1960s clothes: Third Girl by Agatha Christie

Third Girl by Agatha Christie

published 1966




 

Another Christie to catch up on. I am doing a lot of re-reading as I prepare my talk at the forthcoming

International Agatha Christie Festival 

which takes place in Torquay Sept 8-17th. My talk is on Thursday 14th at 5pm, do please come and see me! 

This is a link to my event:

International Agatha Christie Festival | Mysterious Affairs with Style (iacf-uk.org)

As I've said before, I’ll be talking about clothes in Christie – her own interest, clothes detection, and the sociological fascination of her books taking us from flappers in short skirts in the 1920s to trouser-wearing girls sharing flats in the 1960s.

Third Girl is the epitome of the flat-sharing era. I have read it several times, and that fact definitely demonstrates what Dr Johnson (who was talking about second marriages) described as ‘the triumph of hope over experience’. The first time I came to it I was quite excited by the idea of a book dealing with life for young people in 1960s London, it was an appealing thought. Third Girl is a great title and a great concept – it refers to young women sharing a flat, and takes in the rootlessness of the life, and also the idea that the third girl is a bit amorphous, isn’t a friend of the others, has the worst room. Sometimes an idea like that could really work with AC. And actually, the bones of this book are amazing, the disappointing thing is how much it was squandered (a similar disappointment, The Clocks, for instance, is  just a nothing-y book, you don’t feel it was wasted)

The Third Girl, Norma, is wandering around trying to confess to crimes. She gets involved with Hercule Poirot and Ariadne Oliver (Poirot’s Agatha-esque crime writing friend). There are young arty types, there is a visit to a Bohemian studio. Norma’s father is a standard businessman with a second wife/stepmother, there is another home in the country. Her great-uncle has a foreign au pair to look after him. (That particular plotline is extremely unconvincing and not really worked out). But it is a muddle, and there are long repetitive conversations that achieve nothing and consist of people not really remembering correctly at first, but its not being relevant or important. There are wild and unnecessary coincidences. There is an impersonation that beggars belief (even for Christie) but - this may seem like a contradiction - it is so cleverly done that you have to allow it.

I just kept thinking she would have made a much better book of it some years before, because there are a few good ideas and moments…

Third girl is unusual in featuring men’s clothes in a way not related only to sensible tweeds.




‘It might have been someone in fancy dress … a representative of the youth of today. He wore a black coat, an elaborate velvet waistcoat, skintight pants, and rich curls of chestnut hair hung down on his neck. He looked exotic and rather beautiful, and it needed a few moment to be certain of his sex.’

This is David, whom Mrs Oliver always refers to as the peacock.

Norma’s appearance is a standard young woman from the Christie books of this era – compare with this from The Adventure of the Christmas Pudding, 1960

 ‘Sarah has got in with what they call the coffee-bar set. She won’t go to dances or come out properly or be a deb or anything of that kind. Instead she has two rather unpleasant rooms in Chelsea down by the river and wears these funny clothes that they like to wear, and black stockings or bright green ones. Very thick stockings. (So prickly, I always think!) And she goes about without washing or combing her hair.’




… and in the 1961 Pale Horse (which is on the blog,  but we were more interested in the mysterious Box at that time) the annoying Mark dislikes women who are dirty and ‘much too warmly dressed’: a yellow wool pullover, a black skirt and black woollen stockings.’

Here, Norma starts out in black high leather boots, white open-work stockings, a skimpy skirt and a long sloppy pullover.

We can safely take it that Christie doesn’t approve of this. She is more sympathetic to the men’s clothes in fact – Poirot says David resembles a Vandyke portrait.

The  young woman went to Meadowfield School – in Christie’s Cat Among the Pigeons the girls’ school was Meadowbank. You would never be sure with Christie, she also mentions her all-purpose Ruritanian/ Balkan state which in this case is Hertzogovinia, but has appeared under other names in her books down the years.

‘Art school Boho’ of the 1960s is an illo from a book by Sam Knee called The Bag I’m In, but I think the drawing might actually be Florence Bamberger - I would love to credit them further and more clearly, and also buy the book, but it is hard to track down. He is on Instagram.

The woman in the photograph is Britt Eckland.

Comments

  1. Oh, I so much wish I could be there for your talk, Moira! I know you'd have such insightful things to say, and I did love being in Torquay during my last UK visit. I'd love to go again. Anyway, on to Third Girl. I thought Christie captured the era very well in the novel. I agree there are things that aren't as well done here as in some of her other books, but still, things to enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Margot, I wish you could be there too! And even lesser Christie is always still worth reading, as you say.

      Delete
  2. When Poirot meets the former principal of the school you don't get the impression that the same school as in Cat Among Pigeons can be meant. The principal is not one of the characters from that book, and no acknowledgement is made of Poirot helping the school in the past.

    This book contains a simile were Poirot compares himself to a human computer, a comparison that becomes more prominent in the next book. I find it amusing how incomprehensible that comparison would have seemed when Christie introduced the character.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course you are right, I was only playing idly with the idea.
      Nice thought about the computer...

      Delete
  3. The illustration seems a testament to the enduring appeal - not to mention the wearing quality - of Fair Isle sweaters (I'm rather a cashmere girl myself. I have a couple that are old enough to vote).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was thinking about that style of sweater - I was very jealous of a girl in my primary (elementary) school who had one, her aunt had knitted it, and I could still work up some sweater-envy now. So exactly as you say - that is a loooong time. But am also up for cashmere - I remember reading someone being interviewed saying that once you get used to cashmere there's no going back..

      Delete
    2. People think cashmere is delicate and expensive. I take a couple of cashmere sweaters with me when I deploy in the winter (Red Cross). They roll up into nothing to pack, they're the warmest thing out there, and you can wash them in the basin after work, pat them dry with a towel, and wear them the next day. As I said - I have a couple of cashmere sweaters that are old enough to exercise the franchise, so the cost works out to about ten cents per wearing.

      (If sweaters had a franchise).

      Delete
    3. What a recommendation! A lot to be said for cashmere, indeed. It is the lightness I love. But I have found some of them get bobbly, and there is no predicting - it's not a feature of, say, the expensiveness of the sweater, and they all get washed the same way. Any tips?

      Delete
    4. Even my nicest ones get bobbly (although the cheaper the cashmere, the higher the degree of bobbliness). I have one of those little sweater razor thingies. Eventually the bobblies stop.

      Delete
    5. A future in which they no longer appeared would be good! Have you tried any of the electric razor items? I have bought one but not tried it yet...

      Delete
    6. I'm afraid to try the electric razor thingies as I'm terrified I might slice open a sweater (although they are supposed to have some kind of safety features to prevent that). As long as my manual razor works, I'll use it.

      Delete
    7. I have also just bought something called a sweater stone, which is (apparently) going to solve the problem. We'll see.
      Do you know the comics character Cathy? Years and year ago there was a strip that so resonated with me: she says she looks at magazines now and knows it doesn't matter that she isn't a model, expensive clothes won't change things, & she knows now that buying fancy skin cream will not make her more beautiful & she is happy with herself & her life. BUT - show her the answer to a household problem and she immediately is ordering stuff, trying out tricks.
      That is so me. Cathy was referring to boxes to make you tidy up, but I think it applies to sweater solutions too.

      Delete
  4. Loving the Everly Brothers, Fabian, Bobby Rydell style hair dos of the likely lads and the beautiful Britt Ekland in the mini skirt.
    I wish I could go to your talk, it will be fascinating.
    Sue

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh thank you for the kind words. And yes, I liked the pics. Agatha seemed to disapprove of the girls while liking the boys, intriguingly

      Delete
  5. Poirot's comparison of the Peacock's "look" with an old painting is a reminder that for centuries men did dress flamboyantly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, good point, it's only very recently that they have been expected to be so dull...

      Delete
  6. I remember thinking at the time (reading Third Girl and others as they were published) that it was odd she always described beatnik/hippie type girls as unwashed, when most of us were constantly washing our hair. Maybe the British version was grubbier?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent point, I've always taken issue with the constant harping on being dirty, and you have put it into words, plus pointed out the absurdity. Apart from anything else, for huge numbers of people there would have been much more availability of hot water, bathrooms, and hairdryers in this era. (and no, I don't think the British were grubbier!)

      Delete
    2. I think it has something to do with eschewing the neat and tidy, scrubbed clean look of the 1950s, combined with sooty black eye make up. All of which (I think) would have made these girls look, if not dirty, at least unkempt to the older generation.

      Delete
    3. Good point, and part of the way in which all generations look back at an earlier time as being much better

      Delete
  7. Wish I could be there, Moira! Listened to Hugh Fraser reading Third Girl recently and hearing it read aloud did show up its flaws. The 1960s were so remote from Christie's own girlhood - I just don't think she understood it at all. Chrissie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks and yes, she feels somewhat out of her depth I think. A slightly sad downward trail in the 60s do you think? Halloween Party and Nemesis are better, perhaps, though the young people in Halloween don't really convince either.

      Delete
  8. Reminiscent of the BBC series 'Take Three Girls' though that was in the 1970s. Also of Katherine Whitehorn's 'Cooking In A Bedsitter.'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh I loved Take Three Girls, I was the right age to be entranced with the idea of flat-sharing in London and heartbreak and jobs and parties.
      And I still pick up Katherine Whitehorn's book sometimes, the picture of 60s life is indeed perfect. And although food and cooking opportunities have changed out of all recognition, she still has some very good advice.
      There's a bit where she has advice on what to do if you are expecting people round and are running late - she gives an order of priorities, and I use it to this day. ('Set the table so they know they've come on the right day. Get yourself ready - you can cook in front of them but can't be putting on your mascara')

      Delete

Post a Comment