Ordeal by Innocence does not follow the standard Agatha Christie format. This novel presents the psychology of the suspects in a murder of a domineering woman. Rachel Argyle, a wealthy and generous woman falls victim to death by a poker. Her adopted son, Jacko, falls prey to a conviction for her murder and dies in prison from pneumonia. He had claimed his innocence by stating a man gave him a ride. The man, Dr. Calgary, meets with obstacles and does not confirm Jacko’s plea until two years later. Dr. Calgary goes to the Argyle family to explain the situation that only opens old wounds. Each of the adopted children, the husband, the husband’s secretary, and a nurse explore their relationship with Rachel. A wonderful approach to murder and how each individual involved might be the killer. The story reminds me of the novels of Elizabeth George and her Inspector Lynley series. Too often, the why tends to be omitted. ( )

Two years ago a man was found guilty of killing his mother, sent to prison, then died while incarcerated. Now a man has come forward with solid evidence to clear the son’s name, but he doesn’t at all get the reaction from the family that he expected. Because now, of course, the case is once again wide open, and any of them could be the murderer…

I think this is likely my least favorite of Christie’s novels I’ve read so far. It’s an interesting premise, and by the end I was interested to see who’d dunnit, but the beginning and middle seemed really to drag along at a snail’s pace, and then when the killer was revealed, I was disappointed that the answer wasn’t more clever. *shrug* ( )

Two years after Jacko was convicted of the murder of his adopted mother and has died in jail, his alibi steps forward. Dr Calgary had been out of the country during the trial and only heard news of it upon his return. Certain that Jacko was innocent, Dr Calgary takes it upon himself to investigate the past.

A psychological endeavour on Agatha Christie’s part, this story signifies a shift in style from some of her earlier, light works, and focuses largely on conversation, memory and perception, as each sibling suspects each other of the murder of their somewhat eccentric foster mother. The book was dedicated “To Billy Collins with affection and gratitude”. It was he who had convinced Christie to leave her one-sided deal with the Bodley Head, the publishers of her first six books, and to switch to William Collins Sons & Co in 1926. Now known as HarperCollins, they are Agatha Christie's UK and US publishers to this day.

It was first published in 1958 and it was in 1984 that the story was first adapted for film. It starred Donald Sutherland, Faye Dunaway and Christopher Plummer, and featured an interesting soundtrack that is often thought to conflict with the atmosphere of the film. In 2007, the story featured Miss Marple as part of the ITV television series, played by Geraldine McEwan.

In 2018 new TV adaptation of Ordeal by Innocence was broadcast with an all-star cast, including Bill Nighy, Eleanor Tomlinson and Anna Chancellor.

It is 10 years since I last read this and I am re-reading it for my Agatha Christie reading group.
It was chosen for our discussion because it is a stand alone, so we will be following our discussion with the viewing of the 2018 TV adaptation.

We are told in reviews that the book was one of Agatha Christie's own favourite novels, and featured a interpretation of her holiday home, Greenway House. Also that the reason this was not a "Poirot" was that when she wrote this book Christie was free to do whatever she wanted as she was not in any financial need that period and wanted to write something that would be enjoyable for her.
We spend a lot of time (along with the characters) thinking about who the murderer is, and also about the fact that the innocent are suffering too. We are presented with each of the family in turn for assessment. Did you finally guess who it was?

I haven't actually created a list of questions this time, so it will be interesting to see how the discussion goes.
Some suggestion of themes

Guilt vs Innocence
Why is no-one pleased by Dr. Calgary's assertion of the alibi?
Nurture vs Nature - in particular why didn't Rachel Argyle's great "experiment" work?
Did Calgary do the right thing? Or should life have gone on with the case unsolved?
Remember that Calgary's revelations eventually led to Mary's husband Philip becoming fixated on solving the murder and so there was in fact another murder and an attempted murder. ( )

This was a little slow to get going, but kept me guessing throughout - I suspected each character in turn - no doubt exactly as Christie intended me to. I found lots of the characters' attitudes and sweeping statements hard to stomach (on women in general, menopausal women, mothers, women unable to have children etc - always women, you note) and I suppose I should think of this as a 'historical' novel now. I am getting old...

MILD SPOILER

I'm glad Hester ditched the appalling Don, but she should really spend some time growing up rather than marrying the next older man she comes across. ( )

CRÍTICA: http://www.planocritico.com/critica-punicao-para-a-inocencia-de-agatha-christie/ ( )