These two kinds of 50-year successes are not unique, but there are great differences in both authors and works. These differences can be roughly attributed to:
The first is characterization.
First of all, all Conan Doyle's detective novels revolve around only one detective, that is Sherlock Holmes; Although Agatha's novels are widely known as Poirot's detective stories, she has written almost as many detective stories about Miss Ma Puer, as well as detective stories of other characters. Comparing the characters, Hastings and Watson have basically the same roles in Poirot's detective cases, but not every case of Poirot has his participation, which is completely different from Conan Doyle's creative thinking. We know that Watson is always with Holmes. Therefore, Conan Doyle's works have concentrated characters, which is why whenever Conan Doyle is mentioned, he will think of Sherlock Holmes, and whenever Holmes is mentioned, he will think of Watson. When we mention Agatha, we must first think of her series of works, such as The Nile Massacre or Murder on the Orient Express, rather than the characters she created.
Secondly, the hero's form, hobbies, personality, status and value orientation are also very different. Holmes is a tall, thin and untidy person, while Poirot is a fat, short, well-dressed and arty person; Sherlock Holmes likes to collect criminal evidence, violins and bangzi, while Poirot is more interested in studying food and enjoying lakes and mountains. Holmes is quiet, but Poirot is very active; From the point of personal temperament, Sherlock Holmes is a civilian detective rooted in the bottom of London, humble and calm when things happen, while Poirot is more like an aristocratic detective wandering in the upper class, "accustomed to making a good evaluation of himself"; Sherlock Holmes never cared about the reward, but more for the benefit and justice, while the author gave Poirot more for a detective's self-esteem, conceit and a better life.
Of course, the endings of the two detectives described by the author are also very different. Poirot finally retired in the last frame of the curtain; Although Conan Doyle tried to give up Sherlock Holmes, he was finally reborn in a new detective story. This is not so much an invitation from readers as an eternal contest between Sherlock Holmes' spirit and crime. However, Poirot's investigation began in Hurstel and ended in stiles, which also gave people a sense of well-being.
Second, the choice of the nature of the case and the development of the plot.
The cases we read in The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes cover a wide range of topics, including revenge, economic interests, terrorism and so on. Compared with Christie, he reflects a broader and deeper social background. Although his creative background is mainly locked in London, Holmes doesn't like traveling around like Poirot, but spends most of his time in Baker Street, waiting for letters from customers or visiting them at home. Christie's creative background is broader than Conan Doyle's, involving some fields in the Middle East and Africa, such as The Mystery of the Tomb and The End of Death. The choice of case theme mostly revolves around money. She saw the hypocritical interpersonal relationship and the fact that there was no friendship under money, but she lacked Conan Doyle's deeper excavation of human nature, which is why when we read The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, we felt a lot of warmth and concern for human nature.
This is also the difference between Conan Doyle's creative means as a man and that of women. What we feel in Conan Doyle's creation is Hui Hong's social consciousness, which is grand even if it is not portrayed. Christie's creation exudes elegance. Even when she wrote Poirot's Christmas Exploration, she thought it was bloody, and it still exudes elegance.
Holmes likes to compare cases in the way the protagonist handles cases. He believes that no matter how many decades or even hundreds of years have passed, cases are similar and periodic. Then he will change his face, go deep into the tiger's den to seize the clues, connect the clues in series with powerful logical reasoning, and more importantly, he is quick-thinking, and often can't avoid a battle at the last moment when he catches the murderer; Different from Poirot, he mostly found flaws in conversations with all the suspects by asking questions, then peeped into their words and deeds to further obtain evidence, and finally gathered all the suspects together, published the most wonderful closing statement in the book, and found out the murderer in public. Therefore, when we get a copy of Christie's Case, we can turn to the last pages of the work and only read the detective's closing statement, and we can also have a general understanding of a book. Unlike Sherlock Holmes, his investigation is closely linked, and there is no long story at the end of the case. He can answer Watson one or two questions at most, and help him clear his mind and prepare for filing.
Therefore, Holmes is a more skilled detective. He combined his lifelong accumulation with his own talent, showing a more diligent attitude towards life. Poirot showed more wisdom. Although he was slow and fussy, with careful observation and cooperation with Scotland Yard, he could also find out the real murderer. Fortunately, there are not many fugitives in Christie's case, otherwise once Poirot is alone, he will not be able to confront him. This is why Christie's works are elegant. Her criminals are always caught in armchairs, lacking the spirit of resistance and escape of criminals written by Conan Doyle. Even a criminal should be endowed with this spirit, because he is a person.
Conan Doyle likes to create difficulties for criminals in shaping them.