I just took over the "Death on the Nile" ( "The tragedy on the Nile"), the cloud of Wuli. Then must not the words to bear down on all sides, we must uphold the principle of dialysis, and strive to understand the effect. In a novel, the effect is synonymous with the plot, so read plot enough.
The first is the effect of guessing words and then guess the gist of the original. Words can not really tell, but also guess from the spelling part of speech. Very often, just enough to know that part of speech. For example: "Hercule Poirot shook his head and shuddered slightly." Investigation did not have time to "shudder", but it is easy to see that it is an action, detective Poirot to know a little "shudder" then, it is enough. And large landscape descriptions or more characters do not have to look at the description of appearance, as they push forward with the cases not directly linked.
Despite the considerable number of new words no investigation, I have read dozens of pages after a general idea of the "Miss Lin Neite Simon and her husband went to the Nile on the tour, Miss suddenly killed, witnesses have died mysteriously," the basic plot.
A turn for the better detective stories, many doubts, often describing the details of the key may be the case. For example, clues left by the murderer, that is, through the writer seems to describe the details of inadvertently exposed. Through a large number of new words, I had to ignore a lot of details - I am sure that you want to read the loss.
The contrary, in strict compliance with the dialysis technology, I read the crime took place in the moment, probably already guessed who the murderer, and they suspect that the murderer may have accomplices - for aiding and abetting each other to create a large number is not present evidence; only guess not specific means for its commission. The outcome of confirmed my guess is quite correct.
I guess not rely on the details, but intuition. The so-called intuition is not something vague, but from my grasp of the effect. Details of the crime shows the specific steps, and told me the effect was fully human characters. Humanity is the writer to shape the most deliberate thing. Detective story is no exception. Simon in his capacity as the background, speech and deportment to the constantly caught my attention, even though a lot of details missing, but I doubt he has not give up too - the crime turns out to be distortions caused by the tragedy of human nature. Later I also read "The return of Sherlock Holmes" ( "Sherlock Holmes return"), "The Moonstone" ( "moon gems"), such as detective novels, the effect is still in the grasp, ignored the principle of the details of the study completed. The moralist who may be reading this did not, but I was not confused reading, the full enjoyment of the fun of the case.

1、当然不是。
2、西蒙杀害林内特，是为了钱，那么怎么可以说是情种呢。
3、《尼罗河上的惨案》写持有万贯家财的林内特·里奇维小姐和她朋友杰奎琳·德·贝尔福特的恋人西蒙·道尔结婚了，他们乘坐由英国驶向埃及尼罗河的豪华游轮去度蜜月。这艘游艇上载着来自世界各地的豪绅、名媛、没落贵族……这本是一次迷人浪漫奢华的旅游，然而发生在游艇上的连环谋杀案使整条游船变成“死亡之旅”。
百万富翁的女继承人林内特头部中了一枪，死在她度蜜月的游艇上，她的那条价值五万英镑的珍珠项链也不翼而飞了，表明这是一桩谋财害命案。正值波洛寻找破案线索时，林内特的女仆路易丝·布尔热被杀死在房间中，她手里握着一张一千法郎的一角，显然她发现了凶手，并进行敲诈而被杀死。值得庆幸的是，奥特勃恩太太是这件凶杀案的唯一目击证人。但是正当她要说出凶手时，却被窗外的一颗子弹击毙。最后，侦探波洛揭露了这一离奇曲折的真相，他详细讲述一些通常易被人忽视的蛛丝马迹，譬如：凶杀案发生当晚喝了“发浑”的酒；在尼罗河里找到的有枪眼的披肩；林内特的梳妆台上留有红墨水的指甲油瓶以及墙上用血刻写的大写字母J……波洛精心地把这些表面看来毫无关联且错综复杂的线索摘理清楚，最后推断正是杰奎琳和西蒙合谋杀害林内特。这让读者有始料未及之感（解谜结束）。最后结局同其它侦探小说一样，真凶杰奎琳和西蒙自杀。