You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.83 AVERAGE
3.83 AVERAGE
adventurous
mysterious
relaxing
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Another classic mystery down thanks to the Phoebe Reads a Mystery podcast. I will say the complexity and length of this novel made it a challenging listen, and I may have been able to keep up with it easier if I had been reading words on the page. But it is an interesting use of epistolary storytelling and a progressive narrative too.
A fun read. Different narrators tell different sections of the story - I really liked the first narrator, who did the first 32% of the book. I liked the others less, which definitely decreased my enjoyment. I found the later sections overly long & skimmed quite a few parts. I mostly enjoyed the read, but had lost interest by the end & wasn't even too interested in finding out who the thief was.
adventurous
funny
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Simultaneously brilliant and (perhaps to modern sensibilities) silly (e.g., if you think someone hid something in their bedroom, there are easier ways to test that theory ...).
What a fun listen. It is awesomely well narrated by Peter Jeffrey, who somehow manages to pull off sounding like a bevy of cast members. The book itself, which was published in 1868 in serialized form in Charles Dickens’ magazine, is truly Victorian in tone, which I enjoyed very much. But the attitudes in it are remarkably progressive for the period: the narration is much more respectful than the attitudes of the era toward servants, to women, and to non-Christians and non-Whites. Collins also has lots of fun tweaking proselytizing Christians — just wait until you find out about the organization devoted to ruining trousers, for example. Best of all is the underlying story. This book is generally considered the first detective novel, and it has a fine mystery at its center, with a satisfying solution and conclusion. There are some flaws, of course. The medical details seem like plain nonsense, particularly the information about opiates, there is some baked in racism and chauvinism which is simply to be expected from this period, and everyone’s depicted emotions are VERY Victorian. Also, the male “hero” of the piece is at bottom something of a jerk. But these are details. I loved listening to this book.
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Fun mystery/whodunnit book. The second narrator, the religious lady, almost made me stop reading the book, she's so annoying. I liked most of the rest of the characters fine.
"Every human institution (justice included) will stretch a little, if only you pull it in the right way."
-------
I read this several years ago but it was nice to revisit this year as I had actually forgotten the big reveal- that it was in fact Franklin Blake who had stolen the diamond under the influence of laudanum. I found the restoration of the Moonstone to the Indians to be a really modern outcome for the time- it was a religious object stolen from them by greedy Englishmen and they were in fact entitled to its return.
I found the change of narrator to be refreshing as at times it became a little dull and I found myself skimming the moments there were a lot of words saying nothing at all. This was actually less predictable than many modern mystery novels and would have rated better if not for the increasing boredom. I found it funny that the detective retied to grow roses at the first part of the story as it was so unlike other traditional "detective" novels. I found the question of unreliable vs. reliable narrators to be at the forefront of my mind while reading this. It increased the entertainment to have different perspectives of the same people.
-------
I read this several years ago but it was nice to revisit this year as I had actually forgotten the big reveal- that it was in fact Franklin Blake who had stolen the diamond under the influence of laudanum. I found the restoration of the Moonstone to the Indians to be a really modern outcome for the time- it was a religious object stolen from them by greedy Englishmen and they were in fact entitled to its return.
I found the change of narrator to be refreshing as at times it became a little dull and I found myself skimming the moments there were a lot of words saying nothing at all. This was actually less predictable than many modern mystery novels and would have rated better if not for the increasing boredom. I found it funny that the detective retied to grow roses at the first part of the story as it was so unlike other traditional "detective" novels. I found the question of unreliable vs. reliable narrators to be at the forefront of my mind while reading this. It increased the entertainment to have different perspectives of the same people.