18 Maigret Takes the Waters

18 Maigret Takes the Waters

[@tomcurran8470]

I am shocked! Maigret drinking water instead of beer! LOL.

[@sieradelphi3497]

It is a very sad story. For 15 years, someone deceived some other people. Who is the victim, I wonder....Thank you for your uploading.

[@kathleenellenford4816]

👏🏻❣️

[@helenswan705]

What a pity the ads start with this one (Jan 2024).

[@marvfj6451]

FINALLY learned at Maigret works at Quai des Orfèvres !!! So hard to understand

[@mavisemberson8737]

Maurice Denham..

[@RockyRacoon123]

👍👍👏👏

[@sittnknittnwatchn3980]

💙🎙📻💙

[@Granny73]

Pure Evil, they were.

[@dodojack1045]

GS's mysogeny at work once more. This time sympathy & an apologist for the brutal male murderer of a "monstrous" female victim, as he referred to her. A shameful account of himself.

[@martin5504]

It's just a story. Please choose not to listen if it doesn't fit well with your philosophy of life.

[@2msvalkyrie529]

Yes. G S claimed to have had thousands of" lovers ". (! ) The majority of them were prostitutes it transpired . He was a very unusual character to put it politely.

[@janebrown7231]

No, that's a misrepresentation. (Spoiler alert) The word 'monstrous' was used by Louis Pelardot, the man who was deceived by the female conspirators. He said it was monstrous that "for 15 years, I believed I had a son". He didn't use any defamatory language about the women at all, and his concern throughout was not to blame, but to find his son. The word was used only to refer to the plan to milk the man of money for 18 years, to support a son that didn't exist. At no point was either of the dishonest women called 'monstrous'. 41:12 The policeman (Georges) shortly afterwards agreed that the plan was 'monstrous' . The word is not used anywhere else in the script. Pelardot was not a "brutal male murderer" in the story. He was not even charged with murder. His account was that the death was accidental, his trial was for manslaughter not murder, and he was acquitted by a jury after hearing all the facts. So that is another misrepresentation. Some language and attitudes are 'of their time' in this and any vintage piece of writing. For example Agatha Christie highlights some shocking attitudes in her characters. But it's always a mistake to confuse what a character says with what the author thinks, which you do in your comment. Often an author is deliberately highlighting unacceptable attitudes. Simenon was relatively advanced and non-judgemental for the time he was writing.

[@carnmarth334]

You can't even spell "misogyny". That aside, you're stupidly assuming that characters in novels reflect the beliefs of the author.

[@TheHansoost]

She was rather nasty woman as was her sister. Believe all women did the murderer no good. Madame Maigret was treated with respect here.