A mystery concerning Curtain… and The Princess Bride.

***Major spoilers, but for the record… if you’re on this site, assume that I’ll be regularly “spoiling” plots anyway because I assume you know them.***  😉

It is, perhaps, the one thing about the television adaptation of Curtain that baffles me completely.

In that striking scene where Poirot unmasks Norton one-on-one, and Norton begins funneling the venom into his rival, he makes this comment: “Murder me… And then what– suicide to avoid the ignominy of hanging?”

Poirot does not respond in words, but his eyes say something like, “Well yes, that’s basically what I had in mind.” That this was intended as a sincere reaction by Poirot seems to be confirmed by a statement Suchet makes backstage in the opening scenes of the documentary Being Poirot: “He knows he has to die. He could never take the ignominy of being accused of a murder and then [hanged].” It would seem from this that Poirot really means to help his death along in some way, to avoid the shame of both conviction of a crime and being sent to the gallows.

There is one small problem, though: Poirot is never in any danger of the gallows to begin with.

princessbride6 copy

It makes sense, perhaps, for a startled Norton to come up with this idea when he first realizes what’s going on. But Poirot has had months, possibly even years, to think this through. He must have known that he has no danger of being hanged.

Point #1: Poirot is in practically zero danger of being caught at all. And in fact, he isn’t caught. He’s worked this out with remarkable efficiency.

princessbride14 copy

In that awesome aforementioned scene, Poirot suggest to Norton that he himself might fail in his attempt to serve justice, but does Poirot really believe that he’s likely to fail? It reads more like a “humble-bluff” to me. Despite revealing himself to be a clever devil who “does his homework,” Poirot still comes across to Norton as a “pathetic, self-important little man.” As Christie often tells us, this is a favorite ruse of Poirot’s to cause his enemies to underestimate him.

bluffing

Whether he’s bluffing there or not, he certainly is by the time they get to the chocolate. Norton feels he has won a spar with Poirot (“Shots in the dark”) and is then apparently clever enough to take Poirot’s cup of chocolate instead of his own when suspiciously offered a drink. Unfortunately for Norton, he never saw The Princess Bride.

iocane

He could have learned some important life lessons…

trap

I mean, Poirot’s ingenuity with drugged chocolate has already previously saved Hastings from worse than death.

princessbride19 copy

And of course, Poirot has other substantial tricks up his sleeve, including an intricate plan involving a fake moustache and (most importantly) full use of his limbs. No, I cannot believe that he really has any intentions at all of being caught. He’s going to hop out of the wheelchair and commit the deed, and no one will know the full truth– until he reveals it.

princessbride26 copy

Point #2: In the unlikely event that Poirot’s actions were discovered by the authorities, it seems that the most probable way would be if he actually turned himself over to the police. Supposing that he subsequently found his actions so unbearable that he felt he had to give himself up immediately. Would he have been hanged in that case? No. Would he have been hanged even if someone else had turned him in? No.

princessbride4 copy

Why? The simplest reason is that he would not have lived long enough for a trial. Christie knows this theme well; consider the following passage from the end of “Dead Man’s Mirror”:

    ‘That was– rather noble in a way. I hate to think of her going through a trial for murder.’
Poirot said gently:
‘Do not distress yourself. It will not come to that. The doctor, he tells me that she has serious heart trouble. She will not live many weeks.’

For good measure, here’s “Problem at Sea,” in which Poirot deliberately kills the murderer with an extra-shocking denouement:

    Ellie Henderson was beside him. Her eyes were dark and full of pain. ‘Did you know his heart was weak?’ she asked.
‘I guessed it…’
Ellie murmured: ‘So you thought– it might end– this way?’
‘The best way, don’t you think, mademoiselle?’ he said gently.

In “The Chocolate Box,” Poirot allows the killer to walk free, a very rare move, knowing she will die very shortly. In Curtain, Poirot knows he’s about to die from his heart condition. We know from the book that he has deliberately timed this crime so that it will be approximately the last thing he does.

   ‘I knew that my time was short– and for that I was glad. For the worst part of murder, Hastings, is its effect on the murderer. I, Hercule Poirot, might come to believe myself divinely appointed to deal out death to all and sundry… But mercifully there would not be time for that to happen. The end would come soon.’

‘I am very tired– and the exertions I have been through have strained me a good deal. It will not, I think, be long before…’

princessbride22 copy

In short, Poirot knows perfectly well that he is not going to live long beyond his murder, and he must have known that hanging was not a possibility for him. He was going to die first regardless.

Point #3: Let us speculate even further… even if Poirot was not likely to have a heart attack at any moment, would he have ever been convicted and hanged? I think that even that is questionable. Ironically, (movie-)Norton’s own words help explain why Poirot would not hang:  “You can see them now: ‘Went off his rocker, in the end, you can never trust a foreigner.’”

Poirot’s own opinion, in the book, is that he could have killed Norton quite openly with a “gun accident” and it would have never been suspected as murder; that Poirot indeed would have had the sympathy of people who considered him to be a poor, gaga old man who simply didn’t realize the gun was loaded. Such a person would not have been hanged. Of course, Poirot does not choose that route for one particular reason:

princessbride7 copy

And despite Norton’s dig at Poirot’s foreignness, and Poirot’s clear breaking of the law, he has the reader’s sympathy in his quest to protect the innocent, and would likely have a good deal of sympathy in England, too. He has an excellent long-standing reputation there in apprehending criminals, and again, he is a very old and ill man at this point. At worst, it might be said that his mind was going and he needed institutionalizing.

princessbride18 copy

But as Poirot is, in fact, at the brink of death, Point #3 is just added speculation on what could have been. In the end, Poirot is just smarter than Norton. And pretty much everyone else. And he knows it.

morons

So, in summary…

princessbride20 copy

#1: Poirot is in no great danger of being hanged because he probably won’t even get caught. #2: Even if he does get caught– or, more likely, turns himself in– he would be dead long before he gets a trial and sentence, assuming that the sentence IS death. #3: The sentence probably wouldn’t be death, since he’s a sick, very elderly man with a great track record in England and a provocation that is reasonable enough to draw plenty of sympathy from the reader– and the public. Poirot may, possibly, fear criminal conviction and a blow to that reputation, but surely not the shame of execution by hanging.

hanged

How does this affect the reading of the film? Personally, to make sense of the scene, I have to read Poirot’s initial reaction of assent to Norton’s suggestion of “suicide to avoid hanging” as deliberately deceptive rather than sincere on Poirot’s part, and Norton’s mark only truly hitting home when he mentions the judgment of God a few moments later. There is enough of a difference in those wordless reactions that I think such an interpretation can stand. Funnily enough, the first two fans I discussed this with said that they read this scene exactly the same way, and NOT as Poirot actually intending to escape hanging via medicinal neglect. Yet, this preferred interpretation of mine seems to be at odds with Suchet’s own intentions for his performance. Am I missing some vital point? What say you, intrepid reader?

This strikes me as an important question for other reasons that seriously affect the story: Why does Poirot refrain from taking the meds? What are his words “Forgive me” exactly in reference to? To some extent, questions like that turn on this point.

(Continued later…)

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “A mystery concerning Curtain… and The Princess Bride.

  1. I’ll try to keep this short…

    Poirot didn’t see (I don’t think) the refusal to take the medication as a suicide so much as POSSIBLY judging his own actions. Tit for tat. That sort of thing. For a good part of the story, dear Poirot was having a serious inner conflict about this, which was partly why he was so snippy with Hastings. There was no OUT here, apart from Poirot deciding, “Forget this! I’m going to live out my last weeks at Clariges!” After all, he wasn’t commissioned to find a killer, so there was no pay in it for him. And there’d be no praise for a job well done, as no one, apart from Poirot and the killer knew there was a killer. So Poirot’s actions here were NOT driven by EGO ! (no matter what her flipping majesty, Agatha, has to say !)

    Sadly, some fans have been rather testy about Poirot’s actions, while not offering any solutions of their own. Poirot, himself, admitted that Norton was a genius, and he was. An EVIL genius but a genius nonetheless. He managed to be the devil on the shoulders of those, like Toby Lattrell and Elizabeth Cole’s sister; encouraging them to act on what they really wanted to do, without actually telling them to do it. Even if Japp were involved in the case, he’d tell his dear, dying friend, “If Norton told all those people to jump off the tower of London, and they did it, that would just make them idiots. Norton can’t be held responsible because those poor saps don’t have the brains God gave a steak and kidney pie!” And morally, he’d be right.

    But… what if Judith Hastings had acted on what Norton was goading her into doing, during that dinner conversation from hell!? (Euthanasia at the dinner table! What’s the topic for breakfast, Agatha? Abortion over scrambled eggs!?) . 😱🤦 And what if, within twenty four hours of that conversation, Poirot ended up dead? During the inquest, every one at the table would have to testify about the conversation that took place. That was where Poirot KNEW who X was. I wonder, for the sake of discussion, if he did worry about What Judith would do, given her views? Kevin Elyot gave us a very intriguing red herring to toy with, in having Judith make such a statement, about the old and the ill, TWICE, and both times in the hearing of an old and terminally ill man. Nice lady. Or NOT!

    But back to the original point (I hope). I don’t believe Poirot feared the law so much as he partly loathed his own actions, however justified, in a sense, he might have felt. In his letter to Hastings, he admitted that he did not believe that a person was right to take the law into his own hands. He did because there was nothing else that could be done to stop a killer who acted just outside the rule of law. So when he says, ‘Forgive me’, as he’s dying, he’s praying for forgiveness, for this action, specifically. But maybe, too, for things in his life he realizes he needs forgiveness for. (I’m getting Faclempt here!😭) Compare that contrite attitude to Norton, who casually drives people to kill others without so much as a hint of remorse!

    Recall, earlier, he asked Hastings, “I have always tried my best. You believe that, don’t you?”

    There is a whole mystery to Poirot, himself, that I would LOVE to explore! Snippets of things he’s said in various movies and episodes I wonder if David Suchet has explored. Just wonderin’

    Like

    • I agree that his actions in not taking his medication was 1) not exactly suicide anyway, and 2) meant as an expression of justice since he himself had taken someone else’s life. He did not actually kill himself, and was going to die at any time anyway according to Franklin, but did not go out of his way to cling to an extension of his life. And his asking for forgiveness certainly seems primarily for his action in killing Norton and all that went with it. But the strange thing is that Suchet, in a certain interview says that in “not helping himself” in his quasi-suicide, he asked God’s forgiveness in *that*. As though the primary thing Poirot is asking for forgiveness for was not taking his meds. This would go along with Poirot’s apparent dismay at Norton’s words in the episode that suicide to avoid hanging, on top of murder, would certainly cause God to condemn him. But in my view, it does not at all seem consistent with the rest of the story (mainly for reasons outlined in this post). It makes much more sense that Poirot’s asking for forgiveness is mostly in reference to his murder of Norton, and this is supported by comments in Poirot’s letter to Hastings at the very end.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s