Agatha Christie is most famous for the 2 detectives that she created, the egg shaped egoistical Belgian detective Hercule Poirot, and the elderly spinster Miss Marple, with Hercule Poirot being the more famous of the 2. One famous way of writing the books was with the constant companion of Poirot, Captain Hastings being the narrator. However, with the book ‘Dumb Witness’, this concept of Hastings being the narrator was coming to a close, with this being the second last book of Poirot with Hastings as the narrator (the last one being the 1975 book ‘Curtain: Poirot’s Last Case’. Like many of her other books, The Dumb Witness was also the name of the book release in Britain, with the US release having a different name ‘Poirot Loses a Client’.
The Dumb Witness had a not so enthusiastic reception by critics when it was released, with many of the reviewers proclaiming the story as not having the complexity and twists, and not being gripping enough; however, the book did contain many of the usual plots that are present in books by Christie, with a rural setting, a small English village, an old lady, relatives who have a motive for the murder, follow on deaths, use of poison, and also some elements of the occult.

The novel centers around the character of an old wealthy lady, Emily Arundell, who lives in an old English village, and who has written to Poirot for investigation of a suspected murder attempt on her. However, by the time Poirot receives this letter, it is too late. Emily dies, with her doctor declaring that she died of a long standing liver problem that she was suffering from (the doctor was also old, and had a problem that he had mostly lost his sense of smell, something that is very relevant for the story).
Poirot gets involved with the story, since he considers the dead lady still his client, and pretends to be interested in the property to investigate the death in more detail. Like many other stories, there is money, motive; and there is some amount of the occult, a small cute dog, a brooch, and many other points that make this an interesting story.

Cards on the Table was a very interesting piece of fiction, taking a unique mix of 4 people who could have committed murders in the past, and combining this with a mix of 4 detectives from Christie’s earlier books. The main characters in this book are:
The Four Apparent murderers:
- Dr Roberts, a physician and a hearty man
- Mrs Lorrimer, a well-to-do gentlewoman of middle age and an expert bridge player
- Major Despard, a dashing explorer suspected of killing a rival earlier
- Anne Meredith, a pretty, impecunious and poor young woman
All of them have been brought together by a strange man called Mr. Shaitana, who meets Poirot at a cultural event, and then declares that for a detective such as Poirot, the collection of murderers that Shaitana has (who were never caught) would be much more interesting. In the bridge game, he brings in 4 detectives:
- Superintendent Battle, an officer from Scotland Yard
- Colonel Race, a MI6 agent who had worked with Poirot before
- Ariadne Oliver, writer of popular detective fiction
- Hercule Poirot, the private detective

In the Bridge game the 4 detectives play Bridge separately in a different room, and the other 4 play Bridge in a different room, with Mr. Shaitana in the same room. However, several hours later, at the end of the session, when people go to thank Mr. Shaitana, they realize that he is dead, having been stabbed by a jeweled stiletto; and since none has arrived in the room, it has to be one of the 4 who is the murderer.
Then these 4 detectives start detailing the past history of these characters, trying to figure out who was guilty of which crime in the past. Poirot also tried to figure out from each of the players as to who played bridge in which style, to try to determine from each of the players what they thought of the other’s level of playing, as also about what was happening in the room.
And then at one point, one of them confesses to Poirot to the crime, but he does not really believe this and when she is killed the next day, it is even more clear that they need to find the killer soon; and Poirot does eventually deliver.

The Murder in Mesopotamia was a book published in 1936 by Agatha Christie, and was based on an archaeological excavation set in Mesopotamia (modern day Iraq), something pretty close to Agatha Christie, since her second husband Sir Max Mallowan was an archaeologist who went for digs in the Middle East, and Christie had also accompanied her husband on some of those digs. At the time at which the novel was set, the state of Iraq was a British protectorate. One interesting point in this novel is that it was released after ‘The Murder on the Orient Express’, but was set before the actual Orient Express event, since he was returning from Mesopotamia when he came back on the Orient Express. Like many of other novels, this one was also turned into a television movie in 2001, starring David Suchet.
The novel was set on a dig, but did not really have much reference to any findings from the dig, or any treasure hunt, or so on. It was mostly based on a person taking on a different identity, and then finally his original identity being unmasked.

Poirot is in Iraq when a murder happens, and Poirot’s friend, Dr. Reilly, who is with the archaeological dig asks him to help by investigating. There is a story behind the murder. The lady who is murdered is called Mrs. Leidner, married to Dr. Leidner, a Swedish-American archaeologist working on the same dig. Mrs. Leidner has a past, since she was married to a person named Frederick Bosner, who was a spy for the Germans while working for the US State Department during the First World war. His betrayal was discovered and he was sentenced to death. He managed to escape, only to finally die during a train crash where his badly mutilated body was found. From time to time, when Mrs. Leidner started getting close to a relationship, she would get threatening letters (supposedly from her dead husband). Given this history, Dr. Leidner had hired a nurse Amy Leatheran to look after his wife on the dig. However, one day they found the wife dead in her room, killed by a blow to the head.
And then soon after, a female associate of Dr. Leidner called Miss Johnson is killed by making her drink acid instead of water, but she manages to say a cryptic ‘the window’ before she dies; this helps Poirot in the case even though the clue seems very cryptic.

Agatha Christie did a lot of experimentation with her books, sometimes confusing her readers by laying red herrings in some of her books that would mislead the users, in another she finally made almost all the characters in the novels as the guilty parties, and so on. In ‘The Murder of Roger Ackroyd’, she experimented with changing the narrator, and tried having the murderer be the narrator, and so on. In The ABC Murders, Christie experimented with having a mix of first person and third person narration (with Hastings trying to also reconstruct the third-person narrative).
Why is this book called The ABC Murders ? Well, because a series of murders is committed with the first person being killed having his name starting with ‘A’, the second with ‘B’, and so on. And each time, a letter (a challenge) is being sent to Hercule Poirot and the police before each murder, detailing where the murder will happen, but they are unable to prevent the murders from happening.

However, after 3 murders, there may be a break. The apparent 4th murder (‘D’) goes wrong, and then a man named Alexander Bonaparte Cust (ABC), who is a stocking salesman, walks in and confesses to the murders (he suffers from epilepsy, has blackouts, and has been near the scene of each of the murders and finds blood on his short cuffs), and the letter have been typed on his typewriter. And the clues that the police have found till now lead them to believe that the man committing the murder is a stocking salesman. But, there is a problem. He has not heard of Hercule Poirot (the wound to the pride of Poirot), and also does not have any idea about the letters. Poirot can soon prove that he has an alibi at the time of the murders and could not be involved.
And then it turns out that the murders are a blind, that innocent people lost their lives because one of the murders was desired for a specific financial purpose, and that the others were just done to set a different pattern. And this was the master planner, who had hired Cust to be near the scene of each crime as a part of each job, had used his typewriter to do the letters, and also put the blood on the cuffs.