#73 – Elephants Can Remember – WITH SPOILERS

“Did her mother kill her father or was it the father who killed the mother?”

This is the most inappropriate question that Ariadne Oliver is asked at a literary luncheon about her god-daughter’s parents. The questioner, Mrs Burton-Cox, is concerned about the heredity of her son’s intended, Celia Ravenscroft. Fourteen years ago, General and Lady Ravenscroft died in what the police could only conclude, despite a lack of motive, was a double-suicide or a murder-suicide but which of them actually pulled the trigger was unclear.

So with the help of Hercule Poirot she probes the memories of old friends and acquaintances to gather sufficient information that the wheat may be sifted from the chaff and the truth might appear.

The premise is a good one as is the solution and it would make a good Miss Marple short story – I can just imagine her saying the key phrase – but as a novel the rest is just padding as conversations are had and recalled, some meetings aren’t described, with Mrs Oliver pouring forth more mixed recollections. One chapter is titled “Poirot Announces Departure” which doesn’t make any sense. Towards the end he meets Maddy and Zélie when there is no need for Maddy at all.

This was the final Poirot book to be written, and unlike “Nemesis” which gave Miss Marple a good send-off, this is not a satisfactory end to his career but (fortunately?) we still have “Curtain” to come.

Recurring Character Development

Hercule Poirot

Miss Lemon is still his secretary.

Mrs Oliver

Has tried many hairstyles and owns four hats to suit different occasions.

Has false teeth.

Was planning to write a story about a golden retriever but as it wasn’t going well decided to look into this cold case instead.

Miss Livingstone has replaced the previously unmentioned Miss Sedgwick as her assistant.

Once lived at Sealy House.

Her husband died years ago.

Signs of the Times

The story is set in 1972 (as 1971’s address book is last year’s) but Poirot says they’ve known each other for about twenty years which makes no sense given they met in “Cards on the Table” which was set in 1937 (or maybe 1936).

Mrs Oliver takes Nanny Matcham a tin of her favourite Tophole Thathams tea which sounds a plausible brand but I can find no record of it online.

Poirot says “I am like the animal or the child in one of your stories by Mr Kipling. I Suffer from Insatiable Curiosity.” This is appropriate as it was the Elephant’s Child who suffered from this complaint in the Just So Stories and was the reason it got its trunk.

References to previous works

Poirot investigated a definite historical murder in “Five Little Pigs” and and the vague possibility of a cold case in “Hallowe’en Party” and these are mentioned here with spoilers of varying degrees. Mention is also made of “Mrs McGinty’s Dead”. In all three instances, the case alluded to is named in a footnote, which does not occur in any of the earlier books where no allusions are clarified, except sometimes in the text itself.


Underneath all the verbiage there is a great tragedy and maybe it would work psychologically if set pre-WWII and the Ravenscrofts had had no children.  But would Zélie really work with the General to leave two children orphaned and believing that one parent had killed the other? I don’t think so. At least Dolly doesn’t get the chance to offer someone a glass of warm milk.

2 thoughts on “#73 – Elephants Can Remember – WITH SPOILERS”

  1. You’ve only scratched the surface of how screwy the timeline is for this one! I think the main issue involves the ages of the late couple which are far enough apart to question their meeting as schoolmates or young lovers or whatever! I will say that
    Mrs. Oliver is always entertaining, no matter how good the book is, and Mrs. Burton-Cox is a wonderfully drawn monster! The rest is hokum, made worse for me because the solution was so obvious.


    1. Lady Ravenscroft seems too young compared to her husband, and based on her and Mrs O being at school together makes Mrs O too young as well. And then Nanny Matcham’s age throws another spanner in the works as well. But I just couldn’t be bothered to write it all out and figure out all the inconsistency’s.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: