Who Killed Roger Ackroyd?: The Mystery Behind the Agatha Christie Mystery

Rating:
Summary: A Worthy Analysis
Review: First, a warning, Bayard's book contains long discussions of the methods used by Christie to hide the answer in many of her books. As such, it is best suited for Christie readers who have already read those works, or who do not mind having surprises revealed.

Otherwise, Bayard provides a good analysis of how Christie fools her readers, pulling back the curtain to reveal the magician's secrets. His taxonimy of the tricks is useful, although incomplete. This makes it a good guide for an aspiring mystery writer looking to see how Christie worked her magic.

Bayard's psychoanalysis of the crime is a bit more speculative. One can nit-pick his facts and conclusions, but the exercise is itself useful. Appling critical analysis to Christie's solution seems no less absurd than Tey's re-analysis of Richard III in Daughter of Time, the endless books on Jack the Ripper's identity, or decades of English literature classes convinced that the author is the last person to understand the significance of his own works.

In sum, worth reading for those who enjoy learning about the tricks of the mystery writing trade.

Rating:
Summary: Um... what?
Review: I'm a huge Agatha Christie fan and a psychology major, so I was given this book as a gift by someone who though I would enjoy it. Wrong! By the time I was done reading it the cover was torn and the binding broken from being hurled against the wall in frustration. First of all, I get it. Second of all, it's this kind of [stuff] that give psychology a bad name. This guy has nothing better to do that rethink one of the greatest mystery novels of all time?..

Rating:
Summary: Agatha Christie Would Role Over In Her Grave
Review: Who Killed Roger Ackroyd? was for me a disapointment. Offering an alternative solution to Agatha Christie's classic The Murder Of Roger Ackroyd, the book suggests that an entirely different person is responsible for the murder. I prefer the author's original murderer. After all, she wrote the book. No one else. I can only think that Agatha Christie would have been shocked to find someone else write a book about her book saying that the killer was not the person Agatha wrote as the killer. But maybe I'm wrong. I can see the book as an excellent source for a psychoanalyst and those interested in this field of research. Oddly, I was not surprised by the ending. From the very moment in the prologue, when the suggestion was made that the killer Agatha Christie wrote as the killer was not the killer, I knew where it was headed. And I was right. Normally I am not. But I could see where this was going. As a Agatha Christie fan I didn't really care for it. But as someone interested in psycology, it was very well written. One thing to note is that it gives away the solutions of several of Agatha Christie's works. So, be aware of that before reading.