💻BLOG
POST💻
~The
Final Word~
{An Open Letter to
Agatha Christie and
David Suchet}
Cover for the book Suchet SHOULD have written!
Well hello, Agatha!
Yes, I’m well aware that you're dead and I 'm smiling to myself
as I write this. First, because this does seem an odd thing to do. Mainly, though, I’m
writing this letter is the ultimate 'IN YOUR FACE'! You've had it coming for quite some time.
Additionally, I’m also writing this antagonistic
epistle to your most devoted ‘parrot’, David Suchet who, without a moment’s
hesitation, (or even thought, for that matter!) recites your words as if
they’re Biblical cannon. I’m glad he’s alive and can read what I have
to say to both of you. If I had to be
completely honest, I’d say I was writing this letter to Mr. Suchet, as I rail at each of you ! Since Mr. Suchet shares your malevolent attitude about Poirot, then it’s
only fitting that he be told off as well as you.
My fan-fiction project, 'The Execution of Agatha Christie' is
in the final editing phase. Of course, each story has its own title,
but the main title will be a mystery to some, even as it antagonizes your
devoted followers. Either way, it will get people's attention. This
is as it needs to be, because of what you started. However,
it may surprise you to learn that this is not necessarily as I wish.
I TRUSTED YOU, Mr. Suchet, as I wish I
could have trusted Agatha. Tragically, it turns out, I can’t trust either of
you. WHY should I (or ANY reader) waste the emotional investment of
reading time (the money is almost secondary) on an author and actor who treated
a character with such poisonous contempt? I don’t get it! I do NOT understand! What DID Hercule Poirot do to you, Mr. Suchet, to deserve your
disdain? Do you have a personal reason for your hatred of the Belgian detective
or are you just parroting your beloved Agatha? I fantasize about getting in-your-face and
demanding to know why. Why didn’t you just listen to your brother and NOT
bother with the character you and Agatha wished didn’t exist? In truth, I agree with you and Agatha, albeit, NOT for your reasons, whatever they might be. The pair of you used Poirot to up your career
game and financial ends. Passed that,
neither of you could give a damn about Hercule Poirot
It’s for the above-mentioned reason, Mr.
Suchet, that Belgian detective Hercule Poirot was better off NOT existing. I went so far as to make that happen for
Agatha in the title story. Your part in
Poirot’s end comes in the last story in this project. I’ll let you read it for yourself. By way of a hint, you will, no doubt, be
delighted to learn that your villain collaborates with Agatha’s fictional self,
(aka Ariadne Oliver) to get the deed
done.
As to the reasons for Christie’s loathing of Poirot,
I have one main theory, which has a lot to do with the foundational source material of Poirot
(man and story structure). Simply put; Arthur Conan
Doyle's Sherlock Holmes. Christie SOOOO wished Holmes had been hers and 'created' a character very close to who she wanted Poirot to be.
In Appointment with Death (movie,
2008) a woman named Lady Boynton is shown to be abusing her four adopted kids,
simply because they weren't hers. Christie HATED Poirot for the same
reason. He wasn't truly hers and in her gut of guts, she knew it,
whatever ARROGANT claims she made to the contrary. I won’t ask why you despised the detective,
Suchet. Whatever Christie’s hostilities were, against Poirot were, you seemed content to go along with
them.
In addition, Poirot's key personality traits, such as his pride in
his career achievements, as well as his penchant for order and method come from
Holmes. Common
Points between Holmes/Poirot Christie wanted Holmes
and took out her frustration for the unfulfilled wish on the re-designed Holmes,
rather than simply appreciating that she was able to get away with such brassy
plagiarism unpunished. It's not every day a newbie (which is what Christie
was at the time) can steal off an established author. At the end of the
day, though, Christie despised Poirot because he was a re-modelled Holmes but he
wasn’t HOLMES.
Like Lady Boynton’s abused of
children who weren’t hers, Poirot was maligned for NOT being the character she
wanted.
"Why,
oh WHY did I Ever create that DETESTABLE, bombastic Creature?" Christie
about Poirot.
As bad, as
unspeakably VILE as Christie was, to make such a VICIOUS,
uncalled-for statement, about a character, who was loved by readers, it was AS
BAD, if not WORSE, to read that same vitriol in the book of
the ACTOR, who Poirot fans trusted with that character!
To this Poirot fan, who'd ditched Christie novels in favor of the series, your
WILLINGNESS to quote that damnable diatribe was nothing shy of a kick in the
stomach and a spit in the face.
Adding injury to insult, you also
said, on a British daytime talk show, that you would be willing to play Poirot
again, "ONLY if AGATHA wrote the story." KNOWING full
well her SEETHING ANIIMOSITY for Poirot, David Suchet, you would have ZERO problem playing the
disdained detective on the condition that Poirot's foremost enemy was at the helm!
Well, there are POIROT fans, and I count myself
among them, who have written better stories for the character than Christie ever cared
to create! I can't speak for other fans' motivation, Mr. Suchet, but I know what mine was. I
gave Hercule Poirot the love story Christie deprived him of. I also let him have
a family because .... well, why not?
For all the
countless times I've repeated myself in these blog posts, the one thing I
honest-to-God want to do is face you down! In betraying Poirot, you stabbed his fan base in the back. Paying tribute to Christie meant slamming the character she hated. What puzzles me, Mr. Suchet, is your abject fawning over this ...arrogant, malevolent glory-whore for 'creating' a character both you and Agatha wish never existed. Again, I don't get it. If you hold the same disdain for Poirot that Christie had, why praise her for creating him?
But, since we're on the subject of 'detestable creatures', I know an actor who
treated his villain character with much more appreciation than you have for
Poirot.
In 1974, Paul Williams played a
character named SWAN, in the movie Phantom of the Paradise. It is relevant to note that the character in
said movie was a record producer who thieves the life’s work off young
composer, Winslow Leach.
To the befuddled amazement of the entire
cast of that film, Winnipeg Canada has embraced Phantom of the Paradise, which
has gone on to inspire a documentary called Phantom of Winnipeg, 45 years after
the movie was released. For his part,
Paul Williams appreciates Swan’s substantial contribution to his acting
career. For an established songwriter
to play the guy who steals the music is an impressive acting debut. The
point is, Mr. Williams thanks the character who gave him his start.
As a person, Swan was a total jerk! (understatement!) He was sadistic, warped and nasty when he was
out to get what he wanted. No songwriter
wants to get within thieving distance of a guy like Swan. On the other hand, as character roles go, he was gold
and Paul Williams has always valued the part that little scuzz-wad had
to play in jump-starting his acting career.
NOW, contrast Paul’s gratitude for Swan’s
contribution to his career to your TOXIC ingratitude for Poirot. What makes the Belgian sleuth LESS entitled to respect
than a despotic record producer who reduces an aspiring songwriter’s life to a
living hell?!?!
I eagerly await your explanation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Feel free to disagree but keep it civil, please.