Talk:Taken at the Flood/Archive 1

Archive 1

The sequence of the Poirot novels

The Labours of Hercules was published in 1947, between the publication of The Hollow and Taken at the Flood. Because this book of short stories comprised material published previously, I have omitted it from the series in the infobox. --Sordel 17:22, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

1930s?

I do not believe that the TV adaptation for ITV (with David Suchet) resets the action into the 1930s. Costumes etc. as well as a possible reference to World War II suggests it is late 1940s or early 1950s. 71.36.157.148 (talk) 19:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC) Oops, I got logged out by the system. Lufiend (talk) 19:34, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It is a feature generally of the TV series that the action is generally set in the 1930s, regardless of when the novel was released. Thomas1974 (talk) 12:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Taken at the Flood/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

The "Major Themes" section is heavily partial, creating an argument that doesn't follow the reality of the novel. The author denigrates Christie's "social conservatism" and ascribes false agency ("tried to exploit the chaos of war for her own social mobility") to the character of Eileen Corrigan, who is actually within the novel a complete dupe, not at all an opportunistic femme formidable. Moreover, the 'return to status quo' in the novel is extremely disturbing to the reader; the former Wren decides that the man whom she was previously engaged to is really the man for her, after he tries to strangle her. It turns out that this attempted murder gives him just the right amount of edge to keep him from being a 'safe' marriage choice. There is some heavy and unpleasant feminine psychology described here, which, reviewed alongside Frances Cloade, the unscrupulous, blackmailing lawyer's wife and Lionel Cloade, the morphine-addicted doctor, underlines the unsavoury and unsafe elements of Agatha Christie's upper class society. It's hardly an idyllic status quo to which things rightfully return. It is not the unrightful grabbers who are punished for stealing what belongs to the sacred aristocracy, but men who prey on women and manipulate them for their own ends (ie. David Hunter). This type of man comes up repeatedly in AG's novels (e.g. Evil Under the Sun, A Caribbean Mystery, A Pocketful of Rye). 203.230.181.18 (talk) 00:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 00:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 07:34, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Flashback?

In the plot, the article mentions that "After the Prelude, the novel flashes back from late Spring to early Spring,... ". But the prelude is late spring 1944 and the part after that is early spring 1946. So there is no question of "flashing back". I think it should be changed. 117.194.227.83 (talk) 11:07, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

That text is removed now, it was very confusing, 117.194.227.83. The events of 1944 are now under the title Plot introduction, mainly from the Prologue. --Prairieplant (talk) 09:52, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Although the first half of the prologue takes place in autumn (not spring) of 1944, it then jumps ahead to late spring 1946 when Katherine Cloade (guided by spirits) comes to visit Poirot in an attempt to track down Rosaleen's first husband, and then five days later when Poirot reads about the death of Enoch Arden in the newspaper, causing him to muse "I wonder what has been going on in Warmsley Vale." This ends the prologue, and the main part of the book then jumps back by a few weeks to recount what has been going on in Warmsley Vale and the events leading up to "Arden's" death. The second half of the prologue is currently omitted from the plot summary, which is fair enough. —Snarkibartfast (talk) 08:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)