Category: And Then There Were None

Moral principles function as a prerequisite for human life. Wargrave the retired judge and has a profession that signifies his character’s unique way of the perception of the ethical values, meant to reveal the virtue of judicial systems in fighting the will for crime in human beings. For Wargrave, his victims’ crimes are vicious doings they must be punished for. Yet he wants to punish those who consign bad deeds by his own hands (Christie303). For he has a strong desire to tell people what is right, deeply influenced by his position as a judge. One more motivation for Wargrave is his wish to recover the mistaken system.

The role that morality operates in And Then There Were None is different; for it is no more about God’s regulations, it is about crimes. While the law always replicates the ethical society; in a sense, it is the morality of the people that do not reflect the beliefs rather even those who; “count and who speak out in the community” as well (Friedman qtd. in Pruitt4). That person who speak out loud without saying a word; his actions and assumptions, build his presence in society. Like the case of Wargrave, makes his existence by the observation and the behaviors he has, so he can assure his presence in his community. This can also give hints to that Wargrave believes in actions, yet he wants to observe. He confronts that he was observing the guests’ activities while he was on the terrace; Christie portrayed him as a person who observes before doing the act (Christie161). Giving proves to his victims that he is observing their movements.

Moreover, people change as morals and customs naturally do, with rising and diminishing intensities and inclinations (Freedman qtd in Pruitt4). Wargrave’s world is different from that of the other guests (his victims). This forged moralist receives crimes as an illegal deed; thus he accepted the idea that to be himself the punisher. He believes in moralistic values as judicial rules; the lucid simple example for his corrupted Morals is his fake death by the brand of Cain; which stands for the first murderer of Able by his brother Cain in the Book of genesis.

In addition, the guilt of his sufferers is the result of his disturbed contradicted morals. He uses the mark of Cain (that scar in his forehead) as a metaphor to bring an understanding of his relation to Claim at the end of the document he sent to the police, to claim that: “The third, [the third clue], [is symbolical. The manner of my death marking me on the forehead. The brand of Cain”], which serves as an overlap between the biblical story of Cain, the son of Adam and Eve and that of judge Wargrave (Christie316). This highlights Wargrave’s correlation with Cain’s perspectives on God’s rules back then. Christopher Chanock explained in Kenyou. Edu. Com website that “Am, I brother’s keeper” is an answer to Cain’s standpoint that he is not responsible for the termination of his brother Able, so in the eye of Cain his actions alone absolutely do not worth any panel (Chanock). The same how, Wargrave thinks, that he is not responsible for God’s failure in accomplishing moral justice on the earth; so it is not his fault that he kills and reprimand criminals.

Wargrave sees himself able to judge in contrast to others. He is certainly judging those unblemished guests for escaping justice. Christie used Wargrave’s judgment as a notion to pore-over that judgment is God’s quality, not humans; for they are not able to critic each other. He plays also a judgmental role trying to preach the victims and their actions, judging and playing God’s role like the case of many people in real life; Vera Claythorne (the secretary) starts thinking in her-self “he plays God almighty for a good many months every year” (Christie181). Wargrave intends to take God’s work to do what God could not do as he believes; so he selects his victims to panel them himself instead of God. It is also credible in the description of his voice as having a judging moralistic tone as described by Ethel Rogers, Thomas Rogers’ wife; “the voice that sounds like Judgment” (Christie62). Describing his judicial tone and how much of a saint he is judging others’ actions instead of his. In fact, the judgmental deposits itself on Wargrave, thinking that judging is the power he has to underestimate others. Indeed, actions and tone of authority say a lot about the selfish judgmental Wargrave.

In the novel, And Then There Were None, Agatha Christie touches on several social issues that include, race, gender, class, and age. In this post I want to discuss how Christie uses her novel to discuss the theme of gender bias and how this impacted the women on the island. Reading this novel, there are two ways that genders were perceived. At first, we see how the men treat women and place them inside this box of the 1930s gender stereotypes. Then, with reading further in we can see how these gender stereotypes are challenged as the murders continue. Christie really gives you well developed characters that show their real strength.

First, we actually get a glimpse into how women are perceived by the men in this novel in chapter one. Dr. Armstrong speaks of “Mrs. Owen” as someone who is frail, “These women and their nerves” (12). He then continues to mention that these nerves are what keeps him in business. This showcases how doctors look at women and their symptoms as them just being bored during this time. Farther in the novel, after the death of Mr. Rogers, Vera Claythorne begins to laugh wildly. The first response that Dr. Armstrong has is to strike her across the face. For someone who is supposed to be familiar with women, he disregards how to appropriately treat women, especially during events such as this. Another instance that describes the way that the men perceive women is during Lawrence Wargrave’s confession letter, “Women are fiends – absolute fiends – you wouldn’t think a girl like that – a nice straight jolly girl – you wouldn’t think she’d do that, would you? That she’d take a kid out to sea and let it drown – you wouldn’t think a woman could do a thing like that?” (290). Right here he underestimates the ability and the strength that women have. Basically saying that they are weak and frail.

During this novel, we see how the men perceive the female characters and how they try to confine them to the normal 1930s gender roles and stereotypes. Though Christie actually describes these women breaking normal stereotypes. As described above, the men see them weak and frail, but on the other hand they are some of the stronger characters. Spoiler Alert! Ahead – Vera Claythorne making it to be the last character alive, shows the strength that she has. She survives everyone else, even though the doctor talks about her having episodes of hysteria. Then you have Emily Brent, who really breaks this gender stereotype. She is very opinionated and set in her ways. She was a very independent character and very confident in herself, which really unlike most female characters during this time.

I think that Christie wanted to show and have people understand that in a mystery novel, everyone is capable of something to the extreme, including murder. Christie really breaks away from social norms that include gender, class and race. The use of these really enhances the novel because everyone is a suspect. It makes the reader really focus on everyone and notice details that could led to solving the mystery, even though at the end we find that we would have never solved this one.

In my opinion people are born neutral. Your behavior can depend on how you were raised. There are people that are very influential to you in a positive or negative way. Our attitude can be changed from being around people who make bad choices. If you are around good people then you will make better choices around others. The books that I will be proving people are born neutral are To Kill A Mockingbird, And Then There Were None, Macbeth and The Boy In The Striped Pajamas. I will be quoting characters from each of these books and how they are not influenced by others. This will prove why John Jacques Rousseau believed we all were born neutral.

In And Then There Were None it is about ten people staying on Soldier island. The characters are Vera Claythorne, Emily Brent, Justice Wargrave, Anthony Marston, Philip Lombard, General MacArthur and, William Blore. Mr. and Mrs. Rodgers are already on the island because they are maids. Later into the book, a record comes on listing that everyone has committed a murder in the past. “Ladies and Gentlemen! Silence, please!” “ Everyone was startled. They looked around at each other, at the walls. Who was speaking?” (Page 42.) After everyone’s crime had been listed everyone was scared, and suspicious. Hearing all the crimes shows us that these people aren’t normal. This goes along with what I’m talking about perfectly. Lot’s of the people in this room have done some tame crimes while the others have done terrible crimes. These people were treated differently, and later in life caused these crimes. They were taught bad things and made them bad people.

As the story goes on, we hear the causes of the crimes. Some of the people, like William Blore regret what they did. aren’t bad like what we thought.They were all weirded out after hearing all of the crimes. Vera shoots Phillip and she is all that is left. She has shown that she is not a normal woman. They don’t talk about her having a bad childhood in the book, but something in her life triggered her to do wrong.At the end of the book she foundation noose. She goes onto the chair, puts the noose around her neck, and kills herself.This was all caused because of Hugo and how she let him down . She let him down by letting Cyril swim very far at the beach. She was influenced by killing Cyril that made her bad. Vera ends her life just like in the nursery rhyme in the house. “One little soldier boy left all alone, he went and hanged himself and then there were none,” (Page 284).

Macbeth is the next book. The main character Macbeth is in good condition with the current king of Scotland. Later we learn that his wife, Lady Macbeth is the one who gets him into all of the trouble he will later experience. She calls out to demons from hell to help her comment bad things, and is always telling Macbeth that they should kill Duncan. Lady Macbeth causes Macbeth to do lots of evil later on. What I’ve talked about before is that us humans are made out by actions. Lady Macbeth was made out by bad actions. She later gets Macbeth to agree to kill Duncan. “LADY MACBETH: Who dares receive it other,As we shall make our griefs and clamour roar Upon his death?” “MACBETH: I am settled, and bend up. Each corporal agent to this terrible feat,” (Act 1, Scene 7.) That night they kill Duncan, and Macbeth is faltered. He has changed by the action of Lady Macbeth.

As we near the end of the book, it seems as if Macbeth and Lady Macbeth have swapped places. Macbeth’s actions have now shaped him into an evil king while Lady Macbeth witnessing her husbands reign has made her more nice and scared. She can’t stand what she is seeing, and commits suicide. “Seyton: The queen is dead my lord.” “Macbeth: She would have died later anyway,” (Act 5, Scene 5.) Macbeth is sad, but continues with the battle at hand. If he hadn’t changed from his wife’s actions, he would have cared more. His actions have made him way too malevolent in which he can’t even mourn for his wife.

In To Kill a Mockingbird, Scout Finch is affected by Maycomb county and all of its racism. Jem and Scout, the main characters, were born and raised by their dad Atticus. He made the normal kids they should be. We are told about the kids mother and her past, “Four years later I was born, and two years later our mother died from a sudden heart attack. They said it ran in her family. I did not miss her, but I think Jem did,” (Page 3). Scout was born without the love of her mother, making her act more of a man than a women. Jem did know his mother, and was raised by her for awhile. The start of their childhood started the train that shaped them. That was only when Jem was four and Scout was two. Atticus later raised the two into what he essentially was. Scout was man like and tuff, but Jem was more civilized from being raised by his mom.

As they grew older, Jem took Scout to school. Her teacher, Miss Caroline, patronised her, “Now you tell your father not to teach you any more. It’s best to begin reading with a fresh mind. You tell him I’ll take over from here and try to undo the damage,”(Page 9.) This was the first time that scout saw someone differently. Miss Caroline wasn’t born in Alabama, that’s why she isn’t used to the country folk. She was born and raised differently than Scout.

Seeing Scout upset about the teacher calling her out by how she was raised and taught shows something. One thing’s for certain, humans are different. The other thing is that some people can’t see that we are different. Miss Caroline doesn’t think that it is appropriate for Scout to be taught to read yet, and this upsets Scout. Miss Caroline was born and raised like a gentle person. She doesn’t know another way, and thinks that Scouts way is bad. “Your father does not know how to teach. You can have a seat now,” (Page 9.) They only know their own way, and how they were born and raised shaped that.

The Boy In The Striped Pajamas is about how Bruno, the child of a Hitler general meets a Jew at a concentration camp named shumel. The kids father put him in the Hitler Youth so he could later on be one of the soldiers. “Some people make all the decisions for us,”(page, 14.) This quote shows how the kids did not have a chance to make their own decisions on what they want to do.

Agatha Christie, English writer, once said, “Very few of us are what we seem”. Many people do not seem as they portray. People can take the lead in a rough situation and still be the one who made the situation rough. And Then There Were None, is a murder mystery novel written by Agatha Christie where ten strangers are invited stay at a mansion on Indian Island. They are all trapped and one of them is a murderer. All ten guests had been brought together for a specific reason; they had all committed a crime in the past. Judge Wargrave takes the role of the leader of the group, who invites, murders, and punishes those who had committed crimes in the past.

Philip Lombard, William Blore, Vera Claythorne, Dr. Armstrong, Emily Brent, General Macarthur, Anthony “Tony” Marston, Judge Wargrave, Mr. and Mrs. Rogers have all been invited to Indian Island as guests or were hired by Mr. Owen to fulfill their specific jobs. After all the guests had successfully arrived safely at the island, the host, Mr. Owen, who was expected to arrive the next day, had been missing. After dinner, the guest had began talking together, until suddenly, an inhuman voice comes from the gramophone accusing each person on the island with a specific crime they had committed in the past. Comparing the notes they had received, everyone came to the conclusion that none of them actually know who Mr. Owen is, “I haven’t seen Mrs. Owen—not yet. We only came here two days ago” (21). Anthony “Tony” Marston, chokes on his whiskey that had been poisoned and dies. Spooked, the group retreats to their rooms and almost everyone had been consumed with guilt and memories of their murder. The next morning, Mrs. Rogers was found dead due to an overdose of a sedative. Lombard and Dr. Armstrong plan a search for the island in hopes of finding the mysterious Mr. Owen but failed to find him. General Macarthur stays behind and soon dies after from a blow in the back of his head while looking out at the ocean. The next morning, Mr. Rogers was found dead due to sharp object hitting his head. After breakfast, Emily Brent was found dead due to her neck being injected with poison. Wargrave decides to team up with Dr. Armstrong to fake his death to spy on the murder. However, Dr. Armstrong was tricked by Wargrave and got pushed into the ocean and drowned. Blore is killed when a marble statue is pushed out of a window, crushing him. Vera is convinced that Lombard is the murder and shoots him before hanging herself after returning to her room with a noose waiting for her.

Behind all these deaths was Judge Wargrave himself. Wargrave was filled with desire to commit murder at an early age as well as enforcing justice, “I have a definite sadistic delight in seeing or causing death. I remember experiments with wasps—with various garden pests… From an early age I knew very strongly the lust to kill. But side by side with this went a contradictory trait—a strong sense of justice” (194). He only wanted to punish those who were guilty of a crime, “It is abhorrent to me that an innocent person or creature should suffer or die by any act of mine”(194). When he learned about those who got away with murder, he decided to lure them into the island. He chooses Philip Lombard and Anthony “Tony” Marston because he believed that those who did not feel any guilt for taking lives of others were dangerous, “His complete callousness and inability to feel any responsibility for the lives he had taken made him, I considered, a type dangerous to the community and unfit to live” (197). He chooses Vera Claythorn because she drowned a child for her own selfish reasons, “You see, she did it more or less for me…”(198). He chooses Dr. Armstrong as he operated on a patient while he was intoxicated, killing her. After hearing gossip about General Macarthur, he starts to track him. Emily Brent was chosen for the death of her servant who was fired because of her pregnancy. Tomas and Ethel Rogers were chosen because of letting their former employer die

Wargrave also chooses carefully for those who dies first and how they die—as he wanted to stay true to the nursery rhyme, “The order of death upon the island had been subjected by me to special thought and care”(199), “Those whose guilt was the lightest should, I decided, pass out first, and not duffer the prolonged mental strain and fear that the more cold-blooded offenders were to suffer”(199) . He chose to follow a children’s poem that corresponded with each person’s death, “A childish rhyme of my infancy came back into my mind—the rhyme of the ten little Indian boys”(196). Marston dies first instantly by poison and Mrs. Rogers dies second, during her slumber, “Ten little Indian boys went out to dine; One choked his little self and then there were nine. Nine little Indian boys sat up very late; One overslept himself and then there were eight” (22). They were the first two to die because Wargrave knew that Marston had no morals and Mrs. Rogers was dominated by her husband, “Marston, I recognized, was a type born without that feeling of moral responsibility which most of us have… Mrs. Rogers, I had no doubt, had acted very largely under the influence of her husband” (199). General Macarthur died a painless death when he was approached unknowingly from behind and took a blow to the head, “Eight little Indian boys traveling in Devon; One said he’d stay there and then there were seven”(22). Mr. Rogers was killed by an axe to his head, “Seven little Indian boys chopping up sticks; One chopped himself in halves and then there were six”(22). Wargrave slips chloral into Emily Brent’s coffee and was found nearly unconscious in the dining room. Wargrave then uses this opportunity to inject her neck with cyanide, “Six little Indian boys playing with a hive; A bumblebee stung one and then there were five”(22). After Wargrave tricks Dr. Armstrong thinking that he would be an ally, he pushes Armstrong into the ocean where he drowned, “Four little Indian boys going out to sea; A red herring swallowed one and then there were three”(22). Blore was killed when Wargrave pushes a marble statue out of a second-story window onto him, “Three little Indian boys walking in the Zoo; A big bear hugged one and then there were two”(22).Then, only Vera and Lombard were left. Vera thinking that Lombard was the killer, stole the gun from him and shot him, “Two little Indian boys sitting in the sun; One got frizzled up and then there was one”(22) Wargrave sets up a noose in Vera’s room, testing out a psychological experiment, seeing if Vera would hang herself after being conscious of her own guilt. She ends up hanging herself to match with the poem, “One little Indian boy left all alone; He went and hanged himself and then there were none”(22).

Conclusion

In the end, we come to realize that Wargrave wanted to make sure the guilty were punished for but not before torturing those who felt the most guilt mentally. We also come to realize that Wargrave is sadistic but wants to enforce acts of justice. He never shows pity for the victims as he messes with them and kills them to match the poem, “Ten Little Indians”.

In the novel, Murder on the Orient Express, the topic of justice and judgment is the main theme. The questioning of whether the murder of Casseti, also known as Ratchett, was morally correct and just was a conflict throughout the novel . Justice and judgment are ultimately decided by detective Poirot. The Murder on the Orient Express showed quite often how the characters considered the murder committed to be a heinous, yet justifiable act. Through detective Poirot, the author, Agatha Christie, allows the questioning of whether or not the murder can be justfied. Throughout the novel, the possibilities for the murder of Ratchett was justified through morality, revenge, and deceitfulness.

In Murder on the Orient Express, there were many instances as to how morality plays a role in the topic of justice and judgment. One main instance of how morality played a role is in the murder of Ratchett. Morality comes into play as the detective starts questioning the passengers. In one instance, Detective Poirot questions PrincessDragomiroff, “You do not believe in doing your utmost to further the ends of justice?” “In this case, I consider that justice – strict justice – has been done.” (Christie 143) Princess Dragomiroff aboard the Orient Express believes that justice has been served to Ratchett. She believes it is morally okay since he was evil in her eyes, and affected the people around him in a negative way. Also, an important twist that Christie put in the novel was that every passenger aboard the train knew Ratchett in some way and resented him. Questioning of Ratchett’s murder and whether it was deserved and moral, is where detective Periott began understanding each passenger on board and how they were connected with Ratchett. Christie developed the characters so well that their thought process in the murder of Ratchett was understood and justified as a moral act. Christie also delved into each character and their individual relationship with Ratchett, allowing for such a motive for each to have to quite literally backstab him. It was coming clear to Detective Poirot that through his questioning and stories he heard by the 12 passegers who knew Ratchett, that they were all involved in the murder and that Ratchett was an evil man who deserved to die. This caused Detective Poirot to be quite conflicted in his decision making. Ultimately, the decision made by Detective Poirot is impossible to justify because it goes against his responsibilities to uphold the law, “Nobody can justify or forgive.” (Source 4: Verbalization of concept of “vigilante justice”). No one person can make the distinction of whether an action is just or to be forgiven since everyone has different definitions and moral means to which they justify. This is tied to the morality of each character and whether committing a murder of someone so heinous was morally wrong. To process this, the detective digs deeper into the backstory of each suspect to better understand the motive for such a morbid act.

This also comes up when detective Periott is giving his final verdict to all the characters, “Ratchett escaped justice in America. There was no question as to his guilt. I visualized a self-appointed jury of twelve people who condemned him to death and were forced by exigencies of the case to be their own executioners.” (Christie 95). In this quote, Poriott is emphasizing how they became not only the executioners of the trial but the jury since there were 12 passengers. This deals with morality because in the court system, we have 12 jurors who decide whether a defendant is guilty of the crimes they have been accused of. In this case, the 12 jurors are the characters who committed the crimes, and Detective Poriott gives them the choice of how they will decide on the verdict. Detective Poirot allows them the choice of the truth, to turn themselves in and tell the truth on how they all committed the crimes, or stick with the statements of the passengers. Each of them had strong alibis. This is the moral decision of Detective Periott because he knows that they all committed the murder. However, each passenger claimed it to be seeking justice and serving justice for the heinous acts that Ratchett committed. “Taken under this light, we can understand Poirott’s final gathering of the passengers in an entirely different way”… “We get to see the realization of our vigilante desires and be freed of guilt for having them because there is no guilt in having them.” (Source 5: Traveling Detectives: The ‘Logic of Arrest” and the Pleasures of (Avoiding) the Real). Detective Poirot uses his moral compass rather than his duty of the law to make his justification that the crimes committed were justifiable to make-up for the wrongdoing of an evil Ratchett.

Another way morality is shown through justice and judgment is through the alibis of the passengers. Christie gives the rationale behind killing Ratchett, “Society had condemned him; we were only carrying out the sentence.” (Christie 89). Princess Dragomiroff explains how the effort made by each character was just and they were serving Ratchett with the death penalty. Princess Dragomiroff then supports her statements by including society’s condemnation of Ratchett. To add to the moral compass that Poirot shows, “Poirot does not arrest the criminals because they are not criminals. There is only one true criminal in ‘Murder on the Orient Express,’ the abominable Mr. Ratchett.” (Source 5: Traveling Detectives: The ‘Logic of Arrest’ and the Pleasures of (Avoiding) the Real). In this quote, it explains how Poirot chooses not to arrest the passengers aboard because he is agreeing with the revenge each individual took as morally acceptable.

Revenge also played a role in Murder on the Orient Express. Throughout the entirety of the novel, revenge is evident, since getting vengeance on Ratchett is the reason for the whole story. In the book, the elements of vengeance and retribution become the focus for Detective Poirot as he realizes, ‘The question we have now to ask ourselves is this,’ he said. ‘Is this murder the work of some rival gang whom Cassetti had double-crossed in the past, or is it an act of private vengeance?’ (Christie 112). Poirot in this quote is questioning who has taken revenge on Ratchett. The theme of revenge revolves around the characters getting retribution on Ratchett for murdering an innocent three-year-old girl, Daisy Armstrong. Due to the evil of Ratchett, the passengers took it upon themselves to carry out the sentence he got awway with in America.Revenge for justice was a plot theme Christie used in other novels as well, “Viewing ‘Appointment with Death’, in relation to the ‘Murder on the Orient Express’ we will see how Christie weaves a geopolitical mystery satire out of her Oriental mysteries and with relationships she establishes teasingly with her readers”(SOURCE). Murdering out of revenge has become a theme with Christie’s other murder novels and Appointment with Death creates a close storyline to Murder on the Orient Express. Much like in the Appointment of Death, revenge on the main character in the book becomes the climax and ultimately revenge is the resolution. Murder on the Orient Express becomes synonymous with the other novel Chrisite wrote as she spends time developing her chracters and the themes of her novels carry over through her different works.

Much like the topic of morality, revenge is also seen through the alibis and testaments from the characters aboard the train. It comes quite apparent that no one is sorry for stabbing Ratchet, ‘If ever a man deserved what he got, Ratchett or Cassetti is the man. I’m rejoicing at his end. Such a man wasn’t fit to live!’ (Christie 144). Ratchett was not convicted of the crime he committed and got away with it. In this case, one of the passengers, MaQueen, expressed that Ratchet’s murder was just and he would accept the consequences if had to stab him again. MacQueen’s explanation relates to how justice was served through society, “It is an act of retribution done by a person who can be called ‘vigilante’…who takes the law into his/her own hands by trying (judging) or punishing the other person,” (SOURCE). The act of retribution done by a person in a certain case of revenge is justified as the concept of “vigilante justice.” Vigilante justice is the character’s way of justifying the crimes the passengers on board the train committed. The passengers believe their actions are just and that Ratchett got the right judgment for his actions.

Much like MacQueen’s statements made about the murder, Linda Arden, another passenger aboard, also had a very similar dialogue with Poriott in her confession. She stated, ‘I would have stabbed that man twelve times willingly. It wasn’t only that he was responsible for my daughter’s death and her child’s”…“There had been other children before Daisy – there might be others in the future.’ (Christie 159). In this quote, Linda admits that she would have murdered Ratchett by herself if it came down to it. Her motive is strong in getting revenge considering she wanted justice for Daisy. Murder on the Orient Express is one of the many examples of how Christie uses revenge as the main theme, “Representation of the concept of ‘vigilante justice’ in Agatha Christie’s creative works using Prof. Bogin’s method of comprehension.”(verbalization of concept of “vigilante justice”) Christie’s way of showing revenge in some of her novels is through comprehension and understanding the story before stating the reasons. In Murder on the Orient Express, she uses the storyline of each individual aboard the train and their past relationshsips with Ratchett, to then fully understand the revenge story of the novel and whether or not taking revenge is just.

Another theme that plays an important role in the novel Murder on the Orient Express is lies and deceit. This is particularly evident when Detective Poirot begins to question the passengers. All passengers created solid alibi’s to prove their innocence, ‘In my opinion, M. Poirot,’ he said, ‘the first theory you put forward was the correct one – decidedly so. I suggest that that is the solution we offer to the Yugo-Slavian police when they arrive.’ (Christie 197) This quote shows the conversation between Dr. Constantine and Detective Poirot, in which Constantine is agreeing that justice has indeed been served, yet everyone is innocent since they all had alibi’s. Through everyone’s lies and deceit, the passengers were able to put an end to a morbid man and carry on with the outcome they wanted. This is important because with Ratchett’s death, they were able to avenge Daisy and begin to heal. However, Detective Poirot was an intelligent detective and was able to see through all the lies, “Poirot comes to realize that he has been an audience of one for a careful series of performances.” … “than seeing how their enactment of roles implicates them in carceral circumstances that are sometimes apprehended as “criminal” sometimes not.” (SOURCE). Poirot realized that during his questioning, every single passenger lied to him about where they were and who they were. He easily concludes that every passenger murdered Ratchett.

Another way lies and deceit plays a key role in this novel is through the characters. Poirot discovers that they all murdered Ratchett by each character stabbing Ratchett once. This is when Arbuthnot, another passenger aboard, brings up the 12 people on the jury, “Say what you like, trial by jury is a sound system”(Christie 86). In this quote, Poirot and Arbuthnot discuss whether a trial by jury is fair. Arbuthnot expresses his clear support for the system and shows zero remorse when all the passengers are told that Ratchett was murdered. In this quote, Arbuthnot was not referring to the law, he is referring to the 12 people who killed Ratchett and how all of them became the jurors of Ratchett’s crimes. With all 12 people deceiving Detective Poirot, they essentially created their courtroom to carry out the ruling. Christie wanted to emphasize the jury analogy with these characters, “The pretense, disguise, play-acting, and outward show that are essential to the mystery genre are given a special intensity in Christie’s work by her constant emphasis on and reference to the “theatricality” of her characters’ actions.” (Agatha Christie: Modern and Modernist) (SOURCE). This quote relates to lies and deceit because it states how Christie uses disguises and stereotypical characters to deceive the reader from the big performance that they are about to witness.

With the number of lies the passengers told the detective, it started to raise suspicion on his part. Poirot wondered how every single passenger could have such a sound alibi this easily. M. Bouc, a friend of Detective Poirot, also began to ponder the well constructed alibi’s of the passengers. This thought began to ponder in M. Bouc’s head, a friend of Poirot’s. A conversation then sparked between the detective and Bouc, “Well, you know, I had the preposterous idea that it might be the truth.”(Christie 129). In this quote, detective Poirot is conversing with Bouc about Count Andrenyi’s confession of his wife’s innocence in Ratchett’s murder. Bouc believes that the count gave his word only to protect Countess Andrenyi, but Poirot believes the count is telling the truth. In Christie’s novels, she was able to create a realistic scenario in which murder and justice are an important factor. In Murder on the Orient Express, Christie showcased each character’s past and the darkness that came along with it. A similar way Christie used a character’s past to play a role in the overall murders of one of her novels was through the novel And Then There Were None, “By contrast, the novel’s concerns with gender norms and transgressions could never be excised from the text.” (Gender and Moral Immaturity in Agatha Christie’s ‘And Then There Were None’). Within And Then There Were None, the murder mystery, the characters lie about their dark pasts, so that none of the other characters think that they are the killer. This is very similar to how the passengers aboard the train on the Orient Express try and cover up their past when Detective Poirot is questioning them. Deceit is carried out not just in the murder on the Orient Express, but also in And Then There Were None and others. Lies and deceit gave the passengers, who were the victims of Ratchett’s wrongdoing, the ability to have justice for Daisy Armstrong. This led them to carry out what they believed was judgment for Ratchett’s sins.

Overall, In Murder on the Orient Express, Christie was able to show the unfairness in Ratchett’s freedom, after killing an innocent young girl, through deceiving the detective with a number of witnesses who corrobarated their alibi’s and created a version of murder that conflicted with the common law. Christie also showed how revenge can sometimes be justified through certain circumstances. The morality behind the justification was also questioned in this novel and whether or not Ratchett’s murder was the proper judgment for the crimes he committed. Morality, revenge, and deceitfulness, gave the ability to serve justice upon Ratchett, as well as, be given no punishment for committing the muder of Ratchett. The passengers aboard the Orient Express became the executioners and the jurors of Ratchett’s trial and ultimately carried out the death penalty as the solution for Ratchett’s sins.

And Then There Were None is the most popular novel written by Agatha Christie which is considered the greatest mystery novel that was ever written. In this masterpiece that has a mixture of murder and suspense, Mr. Owen gathers ten strangers who share shameful pasts together on an isolated island. However, the guests don’t recognize the identity of the host that invited them. As they start telling their deepest, darkest secrets to each other, one by one, they start to die. The author of And Then There Were None was Agatha Christie who set the theme of a powerful journey leading the main characters to make a decision about their survival and fate, the way the writer goes into different components to show how this theme materialize about is irony. She uses this technique to get the full attention of the audience based on how the mystery in this novel brings up about missing characters and who will be the lost standing. The author creates a point in the novel which is a very suspenseful view that will catch everyone’s attention.

The novel uses distraught emotions to develop the characters, twisting them in ways they would not turn to. For example, it is not likely for the calm and usually optimistic Vera Claythorne to steal Philip Lombard’s revolver and turn on him. The people on the Indian Island fear that the murderer is among them and are willing to do actions that they never expected to commit, not to mention that some of the guests were already being haunted by their terrible crimes. Another example includes their food and eating habits. When the guests arrive on the island, their morale is high, and they eat a very expensive and well-prepared meal together; but as the novel continues, their food seems less impressive, such as canned meat; and eventually, some guests refuse to eat at all, which leads to a downturn in the mood. Their food represents the emotional and psychological stress that all of the inhabitants of Indian Island were caught up into.

The Catholic theme that was closely related to the story is The Unjust Judge that says “Then Jesus told them a parable about their need to pray always and not to lose heart. He said, ‘In a certain city there was a judge who neither feared God nor had respect for people. Justice Wargrave is an unjust judge who is comparable to the judge that Jesus mentioned in the catholic theme. The significance of the theme is that it tells the readers that this novel is a mystery of unsolved crimes, the elements that reflect with this style are irony, tone and mood. It is important because it shows how there are people who have an exceptional job tend to be malicious because of what they try to believe in. Also, the irony with this progress is how different techniques get into the reader’s mind with all the disappearances on the island that settles with the suspense that it reminds them of their tragic past. The tone and mood of the novel set out how it is dark and sinister that puts the mood very dramatically to each event leading up to their loss.

Trust, deception and immorality in the mystery novel discuss matters that happen most of the time in everyday life. Everything represents each chapter, and it presents us in ways that we don’t understand right away. They require a certain level of thought in order to be understood clearly. In which the author hopes to bring out. Trust is the key element of our lives. For instance, we need to choose whom we can confide in and whether we should believe in our friends or the people who are close to us. If those ten people on the island really want to stay alive, they should be aware of those who are truly trustworthy. However, they need to choose wisely, for one out of the ten is the murderer. Everyone in the house has their suspicions on who was making all the things up. No matter what the circumstances are, they remain immutable about not trusting each other. Having no one to trust makes all of them uneasy, making each of them more susceptible to being the next victim of the murderer. Having no one to trust only uncovers us to the point that we ruin ourselves, and when we trust the wrong person, the inevitable happen sooner than what’s expected.

The practice of deceiving someone by concealing the truth is ,unfortunately, also a part of life. however, the story involves the death of an individual. Lombard and Vera face the fact when they appear to be the last ones who are alive on the island. Instead of being the nice woman Vera seems to be, she turned out to be more despicable. Vera fools a lot of people with her act of being paranoid about having known that the killer follows the poem with his killings. It is herself that she needs to be wary of, and she is not doing a good job of that, because Vera kills Lombard in the end. Death comes in many ways, Murder is one of them. This immorality is the basis of the entire novel that made it more interesting. One by one, each one of the ten people die by someone else’s indecent actions. Even at the end of the novel where Vera shoots Lombard whom she liked, she had committed a crime that was against her will, even though she was trying to defend herself what she did wasn’t necessary, she still made a wrong choice by choosing to take someone else’s life. Immorality plagues our society deeply and most of the time we think that everything we do is the right thing. In conclusion, Some have twisted morals so much that they may think that the most immoral action is supposedly acceptable.

Throughout the novel, And Then There Were None by Agatha Christie, the author chose to display the pervasive theme of Culpability. Culpability defines the several degrees of responsibilities a person could be held accountable for a crime. Moreover, the story takes place on a perplexing Indian island at which an uncanny man, Mr. U.N. Owen bewitched a group involving ten people into following him into the island owing to the fact that each character that was summoned, played a part in some sort of murder while opposing the idea of culpability being applied to them. Besides, each victim begins to die in peculiar manners. Soon enough, the guests begin to notice they have been demanded to take part in trailing this mysterious man into the island to put an end to their lives by surprise. Additionally, readers begin to uncover that each character has niggling doubts about their measure of liability. For that reason, the readers come to presume that not one person on the island is as honorable as they claim to be. Further, the guests begin to notice a murderer is trapping them while Judge Wargrave continuously analyzes evidence as well as validates searches on both guests’ belongings and on the island itself, while also taking charge in prospective weapons and antidotes, assuring them that they’re safely secured. Thereupon, a religious fundamentalist, Miss Brent is accused of, murdering a younger adult by forcing her to commit suicide after being ordered out of her house. Therefore, Judge Wargrave is the most culpable whereas Miss Brent is the least culpable character in the novel, And Then There Were None.

First and Foremost, Judge Wargrave is the most responsible character in the novel due to his intentions of murdering all ten victims. Wargrave’s secret identity began to unfold towards the starting point of the novel beginning at the first meal on the Indian island when a strange voice echoed, “Without warning, inhuman, penetrating… Ladies and gentlemen! Silence, please!. You are charged with the following indictments.” (Christie, Chapter 3). The disclosure of these lists of crimes terminated suspicions as to the purpose of the guests’ being summoned to this island. Moreover, the use of grammar from the voice opens up a new window of possibilities as to who the murderer may be. For instance, the victims are charged with their crimes in a very professional, formal style that is commonly used in a courtroom, such as the grammar that Judge Wargrave was settled into using during his profession. Also, this event allows the readers to easily use important clues to connect actions as well as phrases to the characters themselves. Moreover, Judge Wargrave began to implicate and focus the attention on the other guests’ before his accusations stating “ Mr. Owen could only come to the island in one way. It is perfectly clear. Mr.Owen is one of us” (Christie, chapter 9 ). This phrase from Wargrave marked the second critical climax in the novel. Precedent to this moment, the guests suspected their host, Mr.Owen was plotting to murder them to then find out there was no one to be blamed but those within their party. Moreover, Judge Wargraves’s staged suspicions and acts of tricking the guests into believing he is innocent later results in readers discovering the judge was the killer of all ten guests all along. Therefore, Judge Wargrave holds the highest degree of responsibility for all ten characters of the novel.

Secondarily, a sixty-five-year-old woman, Emily Brent is the least culpable character in the novel due to her crime involving a young woman killing herself rather than Ms. Brent intentionally killing her. The death of Beatrice Taylor occurred due to Ms.Brent’s past decision to kick her out of her home once she discovered she had gotten impregnated by her husband. However, Emily Brent did not intentionally want Taylor dead whereas she does not believe she is culpable of a crime or should feel guilty about the death of Taylor. In addition, during the back and forth conversation between Brent and Vera, Vera questioned Brent saying, “What did you feel like when you knew she’d done that? Weren’t you sorry? Didn’t you blame yourself?”(Christie, Ch.7, Pg 67). Miss. Brent sincerely responded with, “I? I had nothing with which to reproach myself.”(Christie, Ch.7, pg 67). This conveys Emily’s belief that Beatrice Taylor’s suicidal death was not an incident she should’ve felt responsible for especially since she did not plan to have Taylor dead. Overall, Emily Brent is the least responsible character for the past deaths that have occurred resulting in the guests being charged with crimes and multiple degrees of responsibility for these incidents. Ms.Brent did not physically murder or force Beatrice to drown in the river after she had fired her for her teenage pregnancy. Therefore, Emily Brent is the least culpable character in contrast to the other nine guests or characters.

In brief, Judge Wargrave is the most culpable whereas Miss Brent is the least culpable character in the novel, And Then There Were None. Judge Wargrave chose to stage his reactions and thoughts as to who may have been the murderer. Further, into the reading, readers found out he was responsible for all ten deaths on the Indian Island, in comparison with the fact that Emily Brent did not deliberately drive Beatrice Taylor to take her own life. Moreover, Brent did not arrange to have Taylor murdered nor did she create a scheme to intentionally lie and hide her illegal actions. Therefore, the author chose to display the extensive theme of Culpability through the use of the guests’ crimes and comparison of their degrees of responsibility for these incidents which occurred in the novel.

And Then There Were None is a well-renowned murder mystery novel written by Agatha Christie. It is one of Christie’s finest works of literature and subsequently an ideal example of a good murder mystery novel. To determine whether a novel is a good example of a murder mystery novel, one must have the ability to utilize and understand the ultimate necessities required to structure a murder mystery novel. This is because the book consisted of suspense, characterisation and a satisfying resolution.

Suspense is an excellent literary technique constantly utilised in And Then There Were None. Suspense is the intense feeling that the reader goes through for the outcome of certain events. This technique is exemplified following the deaths of Anthony Marston and Ethel Rogers as the remaining characters realise that the set of ten little soldier boys have two missing figures. The first two figures died in an exact manner to Anthony Marston and Ethel Rogers; choking and oversleeping. This increased the suspense because the remaining characters would now face a chilling concept that they are isolated on an island with an unknown murderer who has carefully planned out their death. As each character is murdered, the tension rises as the remaining characters are aware that they are to be the next victim.

Additionally, Christie intentionally employed a constantly shifting point of view to build suspense. She instilled the audience a glimpse of the action from one character’s perspective and then raced on to another point of view and then another. In a way, one does not have a higher understanding than the characters themselves do. In chapter two, when the guests have just arrived on Soldier Island, the author cuts abruptly from one character to the next as they prepare to dine. Dr Armstrong felt inspired by the beauty of the island to “make plans, fantastic plans”; Anthony Marston laid in his bath thinking to himself that he “must go through with it”; William Henry Blore ties his tie and hopes he will not “bungle” his “job”; Macarthur wishes he could “make an excuse and get away, throw up the whole business.” Emily Brent reads Bible verses about the just punishment of sinners, and Lombard looks like a beast of prey. These specific references in the book indicated that the reader had just enough access to each character’s conscience to make them like a potential murderer, and then shifted to the next character. Essentially, the reader is never sure who to suspect the most and does not regard one character in particular to become a potential suspect.

Characterisation is also an essential literary technique for murder mystery literature. In the book, characterisation was used to display the truly evil side of human nature. This is specifically evident in the character Vera Claythorne. Christie had demonstrated Vera as a polite woman who was seemed vulnerable to any occurrence on Soldier Island. However, her previous self contradicted the astonishing outcomes she had accomplished. Christie employed Claythorne as one of the most intellectually capable and dynamic characters in the novel, explaining why she is was one of the last people left standing. She outwitted Philip Lombard, who thought she was a murderer, by stealing his gun and then summoning up the courage to shoot him when he leaps at her. Radically, Claythorne transformed throughout the course of the novel due to drastic influence from life-threatening situations surrounding her. However, Claythorne’s guilt, tendency toward hysteria, and her appeal with the nursery rhyme “Ten Little Soldier Boys” allowed Wargrave (the murderer) to inspire Vera to hang herself and subsequently fulfil the last line of the poem; “one little Soldier boy left all alone; he went out and hanged himself and then there were none.”

A satisfying epilogue is mandatory in all murder mystery novels. To determine whether an epilogue in a murder mystery novel is satisfying or not, it requires to reveal the truths about the characters falsely suspected. This is demonstrated when Lawrence Wargrave stated that “I wanted to kill… Yes, I wanted to kill.” (p. 288). This quote revealed that the murderer was Wargrave and that he had the ambition to kill. This quote is so beneficial to the overall novel, as the reader can fundamentally get in the mind of the character and trace the character footprints, and consequently understand the text to a fuller potential. In a way, Christie had intentionally employed Wargrave as the least likely figure to be the murderer as he was the least suspected to have committed anything negative with the law. This is because his past suggested that he was a judge, which is a primary figure to have nothing negative in relation to law. Christie had possibly implemented Wargrave as the murderer to employ a sense of irony.

Fundamentally, it depends on one’s perspective to determine whether or whether not a novel can be determined as a good murder mystery or not. However, judging by the constant use of suspense, the beneficial utilisation of characterisation and the pleasurable resolution And Then There Were None can be concluded as a good example of a murder mystery. These are all compulsory elements in murder mystery literature as without the usage of suspense characterisation and the pleasurable resolution the novel would be dull, tiresome and subsequently, give no reason for the reader to keep reading the book.

And Then There Were None was released in the United Kingdom as Ten Little Indians in keeping with the title of Agatha Christie’s novel. The movie is a 1945 film adaptation of Agatha Christie’s novel by the same name. The story is about ten strangers who are invited to an island mansion off the coast of Devon by the mysterious U.N.Owen. The U.N.Owens were absent the whole visit but they left a record to be played on their behalf which had the ten strangers’ little secrets of murders. The film is directed by René Clair, produced by René Clair and Harry M. Hopkin and starred by Barry Fitzgerald, Walter Huston and Louis Hayward. It makes a perfect blend of mystery and crime. This paper will compare and contrast the first scene in the movie with the first and second chapters in the book.

Agatha Christie’s style in mystery is always unusual to the mystery genre. She introduces the characters to the readers individually and in details. She makes the readers get indulged with the character’s flow since the beginning of the novel till the end. In And Then There Were None, she managed to introduce to us how the characters were linked to U.N.Owen and how they are linked to each other. The audience by the first two chapters know the nature of the characters, their jobs, their thoughts about their journey to Sticklehaven and Indian Island which increases the difficulty in recognizing the true murderer. She also increases the suspense by letting the audience through the characters’ thoughts which make them have no doubt or suspect any of them as a murderer.

In addition, Christie gives the audience the weapon of knowledge. She makes them know more in order to expect more. For example, she made the audience know more about the characters, like Emily Brent and General Macarthur, believe that they are going to Indian Island to visit old friends and others, like Blore and Lombard, believe that they are hired to do some jobs on the island, while the audience can conclude that the characters are being deceived. Also, she gives her readers the advantage of knowing that there is a deeper, hidden motive behind all these characters while the characters are surely convinced with the minor reasons for each of them to accept and actually visit this island.

The fact that she gives a hint for the characters’ past makes the readers believe that each character is not only a potential victim but also could be a potential suspect. For example, Vera recalls being declared not guilty by a coroner’s inquest, which takes place after a suspicious death. Also, Lombard thinks about the fact that he has not always followed the law, but “always got away with it”; General Macarthur’s thoughts turn to a “damned rumour” that has resolute him for years. All this gives the reader the privilege to be alongside the detective and solve the case with him.

On the other hand, the 1945’s movie adaptation for the novel did not have a good introduction for the characters. The opening scene showed the center point of the whole movie, the ten figurines of Indians in a circle, which was a mystery for the audience and not related to the next scene. The following scene started with all the characters on the boat, not known for the audience nor for each other which is totally different than the book. They started looking at each other in different ways which gave the audience a glance about each character’s personality. For example, Vera Claythorne had a scarf flying around her neck which dabbed on Philip Lombard’s face, that was their first interaction as she smiled to him and took it on the other side; here comes the second interaction also between Vera and Dr. Armstrong also by her scarf dabbing on to his face. Now the audience’s first impression that Vera is a nice lady and same impressionfor both Dr. Armstrong and Philp Lombard. UnlikeVera, Emily Brent was so firm and didn’t like dealing with any on the boat.

How the characters got introduced for the audience was plain, with no details, no previous history about each character. They did not know each other so they started briefly introducing each other to themselves in a random way. Therefore, the audience did not have much of an advantage like the readers of the book. The movie made the audience to explore each character on its own path with the character flow through the scenes. The audience did not know what to think with it and expect something from each character and the character does another thing. The element of knowledge which cooks suspense was missing.

When it comes to music and customs, the music was by Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco and it was very suitable for each scene. It reflected each character’s feelings and engaged the audience with the character’s emotions. Also, the customs managed to reflect each character’s age and the time of the day. For example, if it’s time to sleep, they switch to their gowns and pajamas and if it’s noon, they wear their dresses and suits.

To sum this up, the book had its own style and was very detailed which made the reader a writer too. The book showed how Christie thinks and her talent was very obvious. Also, the movie conveyed the story in an exciting way because acting always conveys the facial expressions of the actors, along with the customs and the music which implies the action that is happening. The book was much better than the movie, it made the readers more engaged with the story.

Committing or assoicating in a murder is not exeptable on any circumstance and must be punished for their action. However, sometimes it is difficult to tell whether someone directly killed another person or not. The court system is used to decide on whether or not a person is guilty or not and if they are guilty, the judge decides how much responsibility they held in the crime. In the book And Then There Were None by Agatha Christie, Judge Justice Wargrave kills ten people in order based off of how capable they are. There are degrees of responsibility to those who are involved in a murder. Vera Claythorn is the most culpable in her crime of drowning Cyril Hamilton and General MacAuthor is the least culpable for his crime of sending Author Richmond to war to die.

Vera Claythorn is the most blameworthy for letting a young child, Cyril Hamilton, swim on his own and drown to death. On the island, she claims that is was an accident and she did not save the boy in time while he was drowning. Almost everyone on the island believes her story but not Wargrave. She let the kid swim and drown so Hugo inherit his rich family’s money and she could marry a wealthy man instead of a poor one. She choose to let death happen to find love and receive money. Out of all ten islanders, she was the only one to kill someone to take something from them which makes her hold the most responsibility in her crime. She was also the only one who was panicking and constantly thinking about her murder throught the book. In the novel it states “They had praised her courage and her sangfroid…. But not Hugo. Hugo had just—looked at her…. God, how it hurt, even now, to think of Hugo….” (Christie 192) She is mentally scarred by Hugo denying her love for him for even he did not think what Vera tried to do for them.

General MacAuthor is the least blameworthy for sending Author Richmond off to war to die. There has been many wars all over the world and soldiers die in every battle. Author Richmond signed up to be a soldier and knew he could be injured or die in a battle but it is worth it to serve for his country. General MacAuthor role is to choose who to send off to war whether the person is someone he values or someone he loathes. Even though MacAuthor wanted Richmond to be killed, he did not directly committ a murder or do something Richmond did not want to do. Despite that fact MacAuthor wanted him dead, it is still his job to send soldiers to protect his country and its people. In the book it states “

The similarity between Vera Claythorn and General MacAuthor’s actions is that by both wanted some dead so they tricked their targets to go do something they wanted to do but purposely know they would fail to survive. The difference between these two situations is that Vera wanted the money and power which shows greediness but General MacAuthor wanted to protect his country which could be argued that one man’s life is worth the sacrifice for the whole country