I enjoyed Agatha Christie’s And Then There Were None. Overall, I would consider it a well-balanced and well-paced mystery story that has stood the test of time. It is one that is both complex and solvable, and I think Christie gives enough information for the story to be comprehensible but not so much that it also becomes too easy.
For the sake of honesty, I must admit that I, for a rather silly reason, suspected that either Emily Brent or Vera Claythorne would be U.N. Owen. Probably the most famous song from the Touhou series of games is titled “U.N. Owen was Her?” This refers to a mysterious character within the game itself, though, and not someone from the book. I was convinced until the manuscript document that the culprit may have been either of them, especially when considering the fact that Vera survived till the end. I was thus surprised to find that Lawrence Wargrave was the culprit and pleasantly surprised too that I had not been spoiled by the song.
The fact that this revelation did not irritate me is a testament to the solid construction of the book – in other words, it employs “fair play” as we have discussed. After all, you’re more likely to be okay with losing a game if you were beaten “honorably” without cheap tricks or cheating. It seems fair enough that one of the ten main characters is the culprit, as having a secret hideout like some of characters suspected would be too obvious and anyone commuting to and from the island would likely be spotted eventually given the increasingly irregular sleep schedules of the characters and the increasing amount that they search the island.
In terms of motive and opportunity, it also makes sense that Wargrave would be U.N. Owen. If we take, for example, the characters of Emily Brent and Vera Claythorne, it becomes much easier to exonerate them when you consider these two factors in retrospect and while you read. As much as one might want to suspect the most seemingly innocent character (especially if you do not expect “fair play”), there isn’t much to suggest that she had much of a motive to kill everyone or that she would have the means to attain knowledge of everyone else’s crimes. Emily Brent is more easily suspected, as her age and predisposition towards divine justice (let us remember that killing in the name of God is not a novel notion) would give her the time/experience and perhaps some reason to investigate others’ crimes, but she pales in comparison to Wargrave, who is shown near the end of section 3 of chapter 5 to enjoy the drama of a good case and to have enjoyed indirectly killing Seton. This combined with his very direct access to the legal system would make it relatively easy for him to know of everyone else’s crimes whether through hearsay, witnessing trials, or looking through the right documents. His authoritative attitude throughout the story is described as coming from him having been in a position of legal authority for much of his life, but it makes even more sense considering that he is also the orchestrator of its events. He is also, as multiple of our readings on fair play have noted, a well-described character who is introduced early on in the story. I will admit, though, that I did not quite grasp how it is that Armstrong and Wargrave were cooperating to fake Wargrave’s death without my knowledge – it makes some sense, but I can’t say I saw any evidence of the fact .Perhaps I glossed over a crucial passage, but alas.
But it’s not necessarily so subtle to anyone who’s not yet finished the book, as Christie does not lay out clues on a silver platter. If there is a platter, though, red herrings are certainly on the menu, as each character, even Vera, is depicted as contemptible enough to potentially be U.N. Owen. The characters are one of the key strengths of the book in that they are distinct enough to be entertaining and distinct enough that one may process their traits and actions individually when considering who might be U.N. Owen. This fact is used in an interesting way in the instances when all of the characters’ thoughts are revealed at once, one of these being the start of chapter 13. After Christie writes, “And by now the thoughts that rain through their brains were abnormal, feverish, diseased…,” she does not outright say who is who when listing these thoughts. This encourages readers to infer who is thinking what using their knowledge of the characters and present circumstances, turning a moment that would otherwise be mere exposition into an interactive mini-game. The varied experiences readers will face may lead them down the entirely wrong path of reasoning, the right one, or perhaps in a path that lies or bends between these two extremes.
To put it quite shortly, Christie cooked. This is a book that is good fun not only for new readers but has enough depth and entertainment that it may be re-read, and a mystery story that can be re-read must indeed be a good one if it does not rely on the element of surprise alone to entertain you.
Intermittent Mechanism 