The Moonstone – December CC Book Club Selection

Parent Cafe
21

<p>

</p>

<p>OK – I did suspect Godfrey before he was revealed, only because he was too happy/ willing to walk away from his two engagements. What I didn’t suspect was the “how” of the robbery. I mean, who would think it was drugs? Maybe when the book was written it would have been suspected more? </p>

<p>I can’t say I liked Miss Clack, but I did get to the point where I was just laughing to myself at the thought of her sneaking all over the house leaving her tracts.</p>

<p>Also, I kept thinking that Rosanna Spearman hadn’t really killed herself, and she would show up again.</p>

22

<p>CBB - I also was expecting Rosanna Spearman to still be alive. I suspected Godfrey before he was revealed, but not way in advance. I started getting suspicious of him when we learned he had someone look at Lady Verinder’s will. I couldn’t figure out how he could have gotten the stone, that’s where I figured Rosanna Spearman to somehow be involved.</p>

<p>SJM - I have to agree with CBB that I found Miss Clack humorous. She was an annoying character, but I chuckled through her section everytime she let us know what she really thought about someone and then let us know she wouldn’t really say it because she was a Christian woman. I think the following passage from page 168 sums her up:

I also chuckled on page 179 when she referred to the need to interfere in Rachel’s life as:

</p>

<p>The section I found the hardest to get through was Frankin Blakes first section, starting on page 212. He was too wordy at times. I wanted him to get to the point much faster than he ever did. Maybe I was being impatient because I was trying to finish the book by the 1st, but his section is the section where I wanted to skip ahead.</p>

23

<p>At what point did I know Godfrey to be connected to the disappearance of the moonstone? After learning that the three Indians accosted Godfrey, I never doubted his involvement in the theft. While the moonstone meant various things to various individuals (a vengeful curse on family - John Herncastle, a pretty bauble - Rachel, harbinger of trouble - Lady Verinder, …), nothing superseded the import of the diamond to the Indians. I trusted their knowledge of the stone’s whereabouts.</p>

<p>Ms. Clack further confirmed Godfrey as “a person of interest” - unwittingly revealing his feet of clay. Mr. Bruff proved Godfrey to be in need of money and less than scrupulous as to his means of obtaining it.</p>

<p>I liked Ms. Clack’s narrative, which means something altogether different than saying I liked Ms. Clack. I think Collins meant Clack to come across as sanctimonious and holier-than-thou - though she meant well, at least. As a reader, I found her machinations dispersing her tracts humorous. In actuality, I would have avoided her. (And what two diverse and well-defined characters - Betteredge and Clack - Collins created back to back and through first-person narratives, no less. I looked forward to the other narratives.) </p>

<p>I agree with SJCM: “This is NOT a book to be read out of sequence.” Collins serialized The Moonstone in Dicken’s magazine from Jan-Aug 1868. The sequence of the story would gain added import under this form of publication, I believe. I can picture readers anxiously awaiting the next installment.</p>

<p>No one really suspected Godfrey (other than the Indians) because he didn’t really steal the diamond, did he? Someone else took the diamond and literally placed it in Godfrey’s hands. That person had no memory of doing so and all clues led elsewhere. Godfrey desperately needed money at the exact time that the diamond ended up in his hands. Would he have stolen the diamond from Rachel’s room? I don’t think so. In fact, he didn’t. Yet to possess the diamond, with no one the wiser, at a time of financial desperation, would have been difficult for a man of much stronger moral character than Godfrey to resist. In a way he was doomed from the moment of possession himself - i.e., the moonstone’s curse.</p>

24

<p>Add me to the crowd that thought Rosanna Spearman would rise again. I felt kind of sad when I realized she really did commit suicide.</p>

<p>Franklin Blake wasn’t ever on my list of suspects. From the first moment he appeared and stretched out in the sand to chat with Betteredge, he seemed too much the easy-going hero to suspect—perhaps a bit hapless, with a tendency to get into “scrapes,” but with a sense of humor and a good-hearted, natural charm.</p>

<p>ignatius, that was a great analysis of Godfrey. I shouldn’t have referred to him above as an “evil villain.” In fact, he was neither. He was financially desperate and morally weak-willed. It was almost as if the moonstone directed Franklin to Godfrey because he was an easier target for its mischief.</p>

25

<p>Mary thanks for those links. Apparently, Wilkie had some sort of facial deformity himself, which may describe his sensitivity to Rosanna Spearman’s pain. I, too hoped she would resurrect. </p>

<p>Ignatius, super post. There really wasn’t an evil villain revealed. The Moonstone just fell into the wrong hands. Godfrey was desperate. </p>

<p>Mary- from your Penguin Book Questions- I found this and would appreciate your collective views. I feel as though I missed something. </p>

<p>“After a conventional happy ending in England, Collins shifts the setting to conclude with an epilogue in India.
How does the portrayal of the Brahmins here compare with that of Betteredge and Miss Clack?
How does the meaning of story change because of the Indian frame at its opening and closing?”</p>

26

<p>Before I tackle SJChessMom’s questions, I have another comment about Miss Clack. As I read her chapter, I kept thinking that she reminded me of someone else–another character we had met in our readings over the past year or so. But who?</p>

<p>And then I remembered: Adelaide Addison from The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society. Does anybody remember her? Like Miss Clack, she has a 1st person narrative (a letter) in which she fussily comments on the goings-on of those around her. Here’s a very Miss Clack-like quote from Miss Addison’s letter (regarding Elizabeth):</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>And she signs her letter to Juliet, “Yours in Christian Consternation and Concern.”</p>

<p>I don’t mean to hijack the thread by resurrecting Guernsey, but I know that many of you read the book when I did, and I think the parallel is interesting. In both novels, we have the writings of an upright, uptight, mildly amusing, hypocritical Christian spinster. Guernsey is set exactly 100 years after The Moonstone. The more things change, the more they stay the same!</p>

27

<p>Re the Penguin book question that SJChessMom wondered about:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I would say that Betteredge and Miss Clack both regard the Indians with distrust and suspicion. Their stereotypical views were probably commonplace at the time: The Indians were mysterious, murderous, clairvoyant, and amoral. The framing stories, on the other hand, pull back from this narrow view and place the Indians in a much broader historical and religious context. The perspective at the beginning and the end is much more sympathetic to the Indians and the injustice they suffered with the loss of their religious relic. </p>

<p>In the prologue, John Herncastle’s cousin condemns him for his part in taking the moonstone. He has no kind words for Herncastle. He is “unfit,” a “madman” with a “fiery temper,” and guilty of murder and plunder. It is clear in the prologue that the Indians have been wronged. </p>

<p>Herncastle’s cousin closes the prologue with the words, “I am even fanciful enough to believe that he will live to regret it, if he keeps the Diamond; and that others will live to regret taking it from him, if he gives the Diamond away.” The long narrative that follows this proves his prediction to be absolutely true.</p>

<p>Then in the epilogue, all is put to rights. Mr. Murthwaite observes a moving religious ceremony, “the grandest spectacle of Nature and Man, in combination, that I have ever seen.” It is a scene of “unclouded glory,” with “thousands of human creatures, all dressed in white, stretching down the sides of the hill.” It is almost a heavenly vision, and it is caused by the return of the moonstone. The Indians are not threatening criminals here; they are Brahmins, honored by the people for what they have sacrificed to retrieve the stone. </p>

<p>Betteredge and Miss Clack (and many others like them) considered the Indians to be thieves, and Rachel to have been unfairly robbed. In fact, the framing stories make it clear that Rachel’s uncle and all the other Europeans who had their hands on the moonstone were the true thieves. At the end, Murthwaite writes with satisfaction and awe, “Yes! After the lapse of eight centuries, the Moonstone looks forth once more, over the walls of the sacred city in which its story first began.” The stone was never really Rachel’s at all, and finally, it is back where it belongs.</p>

28

<p>

I think John Herncastle was the evil villain. He was a murderer and a thief. I believe he intentionally sent The Moonstone to his niece with the hope that the curse would cause problems for his sister and her family. </p>

<p>I read Mary’s last post after I wrote my comment above about Herncastle. The Moonstone did belong to the Indians. It bothered me that no one (perhaps other than the cousin who wrote in the prologue) ever thought the right thing to do was to return the Moonstone to the Indians. Wasn’t the Moonstone’s story common knowledge? Maybe it was stolen before the right thing could be done and that’s why that path was never taken.</p>

<p>

I think all three use their religion (Betteredge’s religion being the truth he finds in Robinson Crusoe) to justify their actions. The Indians may not be thieves in taking back the Moonstone, but they are murderers.</p>

29

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree. I love an eccentric detective, whether it’s Sherlock Holmes, Columbo or Monk!</p>

<p>I think Wilkie could have made a nice series with this character. The dialogue with the gardener (debating about roses) was very charming and amusing to me. I want to take him (Cuff) out of retirement!:)</p>

30

<p>From Sparknotes regarding the prologue and epilogue:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Both Betteredge and Clack live within somewhat narrow parameters. Neither have experienced life outside of England. Betteredge makes excuses for Mr. Blake whenever the German, French, Italian influences acquired from living abroad seemingly muddle his thought processes or behavior. Robinson Crusoe as a source of guidance perhaps confirms his English superiority. </p>

<p>Again Sparknotes:

</p>

<p>Personally, I think Clack and the Brahmins had more than a bit in common with their unswerving focus. Refer back to Clack’s narrative (already mentioned by BUandBC82) and change Christian to Brahmin:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>As a reader though, I find Ms. Clack amusing, annoying, perhaps unrelenting, but no more than that - unlike the Brahmins. The Brahmins are dangerous. Mr. Murthwaite speaks to that on multiple occasions, in warning to those possessing the diamond. I think I sometimes forgot that they would kill whomever stood in the way - Franklin, Rachel, Lady Verinder - and became more caught up in their dedication to the moonstone. </p>

<p>Just for fun, I took the Sparknotes quiz on The Moonstone. I only missed:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Can you list the narrators - without looking back?</p>

31

<p>

</p>

<p>I love a quiz! Let’s see…the cousin, Betteredge, Miss Clack, Sergeant Cuff, Franklin Blake, Ezra Jennings, Mr. Bruff, Mr. Murthwaite. </p>

<hr>

<p>Well, I stopped there and figured the answer must be (D) eight narrators–and then I checked SparkNotes and found that I failed. :frowning: Continuing what ignatius’ started, who can list the narrators I missed – without looking back?</p>

32

<p>I can not list all the narrators without looking back, but I think Franklin Blake and Betteredge each had two. I think?? So if I account for both of them having two, I’ll say B (based only on mathematics). I could never name 11 narrators and that actually seems high to me. I’m going to go look now. :)</p>

33

<p>First, Mary what a great response to the discussion question! Well done!!!</p>

<p>Enjoying this discussion.
Ignatius, interesting points from the Sparknotes, especially regarding the significance of Robinson Crusoe. I kept wondering “Why That Book?” </p>

<p>BU- I forgot about the ‘evil’ John Herncastle, the thief who started the entire drama. </p>

<p>Mary, Kudos for remembering a character in the first book we read, long ago.Impressive comparison. Love the comment " Yours in Christian Concern and Consternation"- so Miss Clackish ! </p>

<p>I am realizing what a significant author Wilkie Collins is to the “detective genre” and must remind myself he is the “father” of Sherlock Holmes and the Agatha Christie empires. </p>

<p>So back to the Sparknotes quiz, fun idea. Wish I could venture a guess, but you can’t imagine how confusing this book is read within couple days, out of order.
Seems like there were 20-25 narrators !!! So my answer "none of the above " :)</p>

34

<p>OK, I know for sure I don’t know the answer to the “how many” quiz – good thing this isn’t a real class! But, I was going to comment on that first narrator, Herncastle’s cousin, who gave all the background on the Moonstone and the theft. As I was reading along, I thought maybe he’d pop up again …</p>

35

<p>^ Yes, he didn’t even have a name, did he? By the end of the book, I had almost forgotten he existed.</p>

<p>The answer to ignatius’ quiz question is 11. Per SparkNotes: </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>SparkNotes has a more liberal interpretation of “narrator” than I do, but I guess it’s true that all of the above had at least a brief 1st person commentary.</p>

<p>SouthJerseyChessMom, I can’t imagine how you managed to read the book within a couple of days, not to mention out of order. That’s quite a feat! Your head must have been spinning!</p>

36

<p>^^^ Actually, I started early Nov, enjoying each chapter, even though it was in little bursts of time. Nov 28th rolled around and I had 1/2 to go.
Got bogged down with those middle narrators (maybe BU’s Blake’s narration) and had to find how “who dun it”. </p>

<p>Hey, if you think figuring out this puzzle is challenging reading it in chronological narrative order, try it my way, out of sequence. Oy vey! LIke recreating a chess game backwards.</p>

<p>Actually, back tracking and reading some of the narration , knowing Godfrey was the cad, made it quite interesting.
I don’t recommend this method for any detective selection in the future. </p>

<p>OK, back to this interesting discussion ! </p>

<p>It’s stunning to think of 1/2 of London waiting for the next installment of this series. Those magazine subscriptions must have flown off the stands.</p>

37

<p>

</p>

<p>My copy of The Moonstone contains an introduction by a Catherine Peters that refers to the public’s interest:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not SparkNotes but Collins himself - look to the Contents page:</p>

<p>Prologue
First Period - Betteredge
Second Period - Eight narratives (with Blake writing two and Betteredge writing another)
Epilogue - Three statements</p>

<p>I overthought (and underthought too, actually - not remembering the ship’s captain or Cuff’s man) by wanting to count Rosanna’s lengthy letter as a narrative. I knew Blake included it within one of his narratives - but it still seemed to me too important to dismiss. </p>

<p>What did you think about Ezra Jennings? His secrets are buried with him - literally. To have learned more about him would have shifted the focus in a different direction. I like how Collins left him - gentle, brilliant, not alone or unloved at his death yet still somehow apart and an enigma.</p>

38

<p>

</p>

<p>Contents page? I’ve been shortchanged! I downloaded The Moonstone to my Kindle, and the novel begins immediately with the Prologue. Since I paid exactly $0 for it, I guess it doesn’t make to ask for a refund. :slight_smile: </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Ezra Jennings’ character was almost a “red herring” in the beginning. He turned people off, and was met with suspicion (at first) by the other characters we liked. I wondered if he was keeping Mr. Candy drugged so that he wouldn’t spill the secret he had on his befuddled mind. But it was soon apparent from Ezra’s journal that he was one of the good guys.</p>

<p>One of the websites about The Moonstone mentioned that Collins treated his own physical ailments with opium (to the point of addiction), and that he may have modeled Ezra Jennings after himself. Perhaps how ignatius described Jennings is how Wilkie Collins saw himself, “gentle, brilliant, not alone or unloved at his death yet still somehow apart and an enigma.”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I am reminded of the movie, “Memento.” Did you ever see it? If you’ve decided you like figuring out mysteries backward, you should rent it! :)</p>

39

<p>On Kindle if you want the Table of Contents you have to back up or use menu to go to the beginning. It assumes you want to start at the first chapter when you download the book and open it. .</p>

40

<p>^ Thanks, I’m a new Kindle user and can use all the help I can get! I still had no luck, though. I used the menu to access the “Go to” choices of “cover,” “beginning,” “location,” and “table of contents,” but strangely, the “table of contents” option was not dark and I could not select it.</p>