‘The principal characters in crime fiction are
not driven by weak moral compasses
surrounding right and wrong, but more
powerful guides of good and evilʼ.
‘The principal characters in crime fiction are not driven by weak moral compasses surrounding
right and wrong, but more powerful guides of good and evilʼ.
Explore the significance of morality in crime fiction.
Murder of Roger Ackroyd and Atonement
Brionyʼs inability to understand right and wrong/young age leading to the crime of
misunderstandings.
Her final atonement being her decision to do good. But is it really good?
Poirotʼs moral compass and reason for solving crimes.
Dr Sheppardʼs “strain of weakness” suggesting a weak moral compass.
For centuries, some critics have viewed crime writing as having a moral purpose where the
powerful guides of good and evil act as agents of morality determining ideas of right and wrong
within the characters. However, it can also be argued that this is ‘flatʼ characterisation with
characters either being good or bad making them shallow and unrealistic. It is therefore
important to view characters as also having a weak moral compass surrounding ideas of right
and wrong which adds an element of realism to the fiction. In this essay I will therefore discuss
to what extent ‘the principle characters in crime fiction are driven by powerful guides of good
and evil instead of weak moral compasses surrounding right and wrongʼ.
In ‘The Murder of Roger Ackroydʼ the novel directly addresses the ideas surrounding a “strain of
weakness” within a person which under the right circumstances can lead them to acting out a
crime. As Poirot directly mentions this weakness, he states the hypothetical picture of the
criminal who killed Mr Ackroyd and blackmailed Mrs Ferrars stating that when with “a chance of
money – a great amount of money… he has to do nothing to it – just keep silence… and in his
greed he overreaches himself”. In this declaration Caroline mistakes Poirotʼs characterisation of
this weak moral compass as a description of Ralph Paton however the reader may miss the
subtle hint by Christie that it is really the criminal Dr Sheppard who Poirot is speaking of. This
can be identified upon second read where moments before Poirotʼs speech Caroline herself
describes Dr Sheppard being as “weak as water” where due to his bad bringing up “heaven
knows what mischief (he) might have gotten into now”. Through this the motivation of the
criminal Dr Sheppard can be seen as this “strain of weakness” within him which causes him to
commit his crimes. He is clearly not a criminal with a strong moral compass deceiving Poirot
and even the reader even mockingly stating in his Apologia that he wished to be able to record
“one of Poirotʼs failures”. As a doctor he immediately is viewed as a character whose role is to
not driven by weak moral compasses
surrounding right and wrong, but more
powerful guides of good and evilʼ.
‘The principal characters in crime fiction are not driven by weak moral compasses surrounding
right and wrong, but more powerful guides of good and evilʼ.
Explore the significance of morality in crime fiction.
Murder of Roger Ackroyd and Atonement
Brionyʼs inability to understand right and wrong/young age leading to the crime of
misunderstandings.
Her final atonement being her decision to do good. But is it really good?
Poirotʼs moral compass and reason for solving crimes.
Dr Sheppardʼs “strain of weakness” suggesting a weak moral compass.
For centuries, some critics have viewed crime writing as having a moral purpose where the
powerful guides of good and evil act as agents of morality determining ideas of right and wrong
within the characters. However, it can also be argued that this is ‘flatʼ characterisation with
characters either being good or bad making them shallow and unrealistic. It is therefore
important to view characters as also having a weak moral compass surrounding ideas of right
and wrong which adds an element of realism to the fiction. In this essay I will therefore discuss
to what extent ‘the principle characters in crime fiction are driven by powerful guides of good
and evil instead of weak moral compasses surrounding right and wrongʼ.
In ‘The Murder of Roger Ackroydʼ the novel directly addresses the ideas surrounding a “strain of
weakness” within a person which under the right circumstances can lead them to acting out a
crime. As Poirot directly mentions this weakness, he states the hypothetical picture of the
criminal who killed Mr Ackroyd and blackmailed Mrs Ferrars stating that when with “a chance of
money – a great amount of money… he has to do nothing to it – just keep silence… and in his
greed he overreaches himself”. In this declaration Caroline mistakes Poirotʼs characterisation of
this weak moral compass as a description of Ralph Paton however the reader may miss the
subtle hint by Christie that it is really the criminal Dr Sheppard who Poirot is speaking of. This
can be identified upon second read where moments before Poirotʼs speech Caroline herself
describes Dr Sheppard being as “weak as water” where due to his bad bringing up “heaven
knows what mischief (he) might have gotten into now”. Through this the motivation of the
criminal Dr Sheppard can be seen as this “strain of weakness” within him which causes him to
commit his crimes. He is clearly not a criminal with a strong moral compass deceiving Poirot
and even the reader even mockingly stating in his Apologia that he wished to be able to record
“one of Poirotʼs failures”. As a doctor he immediately is viewed as a character whose role is to
