Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.56 AVERAGE
3.56 AVERAGE
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
adventurous
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
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:
Yes
Super dark and twisted, writing style wasn't always my cup of tea but I loved the last paragraph and it's definitely thought provoking.
I enjoyed this considerably more than expected. I found it easier to read than I expected for a 1896 novel. The version I read (Suntup press's artist edition) also had some interesting appencies that included some essays related to some of the ideas/logic presented in the novel itself.
dark
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
The Island of Dr Moreau is a dark but very engaging book from one of my favourite authors. On of Well's greatest talents is to make you think and this book does that very well. Exploring the dark areas of science and moral responsibility.
Very classic science fiction tends to be more focused on plot and theme, rather than character. Wells is no stranger to this issue. However I felt like this was one of his more engaging protagonists.
This is a great book and a very accessible story for people new to H.G. Wells writing.
Very classic science fiction tends to be more focused on plot and theme, rather than character. Wells is no stranger to this issue. However I felt like this was one of his more engaging protagonists.
This is a great book and a very accessible story for people new to H.G. Wells writing.
I read three H.G. Wells books recently: The Time Machine, The War of the Worlds, and The Island of Dr. Moreau. The star ratings are relative.
To me, this was the best of the three books by Wells that I read. However, it is also the creepiest and there's a bit of body horror. This is also the overall least well rated of the three, so my opinion seems to be a bit odd.
Of the three, I thought this was the best told story and with the best characters. First, the story is illustrating Wells's ideas and is in service of those ideas. There is much less exposition than in the War of the Worlds. Also, unlike The Time Machine, the different science fiction elements were a bit more subtle (which is a strange thing to say when there are beast people.) It made the story much more exciting. I was propelled throughout most of the narrative, and interested in what was happening.
The characters were also the best, I thought. The beast people had some subtlety to them. The narrator is Pendrick. I could understand his motivations, as well as his original deep distrust of Moreau and Montgomery. All his actions were believable and very human. I appreciated tht after months with the beast people, he grew more accepting and seeing them as almost human. Montgomery was a tortured soul, although he had a surprising sympathy for others. Even Moreau, who is clearly a villain, is relatable to some level. Through the longest exposition of the book, you can understand his motivations and empathize with him some. Compared to the War of the Worlds and The Time Machine, these were much more sympathetic and relatable characters.
There were a lot of ideas about the fragility of society, the rules of society preventing us from reverting to beasts, and whether or not we need a God-like figure to control out baser natures. I don't remember Wells having exposition on those, and instead fully incorporating the themes through the story itself. Again, this is unlike the Time Machine or The War of the Worlds where there is much more exposition. In Moreau the longest exposition was Moreau explaining the motivations for what he was doing. That was needed though, since our narrator Pendrick had no understanding of Moreau's motivations nor could he experience them.
I appreciated the Wells showed the lasting repercussions on Pendrick's life. That his experience on the island hung over the rest of his life. How he viewed the animal nature of his fellow humans, the fragile veneer of society, and the need for isolation were changed for the rest of his life.
In the end, I though this was the strongest book of the three. The characters were the most interesting and sympathetic, and Wells did much more showing instead of telling. The story was much better developed than The Time Machine, and still superior to The War of the Worlds.
To me, this was the best of the three books by Wells that I read. However, it is also the creepiest and there's a bit of body horror. This is also the overall least well rated of the three, so my opinion seems to be a bit odd.
Of the three, I thought this was the best told story and with the best characters. First, the story is illustrating Wells's ideas and is in service of those ideas. There is much less exposition than in the War of the Worlds. Also, unlike The Time Machine, the different science fiction elements were a bit more subtle (which is a strange thing to say when there are beast people.) It made the story much more exciting. I was propelled throughout most of the narrative, and interested in what was happening.
The characters were also the best, I thought. The beast people had some subtlety to them. The narrator is Pendrick. I could understand his motivations, as well as his original deep distrust of Moreau and Montgomery. All his actions were believable and very human. I appreciated tht after months with the beast people, he grew more accepting and seeing them as almost human. Montgomery was a tortured soul, although he had a surprising sympathy for others. Even Moreau, who is clearly a villain, is relatable to some level. Through the longest exposition of the book, you can understand his motivations and empathize with him some. Compared to the War of the Worlds and The Time Machine, these were much more sympathetic and relatable characters.
There were a lot of ideas about the fragility of society, the rules of society preventing us from reverting to beasts, and whether or not we need a God-like figure to control out baser natures. I don't remember Wells having exposition on those, and instead fully incorporating the themes through the story itself. Again, this is unlike the Time Machine or The War of the Worlds where there is much more exposition. In Moreau the longest exposition was Moreau explaining the motivations for what he was doing. That was needed though, since our narrator Pendrick had no understanding of Moreau's motivations nor could he experience them.
I appreciated the Wells showed the lasting repercussions on Pendrick's life. That his experience on the island hung over the rest of his life. How he viewed the animal nature of his fellow humans, the fragile veneer of society, and the need for isolation were changed for the rest of his life.
In the end, I though this was the strongest book of the three. The characters were the most interesting and sympathetic, and Wells did much more showing instead of telling. The story was much better developed than The Time Machine, and still superior to The War of the Worlds.
170th book of 2020.
3.5, I think. A novel of fascinating ideas but not executed with the power of Wells' other books. I adore both The Time Machine and War of the Worlds and this novel had the opportunity to be just philosophical as those, particularly the former, but it fell short.
Pendrick, by way of various events, ends up on a mysterious island with Montgomery and Dr Moreau. It transpires there are strange figures wandering the island: experiments of Moreau’s, vivisections. Can an animal be a man? Are men already animals, do we all have an animal within us? These are the questions Wells poses to us in the novel. The idea itself is rather sinister; Pendrick sees a great number of men/women-animals on the island, some wolf-men, bull-men, monkey-men, dog-men, even. They have developed a law, which is usually quoted but I’ll quote it again:
Indeed, are they not men? Naturally, the island of vivisected, tormented, vegetarian animal-people descends (ascends?) to a problematic climax.
All this said, then, why does it fall short of Wells’ other novels? I think it is simply down to the fact that Wells wrote it in a fairly basic and uninteresting tone. Despite War of the Worlds being “action-packed” (a term I hate in reference to novels), I found it didn’t distract from the tone and interest in the novel. Perhaps Wells balanced it better. In The Island of Dr Moreau, on the other hand, there is a great deal of being chased, shooting at things, and it drew me away from the core, interesting, idea of this book. I felt as if Wells had come up with this brilliant idea (bear in mind this was published 1896 and is discussing ideas we are still having today about animals and humans) and then found he was too afraid to properly approach it, and made an adventure novel of it, instead. In both other Wells novels mentioned above, I remember underlining a great deal of quotes, but here I felt compelled to underline nothing. There have been a number of adaptions of this novel, and it is not a bad novel, only I feel it is a slightly wasted one. Wells could have taken it further, and truly explored, his foresightful theme of animals and men, experiments and the relationship between us human beings and those we share our planet with. Mostly, without harmony.
3.5, I think. A novel of fascinating ideas but not executed with the power of Wells' other books. I adore both The Time Machine and War of the Worlds and this novel had the opportunity to be just philosophical as those, particularly the former, but it fell short.
Pendrick, by way of various events, ends up on a mysterious island with Montgomery and Dr Moreau. It transpires there are strange figures wandering the island: experiments of Moreau’s, vivisections. Can an animal be a man? Are men already animals, do we all have an animal within us? These are the questions Wells poses to us in the novel. The idea itself is rather sinister; Pendrick sees a great number of men/women-animals on the island, some wolf-men, bull-men, monkey-men, dog-men, even. They have developed a law, which is usually quoted but I’ll quote it again:
"Not to go on all-Fours; that is the Law. Are we not Men?
Not to suck up Drink; that is the Law. Are we not Men?
Not to eat Flesh or Fish; that is the Law. Are we not Men?
Not to claw the Bark of Trees; that is the Law. Are we not Men?
Not to chase other Men; that is the Law. Are we not Men?"
Indeed, are they not men? Naturally, the island of vivisected, tormented, vegetarian animal-people descends (ascends?) to a problematic climax.
All this said, then, why does it fall short of Wells’ other novels? I think it is simply down to the fact that Wells wrote it in a fairly basic and uninteresting tone. Despite War of the Worlds being “action-packed” (a term I hate in reference to novels), I found it didn’t distract from the tone and interest in the novel. Perhaps Wells balanced it better. In The Island of Dr Moreau, on the other hand, there is a great deal of being chased, shooting at things, and it drew me away from the core, interesting, idea of this book. I felt as if Wells had come up with this brilliant idea (bear in mind this was published 1896 and is discussing ideas we are still having today about animals and humans) and then found he was too afraid to properly approach it, and made an adventure novel of it, instead. In both other Wells novels mentioned above, I remember underlining a great deal of quotes, but here I felt compelled to underline nothing. There have been a number of adaptions of this novel, and it is not a bad novel, only I feel it is a slightly wasted one. Wells could have taken it further, and truly explored, his foresightful theme of animals and men, experiments and the relationship between us human beings and those we share our planet with. Mostly, without harmony.
adventurous
dark
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot