Murder of Roger Ackroyd Flashcards
‘In many ways, Mrs Ferrars’ crime is the most significnat one of the novel’. TWEDYA
Mrs Ferrars’ crimes sets the action of the novel in motion. It is, as Todorov posits, the crime that pre-exists the crime novel’s principle action and so acts as a typical dramatic feature…
One could argue though that it is not so much Mrs Ferrars’ crime but Sheppard’s discovery and exploitation of this and her reaction to this exposure…
- “Mrs Ferrars’ died on the night of the 16th-17th September - a Thursday. I was sent for at eight o’clock on the moring of Friday 17th. There was nothing to be done. She has been dead some hours”
- “i was considerably upset and worried”
Importantly though, Mrs Ferrars’ murder and subsequent suffering are relatively isolated within the novel itself. This allows Ackroyd’s murder to take centre stage. Crucially, Ackroyd’s murder is fiendishly complex to solve (and so exciting) and also features a far less sympathetic victim which allows us as readers to fully immerse ourselves in teh clue puzzle plot. Mrs Ferrars’s far more emotive crime of passion is more sympathetic, arguably tragic, and so not fitting for a game of whodunnit…
Equally, Ackroyd’s murder exists amid a network of satellite crimes that whilst of course not as significant as th emurder itself, all play a crucial role in the unfolding of the mystery. Principally, these crimes help the suspects appear as if they have something to hide and so they appear to be plausible suspects for the central crime. They may not be the most significant, but thay are essential cogs in Christie’s clue puzzle framework…
On a similar note, we could claim that Poirot’s extra judicial killing of Sheppard at the end is a similarly important crime. This allows the novel to end in a swift and supposedly morally satisfying manner once the central crime has been exposed…
- “I am more than willing to give you the chance of another way out. There might be, for instance, an overdose of sleeping draught”
*- Encourages Sheppard to kill himself after he is exposed as the murderer. - This is an ectra judicial killing (arguably) and Poirot is complicit in it. This highlights the coldness of Poirot as he seeks a compartmentalised end to the novel, avoiding the complexities of arrest and trial for Sheppard. He prioritises neatness over rule of law.
- Alternatively, Poirot offers this way out to Sheppard because of the implict kinship between the two of them. Poirot wants Sheppard to avoid the embarrassment of exposure infront of Caroline.
- “what shall it be? Veranol?”
*- Sheppard’s choice of poison echoes Mrs Ferrars’ thus bringing poetic justice to the close of the novel - The poisoning (at Poirot’s suggesstion - “i am willing to give you the cahnce of another way out”) also sees Poirot potentially implicated in an extra judicial killing, exacerbating our concerns about the morality of his character. Sheppard is, therefore, potentially a victim. It does, howeve, also provide a neat ending to the book and avoid the lengthy complications of arrest, trial and sentencing. This way, thereader leaves the novel immeditatly satisfied.
Conclusion
Ackroyd’s has to be th emost significant. Mrs Ferrars’ crime exists in a pattern with the other crimes in the novel that contributes to its centrality…
‘The novel is a deeply conventional work of crime writing’. TWEDYA
One convention of detective fiction that the novel employs is to use an unsympathetic victim. This ensures that our attention remains fixed in th eunfolding clue puzzle plot…
This in itself is complex, amde especially so by the web of suspects all of whom appear as if they have something to hide…
One could argue, though, that the twist Christies creates subverts convention - in that Sheppard is the narrator and this subversion mocks figures like Watson or Hastings. However, this subversion - namely the plausible cteation of a twist - is in fact Chritie’s stock-in-trade and so can be considered the perfect application of Chritie’s adherence to detective fiction formulas.
In fact, where the novel because less typical and more problematic in its adherence to crime writing conventions is in its ending. Poirot’s extra judicial killing of Sheppard ensures a swift and concise end to the novel and one in which, in theory, we feel a sense of peotic justice has been achieved. However, in doing this, Chritie arguably compromises the morality of the detective, the figure supposed to bring order to the bourgeois local of King’s Abbot, and in this way (most likely inadvertently) subevrts our expectations of the inherent moral conservatism of the genre…
- “I am more than willing to give you the hcnace of another way out. There might be, for instance, an overdose of sleeping draught”
- “what shall it be? Veranol?”
- “one must always proceed with method”
*- Poirot’s detective process is logical and all the pieces of the puzzle add up. this reassures the reader that there is a figure we can safely test our deduction against. - Further reassurance is provided by a figure who we feel confident will solve the crime and restore order to this fallen bourgeois world.
