Transcript murder on the orient express powerpoint 3B

MURDER ON THE ORIENT
EXPRESS PROJECT
By: Dayna Janson and Samya Zitouni, class 3B
VOCAB
Ab initio- from the beginning. (adverb)
Camorras- a Neapolitan secret society organized in 1820, and are
notorious for practicing violence and blackmail. (noun)
Taboo- a custom prohibiting or restricting a particular practice or
forbidding association with a particular person, place, or thing.
(noun)
Onus- used to refer to something that is one’s duty or
responsibility. (noun)
Et al.- and others; from the Latin word et alia. (noun)
Pseudo-science- a theory, methodology, or practice that is
considered to be without scientific foundation(ex. Astrology,
psychokinesis, tarot cards, palm readings). (noun)
VOCAB
Delineation- to represent pictorially; depict. (noun)
Verisimilitude- the appearance of being true or real. (noun)
Gemutlich- warm and congenial; pleasant or friendly. (adjective)
Metaphysics- abstract theory or talk with no basis in reality.
(noun)
Repressed- kept suppressed or unconscious in one’s mind.
(adjective)
Spiritualistic- of or relating to or connected with spiritualism.
(adjective)
RULES
Rule 1: The detective must have the same observational skills as the reader,
and all clues must be obvious to the reader.
Rule 2: No reader shall be tricked unless it is plot-related to the criminal
against the detective.
Rule 3: There can’t be any love interests in mystery novels, for it’s about
bringing people to justice, not to matrimony.
Rule 4: A detective cannot be the culprit, because it tricks the reader.
Rule 5: The offender has to be found through logical explanation, not by
accidents and coincidences.
Rule 6: The detective must use the clues he finds to solve the mystery, for
if he can’t do just that than he is no better detective than us.
Rule 7: Someone must be killed in a mystery, for a murder is more
interesting for readers than a boring, regular crime.
RULES
Rule 8: A detective can’t solve the crime by means of magic, spiritualism, and
other things of the other dimensions because it leaves the readers defeated.
Rule 9: There can only be one detective in a mystery novel, because too
many and the reader won’t know which one to side with.
Rule 10: The culprit has to be a person we’ve already heard about in the
story.
Rule 11: Servants cannot be culprits, for only the ones who aren’t suspected
of the crime make a murder mystery great.
Rule 12: There can only be one culprit, so the reader can only concentrate on
that person and why he or she did such a crime.
Rule 13: The culprit can’t have any aid from mafias or secret societies of that
sort, for then it wouldn’t be a true murder.
Rule 14: When solving a murder, the method of solving it must be through
logical explanation, never imaginative or purely magical.
RULES
Rule 15: If the reader were to read the book again, he/she would have the
ability to solve the mystery before the final chapter, since the clues were pointed
to the culprit the whole time.
Rule 16: No detective novel should have long descriptions and unrelated side
stories, for they have nothing to do with the plot and the crime.
Rule 17: Usually kind folk become overridden with guilt, for you never suspect
them to commit a crime. It would be plain if it were committed by a
professional killer, jailbird, or bandit.
Rule 18: The crime should never turn out to be a suicide or an accident, for that
would fool us into reading something that was nothing but a false-murder.
Rule 19: In detective stories, the crime is always committed because of personal
reasons, that way the reader can also relate to the culprit.
Rule 20: When using ideas like comparing cigarettes to ones at the scene of the
crime, pinning the crime on a twin or relative, and faking fingerprints show that
you as a mystery writer lack originality.
RULE #3
“Twenty rules for writing detective stories”
“3. There must be no love interest. The business in hand is to bring a criminal to the bar
of justice, not to bring a lovelorn couple to the hymeneal altar” (Van Dine).
Explanation:
Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express doesn’t quite fit with this formula
because there was a love interest in the story. This rule states that the novel can’t have
any love related issues and such when it comes to solving the crime. I’d have to disagree,
for it was particularly Colonel Arbuthnot and Mary Debenham who were apart of the
crime in killing Cassetti. They loved each other yet tried to act like strangers to one
another for the sake of the crime. The love interest didn’t make the story terrible, in fact
it made the ending reasonable. For the supporting claim about how they really loved
each other made Poirot and the other investigators sympathize for them, and rethink
whether or not they should turn them in to the Yugoslavian police. There was also Cyrus
Hardman who helped in the crime, for he was in love with the nursemaid who
committed suicide. The quote below supports how love is somewhat important to the
mystery.
Murder on the Orient Express:
“But it’s unnecessary to bring all these others into it. All these good faithful souls - and
poor Michel- and Mary and Colonel Arbuthnot- they love each other” (Christie 245).
RULE #11
“Twenty rules for writing detective stories”
“11. A servant must not be chosen by the author as the culprit. This is begging a noble
question. It is a too easy solution. The culprit must be a decidedly worth-while person–
one that wouldn’t ordinarily come under suspicion” (Van Dine).
Explanation:
Rule #11 doesn’t fit with Murder on the Orient Express, for Mary Debenham was a
governess for Daisy Armstrong. There was also Hildegarde Schmidt who was the servant
for Princess Dragomiroff, and she helped with the murder. Greta Ohlsson was apart of
the murder and she was Daisy’s nurse. All these women were servants around the
household in a way, especially Ms. Debenham for she was the governess of Daisy and
secretary of Sonia Armstrong. Hildegarde was the Armstrong family’s cook, and she
played the role as the servant, and was a part of the murder. The quote below shows how
Poirot finds out that a maid did in fact have part in this brilliant murder.
Murder on the Orient Express:
“I laid a trap for her- she fell into it. I said I knew she was a good cook. She answered:
‘Yes, indeed, all my ladies have said so.’ But if you are employed as a lady’s maid your
employers seldom have a chance of learning whether or not you are a good cook”
(Christie 242).
RULE #12
“Twenty rules for writing detective stories”
“12. There must be but one culprit, no matter how many murders are committed.
The culprit may, of course, have a minor helper or co-plotter, but the entire onus
must rest on one pair of shoulders: the entire indignation of the reader must be
permitted to concentrate on a single black nature” (Van Dine).
Explanation:
Rule #12 is basically saying there must only be one culprit, with maybe one or two
accomplices. This rule doesn’t fit with Murder on the Orient Express because not one, but
twelve people committed the murder of the mob boss Cassetti. I would never have
suspected that many people would commit the murder of one person. But after reading this
book, it all made sense. Since all these people worked for the Armstrong family(whose
daughter was killed by Cassetti) they decided to deliver Cassetti to justice. It was a very
unsuspected ending, but a great one, even if it didn’t fit this formula. The quote below will
support how twelve is better than one when it comes to a brilliant murder.
Murder on the Orient Express:
“There were twelve of us. First we thought we’d draw lots as to who should do it, but in the
end we decided on this way. It was the chauffeur, Antonio, who suggested it. Mary worked
out all the details later with Hector MacQueen. It took a long time to perfect our plan.“
(Christie 244).
RULE #16
“Twenty rules for writing detective stories”
“16. A detective novel should contain no long descriptive passages, no literary dallying
with side issues, no subtly worked-out character analyses, no “atmospheric”
preoccupations. Such matters have no vital place in a record of crime and deduction.
They hold up the action and introduce issues irrelevant to the main purpose, which to
state the problem, analyze it, and bring it to a successful conclusion. To be sure, there
must be a sufficient descriptiveness and character delineation to give the novel
verisimilitude” (Van Dine).
Explanation:
In Murder on the Orient Express, this rule doesn’t fit with the book. There are long passages and
they mainly focus on the little details, such as the grease spot on Countess Andrenyi’s passport, the
the bolts on the doorway with Mrs. Hubbard, Ratchett saying an excellent French phrase when he
couldn’t even speak French. and the small man with a womanish voice who doesn’t fit anyone’s
descriptions. There was also the fact that the woman wearing the scarlet kimono even had a fruity
scent on her, and that detail didn’t even matter. It’s tiny details like this and side issues that throw a
reader off, and that’s not always a bad thing. Sometimes less action in a novel calm us down, and let
us think. They can even make us think differently about who the culprit really is. The quote below
supports this claim.
Murder on the Orient Express:
“Further to confuse the issue, a red herring was drawn across the trail- the mythical
woman in the red kimono. Again I am to bear witness to this woman’s existence. There
is a heavy bang at my door. I get up and look out- and see the scarlet kimono
disappearing in the distance” (Christie 241).
RULE #19
“Twenty rules for writing detective stories”
“19. The motives for all the crimes in detective stories should be personal. International
plottings and war politics belong in a different category of fiction- in secret-service
tales, for instance. But a murder story must be kept gemutlich, so to speak. It must
reflect the reader’s everyday experiences, and give him a certain outlet for his own
repressed desires and emotions” (Van Dine).
Explanation:
For Murder on the Orient Express, this formula fits perfectly with the cause of the
murder. All twelve passengers were friends or relatives of the Armstrong family, and
were gravely affected by Daisy’s murder and how Cassetti got off scot-free. As a reader,
I could totally relate to these people once I found out what position they were in and
why they wanted to kill such a terrible man. This quote from Christie’s novel below
shows how personal issues plays a major role in the murder and story of Murder on the
Orient Express.
Murder on the Orient Express:
“Ah, she was an angel- a little sweet, trustful angel. She knew nothing but kindness and
love- and she was taken away by that wicked man- cruelly treated- and her poor mother.
If you had seen the whole terrible tragedy! I did so rejoice that that evil man was dead that he could not any more kill or torture little children” (Christie 227).
DOES MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS
FIT IN WITH THE PATTERN FOR
WHODUNITS LAID OUT BY VAN DINE?
In Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express, it doesn’t follow some of the rules.
Therefore, it doesn’t fit the pattern for many reasons shown. The rules state how there cannot be a
love interest for it messes up the story. But in my opinion, it gave Poirot something to sympathize
about, for no one would want to jail two people in love. They did it for Daisy, whom everyone on the
train cared deeply about. This was a personal issue and the only rule we chose that fit this book. The
rest of the rules we chose state formulas that don’t follow Murder on the Orient Express. Rule #12
states how there can only be one culprit, because it has to be committed by a single black nature, but
the crime was apparently committed by twelve persons in this book. Rule #11 states that a servant
cannot be a worthy culprit, yet there was Ms. Debenham, Hildegarde who was the princess’ servant,
and Greta the nursemaid. They all were apart of the crime. Lastly, rule #16 states that there cannot be
any long, descriptive passages and side issues. But there were so many in this novel. The fainting of
Mrs. Hubbard when she saw the knife in her sponge bag, and the bolts on the doorway. These were all
side issues, but they contributed very much to the plot. They also gave us not-so-obvious clues, and
that is very beneficial to the mystery reader if noticed. So does following these rules make you a better
mystery writer, or give you an agenda when writing? Probably so, or you could just choose to not
follow these rules like Agatha Christie and see where it takes you. All the rules we’ve chosen, except
rule #19, doesn’t fit with this book. But in all, we think this novel did great for one that doesn’t fit with
the patterns and descriptions laid out by Van Dine.
WORK CITED
Christie, Agatha. Murder on the Orient Express. Toronto: Bantam, 1983.
Print.
Dine, S.S Van. "Twenty Rules for Writing Detective Stories." American
Magazine Sept. 1928: n. pag. Web.