The Murder of Roger Ackroyd

Year of Publication: 1926

Motive for Murder: Identity

Plot:

Roger Ackroyd is murdered. The wealthy man in King’s Abbot has been stabbed with a dagger at the back of his neck.  The suspects: a stepson, niece and sister-in-law who are the beneficiaries of his will.

He was a widower, but everyone knows of his relationship with a widow, Mrs. Ferrars. They also understand of their planning to marry as soon as her mourning period is over. Yet she had committed suicide. Before taking an overdose of sleeping tablets she wrote him a letter in which she was telling him about a person who had blackmailed her for quite some time. She could not face any longer and decided to take her own life.

Hercule Poirot’s retirement in the village has come to an end. The seemingly tranquil surroundings are merely an illusion, for he realizes that a cold-blooded murderer who is at large has killed both the widow and Mr. Ackroyd. Nonetheless, what made him being stabbed from the back?

Highlights:

The narrator, Dr. James Sheppard, tells his side of the story being Poirot’s aide during the investigation. And therefore most of readers’ understanding heavily relies on the doctor’s subjectivity, as what the first-person account is all about. Bearing in mind that he is not Captain Hastings, he is not Dr. Watson either. In other words, he is a suspect, just like the diarist Sir Eustace Pedler in Christie’s previous novel The Man in the Brown Suit (1924).

To begin with, both aforementioned men are of respectable nature; one is a doctor and the other a nobility. Also, they are middle-aged bachelors. Unlike Sir Eustace, Dr. Sheppard tends to be self-deprecating and simple in taste nonetheless. Besides, he does not seem like someone who likes travelling.

Furthermore, he lives with his spinster sister, Caroline, of whom is the chief gossip in the village. Her tongue is as sharp as her mind and nothing would escape from her watchful eyes. When her brother comes home trying to conceal the death of one of his patients, the ‘mongoose’ sniffs something amiss. With a little effort and a little bullying on her part she gets what news he was trying to hold back.

Roger Ackroyd’s body is found by the doctor himself, an hour and a half after leaving his home at nine pm. He rushes back to the other’s home having received a phone call from Parker the butler whom had urged the doctor’s assistance in a matter.

This is where the plot gets interesting. For Parker does not ring up the doctor whilst Dr. Sheppard repeats the message word by word. ‘Is that Dr. Sheppard? Parker, the butler at Fernly, speaking. Will you please come at once, sir. Mr. Ackroyd has been murdered.’ Who is one to believe?

On the home front, it is the situation the doctor hardly gets away from. Caroline’s curiosity develops due to the night call her brother has to answer to a particular home. Naturally, her instinct tells that it is peculiar that two days beforehand he came for an early call to Mrs. Ferrars’s home. Before he comes back she already knows what happens to the widow.

This brother and sister’s relationship is worth noticing, for it sheds some light about two distinctive personalities in the book. Eight years his senior, she rules the roost and dismisses him as having a lack of imagination of things.  ‘….You’ll see. Ten to one she [Mrs. Ferrar]’s left a letter confessing everything,’ she says.

Caroline’s minute interest to the other woman’s suicide and Ackroyd’s murder are described at length. There is an element of love-hate in it, given her aggressiveness and confrontational attitude towards her brother. Although both are close and very fond to one another, the doctor feels like wringing her neck at some point.

Nonetheless, without Caroline nearby James appears to be a man of confidence. His thoughts flow freely as he discusses the case with Poirot as he seems to be at ease with himself.

Be that as it may, James is a mysterious man. Poirot once remarks of the other being on his guard most of the time. He says: ‘Not so did Hastings write. On every page many, many times was the word ‘I’. What he thought – what he did. But you – you have kept your personality in the background; only once or twice does it obtrude – in scenes of home life, shall we say?’ He responds with silence; neither the words are contradicted nor agreed.

Moreover, he freely admits to have withheld information from the sleuth. The nature of it is for the Belgian to find out as if it is a game. All the same, the doctor is an equal whose carefulness and method deserve a bow.

The ending of the story is unexpected but brilliant. The curtain has fallen on the part of the murderer . In a casual meeting Poirot presents the facts and the circumstances which have led him to the solution. Despite being spoken matter-of-factly, his words made me shiver. ‘…I am willing to give you the chance of another way out. There might be, for instance, an overdose of sleeping draught. You comprehend?…’ He adds: ‘the truth goes to Inspector Raglan the next morning.’  Does he have a right to take matters into his own hands?

The Twists:

-Caroline Sheppard hears Ralph Paton talk to a woman in the wood hours before his stepfather is murdered

-Dr. Sheppard leaves Fernly Park at ten to nine pm and meets a stranger who heads for the house as the clock strikes nine

-Flora Ackroyd does not come into the study at half-past nine but stands in front of it holding the door handle

-Roger Ackroyd buys a dictatone from the salesman a few days before he dies

 -Parker the butler tells Poirot that the chair in front of the grandfather clock in the study has been pulled out when he comes back into the room after ringing up the police

 -Ralph Paton is secretly married to Ursula Bourne

Cast of Characters:

Mrs. Ackroyd (Roger’s sister-in-law, Flora’s mother)

Caroline Sheppard (Dr.James’s elder sister)

Colonel Carter (Dr. Sheppard’s acquaintance)

Christopher Kent (seen at Fernly Park by James Sheppard on the night of the murder)

Flora Ackroyd (Roger’s niece, lives in Fernly Park)

Gerrard Raymond (Roger’s secretary)

Miss Gannets (Caroline Sheppard’s friend)

Hector Blunt (Roger’s old friend who stays at Fernly Park)

Hercule Poirot

Dr. James Sheppard (the village doctor)

Colonel Melrose (the Chief Inspector at Cranchester)

Inspector Raglan (local police)

Ralph Paton (Roger’s stepson)

Roger Ackroyd (owned Fernly Park, was in relationship with Mrs. Ferrars)

Miss Russel (Fernly Park’s housekeeper)

Ursula Bourne (Fernly Park’s parlourmaid)

The Most Fascinating Character: Caroline Sheppard

With her partner in crime Miss Gannets Miss Sheppard is King’s Abbot’s answer to o St. Mary Mead’s trio ‘old pussies.’ The only difference is that Dr. Sheppard’s sister is the ring leader. Seeing everything from the window of her house, she counts on her maid Annie to relay news from the networks of maids in the village.

She is likened to Kipling’s mongoose, of which has the motto of go and find out. ‘If Caroline ever adopts a crest, I should certainly suggest a mongoose rampant. One might omit the first part of the motto. Caroline can do any amount of finding out by sitting placidly at home. I don’t know how she manages it, but there it is,’ writers her brother James.

It irritates her, however, little information she can obtain regarding a little foreigner who lives next door; a man with an egg-shaped head who grows vegetable marrows. When she knows more about Hercule Poirot, the Belgian interests her a great deal. In return he sees a neighbour with ample ‘sleuthing’ skill who is too eager to help. As a result, she is more than happy to be sent on errands and gather some facts about the people.

Her analysis can be inaccurate on occasions although they are not entirely wrong. Sometimes she might not have realised how valuable her insights had been to her brother and Poirot. Just like her brother, she is curious and she can be very much like Miss Marple (minus the gardening, the knitting and her sweet approach to people).

From whom was the inspiration for this amazing woman?  In Christie’s later novels, there is a number of woman whose bear resemblances to Miss Sheppard, namely Imhotep’s mother Esa (Death Comes as the End), Mrs. Allerton (Death on the Nile) and Emily Arrundell (Dumb Witness). Although the most significant character with a touch of Miss Sheppard is the indomitable Jane Marple.

Perhaps the only mistake the murderer has done is not have ‘silenced’ Miss Sheppard.

Clues:

The excerpt of Mrs. Ferrars’s letter to Roger Ackroyd:

‘My dear, my very dear Roger – a life calls for a life. I see that – I saw it in your face this afternoon. So I am taking the only road open to me. I leave to you to the punishment of the person who has made my life a hell upon earth for the last year. I would not tell you the name, this afternoon, but I propose to write it to you now. I have no children or near relations to be spared, so do not fear publicity. If you can Roger, my very dear Roger, forgive me the wrong I meant to do you, since when the time came, I could not do it after all…’

Dr. James Sheppard: [in his narration on different pages]

-When had I last seen her [Mrs. Ferrars]? Not for over a week. Her manner then had been normal enough considering- well- considering everything.

-The letter had been brought in at twenty minutes to nine. It was just on ten minutes to nine when I left him, the letter still unread. I hesitated with my hand on the door handle, looking back and wondering if there was anything I had left undone. I could think of nothing. With a shake of the head I passed out and closed the door behind me.

-I was startled by seeing the figure of Parker close at hand. He looked embarrassed, and it occurred to me that he might have been listening at the door.

-As the story unfolded itself, I realized more and more damning what a damning series of facts it was. Alive, Ackroyd could hardly have failed to alter his will- I knew him well enough to realize that to do so would be his first thought. His death came in the nick of time for Ralph and Ursula Paton. Small wonder the girl had held her tongue, and played her part so consistently.

Roger Ackroyd

[To Dr. James Sheppard]: ‘But there’s another point. How am I to get hold of that scoundrel who drove her to death as surely as if he’d killed her? He knew of the first crime, and he fastened on to it like some obscene vulture. She’s paid the penalty. Is he to go scot free?’

The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is a work of detective fiction by Agatha Christie, first published in the United Kingdom by William Collins, Sons in June 1926 and in the United States by Dodd, Mead and Company on the 19th of the same month. It features Hercule Poirot as the lead detective. The UK edition retailed at seven shillings and six pence (7/6) and the US edition at $2.00.

It is one of Christie's best known and most controversial novels, its innovative twist ending having a significant impact on the genre. The short biography of Christie which is included in the present UK printings of all of her books states that this novel is her masterpiece. Howard Haycraft, in his seminal 1941 work, Murder for Pleasure, included the novel in his "cornerstones" list of the most influential crime novels ever written. The character of Caroline Sheppard was later acknowledged by Christie as a possible precursor to her famous detective Miss Marple.

The book is set in the fictional village of King's Abbott in England. It is narrated by Dr James Sheppard, who becomes Poirot's assistant (a role filled by Captain Hastings in several other Poirot novels). The story begins with the death of Mrs. Ferrars, a wealthy widow who is rumoured to have murdered her husband. Her death is initially believed to be an accident until Roger Ackroyd, a widower who had been expected to marry Mrs. Ferrars, reveals that she admitted to killing her husband and then committed suicide. Shortly after this he is found murdered. The suspects include Mrs. Cecil Ackroyd, Roger's neurotic, hypochondriac sister-in-law who has accumulated personal debts through extravagant spending; her daughter Flora; Major Blunt, a big-game hunter; Geoffrey Raymond, Ackroyd's personal secretary; Ralph Paton, Ackroyd's stepson and another person with heavy debts; Parker, a snooping butler; and Ursula Bourne, a parlourmaid with an uncertain history who resigned her post the afternoon of the murder. Dr Sheppard's spinster sister Caroline is a favourite character among readers, and some say she is worthy to have appeared in another book.

The initial suspect is Ralph, who is engaged to Flora and stands to inherit his stepfather's fortune. Several critical pieces of evidence seem to point to Ralph. Poirot, who has just moved to the town, begins to investigate at Flora's behest.

The book ends with an unprecedented plot twist. Poirot exonerates all of the original suspects. He then lays out a completely reasoned case that the murderer is in fact Dr Sheppard, who has not only been Poirot's assistant, but also the story's narrator. Dr Sheppard was Mrs. Ferrars' blackmailer, and he murdered Ackroyd to stop him learning the truth from Mrs. Ferrars. Poirot gives the doctor two choices: either he surrenders to the police; or, for the sake of his reputation and of his proud sister, he commits suicide. In the final chapter of Sheppard's narrative (a sort of epilogue), Sheppard admits his guilt, noting certain literary techniques he used to write the narrative truthfully without revealing his role in the crime or doing anything to suggest that he knew the truth. He reveals that he had hoped to be the one to write the account of Poirot's great failure: i.e., not solving the murder of Roger Ackroyd. Thus, the last chapter acts as both Sheppard's confession and his suicide note. The final revelation uses meta-fictional tropes. The ending also opens up the question as to whether narrators can be trusted. Christie uses an unreliable narrator again in 1967 novel Endless Night. Her earlier novel, The Man in the Brown Suit, is narrated by two people, one of whom is unreliable. Reader response to the ending varies from admiration of the unexpected end to a feeling of being cheated.

In the novel, Christie has laid side by side two modes of gathering information and building a hypothesis. One is Poirot's use of ratiocination; the other is the gossiping practised by almost all of the inhabitants of King's Abbott, Caroline in particular. Although even Caroline is able to interpret certain situations correctly, Christie privileges the scientific mode of investigation by unveiling the murderer through Poirot.

Style/ Genre:

Whodunit- WHO HAS DONE IT?

In this form, the reader is confused with various clues pointing at different people where it is difficult to decide ‘who has done it’. However, in the final pages, the perpetrator of the crime is revealed.

This was the most common style used in the detective fiction between 1920 -1950.

The characters usually belong to the upper and middle class.

Detective fiction is a way of sending out a message that someone is there to protect the public, to restore the calm in the society which has been disturbed by a crime. The detective becomes the harbinger of security and justice. The detective has an exceptional IQ, unusual logic (mostly bang on target), he supports the law, is righteous and stands for restoring the law and order.

The first 24 chapters (entire narrative) becomes a way for the culprit to hide and mislead the reader.

The title can be seen as a literary device, which makes sure that the book is written as evidence to the solution of the case.

This unusual method betrays the confidence of the reader. The irony of the book is that the Doctor, who is a savior of life, takes the life of Roger, also blackmails Mrs. Ferrars. When Poirot says that Dr. Sheppard should not have been a doctor, it establishes the irony in the plot. The only honorable thing he does is that he takes care of his sister by killing himself. The last chapter acts as both Sheppard's confession and his suicide note.

Roger Ackroyd is also a friend who has helped him to hide his identity of a detective.

His moral duty forces him to return to the world of solving crime.

Omissions by Dr. Sheppard in his testimony and his notes prepared while unofficially assisting Poirot:

Dictaphone (does not mention it at all)

He asks Ralph Paton to disappear, lies to Poirot about him

He knows about the marriage of Ralph Paton, conceals the fact from Poirot

His history of being an investor, lies about the money he had obtained in the past, mentions it as a legacy

Lies about the phone call.

Boots of Ralph Paton

Position of the chair

Letter of Mrs. Ferrars

Miss Christie is not only an expert technician and a remarkably good story-teller, but she knows the right number of hints to offer as to the real murderer. In the present case, his identity is made all the more baffling through the author’s technical cleverness in selecting the part he is to play in the story and yet her non-committal characterisation of him makes it a perfectly fair procedure. The experienced reader will probably spot him, but it is safe to say he will often have his doubts as the story unfolds itself.

Dr. James Sheppard is the narrator of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd. If one notices, the title of the very first chapter reads ‘Dr Sheppard at the Breakfast table’. It misleads the reader as to initially assume that the narrator in an omniscient one. Actually, Christie makes Dr Sheppard the narrator and the reader gradually realises this fact while reading. Naturally, readers tend to favour the narrator’s views and opinions and accept his words to be the actual truth. Christie, well-aware of this fact, has used this general habit against the readers to jolt our senses and leaves us stupefied and stunned.

In this novel, Agatha Christie has left around numerous hints with which readers could try with their abilities to piece together, like the misplaced chair in the study or the mysterious phone call. The most impressive fact is that she had the hints all out in the open and some were disguised. When readers do get the solution at the end, they are amazed to find it all so painfully obvious. When Sheppard is revealed to be the murderer, the readers get dumbstruck. When we come to think of it, he is the one who had all the opportunities and means to pull of this murder. Our trust in the narrator betrays us. By the second time we read the book, it is pretty much transparent that Sheppard is the culprit. And one more impressive fact that Sheppard hardly ever lied at all during his narration in the novel.

Moreover, Sheppard shrewdly sticks around alongside Poirot. Christie makes a mention of Hastings at the initial part of the novel and the reader almost automatically puts Sheppard as a companion of Poirot. This gains more trust of Dr Sheppard from the readers. Finally, there is the Dictaphone and the phone call which completely excludes Dr Sheppard from the list of suspects in the reader’s mind.

However, Poirot is not in any way fooled by the dexterity of Dr Sheppard neither is he overshadowed by it. Instead, it only manages to highlight Poirot’s abilities of logical and accurate deductions. “Method, order, and grey cells”, as he says in the novel, is his watchword. Unlike the incompetent police inspectors, Poirot makes no assumptions and even though we have blindly trusted Dr Sheppard, Poirot, in the end, is shown to have been suspicious of Dr Sheppard all along.

One can doubt if Dr Sheppard fits the profile of a murderer as there is no mention of any violent actions of his in the past except that he had once speculated to gain profit. Other than that, there is no evidence of any kind which shows him capable of a gruesome crime as murder though blackmail is another thing. Blackmail may be a plausible case but murder seems a tad extreme as there is no call for Sheppard to panic so much because there is no physical evidence of Sheppard’s blackmail of Mrs. Ferrars except a letter but a few words of accusation is hardly enough to convict him. This seems to be a weak point of the novel.

A lot of critics accused Christie of being ‘deceptive’ or ‘cheating’. Most readers have felt the shock for the disbelief of the term of events in the novel. Critics say that she has violated certain rules but these rules are just assumed one and not written rules. For most, the novel was innovative and fresh and marked itself distinct from the others of its genre. This novel ends with a twist of a most unusual and even outrageous kind, which makes it all the more famous.

Beyond a shadow of a doubt, Christie is blessed with a magnificent talent of entertaining and fascinating her readers. As always, she manages the most creative of endings.

The novel is set up in the fictional village of King’s Abbot in England. It is a countryside, away from the mainstream, crowded and ever engaged city life, with the nearest urban area-Cranchester, which is too, miles away. It consists of a large railway station, a small post office and a couple of rival general stores. Just like any other rural setup, it is devoid of the busy and self-concerned city personalities. The place is inhabited by gossipy and over informed neighbours who never leave an opportunity to discuss about the current affairs and the recent on goings in the life of the people and matters related to the village. In the words of the narrator ‘...we are rich in unmarried ladies and retired military officers. Our recreations and hobbies can be summed up in one word ‘gossip’. The habit of being over concerned with the life of the others plays a crucial role in rumour mongering and acts as a good source of widespread distribution of vital pieces of news. The typical countryside atmosphere created in the novel is an excellent move by Agatha Christie for setting up the murder of Roger Ackroyd as many people are aware of the recent happening and events related to the victim because of the constant gossip sessions and self deduction by people like Caroli. This helps the detective- Poirot get a good grasp on the case. Certain pre-requisites and crystal clear detailing of facts are necessary for the detective to solve a mystery.

Moreover, we have across the facts that Poirot has retired and has shifted to King’s Abbot to lead a life of secrecy and peace. On Page 36 of the text, Poirot says, ‘Mr. Ackroyd knew me in London when I was at work there. I have asked him to say nothing of my profession down here.” “I have not even troubled to correct the local version of my name.” Also on page 98, Flora Ackroyd while conversing with the narrator and the murderer James Sheppa and Caroline says, “A year ago, he retired and came down to live here. Uncle knew who he was, but he promised not to tell anyone because M. Poirot wanted to live quietly without being bothered by people.”

These quotes from the various characters of the text clearly establish the fact that Poirot was in need of a retirement and King’s Abbot being a serene, calm, peaceful and distant place from the daily hustling of the city life served his needs of a life of privacy and secrecy to the fullest. A detective is always in for a call in a city which is a hub for crime and criminals. King’s Abbot being miles away from a city is idyllic for a hideout for Poirot who was fed up of his ever engrossing and over tiring profession. Is is a suitable place for him to lead a life full of mental, physical and emotional space which he is devoid of in the city.

Also, for a mystery to be solved it is always handy to find a detective as near and as soon as possible so that he can derive all the necessary details from the scene of crime and the people related to the victim. The purpose of being engaged to solve a mystery is fulfilled only when the detective is able to gather the relevant clues and evidences related to the case. And in the case of Ackroyd Poirot is not only residing in the same village but also is well acquainted with various aspects and people related to the life of the victim.

I would like to conclude by saying that choosing King’s Abbot as the place for setting up the murder is totally justified and is a very impressive and crucial tactic used by Agatha Christie to make her work a masterpiece.

Poirot is one of Christie's most famous and long-lived characters, appearing in 33 novels, one play (Black Coffee), and more than 50 short stories.

He was so popular that he was even given an obituary in The New York Times after the publication of Curtain, Poirot’s last case. The obituary appeared on the front page of the paper on 6 August 1975.

Poirot is a retired Belgian police officer living in London. He is short, has a lush moustache and has a tendency to use French words and expressions while speaking in English. He is an outsider in the village (King’s Abbot), operating in a foreign environment of Agatha Christie. He possesses all the quintessential elements required to become a successful detective. He is intellectual, observant, persistent, and conscientious.

He is around “five feet four inches” tall but carries “himself with great dignity”. “His head” is “exactly the shape of an egg”, “His moustache” is “very stiff and military”. As described by Poirot’s companion in several novels and his best friend - Captain Arthur Hastings.

In Agatha Christie’s world, the detective does not have to be necessarily physically attractive. She changes the convention of a ‘masculine’ detective. The focus is on employing the “little grey cells” instead of action. There is a distinctive shift from an action hero to domestication of the detective in Agatha Christie’s detective books when we closely study Poirot and Miss Marple (the female detective, an elderly spinster who acts as an amateur detective). Poirot is not into physical combat or threats from people whereas Sherlock Holmes intentionally or unintentionally gets involved in a threatening situation. Poirot is not the smash buckling hero, and does not uphold the physical conventions of the traditional hero type detective. If we analyze the character of Caroline (Dr. Sheppard’s sister in The Murder of Roger Ackroyd), we observe that she is the one who comes very close to the method of unraveling the mystery. Merely relying on gossip of the people, despite being absent in the field of detection, she is able to come to certain conclusions just by using her insight of the human behavior. With characters like Caroline and Poirot, Christie is moving towards the feminization of the detective figure. These figures become a good foundation for the female detective Miss Marple.

Themes

Society, Class and Legacy:

For Christie, a Doctor symbolizes a noble profession, on the other hand, the occupation of ‘speculation’, is not seemed to be an appropriate method of earning money in the middle class bourgeois England.

Legacy plays an important role in the novel.

Cecil Ackroyd and Flora Ackroyd are dependent on inheritance for survival but are given a royal touch by Christie in the book. Ursula who decides to take a “station below her standards” and becomes a Parlour maid to earn a living because of financial problems is not praised or admired in the narrative. One can observe that Christie associates the social standing of a character more with reference to one’s legacy than to one’s profession. Inheriting property and money, or a legacy is still considered to be a justifiable way of getting money, but speculation is still looked down upon. The old and established way of life is being glorified here. By glorifying the old and established way of life, a peculiar characteristic of English society is highlighted that financial legacy serves as a method to perpetuate the social class.

The True Englishman in The Murder of Roger Ackroyd:

Major Hector Blunt is portrayed as the true Englishman. He has hunted in Africa and India representing the ‘bravery’ of the colonial gentleman. Despite being the brave English man, he is not confident of his relationship with Flora who is almost half his age hence hesitates to express his love for her. He is Imperial and rich in royal attitude. He is a repository of the English stereotype.

The rules of detective fiction that are rewritten in Agatha Christie’s ‘The Murder of Roger Ackroyd’.

‘The Murder of Roger Ackroyd’ was a benchmark in the domain of detective fiction, maybe for all the wrong reasons according to the critics but this book rightly affirmed Christie’s title of the Queen of crime or mystery. The book had undeniably transformed, with a hard or delicate move leaving behind endless fragrance behind her, the accepted and prevalent norms of detective fiction influencing her successors to encroach their defined domain while sticking to the ground basics.

Written in 1926, during the period which later came to be known as the golden period of detective fiction, the book invoked criticism from both ends of the spectrum. On the one hand, critics applauded Christie for playing a fair game with the readers as usual and creating a masterpiece. On the other hand, others criticised her for toying with the narrative structure and thus fooling the readers. Whatever might be the case, it still remains a masterpiece.