I have the Harper Collins edition but I don’t know if any other version has edited this scene out so be on guard.
While also being one of her lesser mysteries, there is a scene (out of nowhere I might add) which gives away a list of culprits from her earlier novels. It is phrased in a way to make it seem as if these names were random, but it is immediately apparent that these are indeed spoilers.
You will not be able to avoid reading it, and while I myself was not fully cognizant of what the names were (as I was attempting to forget) on reading “The Mystery of the Blue Train” I immediately recalled one name I had seen before and that spoiled the mystery.
Again if you want to read Christie, avoid this book until you have read all the previously published titles.
PS. The title of the book was changed from ” ***Poirot Loses a Client*** ” so that edition might also be floating around some place.
by butterweedstrover
26 Comments
I like how you gave spoilers to a book that contains spoilers. 🙂
Dumb Witness was one of the first few Agatha Christie novels I read.. can’t remember there being a list of culprits, so it was either edited out or I forgot about it and it never ended up spoiling anything for me.
What’s funny is had you not said this nobody would have remembered or noticed but now everyone who sees this thread will.
For future reference, people might also want to download the Hercule Poirot reading list PDF from the [official Agatha Christie website](https://www.agathachristie.com/stories) (at the end of the Stories page).
It has a handy sidebar which warns of which books in the series directly discuss the plots/culprits of other books, though I guess _Dumb Witness_ isn’t mentioned there since they’re not linked explicitly like in the other cases? Or maybe they just overlooked it and would add a warning if someone wrote in about that. But it’s otherwise useful for avoiding spoilers if one isn’t intending to read the lot in publication order.
Warning: Do not read books in a series out of order.
It’s not a spoiler, it’s a call-back to the previous stories. You can’t blame Christie that you read the stories out of order.
I’m amused that you reading a series out of order constitutes a “screw-up” on the author’s part, and at your presumption that an authorial decision about a book’s content should be policed by readers.
*Poirot Loses a Reader*
[I think this sums it up](https://external-preview.redd.it/OzrJFDG38JcG3ITWRG-vMkyjnrk9CiZyHI92JzQhEA8.jpg?auto=webp&s=a3c02d4b3bdcc440b47e7e21b184a0e6ff7e30cf)
I’ll never have this issue because I always read a series in order except for the Riftwar books and Recluse books because I stopped caring about the order after book 500.
I think it’s wise to remember that popular fiction in the 1920s probably was similar to the concept of watching a crime solving tv show today. The next book was essentially the next episode.
So the stories stand alone but there can be callbacks to previous episodes, because they are a chronological series.
It’s unfortunate you had a spoiler, but it wasn’t a mistake on Dame Christie’s part. Or her editor. It was completely expected that her readers had read her previous books, because that’s how books like hers worked at the time, so it was probably purposeful.
Just to make everyone’s lives easier, if you go to the official Agatha Christie website, you can download a reading list, which includes a chronological order for the stories to be read in, if you so choose to have a spoiler free experience.
Sucks that you got spoiled and I appreciate the warning but it’s like…the 12th book in the series or something. I’d be more shocked if the book didn’t talk about previous books.
Hummm maybe I should read the book, this will save time and I’ll mark all others as read haha
Seriously tho, sometimes spoilers make the reading more fun and details that you would have missed will now be entertaining to notice (that’s why second reads are fun, also third, fourth etc)
I read that book out of order and while I knew they were mention the books it didn’t spoil anything. the book doesn’t straight up mention the culprit wtf
Who’s been spoiling all her books?
#It’s been Agatha all along
or, as I very much successfully do – read it and forget absolutely every name in there 5 minutes after reading the last page 😀
You are under the assumption I actually remember anything I read!
Awesome to see Christie on here. Growing up mom has read every single book and watched every show. It’s my reason for loving great mystery!
The original title was *Dumb Witness* – the *Poirot Loses a Client* version was the US edition.
I’m forgetful enough that I read Mystery on the Blue Train twice and didn’t realise until the end. I don’t think I’d remember tbh
As another comment said, there’s an online list (quick to Google search) of all of Christie’s books and reading order. Utilize it!
Seeing the title and being less familar with this particular novel, I totally thought this was going to be an instruction to avoid this story because it had turned out to be really problematically ableist or something 😉
Warning: OP’s title is terrible. It should be “Don’t read this book out of order” or something similar, rather than the horseshit “do not read it”.
Wow. That says a lot about your memory. I have trouble remembering the names of Agatha’s characters in the story I’m *currently* reading.
knowing myself i wont remember any names 1 week after reading a book i’m fine