Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.83 AVERAGE
3.83 AVERAGE
funny
hopeful
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
I very much enjoyed The Moonstone, 4.25 stars. I absolutely respect the plotting in this long and winding detective novel. I never became bored or lost despite a long list of characters. His best friend, Charles Dickens, often leaves me confused at the end of his complex novel set-ups. I was prepared with notepad and pencil but I never needed it.
I audiobooked it and simultaneously read the copy of this novel available on The Gutenberg Project online. I reasoned that if I got lost in the characters or confused by the cluing, I could catch up more easily seeing the words on the page. It worked really well.
I've heard some reviewers say they didn't like the characters. I quite liked Gabriel Betteredge, head servant to the Verinder's and sort of our host for the telling of the Moonstone story. However, he only tells us the very beginning of the story. His daughter serves Rachel Verinder as her maid. Rachel is engaged to Franklin Blake and at her birthday party, she inherits The Moonstone from a distant uncle who obtained the diamond illegally. Gabriel uses Robinson Crusoe as a steadying oar through life and constantly refers to it. Also he is a deeply human character, kind, hardworking, loyal, and aware of his shortcomings. I thought the Roseanna Spearman character was an excellent character too. Drusilla Clack one of several witnesses who tell what they know to the reader to help recover the Moonstone and to lift the veil of suspicion that hangs over the wrong person. Clack is not a likable character. She reminded me of Charlotte Bartlett in Room With a View by E M Forster. I thought Sargeant Cuff, a nearly retired ace detective who is hired by Lady Verinder to recover her daughter's diamond, is fastidious and well-respected but I thought he felt like a Wallace & Grommit character. As for the rest of the cast, I didn't feel one way or the other about them.
The pacing is quite speedy given the length of this book and the time period in which it was written. I never once became disinterested.
I am not a mystery-lover but I usually enjoy them when I read good ones. Do read it, it moves along quickly and its a fun book. (Still, I prefer his best friend's novels.)
I audiobooked it and simultaneously read the copy of this novel available on The Gutenberg Project online. I reasoned that if I got lost in the characters or confused by the cluing, I could catch up more easily seeing the words on the page. It worked really well.
I've heard some reviewers say they didn't like the characters. I quite liked Gabriel Betteredge, head servant to the Verinder's and sort of our host for the telling of the Moonstone story. However, he only tells us the very beginning of the story. His daughter serves Rachel Verinder as her maid. Rachel is engaged to Franklin Blake and at her birthday party, she inherits The Moonstone from a distant uncle who obtained the diamond illegally. Gabriel uses Robinson Crusoe as a steadying oar through life and constantly refers to it. Also he is a deeply human character, kind, hardworking, loyal, and aware of his shortcomings. I thought the Roseanna Spearman character was an excellent character too. Drusilla Clack one of several witnesses who tell what they know to the reader to help recover the Moonstone and to lift the veil of suspicion that hangs over the wrong person. Clack is not a likable character. She reminded me of Charlotte Bartlett in Room With a View by E M Forster. I thought Sargeant Cuff, a nearly retired ace detective who is hired by Lady Verinder to recover her daughter's diamond, is fastidious and well-respected but I thought he felt like a Wallace & Grommit character. As for the rest of the cast, I didn't feel one way or the other about them.
The pacing is quite speedy given the length of this book and the time period in which it was written. I never once became disinterested.
I am not a mystery-lover but I usually enjoy them when I read good ones. Do read it, it moves along quickly and its a fun book. (Still, I prefer his best friend's novels.)
mysterious
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:
No
An awesome beginning, hundreds of pages of pointless exposition, and a disappointing denouement. The only real value is its historic standing as (perhaps) the first mystery novel.
Excellent mystery with lots of twists and turns. One thing that makes it special though is that Collins lays it out as a series of narratives by different characters, each with their own voices and perspectives, which include flaws that they're blind to, but that Collins and his audience aren't.
There's also a lovely romance that I rooted for, but what I adore most is Collins' insistence on shining a loving spotlight on characters that are considered physically unattractive by general society, but are observant and intelligent and crucial. I'm so used to books from this period casting a distrustful eye towards outsiders. And while it's arguable that for most of the story, The Moonstone does that to its South Asian characters who are trying to reclaim the gem that was stolen from them in the beginning, the novel ultimately reveals that it knows better where they're concerned as well. It's a remarkably sensitive, but also intriguing, exciting, and funny book.
There's also a lovely romance that I rooted for, but what I adore most is Collins' insistence on shining a loving spotlight on characters that are considered physically unattractive by general society, but are observant and intelligent and crucial. I'm so used to books from this period casting a distrustful eye towards outsiders. And while it's arguable that for most of the story, The Moonstone does that to its South Asian characters who are trying to reclaim the gem that was stolen from them in the beginning, the novel ultimately reveals that it knows better where they're concerned as well. It's a remarkably sensitive, but also intriguing, exciting, and funny book.
I read the Lifetime Library edition, so I can’t claim to have read the entire novel. However, I don’t think it would’ve done much more for me. I already grew bored by the end of these pages. As far as detective tales go, it finds and interesting perspective in the people surrounding the hero/victim—it has that going for it. But in almost every other regard it’s an outdated relic of the genre. I can see why it isn’t held in the same regard as Holmes or other later 19th/early 20th century mysteries. It’s foundational, but it’s sort of like an early model of a bicycle. You’d rather ride the new fancy one, the one designed from learning from the mistakes of the original prototypes. It’s only natural. In this way you can appreciate the leaps and bounds the genre has made over the years.
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
funny
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
adventurous
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
This one took a while to fully grab me, but when it did, it did! It's a lot of fun to see all the genre tropes in their infancy; it's a compelling mystery and also funny. I liked the multiple perspectives very much, although I did find it a bit overlong.
adventurous
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated