From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Crime task force. (rated as Top importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents 1 Plot Hole 1.1 Removed sentence 1.2 real chronology of Poiriot? 1.3 Fair use rationale for Image:Curtain.jpg

[edit] Plot Hole

In contrast to the first case of Hercule Poirot, this last case has several plot holes:

• 1)Supposedly there was an autopsy in the body of sadistic killer Norton {aka X} which should have revealed the presence of a knock out drug; it thus would have dawned on the reader that it would have been impossible for Norton to have taken a knock out drug and then shoot himself in the head!!
• 2)Furthermore of all the persons at Styles the only obvious canidate who had a sleeping drought of the type in Norton's body was Poirot-therefore Poirot is the killer {as it turns out in the end-of course the reader would not know this detail -least they figure out the ending!!}
• 3) Another plot hole is that even after Norton's death-why did Piorot remove the files of "X" {Norton}'s cases?

1) An interesting point, but readers are not supposed to think that Norton killed himself. They should think that Norton was murdered, presumably by X. Similarly, they should think Poirot was murdered by X. Any evidence suggesting Norton's death was a murder only helps this.

2) I suppose you mean this as an extension of "1," which is not in fact a plot hole. Incidentally, are you sure the book mentions an autopsy? A bullet hole in the forehead is quite convincing to any coroner, and there are plenty of other examples in Christie of people dispensing with autopsies when the cause of death is obvious.

3) I don't remember the reasoning the book gives, but this still is not a plot hole. Poirot had solved the case and had wrapped it up as judge, jury and executioner. The case was closed. So he removed the files.

4) Poirot had already solved the case, but wanted to test Hastings. The drug Poirot gave was clearly stated as being enough to induce sleep for a novice, but Poirot has developed tolerance to it due to long usage. Poirot removed the case files of X to try to induce Hastings to really think about the case... giving the identify of X would have made it too easy. Christie's genius as a writer lived on as she makes Poirot the killer... perhaps the ultimate plot twist. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jclinard (talk • contribs) 01:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

--Ellissound 03:54, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed sentence

I've just removed the following sentence:

He is considered to fail all the previous records.

Perhaps the person who added it could explain exactly what the sentence means (it's not understandable English) and why it was at the very end of the entry, after the table. --70.72.19.133 10:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] real chronology of Poiriot?

If Poiriot had really existed::

• Poirot born 1850?
• HAstings born 1890?
• Poirot age 55 at his retirement in 1905?
• Poirot and Hastings first met each other in 1916
• Poirot and HAstings last met each other in 1946?
• Poirot dies and Hastings remaries age 55/56-second wife age 35

As an author can make a fictional characther live outside of a real timeline-thus Christie has Poirot living into the 1950's and 1960's-when he'd have been well over 100 years old!!!

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Curtain.jpg

Image:Curtain.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)