Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.32 AVERAGE
3.32 AVERAGE
A very curious novel, nowadays perhaps more interesting for the fin-de-siecle attitudes to race, gender and sexuality it depicts than for the (not a little ludicrous) plot.
It's a period piece more than anything else. Imperial England (portrayed by the white, virginal woman - who also happens to be a New Woman) is under threat from an 'Oriental', sexually ambiguous (and sexually threatening)Other and can only be defended by the honorable polititian (yes, you heard that right) Paul Lessingham. The structure is circular and repetitive - the same events are told four times from different perspecitves - and the events are overblown, but it is entertaining in its own way.
It's a period piece more than anything else. Imperial England (portrayed by the white, virginal woman - who also happens to be a New Woman) is under threat from an 'Oriental', sexually ambiguous (and sexually threatening)Other and can only be defended by the honorable polititian (yes, you heard that right) Paul Lessingham. The structure is circular and repetitive - the same events are told four times from different perspecitves - and the events are overblown, but it is entertaining in its own way.
adventurous
dark
funny
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
This book is a little difficult for me to review, so my review itself is scattered. It was different. I did enjoy it for the most part, although there were some points at which it dragged a bit.
I think what I found different about it is that I don't know that I could give it a specific genre. It is definitely Victorian Gothic, but the different sections of the book have entirely different feels to them. There are four sections narrated by four different characters. I really enjoyed the first section, which was the creepiest and could probably best be described as Gothic horror. The second two sections lost quite a bit of that creepiness, and I would describe as general fiction. The last section suddenly became a mystery with a Sherlock Holmes feel to it. Even though the last section felt like a whodunnit, there really wasn't any sort of mystery going on, just a mysterious feeling chase that ended in a somewhat vague anticlimactic ending. Not a whole lot of answers. Some parts were creepy, some parts dragged a bit, some parts were mysterious, and I found some parts to be downright funny.
It is definitely a book that was all over the place, but I am nonetheless happy to have read it. Old horror can be so much fun at times.
I think what I found different about it is that I don't know that I could give it a specific genre. It is definitely Victorian Gothic, but the different sections of the book have entirely different feels to them. There are four sections narrated by four different characters. I really enjoyed the first section, which was the creepiest and could probably best be described as Gothic horror. The second two sections lost quite a bit of that creepiness, and I would describe as general fiction. The last section suddenly became a mystery with a Sherlock Holmes feel to it. Even though the last section felt like a whodunnit, there really wasn't any sort of mystery going on, just a mysterious feeling chase that ended in a somewhat vague anticlimactic ending. Not a whole lot of answers. Some parts were creepy, some parts dragged a bit, some parts were mysterious, and I found some parts to be downright funny.
It is definitely a book that was all over the place, but I am nonetheless happy to have read it. Old horror can be so much fun at times.
During my second year at University I took a course on Victorian literature and was surprised by the variety of books published during that era. One of these books was The Beetle, which remained in some obscurity, despite immense popularity in its heyday, due to the growing fame of Stoker's Dracula, published in the same year. The Beetle has had a weird pull on me ever since 2014, hence why a re-read felt completely timely. Thanks to Poisoned Pen Press and NetGalley for providing me with a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. Gratitude also for the patience.
The Beetle is a typical example of Victorian literature which placed evil outside of Britain. A lot of Gothic books of the time did this, since it allowed them to imagine England as a pure and civilised place which is threatened by uncivilised danger from outside. Imperialism and racism are therefore an almost natural element of these books and that can be difficult to swallow for modern readers. In and of itself, however, that is exactly what makes it valuable reading! It is so important to realise how unconscious and conscious biases slip into our cultural productions, because it lays bare how many things seem natural. In The Heart of Darkness Joseph Conrad did so purposefully, showing the power of such thinking on a "normal" man who technically does know better. The Beetle has no such insight, it simply is a product of its culture and reflects what certain classes considered acceptable and obvious. It's a fascinating product of history because of that and does deserve to be read. I'm therefore glad it has recently been republished by different outlets, including Poisoned Pen Press.
The Beetle is told from four different perspectives. First comes Robert Hold, a man down on his luck. He enters a house he shouldn't, meets a horrifying creature that strips him and then... changes him. Second comes Sydney Atherton, a scientist in love with the wrong person. Through him we meet Marjorie Lindon and Paul Lessingham, the latter of whom is what I would call the real main character. He too encounters a horrifying creature. Third comes Marjorie, who is engaged to Paul. Concerned about her fiancé, she is the one who draws Sdney into figuring out what is going on and what has London, but especially Paul, so freaked out. Our last narrator is Augustus Champnell, who is asked for help by Paul. Is he the one who can figure out what is going on? The reason I have laid the plot out like this is because it demonstrates one of my favourite writing techniques, which is this neat folding in of narratives and narrators. In my opinion Mary Shelley does it best in Frankenstein, which is stunningly circular. But The Beetle is also fascinating in how it uses its different narrators to reveal new layers to the mystery and unearth new motivations.
The choice of structure discussed above really helps The Beetle be more fascinating than it perhaps, entirely, deserves. It's kind of like Pulp Fiction in that way, in the sense that both, if told in a normal, chronological, single narration would be a bit boring, but due to how it's structured becomes fascinating. In the end The Beetle is kind of pulp Gothic and utterly dramatic in a way that may seem a bit odd to readers used to 21st-century hyper-realism. It's a timepiece, clearly of its period, but it can also be real good fun. What sets this edition apart from the edition I read before is its extensive background material. Most classics come with an introduction, but this Poisoned Pen Press edition also has a reading list, discussion questions, and annotations. As I mentioned above, I do think The Beetle is the kind of text that needs some background information to explain its weirder aspects.
The Beetle, while no older than Dracula, looks its age. A lot of its tropes, ideas, and language are outdated. And yet, it's quite a fun read once you come to terms with that. It's beautifully over the top and the way its structured really elevates the material to a higher level.
URL: https://universeinwords.blogspot.com/2022/09/review-beetle-by-richard-marsh.html
The Beetle is a typical example of Victorian literature which placed evil outside of Britain. A lot of Gothic books of the time did this, since it allowed them to imagine England as a pure and civilised place which is threatened by uncivilised danger from outside. Imperialism and racism are therefore an almost natural element of these books and that can be difficult to swallow for modern readers. In and of itself, however, that is exactly what makes it valuable reading! It is so important to realise how unconscious and conscious biases slip into our cultural productions, because it lays bare how many things seem natural. In The Heart of Darkness Joseph Conrad did so purposefully, showing the power of such thinking on a "normal" man who technically does know better. The Beetle has no such insight, it simply is a product of its culture and reflects what certain classes considered acceptable and obvious. It's a fascinating product of history because of that and does deserve to be read. I'm therefore glad it has recently been republished by different outlets, including Poisoned Pen Press.
The Beetle is told from four different perspectives. First comes Robert Hold, a man down on his luck. He enters a house he shouldn't, meets a horrifying creature that strips him and then... changes him. Second comes Sydney Atherton, a scientist in love with the wrong person. Through him we meet Marjorie Lindon and Paul Lessingham, the latter of whom is what I would call the real main character. He too encounters a horrifying creature. Third comes Marjorie, who is engaged to Paul. Concerned about her fiancé, she is the one who draws Sdney into figuring out what is going on and what has London, but especially Paul, so freaked out. Our last narrator is Augustus Champnell, who is asked for help by Paul. Is he the one who can figure out what is going on? The reason I have laid the plot out like this is because it demonstrates one of my favourite writing techniques, which is this neat folding in of narratives and narrators. In my opinion Mary Shelley does it best in Frankenstein, which is stunningly circular. But The Beetle is also fascinating in how it uses its different narrators to reveal new layers to the mystery and unearth new motivations.
The choice of structure discussed above really helps The Beetle be more fascinating than it perhaps, entirely, deserves. It's kind of like Pulp Fiction in that way, in the sense that both, if told in a normal, chronological, single narration would be a bit boring, but due to how it's structured becomes fascinating. In the end The Beetle is kind of pulp Gothic and utterly dramatic in a way that may seem a bit odd to readers used to 21st-century hyper-realism. It's a timepiece, clearly of its period, but it can also be real good fun. What sets this edition apart from the edition I read before is its extensive background material. Most classics come with an introduction, but this Poisoned Pen Press edition also has a reading list, discussion questions, and annotations. As I mentioned above, I do think The Beetle is the kind of text that needs some background information to explain its weirder aspects.
The Beetle, while no older than Dracula, looks its age. A lot of its tropes, ideas, and language are outdated. And yet, it's quite a fun read once you come to terms with that. It's beautifully over the top and the way its structured really elevates the material to a higher level.
URL: https://universeinwords.blogspot.com/2022/09/review-beetle-by-richard-marsh.html
i liked the characters, the setting, and the writing but the mystery wasn't compelling, it wasn't remotely scary, the pacing was off, the whole "ancient creature getting revenge" thing is boring to me, there was a whole load of build up to nothing, and the ending was anticlimactic and annoying
A classic subtle horror. Don't expect a bunch of blood and gore. This is one of those subtly creepy horror books typical of this era. Much is left up to the individual imagination to create what is most terrible for you. However, this is done in a way that works- not one that leaves you wanting. A must read for horror fans, and a good one for those who want to dip their toes into the horror genre, but are not fond of blood and gore.
So weird. Honestly, I wouldn't recommend it outside of a classroom setting, as the class discussions helped keep me anchored into what the hell was actually going on.
funny
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Read this for a Gothic horror module at university, expecting a sort of early 20th-century ghost story kind of book, which I suppose it is, but instead found a completely different book for possibly the wrong reasons. The book is not scary, as a lot of these older horrors are, it's almost funny, but it is entertaining. It's quick paced and kind of feels like a modern shitty, low-budget, trashy horror film and that's a compliment to it. To add to this, the villain is a hermaphrodite, which is interesting to me, in the way of the way that writes used to explore ideas of gender is interesting. This book is famous for outselling Dracula as they were released in the same year, and I can see why, I'd rather read this page-turner than that load of drag!
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Δε το πιστεύω ότι στη εποχή του είχε ξεπεράσει τον Δράκουλα σε πωλήσεις. Για εμένα φλοπαρε αλλά αξίζει 1- για το πρώτο μέρος και 2 - γιατί το διάβαζα στην Ισπανία και αυτό είναι χοτ.