgVfQ5QC&pg=PT84&lpg=PT84&dq=characters+behaving+in+ways+the+writers+h
ad+not+expected.&source=bl&ots=b4OZov0e8L&sig=WTui00kQi4lwFLNdyem
qe6KxNcU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QcIfVaT0NZGHuASw3oDQDQ&ved=0CBwQ6
AEwAA#v=onepage&q=characters%20behaving%20in%20ways%20the
%20writers%20had%20not%20expected.&f=false
Odone, C. (2011). In terms of literary racism, Agatha Christie is truly the Queen of
Crime. The Telegraph. Retrieved May 15, 2015, from
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/cristinaodone/100070883/in-terms-of-literaryracism-agatha-christie-is-truly-the-queen-of-crime/
Petkovic, P. (2004). Shakespeare, Culture, New Historicism. Faculty of Philosophy, Nic,
Serbia. Retrieved 9 May 2015, from http://facta.junis.ni.ac.rs/lal/lal2004/lal200412.pdf

27

Talib, I.S. (2014). Narrative Theory: A Brief Introduction. NUS. Retrieved 9 May 2015,
from https://courses.nus.edu.sg/course/ellibst/narrativetheory/chapt4.htm
Thompson, L. (2009). Agatha Christies private life would have stumped even Poirot. The
Telegraph. Retrieved 26 June 2015, from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/6073273/Agatha-Christies-private-lifewould-have-stumped-even-Poirot.html
Ukkan, R. P. (2002). Introduction: An Analysis of New Historicism and Its Possibilities in
Anne Tylers Fiction. Retrieved March 30, 2015, from
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/bitstream/10603/29066/6/06_chapter
%201.pdf
Winterman, D. (2014). World War One: How 250,000 Belgian Refugees didnt leave a
trace. BBC. Retrieved June 22, 2015, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine28857769

28