Summary Of And Then There Were None By Agatha Christie
The Personal(ity) Aspect of Justice Wargrave
In the “Twenty Rules for Writing Detective Stories” S.S. Van Dine, the author, explains Twenty rules that need to be followed to write a great mystery novel. In rule Nineteen he states, “The motives for all crimes in detective stories should be personal.” This means that the killing/s can’t be random. They murdered has to know the victim/s , and they have to have done something to the murderer/s to make him/her want to kill him/her. Agatha Christie, the famous author of the great novel And Then There Were None, did not prove this rule, because Justice Wargrave did not know any of the victims personally and he did not care about the people, only the act of the perfect crime. The fact that Justice …show more content…
This again proves that Agatha Christie did not follow rule 19 of “Twenty Rules for Writing Detective Stories” in her novel And Then There Were None. On page 262 in the manuscript Wargrave writes, “I have a definite sadistic delight in seeing or causing death. I remember experiments with wasps-with various garden pests….From an early age I knew very strongly the lust to kill.” In this statement he admits that causing others pain and death bring him massive amounts of joy. He had even been killing animals since a very young age and also knew that he had to or needed to kill. He was like a drug addict the more he killed the more he needed to kill and the more bodies the better. This act of mass murder was not personal at all to the victims it has been just an inevitable result and epilogue to these massive feelings of pleasure and need from killing. Also in the manuscript on page 262 he writes, “It may be understood-I think a psychologist would understand-that with my mental makeup being what it was, I adopted the law as a profession. The legal profession satisfied nearly all my instincts.” When he writes this means that the more he was in the law profession and involved in murder cases he didn’t to kill because hearing specific details about death and murder repletely satisfied him. But like I wrote earlier
In the “Twenty Rules for Writing Detective Stories” S.S. Van Dine, the author, explains Twenty rules that need to be followed to write a great mystery novel. In rule Nineteen he states, “The motives for all crimes in detective stories should be personal.” This means that the killing/s can’t be random. They murdered has to know the victim/s , and they have to have done something to the murderer/s to make him/her want to kill him/her. Agatha Christie, the famous author of the great novel And Then There Were None, did not prove this rule, because Justice Wargrave did not know any of the victims personally and he did not care about the people, only the act of the perfect crime. The fact that Justice …show more content…
This again proves that Agatha Christie did not follow rule 19 of “Twenty Rules for Writing Detective Stories” in her novel And Then There Were None. On page 262 in the manuscript Wargrave writes, “I have a definite sadistic delight in seeing or causing death. I remember experiments with wasps-with various garden pests….From an early age I knew very strongly the lust to kill.” In this statement he admits that causing others pain and death bring him massive amounts of joy. He had even been killing animals since a very young age and also knew that he had to or needed to kill. He was like a drug addict the more he killed the more he needed to kill and the more bodies the better. This act of mass murder was not personal at all to the victims it has been just an inevitable result and epilogue to these massive feelings of pleasure and need from killing. Also in the manuscript on page 262 he writes, “It may be understood-I think a psychologist would understand-that with my mental makeup being what it was, I adopted the law as a profession. The legal profession satisfied nearly all my instincts.” When he writes this means that the more he was in the law profession and involved in murder cases he didn’t to kill because hearing specific details about death and murder repletely satisfied him. But like I wrote earlier