The Moonstone (Dover Thrift Editions) Dover Thrift Editions

I first read Wilkie Collins's "The Moonstone" when I was about 10 years old. However, when I read this time that, according to P.D. James, this book was the first mystery that used a detective character involved in the case, I decided to have another read, since that fact makes the book rather historical. Of course, my take after decades was quite different. The child was enamoured with that Indian (as in India) culture woven throughout. The adult was enamoured with the overall mystery storyline.Wilkie Collins wrote an engrossing murder, but it was written when either editors didn't exist or publishers didn't care about lengths of novels. That was the fashion in those days. It is very well written, but as a former newspaper editor, (yes Virginia, there were newspapers once upon a time) I was itching to edit it and shorten it about 300 pages.But of course,, it was worth reading. I won't go into detail since it is a mystery , just to say that the moonstone itself ended up in its rightful place.This was an Everyman's Library edition, which has an attractive cover and its own book mark built in. It is quite attractive, but the print is far too small. I believe the pica is about a 5 point rather than the more readable 8-10 points. There are magnifying glasses on the market now (Amazon has them) and I keep a couple of pairs for books whose publishers insist on making more bucks by printing books with print so small that readers can't read them. The sales are everything and not the comfort of the consumer. (So what else is new??)The character of the detective from the (new at that time) Scotland Yard is very well drawn. Since I don't have the book anymore, having passed it on to a relative, I can't tell you his name. Let me say, though, that he was very astute and tough with a streak of tenderness. By that, I mean that he was passionate about growing roses and wished to retire and grow his roses full time,, to the exclusion of all else. He has a running dialogue and argument with a gardener about which was the proper way to treat the soil for roses production, which is humorous and homey. By that, I mean that in the chaotic murdering world in which he works, he has a comfortable passion for the every day growing of roses. It is his anchor in a violent, uncertain world.If you are a mystery buff, you can't go far wrong by reading "The Moonstone" regardless of its verbosity in parts.My husband, who is a mystery buff who like them short and to the point, actually read Collins's book from cover to cover and was quite taken with it.It's worth the read.

There were so many aspects I thoroughly enjoyed in this book. The mystery has some great twists and turns as well as the various unique characters! The book is written from several character perspectives, which is fun for the most part. One character in particular though, was not so fun to listen too. She just went on and on and from an exhausting and close-mindedness religious mindset .....The first character reminded me so much of "Mr. Carson" on Downton Abbey that I really enjoyed reading anything from him.Since this was written in the latter half of the 1800's, I anticipated a tougher read given how much are language has changed since then, but I was quite relieved and delighted that it was very easy to read.

First, a word about the Kindle file (which does not influence my rating). Every few pages I would get an error message that would throw me back to my home screen. The only fix was to download the file again from Amazon, which got me a few pages farther along. I tried to return the product, but I was unable to do so, nor to make contact with Amazon over the issue. It's only $0.99, but it's still annoying. I ended up finishing the book from paper copies.The stories move far too slowly for modern tastes, filled with pages of trembling emotional reactions to everyday events that quickly become tiresome. The books were originally written to be serialized in magazines and it shows. Each section begins by resetting the scenes and resolving the cliff-hanger from the previous section, then there's lots of going to and fro and characters telling each other stuff the reader already knows, before a not-very-thrilling cliff-hanger to end the section.The plots themselves all involve young love, crimes from the previous generation, complex inheritance rules and worries about money. Although these kinds of stories were popular in mid-Victorian times, they were 100 years out of date in most respects when published. People do take trains now and then, but most of the transport is walking or horse-drawn. No one sends telegrams or sees a factory. No one has a job or interest unfamiliar to prior centuries. The social structure is thoroughly Georgian. Near-universal literacy seems to be assumed, but in other respects worldviews seem little changed since the 18th century.Characters are broadly and humorously drawn, but do not develop. The mood is all imposed by the narrators. Descriptions are pedestrian.I find it odd that people identify The Moonstone as the first detective novel. Collins' earlier The Woman in White is a more conventional detective story, and there are many similar earlier examples of romantic novels with puzzles at the core and characters who steadily unravels the truth.But all of these lack important features that were supplied in Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories and later works. There is no concept of playing fair with the reader, or of clues revealed to the detective and the reader at the same time. Crimes are not solved by either logic or psychological insight. There is no concept that the facts force one solution, nor that there is a single core solution that explains everything. Lots of loose ends remain at the end. These books are romantic novels with puzzling events and crimes that are eventually explained--and that the reader usually figures out long before the characters; not by logic or insight; but by figuring out the author's style--not detective stories.

This Kindle edition is unreadable. I can’t tell if it’s an OCR problem, or if it’s been machine-translated to another language and then back to English, or what. But the words just don’t make sense. See the attached screenshots. “The moon god turned into installation and worshipped.” “The 3 dad or mum priests followed and watched it in cover.” “I turned my returned on him; and we’ve now not spoken considering the fact that.” What?

Skip the Foreword and the Afterword and just enjoy the story. The Foreword and Afterward were written by two curmudgeons who evidently had no sense of humor, probably are English professors somewhere. I think Wilkie Collins was simply writing a good story to entertain his readers, and it was very funny indeed. I don’t believe he meant it to be some great social commentary about the British Empire, imperialism and race. The guy was trying to make a living and writing for serialization . Let’s face it, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

This is a book I have been meaning to read for too many years, and am so glad that I have finally got around to doing so. First published in 1868 and laying claim to be the first true detective novel, it is among the most intricately woven mysteries ever written. Originally published in instalments instalments in Charles Dickens' magazine, "All the Year Round," it demands a good deal of patience, and as much dogged determination from the reader as from the detectives, professional and amateur, who contribute to its resolution.What it has in common with its worthier descendants is its emphasis on character, which is assisted by the use of a number of narrative voices. The fates of all participants are of interest, even where only indirectly connected to the main story.The book is available to read online for free, or as a free Kindle book.

A yellow diamond with a curse on it; a young girl trying to choose between two suitors; one of the first detectives in fiction and more twists and turns in the plot than you can shake a stick at not to speak of a huge cast of characters and multiple narrators and you have a fascinating story of theft and murder.I was surprised how modern this book still is even though it was published over a hundred years ago. I was especially struck by the conversations between Rachel Verrinder and Franklin Blake – her on/off fiancé. I thought the author caught the different voices of his narrators very well indeed and I was never in any doubt who was narrating the story. This is well worth reading even today and it puts some modern crime novelists in the shade.

Recommended to me by a friend as essential reading after I'd enjoyed "The Suspicions of Mr Whicher" by Kate Summerscale, as one of the blueprints for the detective fiction genre. I found "The Moonstone" to be a real page-turner - a cast of very engaging characters, not all of whom are particularly likeable (step forward the wonderfully awful Miss Clack); a clever plot with cliffhangers a-plenty; and a satisfactory dénouement.I particularly enjoyed the style of using several different narrators throughout the book to add different viewpoints of the same event, thereby gradually revealing the story and adding twists where previous narrators have omitted key information to suit their own ends. This technique can have the tendency to be clumsy and repetitive, but it was very effective in this novel.There's also quite a refreshing portrayal of the female characters in this story for the period in which is was written (1860s) - whilst there are some stereotypical Victorian gender roles presented in the views of some of the male characters and the aforementioned Miss Clack, these are often presented in a satirical way so that the reader is invited to laugh at these strict views. The female protagonists on the other hand are mostly presented by the author as strong, assertive characters in their own right, their actions having a pivotal role in the story.A thoroughly enjoyable read.

In his excellent introduction, John Sutherland says that Charles Dickens praised the early instalments of the Moonstone. but later found fault with it. He couldn't understand why, so this latter-day Dickens will try to explain.The narrative of Gabriel Betteredge, which introduces the characters, setting and plot is brilliant - informative, amusing, and well-judged. We get to know this charming, old-fashioned old buffer, with his passion for Robinson Crusoe; and we are intrigued by the exotic background to the "unlucky jewel". And the circumstances of the theft are as much a mystery to us as they are to the characters in the book. In other words, a great set-up.Then it starts to go wrong: first, a plot weakness, then an unbelievable suicide note; then a preposterous reconstruction. The second half of the book is so disappointing. I put it down partly to "serialitis", and (with Mr Sutherland's intro in mind) the author's poor health and drug dependence.(By "serialitis" I mean the practice of dragging out a story issued in instalments when it has proved to be a success. For an extreme example, see "The Count of Monte Cristo". Modern example? Game of Thrones.)The second narrative, that of Drusilla Clack is promising. Miss Clack is a tiresome god-botherer and Collins had a lot of fun with her character - but she too is intelligent and observant. During the early part of her narrative the mystery seems to be nearing a solution. We hear about the attacks on Godfrey Ablewhite and moneylender Septimus Luker, and the bank deposit of a precious jewel by Luker. "The Moonstone?" asks Rachel. The shrewd lawyer Mr Bruff thinks so. He also points out that Ablewhite was the first to leave Yorkshire for London, and thinks that things look bad for him.So.... we just need the police to establish whether the "precious jewel" is indeed the Moonstone and to force Luker to say who pledged it. But nothing happens. This thread is left hanging. So for the next 250 pages I'm thinking, it's Ablewhite. So when it turns out to be the case, it's a huge anti-climax.Much of the second half of the book is the narrative of Franklin Blake. Blake has been presented as an interesting modern character with a multi-cultural background: yet his narrative is matter-of-fact and rather dull. But what about that buried confession by Rosanna Spearman? A 20-page suicide note? That reads like another narrative deposition? Credibility is strained to the utmost.Much of the last quarter of the book is given over to the reconstruction of the night of the theft. The whole idea is utterly preposterous, yet at the same time predictable. The character of Ezra Jennings is surplus to requirements anyway - the author could have expanded and changed the role of Dr Candy to deal with Jennings part of the story. I'm not impressed by Sergeant Cuff - he comes to the wrong conclusion and fails to solve the mystery, in fact he's no more effective than the boneheaded local bobbies.But in spite of the above, there is a lot to admire in this book. A huge effort has gone into the construction of the story, and in the creation of a cast of interesting and (largely) believable characters. Above all, the book is a work of great originality (though much imitated since).Btw, you can't sink into quicksand over your head, except in fiction. The Hound of the Baskervilles, The Woman in Black, and several other works repeat this canard.

Read The Moonstone for it's literary significance as the first mystery and for a decent depiction of various strata of society but don't expect it to be as gripping as an Agatha Christie, Conan Doyle etc. I liked how it had such a feisty, quite independent woman at the centre of the story, and I liked the story being told from multiple characters' points of view but it did end up being a very long book and with Collins labouring each point. A lot. I suppose he really wanted us to pick up of a significant clue or grasp the logic but that was a little tiresome at times. I do, however, understand that he is figuring out the genre and I actually appreciate, far more, how more recent authors so artfully pace their writing and drop clues like little crumbs for us to gobble up.Not a wasted read but I wouldn't read it again.