"Alive" reading sharing

Second Financial Class Chen Tianran

In "Death on the Nile", the young and beautiful Linnett inherited his father's huge property, which not only made Linnett's friend Jacqueline jealous, but also made Jacqueline's boyfriend Doyle abandon him. He lost his old love and fell into the embrace of this rich woman. After marriage, Linnett and Simon decided to go to Egypt for their honeymoon. Detective Polo noticed something strange in this journey, so cleverly he and Colonel Reis also came to Egypt and boarded the ship bound for conspiracy and death. On a luxury cruise ship sailing on the Nile, after a well-planned murder, a second, and a third death followed. The murders all take place in a fairly enclosed space. It seems as though everyone on board the cruise ship had a motive for killing the beautiful heiress Lynette and the other victims. Although the case is tortuous and bizarre, the truth cannot escape the eyes of great detective Polo. With Polo's witty investigation and careful analysis, he finally found the real murderer.

Polo has 4 very meticulous derivations. Now let's use logic to analyze Polo's process of deriving the truth.

1. After Louise died, holding the fragments of coins, Polo thought that the deceased might have been blackmailed and killed instead, and he also confessed to Louise before his death: "If I can't sleep, if I am on the deck Come on, maybe I'll see the murderer go in and out of my wife's cabin," suspected. Let's take a look at Polo's logical derivation process. There is no need for Louise to say such a sentence, so she is lying on purpose, so it can be seen that she should have seen the murderer. But most importantly why did he talk like that? Then she was implying that the murderer had seen the truth, so the murderer was present at that time. At that time, there were only four people, except for Louise, Poirot and Colonel Hastings, it was Simon.

From the above derivation process, it can be seen that Polo's logical thinking is very meticulous. But the real culprit was found, and many suspicious points became difficult to explain. Therefore, Polo must deduce Simon's crime process in order to find evidence to prove this conclusion, and to explain how Simon killed Linnett when he was shot in the foot.

2. The shawl wrapped with the gun that was fished up from the bottom of the river has holes punched by the gun. It can be seen that the gun was indeed wrapped in the shawl and opened. However, there were scorch marks on Linnett's head near where he was shot, proving that he was not shot by the shawl-wrapped gun. When Simon was shot in the leg, witnesses proved that Jacqueline did not wrap the gun in the shawl. Then the gun must have been fired three more times, one of which no one knew about. That shot was probably fired by the murderer, so why did the murderer shoot?

When the gun was picked up, there were only two empty shells inside. Why deliberately create the illusion that only two shots were fired? It must have been intentional by the murderer to cover up the third shot. The purpose of the cover-up must be to prevent everyone from discovering their identities, which means that the third shot is likely to prove the murderer's identity.

The murderer killed Linnett, and he could have left the gun in Linnett's room, but the murderer did not do this, but wrapped the gun in a shawl and fired another shot for unknown reasons. Throw the gun into the river. If the murderer fired a shot before killing Linnett, then there is no need to take the gun away after killing Linnett. Explain that the third shot was fired after Linnett was killed. The important thing is that after the third shot, the gun must be thrown away, otherwise the identity will be exposed.

These are the conclusions drawn by Polo's step-by-step reasoning. These conclusions do not seem to be of any help to the murder case, because there is still no clue about the murderer at the beginning, but combined with the previous derivation conclusion- ---The murderer is Simon, so the whole case seems to be much clearer at once. But it still needs to explain why Simon can kill people after he can be shot.

3. Polo found an empty nail polish bottle in Linnett's room. The point is that he smelled the smell of ink in the empty bottle, and he could tell from the residual ink attached to the empty bottle. It's red ink. Polo connected this with the handkerchief with red ink stains found with the murderer's discarded gun, and discovered that this could be the murderer's deception.

If the derivation conclusion of the first article is correct, then the case of Linnett's murder can be clearly restored. Simon was not injured at all at first, but pretended to have injured his leg, and the blood that witnesses saw was red ink. Simon didn't get shot, so everything is logical. When Simon was shot, he asked two witnesses to take care of the emotional Jacqueline at the same time. The purpose turned out to be to create opportunities for committing the crime.

At this time, Polo deduced it in reverse, and he was able to resolve the doubts that arose when he came to the second derivation conclusion. The third shot Simon fired was to rob and injure his leg. He couldn't leave the gun directly after killing Linnett because he still had to use the gun. After using the gun, he couldn't move anymore. Able to throw guns into rivers to hide.

4. The first three derivations perfectly explained how Simon killed Linnett, but a new problem came up again. Simon was really injured later, so the second dead Louise and Who killed the third dead Otterborn, especially when Otterborn died in front of Polo, it must not have been killed by Simon? There are two people who were not killed by Simon, so Simon has an accomplice.

The most likely accomplice is Jacqueline. At this time, Polo assumes that Jacqueline is the accomplice, then he can explain the deaths of the remaining two people. Simon knew that Louise saw him kill Linnett. Louise was killed after Jacqueline met Simon, and Jacqueline was next to Simon's room. She could quickly escape back to her own room after killing Otterborn. Room.

If Jacqueline was an accomplice, then it was Jacqueline's intention that Simon was not shot at the beginning, and the murder of Linnett was also a premeditated crime. This also explains Poirot's unconsciousness on the night of the murder because his drink was drugged. Otterborn said that when he saw the murderer of Louise, Simon refused to obey the doctor's orders and made a loud noise in order to let Jacqueline in the next room know. After that, Simon asked Otterborn to start from the beginning again, in order to buy Jacqueline time to kill Otterborn.

Delayed construction of the second financial class Yu

After reading "Tragedy on the Nile", I stared at Lynette, who was wearing a champagne gold dress on the cover, looking at the peaceful Nile with fascination, and I didn't know who I was feeling sorry for.

The story begins when Lynette, who is less than twenty years old, walks into the restaurant amidst the buzz of people. She has wealth and beauty, but also friendship and love. That day she still told her friends with a smile: "In this world, I have no enemies", but such beauty was like colored soap bubbles, and was disillusioned when her old friend Jacqueline brought her engaged boyfriend back. Originally, Lynette should have lived her days as a star and friend, and her old friend Jacqueline would have lived a full and happy life. But when the old friend Jacqueline came with her boyfriend Simon. Lynette was fascinated by Simon's dark blue eyes, curly brown hair, square jaw, and innocent, boyish smile. A warm, sweet, intoxicating feeling flowed through her. Soon, Lynette married the boyfriend of her old friend Jacqueline.

The seemingly happy couple decided to go to Egypt for their honeymoon. Determined to take revenge, Jacqueline secretly tampered with Linnett's belongings, and quietly boarded a boat to Egypt, along with a lawyer, a detective Poirot, and many other tourists who seemed to be out of the story.

On the sparkling Nile River, a bullet pierced Lynette's head while sleeping : "I really want to put my dear little pistol to her head and pull the trigger". Poirot learned about the murderer through investigation, questioning, and talking to individual suspects. At this time, two more people died on board. Facing the suspicious case, Poirot finally found a breakthrough, investigated the case to the bottom, and finally caught the two murderers---Linnet's husband Simon and Lynette's best friend Jacqueline.

Detective Poirot's calmness and meticulousness in the book are admirable. Through the meticulous analysis of every detail, it is indispensable to judge. He heard the faint sound of something falling into the water, noticed that a handkerchief was missing, and finally locked the murderer by discovering the abnormality of the red ink.

Maybe sometimes, love can ruin a person's life, or it can make a person reborn. Love has a limit. If you love someone too obsessively and make him bored or even scared, maybe he will retaliate. Like Lynette and Simon in the book. Simon doesn't like Lynette, and thinks she is lonely and self-admired, but Lynette loves Simon very much. Under love and hatred, a tragedy happened. Also sad is the reaction to Lynette's murder -- indifference, even meanness. They used to respond to Lynette like all the stars and the moon. But after she died, the topic turned to horse racing after a brief discussion; some even said, "It seems that she didn't get any benefits." Oh, poor Lynette.

The author Agatha also shows us a beautiful picture of England at that time in the book. Especially in the British countryside at that time, there was the desolation of "huge rocks disappearing from the shore into the water"; there was also the prosperity of "incomparable classical beauties and more magnificent Elizabethan buildings"; Embellishment, everything is so beautiful and peaceful.

This is the end of my opinion on Death on the Nile. Finally, I hope to enjoy more good works in the future. As Mr. Ferguson said, "It is not the past that matters, but the future".