Don’t invite Peter Temple and this biographer to the same party
Why should you read the review? For lines like these:
"Christie's brother Monty went to Harrow. A hopeless incompetent, he then found accommodation in the British army, a traditional sheltered workshop for upper-class dolts."and this, which perhaps helps explain any animus on Temple’s part toward Thompson:
"Mildly deranged and possibly on substances, he amused himself by taking pot shots at the wobbling backsides of the local matrons. True to form, he missed."
"It was, of course, written in the stars that Archie, employed by a company with Imperial in its name, would betray her by shagging his secretary."
"Sadly, Thompson thinks Tasmania is its own nation state."Christie was a woman of narrow views, ridiculous plots, and a prose style that could have used trimming and toning down, according to Temple. As for her biographer, Temple excoriates Thompson for creamy, cloying and gushing style and, more seriously, for her habit of assuming that passages in Christie’s novels explain Christie’s life.
That's tough but fair. And fun to read.
And now, readers, don't restrict yourselves to crime fiction on this one. Let's hear the funniest, harshest, most caustic or widest-of-the-mark critical putdowns you have ever heard or read.
© Peter Rozovsky 2007