Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in The Mysterious Affair at Styles, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
Logic and Deduction
Love and Passion
Suspense, Intrigue, and Secrecy
Wealth, Inheritance, and Power
Summary
Analysis
In the days leading up to the inquest, Poirot works on his own, which annoys Hastings because he wants to be part of the investigation. Thinking Poirot might go to Mrs. Raikes’s farm, Hastings goes there himself. He meets one of the farmworkers as he approaches, and the worker tells him that Poirot has been there multiple times. He also says that another person from the Styles country home often comes to visit. He doesn’t say whom he’s talking about, but he hints that this person is having an affair with Mrs. Raikes. Hastings comes away feeling angry at Mr. Inglethorp for disrespecting Mrs. Inglethorp so blatantly.
By striking out on his own, Hastings essentially decides to rely on his own instincts as a detective, even though his instincts haven’t proved all that great so far. It is perhaps for this reason that he simply tries to trace Poirot’s footsteps, hoping to find out what his friend is up to as he pursues the case. In doing so, Hastings thinks he has made an important discovery: namely, that Alfred’s affair with Mrs. Raikes isn’t just a rumor, thus (possibly) confirming that he never loved Emily and only married her for her money.
Themes
At the inquest, Dr. Bauerstein explains that Mrs. Inglethorp’s death seemed to be the result of strychnine poisoning. However, he notes that strychnine acts very quickly, which means the timeline of her death doesn’t make much sense, since she most likely drank the coffee sometime around 8 in the evening but didn’t die until much later. She also drank some cocoa later in the night, but Dr. Bauerstein had the cocoa analyzed and didn’t find any strychnine—he also adds that cocoa wouldn’t mask the bitter taste of strychnine like coffee would.
Dr. Bauerstein’s statements outline the puzzling dilemma surrounding Emily’s death. She died of strychnine poisoning, but it’s a mystery how this happened; it would have kicked in faster if it had been in the coffee, and she would have tasted it if it had been in the cocoa. What’s interesting, though, is that this is the exact kind of detail—one that doesn’t make sense—that Poirot likes to focus on. Solving this discrepancy would, it seems, go a long way toward solving the entire case.
Themes
Next, Lawrence Cavendish presents his evidence, which mostly reaffirms his brother’s. Just before he finishes, though, he suggests that his stepmother’s death might not have been a murder. He reveals that she had been taking a tonic that contained strychnine. With this in mind, he references several cases in which such tonics containing strychnine eventually poison people, taking a “cumulative effect” on the victim. Lawrence also suggests that Emily may have simply taken too much of her medicine by accident. But Mr. Wilkins—Emily’s doctor—refutes this idea, saying that she would have had long-term symptoms leading up to a cumulative poisoning. Plus, even four doses of her tonic taken at the same time wouldn’t have been enough to kill her.
Lawrence’s insistence that Emily died of natural causes makes him seem like he has something to hide, as if he murdered her and now wants to throw everyone off track. Still, though, the information he introduces about the tonic containing strychnine is certainly important, since it’s a new detail that is highly relevant to the case. As the investigation proceeds, then, it becomes clear that Poirot and the others are far from unraveling the entire story, which is complex and layered.
Themes
One of the people on the jury points out that Mrs. Inglethorp’s pharmacist could have accidentally put too much strychnine in her tonic. But then Dorcas is called to present her evidence, and she says that the medicine wasn’t made recently—Mrs. Inglethorp took the final dose the day that she died. Mary Cavendish is the next witness, and she explains that she awoke at 4:30 as per usual and was getting dressed when she heard the sound of Mrs. Inglethorp’s bedside table falling over. She then ran to Mrs. Inglethorp’s room with everyone else.
The hypothesis that Emily’s tonic accidentally contained too much strychnine falls flat when Dorcas notes that it wasn’t made recently—after all, if it contained too much strychnine, Emily would have shown symptoms long before the night she died. The investigation therefore still has to find a way to account for how, exactly, the fatal dose of strychnine was introduced into her system.
Themes
Get the entire The Mysterious Affair at Styles LitChart as a printable PDF.
The examiner at the inquest asks Mary Cavendish about an argument she overheard on Tuesday the 17th (the last day before Mrs. Inglethorp’s death). Suddenly, Mary becomes sheepish and hesitant. It occurs to Hastings that she’s stalling for time, trying her best to think of something to say without answering the question. Finally, it becomes clear that she was sitting outside Mrs. Inglethorp’s boudoir and clearly heard an argument in which Mrs. Inglethorp said something about “causing scandal between husband and wife.” However, she claims to have tuned out the rest. Her general behavior during this line of questioning gives Hastings an uneasy feeling, but the examiner lets her go.
It’s unclear why Mary would hesitate to answer questions about the argument she overheard, though there’s the possibility that the argument was actually about her. Indeed, Hastings himself suspects Mary of carrying on an affair with Dr. Bauerstein, so it’s possible that Emily Inglethorp somehow found out about her infidelity. Naturally, Mary wouldn’t want to talk about this publicly. If this is the case, then it becomes clear that illicit romance can make it much harder to sort out the details of a mystery, since the people involved in secret affairs are hesitant to divulge information.
Themes
Eventually, Cynthia is called to present her evidence, but she doesn’t have much to say—even though her room is right next to Mrs. Inglethorp’s, she didn’t hear the commotion and only woke up when Mary Cavendish came to get her. Next, Evelyn Howard presents her evidence in the form of the letter written to her by Mrs. Inglethorp on the evening before her death. The letter expresses a desire for the two friends to make up, but it doesn’t get into specifics, other than to say that Evelyn said terrible things about Alfred but that Emily wanted to forget all about such things.
The details presented at the inquest might seem somewhat tedious, but that’s only because—as Poirot has already pointed out—every detail matters, no matter how seemingly small or insignificant. Therefore, it’s necessary to collect information from Cynthia and Evelyn, especially since the initial facts of the crime will later be called into question as Poirot continues to investigate.
Themes
After Evelyn Howard, the examiner calls Mr. Mace (the pharmacist) to present evidence. He admits to having sold strychnine to Mr. Inglethorp on Monday—the day before Mrs. Inglethorp’s death. Mr. Inglethorp claimed to need the poison to put down a dog. Mace feels guilty about this, since he’s not technically allowed to sell strychnine to unauthorized people, but he did so because he thought Mr. Inglethorp was a respectable man.
It now becomes clear why Mr. Mace rushed to Poirot’s apartment and frantically asked if Emily died of strychnine poisoning: he was the one, he now admits, to sell the poison to Alfred. This is a very condemning piece of information—one that makes it seem highly unlikely that Alfred could possibly be innocent.
Themes
Hastings sympathizes with Mr. Mace, since it’s well known that everyone in town reveres the people who live at Styles Court and want to be in their good graces. It’s only natural, then, that Mr. Mace bent the rules for Mr. Inglethorp, who even signed his name in a small book—a requirement for anyone buying strychnine. Mr. Mace produces the book at the inquest, and sure enough, it contains Mr. Inglethorp’s name.
The people living at Styles Court appear to enjoy a certain privilege in town, since everyone respects them and wants to please them. There is, then, a sense of power that comes along with the Inglethorp/Cavendish family’s wealth.
Themes
Mr. Inglethorp takes the stand. He denies everything that has been leveled against him. His mood is somber and straightforward, and instead of making a great effort to prove his innocence, he simply states that everything that has been said is untrue. There isn’t even a dog at Styles Court, he points out. He also insists that the signature in the book doesn’t match his own. Writing out his actual signature, he holds it up for the jury to see, and it’s agreed that the two signatures aren’t the same. However, when the questioner asks where Inglethorp was on the day that Mr. Mace says he bought the strychnine, he can’t answer—he doesn’t remember. He was out walking, but he can’t say where he went or even which direction he walked in.
Alfred Inglethorp’s alibi is terrible because it lacks specificity. In the same way that tracking a murderer requires a detective to be very detail-oriented, proving one’s own innocence means giving a clear, indisputable account of why the allegations are untrue. Alfred, however, appears unable to give this kind of account, ultimately making himself seem guilty.
Themes
As Mr. Inglethorp fails to provide a suitable alibi, Poirot shifts in his seat. “Does this imbecile of a man want to be arrested?” he mutters to himself. Meanwhile, Inglethorp refutes everything the examiner says, noting that he didn’t even have an argument with his wife on that fateful Tuesday before her death. Even though both Mary Cavendish and Dorcas claim to have overheard him arguing with her, he denies that this happened. When the examiner asks why his wife uttered his name as her last dying words, he suggests that she thought Dr. Bauerstein—who also has a dark beard—was him. Poirot finds this idea interesting, though he doesn’t necessarily believe it; he simply mutters that it’s an “ingenious supposition.”
It’s evident that Poirot doesn’t want Alfred to be arrested for murdering Emily, but it’s not so clear why he feels this way. Indeed, all signs seem to suggest that Alfred is guilty. And yet, Poirot seems to be rooting for him to get off the hook, which is why he’s so frustrated that Alfred can’t provide a plausible alibi. Poirot’s agitation in this scene only adds to the novel’s suspense and tension, as readers are forced to wait—alongside Hastings—to discover Poirot’s reasoning for wanting to protect Alfred.
Themes
When the examiner asks Inglethorp if he poured his wife’s coffee and took it to her, he says that he did, indeed, pour it, but that he didn’t take it to her. He was about to bring it to her bedroom, but then a “friend” came to the door, so he set the coffee down on a table in the hallway. Upon his return just a few minutes later, it was gone. Hastings doesn’t think this story proves Inglethorp’s innocence, since Inglethorp certainly had plenty of time to poison the coffee. Meanwhile, Poirot nudges him and points at two detectives sitting in the back of the courtroom. He identifies one of them to Hastings as Jimmy Japp, a detective with the Scotland Yard.
Throughout the inquest, one of Alfred’s only tactics is to throw suspicion onto Dr. Bauerstein. First, he points out that Bauerstein has a beard like his own, suggesting that he might have been the one to purchase the strychnine. Now, he reveals that Bauerstein arrived just as Alfred was about to bring the coffee to Emily, meaning that Bauerstein (or, perhaps, someone else) might have had a moment to poison it. But Hastings finds this implausible, though it’s worth noting that he might just think this because he's already decided Alfred is guilty.
Themes
