Chapter 5
‘How I Created Hercule Poirot’
‘Why not make my detective a Belgian?’
SOLUTIONS REVEALED
Death on the Nile
Agatha Christie wrote the article that follows to herald the Daily Mail’s serialisation of Appointment with Death (or, as they renamed it, A Date with Death) on 19 January 1938, prior to the publication of the novel by Collins Crime Club in May of that year.
The appearance of the ‘latest Agatha Christie’ in a newspaper or magazine was mutually advantageous. Both author and periodical enjoyed a boost in sales and publicity. Although not every novel had a pre-publication appearance, as early in her career as The Mysterious Affair at Styles and as late as Sleeping Murder Christie was regularly serialised on both sides of the Atlantic. Changes to the title and often to the text were tolerated, as the financial rewards were significant. The Saturday Evening Post in America paid $14,000 for Cards on the Table and $16,000 for Dumb Witness. But the enterprise was not without its pitfalls. A competition to accompany the serialisation of The A.B.C. Murders, in which readers were invited to send in their solutions, was won by a reader who got every detail of the plot correct.
Christie’s account of the genesis of Hercule Poirot has appeared in print only once since, in the Agatha Christie Centenary Celebration book, edited by Lynn Underwood and published in September 1990. The version below is reproduced from the pages of Notebook 21 and I have left intact many of the original deletions, made by Christie herself. This will help to show how fluently she could produce 1,400 words with a minimum of cutting and rearrangement. Unusually, the text in Notebook 21 is continuous and, apart from the slightly amended drafts of the final paragraphs, would seem to have been completed at one sitting. It is impossible at this stage to be absolutely certain that this was the case, but it is all written with the same ink and, until the final stages, in the same handwriting on 12 consecutive pages. The earlier 1990 publication is shorter and slightly different; some paragraphs were there rearranged to create a more coherent structure – for example the discussions of Poirot’s earlier cases were brought together – but I include here the entire text exactly as it was first written.
How did the character of Hercule Poirot come into being?
Difficult to say – he came perhaps about accidentally that is I realise that he came into being not at all as he himself would have wished it. ‘Hercule Poirot first,’ he would have said. ‘And then a plot to display his remarkable talent to the best advantage.’ But it was not so. The idea often plot of the story, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, was roughed out and then came the dilemma: a detective story – now what kind of detective? It was wartime in the early autumn days of 1914 – Belgian refugees were in most country places.22 Why not have a Belgian refugee, for a detective, a former shining light of the Belgian Police force.
What kind of man he should he be? A little man perhaps, with a somewhat grandiloquent name. Hercule – something – Hercule Poirot – yes, that would do. What else about him? He should be very neat – very orderly (Is that because I was a wildly untidy person myself?)23
Such was the first rough outline – mostly, you will note, externals – but certain fad traits followed almost automatically. Like many small dandified men, he would be conceited and he would, of course, (why ‘of course?’) have a luxuriant handsome moustache. That was the beginning. Hercule Poirot emerged from the mists and took concrete shape and form. but he was a particularly Once he was that had happened he took charge, as it were, of his own personality – there were all sorts of things about him that I did not know, but which he proceeded to develop show me. There was more in this little man than I had ever suspected. There was, for instance, his intense interest in the psychology of every case. As early as The Murder on the Links he was showing his appreciation of the mental processes of the a murderer – and insisting that planning of a every crime had a definite signature.24
Method and order still meant much to him – but not nearly so much as before. In The Murder of Roger Ackroyd he was at his best investigating a crime in a quiet country village and using his knowledge of human nature to get at the truth. For the terrible death on the Blue Train he was I have always suspected not I have always thought he was not, I think, quite he was not at his best but the solution of Lord Edgware’s death was, I consider, a good piece of work on his part, though he gives some of the credit to Hastings.25 Three Act Tragedy he considers one of his failures though most people do not agree with him – his final remark at the end of the case has amused many people [but] Hercule Poirot cannot see why!26 He considers that he merely stated an obvious truth.
And now, what of the relation between us – between the creator and the created? Well – let me confess it – there has been at times a coolness between us. There are moments when I have felt ‘Why, why, did I ever invent this detestable, bombastic tiresome little creature? Eternally straightening things, forever boasting, always twirling his moustaches and tilting his ‘egg-shaped head.’ Anyway, what is an egg-shaped head? Have I ever seen an egg-shaped head? When people say to me, ‘Which way up is the egg? – do I really know[?] I don’t, because I never do see pictorial things clearly. But nevertheless, I know that he has an egg-shaped head covered with black, suspiciously black, hair27 and I know that his eyes occasionally shine and some with a green light. And once or twice in my life I have actually seen him – once on a boat going to the Canary Islands28 and once having lunch at the Savoy. I have said to myself, ‘Now if you had only had the nerve you would could have snap-shotted the man in the boat and then when people have said “Yes, but what is he like? I could have produced that snap shot and said ‘This is what he is like.’ And in the Savoy perhaps I would have gone and explained the matter but life is full of lost opportunities. If you are doubly burdened – first by acute shyness and secondly by only seeing the right thing to do or say twenty-four hours late – what can you do? Except only write about quick-witted men and resourceful girls whose reactions are like greased lightning!
Yes, there have been moments when I have disliked M. Hercule Poirot very much indeed –when I have rebelled bitterly against being yoked to him for life (usually at one of these moments that I receive a fan letter saying ‘I know you must love your little detective by the way you write about him.)29 But now, I must confess it, Hercule Poirot has won. A reluctant affection has sprung up for him. He has become more human, less irritating. I admire certain things about him – his passion for the truth, his understanding of human frailty and his kindliness.I did not understand suspect before that he felt so strongly so strictly not for the punishment of the guilty but for the vindication of the innocent. And he has taught me something – to take more interest in my own characters; to see them more as real people and less as pawns in a game. In spite of his vanity he often chooses deliberately to stand aside and let the main drama develop. He says in effect, ‘It is their story – let them show you why and how this happened.’ He knows, of course, that the star part is going to be his all right later. He may make his appearance at the end of the first act but he will take the centre of the stage in the second act and his big scene at the end of the third act is a mathematical certainty.
He has his favourite cases. Cards on the Table was the murder which won his complete technical approval;30 the Death on the Nile saddened him.31 Since Appointment with Death is sub judice he must not comment on it here; let me only say that three points in it appealed to him strongly. Firstly the fact that desire for truth on the part of another man coincided with his own strong feelings on that point. [Secondly] the limitations of his investigation also appealed to him – the necessity of getting at the truth in twenty four hours with no technical evidence, post-mortems or the usual facilities of his background resources And thirdly he was fascinated by the peculiar psychological interest of the case and particularly by the strong malign personality of the dead woman.32
Well, I have told you all I can of Hercule Poirot – it is possible he has not finished with me yet – there may be more of him – facts to know which I have not fathomed.
Having drawn a line, literally, under the essay at this point Christie then decides to redraft the last paragraph and expand it slightly, although she omits the third reason for including Appointment with Death among Poirot’s favourite cases:
Firstly that he undertook the case at the express desire of a man whose passion for truth was equal to his own.33 Secondly the technical difficulty of the investigation put him on his mettle made a special appeal to him and the necessity of reaching the truth in twenty four hours without the help of expert brilliance evidence of any kind
Well, I have given you some of my impressions of Hercule Poirot – they are based on an acquaintance of many years standing. We are friends and partners. I must admit that I am considerably beholden to him financially. Poirot considers that I could not get along without him but on the other hand I consider that but for me Hercule Poirot would not exist.
There are times when I, too, have been tempted to commit murder.34 I am beholden to him financially. On the other hand, he owes his very existence to me. In moments of irritation I point out that by a few strokes of the pen (or taps on the typewriter) – I could destroy him utterly. He replies grandiloquently ‘Impossible to get rid of Hercule Poirot like that – he is much too clever! To permit such a thing to happen And so, as usual, the little man has the last word!