‘The allure of the criminal outweighs the
sympathy felt for their victimsʼ.
‘The allure of the criminal outweighs the sympathy felt for their victimsʼ.
Explore the significance of the criminal psyche.
Murder of Roger Ackroyd and Atonement
Detestability of Paul Marshall.
Briony as the author – her presentation as a child to adult.
Allure of Dr Sheppard as the author and doctor.
Presentation of victims in the novel.
For centuries crime fiction has presented criminals as alluring figures. Whether it be because
humanity is drawn to something irresistibly evil and wrong, or due to a subdued part of each
person being capable of committing similar crimes to the criminal, it can be argued to that
extent the allure of the criminals outweighs the sympathy for their victims. In this essay I will
discuss the extent of this in the Murder of Roger Ackroyd and Atonement.
After finishing ‘The Murder of Roger Ackroydʼ many readers realise that when attempting to
solve the crime alongside Poirot they subconsciously missing out two possible suspects – “in
fact – Dr Sheppard!” and Poirot himself. This is what prevents the mystery from being solved by
many readers as the allure of the narrator and Watson figure alongside his position as a doctor,
a position which personifies respectability and the idea of saving lives, draws the reader into
trusting Dr Sheppard. When the novel was published in 1926 critics were outraged believing
Christie had cheated by breaking Knoxʼs first rule of Detective Fiction – ‘the murderer cannot be
the narrator or someone who the reader has heard the thoughts ofʼ, causing Dr Sheppardʼs
position as the criminal to be glanced over by many readers.
Sheppardʼs many slights of hand as he “never lies simply evades” (Thompson) when telling the
story for example in Chapter 4 where he reflects “wondering if there was anything I had left
undone. I could think of nothing” forces the reader to believe that he means this on medical
grounds or in attempting to make Mr Ackroyd reveal what is in the letter. However, it is only in
Poirotʼs dénouement by the end of the novel and Dr Sheppardʼs Apologia where he regrets not
putting a “row of stars” to describe the events between twenty to ten and ten to ten that it
becomes clear this is when Dr Sheppard was murdering Mr Ackroyd. Similarly, when answering
the phone call, it is very significant that Dr Sheppard only gives us his side of the call when the
rest of the novel gives so many details about miniscule things; “ʼParker telephoningʼ, I shouted
to Caroline, ‘from Fernley. Theyʼve just found Roger Ackroyd murderedʼ”. In Chapter 2 titled
‘Whoʼs who in Kingʼs Abbot, instead of revealing details about himself Dr Sheppard gives a brief
summary of the dramatis personae (and also the list of suspects soon) present in the novel to
deflect the readerʼs attention away from him. This is important in building the readers trust,
sympathy felt for their victimsʼ.
‘The allure of the criminal outweighs the sympathy felt for their victimsʼ.
Explore the significance of the criminal psyche.
Murder of Roger Ackroyd and Atonement
Detestability of Paul Marshall.
Briony as the author – her presentation as a child to adult.
Allure of Dr Sheppard as the author and doctor.
Presentation of victims in the novel.
For centuries crime fiction has presented criminals as alluring figures. Whether it be because
humanity is drawn to something irresistibly evil and wrong, or due to a subdued part of each
person being capable of committing similar crimes to the criminal, it can be argued to that
extent the allure of the criminals outweighs the sympathy for their victims. In this essay I will
discuss the extent of this in the Murder of Roger Ackroyd and Atonement.
After finishing ‘The Murder of Roger Ackroydʼ many readers realise that when attempting to
solve the crime alongside Poirot they subconsciously missing out two possible suspects – “in
fact – Dr Sheppard!” and Poirot himself. This is what prevents the mystery from being solved by
many readers as the allure of the narrator and Watson figure alongside his position as a doctor,
a position which personifies respectability and the idea of saving lives, draws the reader into
trusting Dr Sheppard. When the novel was published in 1926 critics were outraged believing
Christie had cheated by breaking Knoxʼs first rule of Detective Fiction – ‘the murderer cannot be
the narrator or someone who the reader has heard the thoughts ofʼ, causing Dr Sheppardʼs
position as the criminal to be glanced over by many readers.
Sheppardʼs many slights of hand as he “never lies simply evades” (Thompson) when telling the
story for example in Chapter 4 where he reflects “wondering if there was anything I had left
undone. I could think of nothing” forces the reader to believe that he means this on medical
grounds or in attempting to make Mr Ackroyd reveal what is in the letter. However, it is only in
Poirotʼs dénouement by the end of the novel and Dr Sheppardʼs Apologia where he regrets not
putting a “row of stars” to describe the events between twenty to ten and ten to ten that it
becomes clear this is when Dr Sheppard was murdering Mr Ackroyd. Similarly, when answering
the phone call, it is very significant that Dr Sheppard only gives us his side of the call when the
rest of the novel gives so many details about miniscule things; “ʼParker telephoningʼ, I shouted
to Caroline, ‘from Fernley. Theyʼve just found Roger Ackroyd murderedʼ”. In Chapter 2 titled
‘Whoʼs who in Kingʼs Abbot, instead of revealing details about himself Dr Sheppard gives a brief
summary of the dramatis personae (and also the list of suspects soon) present in the novel to
deflect the readerʼs attention away from him. This is important in building the readers trust,
