<p>^ Smdur thanks for that information, I hope to see one of these versions.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the only version available from Netflix is the 1934 film, which is supposedly pretty bad and bears little resemblance to the novel.</p>
<p>I will look for one of the movie versions. Would be interesting.</p>
<p>After reading 1/3 of the book, I decided it would definitely not attract a crowd at my bookclub.</p>
<p>^ Reading The Moonstone did take some getting used to, especially after the very readable, action-packed, character-driven Cutting for Stone. However, I am very glad we chose The Moonstone, because I have sorely neglected the classics over the years. I would be open to another classic for a future discussion (and I would even spend $1.59 for it ;)).</p>
<p>Here’s a question we haven’t really touched on: What did you think of the women in The Moonstone? Although there was a certain amount of sexism in the narratives (probably normal for the time), I thought the women were admirably “scrappy”—very independent, strong-willed and forward thinking (Miss Clack being the notable exception—although come to think of it, she was strong-willed!)</p>
<p>There were no “shrinking violets” undergoing fainting spells. The women were not afraid to speak their minds or take action when necessary. I thought the more peripheral female characters were particularly interesting, especially Limping Lucy. Her fierce love for Rosanna Spearman—and her loathing of men—set her apart from the other characters. Lucy to Betteredge re Rosanna’s death: “What do you care? What does any man care? Oh! If she had only thought of the men as I think, she might have been living now!”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, Mary. Quite a different read than what I usually chose, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. I plan to join Oprah now into her Dickens excursion: A Tale of Two Cities and Great Expectations. I know nothing about Oprah’s book club and how it works, but she announced these titles Monday, just as I was pondering my need to occasionally acquaint - or reacquaint - myself with some classics. I sometimes think I’m the only person who has NEVER watched Oprah on TV so, when I say I don’t know what to expect, I mean more than just her book club. (Though I have to say, I noticed on her site you can download a handy, dandy bookmark with a reading schedule. :))</p>
<p>FYI: I found the 1996 version of The Moonstone at the public library.</p>
<p>So in response to Mary’s question about the women in The Moonstone:</p>
<p>I like Lady Verinder. She exhibits grace under pressure after the disappearance of the moonstone. She maintains steadfast trust in her daughter, despite Rachel’s baffling actions. Certainly her management of her estate during her life and the provisions she makes in her will for Rachel depict intelligence and forethought. </p>
<p>Rachel annoys me. Evidently high maintenance young ladies with a penchant for drama existed in the 1800s. I find it telling that her mother made provisions in her will to protect Rachel from fortune hunters. (Even more telling that Lady Verinder’s husband had no need to do so himself for his lady wife.) I did feel that Collins expected me to like Rachel more than I did. Telling myself that Rachel was only 18 and high-strung, due in part to circumstances, helped. </p>
<p>Miss Clack contrasts nicely with Lady Verinder. At no time does she exhibit grace or instill loyalty and respect. I enjoyed her narrative, while not liking her a whit.</p>
<p>Limping Lucy lives a hard life. Just her name alone clues the reader into how others view her - not “Lucy” but rather “Limping Lucy”. I imagine those times unforgiving for anyone disabled - particularly young women of the working class. Lucy and Rosanna perhaps recognize in each other a life of hardship and hurt and so form a tight bond. Lucy seems especially embittered and angry. Does she herself feel betrayed when Rosanna falls in love with Franklin? Certainly Lucy knows that Rosanna heads for disappointment. I think she’s not only angry with Betteredge and Franklin - though she clearly expresses anger and disdain to them - but with Rosanna and both their lots in life, in general.</p>
<p>Rosanna remains a tragic character. Even before she see Franklin, the Shivering Sands hold too much allure for a girl who can’t make peace with herself. She can’t forget her past, her present holds no satisfaction, and her future looks even bleaker without any hope of Franklin in it.</p>
<p>Even Betteredge’s daughter Penelope came across as capable and more than comfortable speaking her mind whether called upon or not.</p>
<p>
Me too! The whole thing with her not talking to anyone after the Moonstone disappeared and sort of going off the deep end because the police were investigating really irritated me. Perhaps it was because it took so long (reading the book) to find out that she was actually trying to protect Franklin because he had taken the gem. Clearly she was spoiled, which is, in itself, annoying, but perhaps it was no more than any other young lady of her position at that time.</p>
<p>OTOH, I too liked Lady Verinder. Independent, capable, intelligent, doing fine without a man after her husband died. </p>
<p>As mentioned above, I mostly found Miss Clack to be a humorous addition to the story.</p>
<p>Rosanna was an enigma – not only did I think she hadn’t really died, but I also thought there was going to be a much more complex story/explanation about her, rather than she fell in love with Franklin the first time she saw him and he didn’t know she existed.</p>
<p>^“Rosanna was an enigma – not only did I think she hadn’t really died, but I also thought there was going to be a much more complex story/explanation about her, rather than she fell in love with Franklin the first time she saw him and he didn’t know she existed.”</p>
<p>Exactly! I was certain there was a back story, and thought perhaps I missed it as I rushed through the book. I found this a serious weakness to the intricate plot, and interesting characters. Rosanna’s “love at first sight” was too strange.</p>
<p>Ignatious, CBB, and SJCM - I agree with all of you. Excellent descriptions of the female characters. I guess Rosanna is the female I like the least. Her character wasn’t developed enough to let us know and understand her. I suppose if Collins’ purpose for her character was to steer us off the correct track, then he was successful. It seems we all thought her role was going to be something different than it was.</p>
<p>Rachel is a teenage drama queen. In that respect, she reminds me a little of those nearest and dearest to me, so I can’t dislike her too much. 
One can only hope that she will one day mature into a woman like her mother.</p>
<p>Speaking of Lady Verinder, I read somewhere that Wilkie Collins, like Charles Dickens, routinely chose names for his characters that had some underlying significance. “Ver” means “to see” in Spanish. As ignatius pointed out, Lady Verinder is intelligent and insightful – perhaps “to see in”? </p>
<p>The 1998 Penguin edition of The Moonstone has an interesting introduction, which discusses (among other things) the significance of names, from Rosanna Spearman (“whose name is clearly emblematic”) to Drusilla Clack (“who is allowed a voice in the novel, but who engages in meaningless ‘clacking’”). Bruff and Cuff are a pair: Both demonstrate level-headed, no-nonsense objectivity. You can find the introduction in Google books, here:</p>
<p>[The</a> moonstone - Google Books](<a href=“The Moonstone - Wilkie Collins - Google Books”>The Moonstone - Wilkie Collins - Google Books)</p>
<p>I like the strong loyalties that tie the characters one to another:</p>
<p>Lady Verinder to Betteredge and staff</p>
<p>Betteredge to his lady and his young lady</p>
<p>Penelope to Rachel</p>
<p>Bruff to Lady Verinder and to Rachel (Bruff heads to Brighton so that Rachel does not have to face Godfrey’s father alone.)</p>
<p>Lucy to Rosanna</p>
<p>Ezra Jennings to Dr. Candy (Jennings refuses to release his notes taken at Dr. Candy’s bedside to Franklin Blake, except those that pertain to Blake’s situation in particular.)</p>
<p>Dr. Candy to Ezra Jennings (Candy buries Ezra according to his wishes with letters and journals with him.)</p>
<p>Sergeant Cuff to Franklin Blake (Cuff comes out of retirement to rework the case, once he determines he erred in his conclusion. He repays Lady Verinder’s large retainer not so much through loyalty but as an act of honor.)</p>
<p>I think that had Ezra Jennings lived, his inner circle would have extended beyond Dr. Candy to include Franklin and Rachel. A moral obligation, if you will, that Blake would have willingly taken on.</p>
<p>The ties and loyalties extend far beyond family. You expect to have unswerving loyalty from Lady Verinder to Rachel - less so between Cuff and Blake at a later date. If you think about it, these ties of love (yes) but also just plain loyalty and honor drive most of the story.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re right, and I think we have to add the three Indians to your above list, despite their homicidal tendencies. They were inseparable, bound to each other by faith and (presumably) friendship. Their ritual of purification required that “Never more were they to look on each other’s faces.” Upon hearing this, “The three men prostrated themselves on the rock, before the curtain which hid the shrine. They rose—they looked on one another—they embraced.” Love, loyalty and honor are motivating factors for the Indians as well, although Mr. Murthwaite is probably the only character who recognizes this.</p>
<p>One final observation:</p>
<p>The Google books introduction (cited above) notes that The Moonstone lends itself to theatrical melodrama, with “the implicit rise and fall of a stage curtain,” as characters hide behind curtains, enter and exit “the stage” through various drawing rooms and bedrooms, etc.</p>
<p>With that in mind, look what is coming to the Lifeline Theater in Chicago on February 4, 2011: [Lifeline</a> Theatre :: The Moonstone](<a href=“http://www.lifelinetheatre.com/performances/10-11/moonstone/index.shtml]Lifeline”>http://www.lifelinetheatre.com/performances/10-11/moonstone/index.shtml)</p>
<p>And some related commentary: [Bringing</a> The Moonstone to the Stage: The Moonstone and Genre](<a href=“http://moonstone-lifelinetheatre.blogspot.com/2010/11/i-confess-i-have-been-delaying-my-first.html]Bringing”>Bringing The Moonstone to the Stage: The Moonstone and Genre)</p>
<p>If this were a RL book club, we would all go on a field trip!</p>
<p>^^^Mary, what are the odds this would be scheduled in Chicago area! You have to go with flip phone in hand, we’ll look for it on you tube.</p>
<p>From your link:
It is also worth noting that Collins wrote a version of The Moonstone for the stage which was performed in 4 acts at the Royal Olympic Theatre in 1877.
Collins simplified the plot,
cut major characters and restricted the action to 24 hours.
It was not well received and though it ran for three months the principal actors left the production before the run had finished.</p>
<p>Mary</p>
<p>I too think the Indians exhibited love, loyalty, and honor. I realized my omission too late to add them, but figured someone would do so for me.</p>
<p>Rachel also acted on ties of love (Franklin) and honor (Godfrey - by breaking the engagement without exposing the reason).</p>
<p>Should we start thinking about our February selection?</p>
<p>It might be fun to follow The Moonstone with Major Pettigrew’s Last Stand - Helen Simonson. (Kirkus Reviews: “Set-in-his-ways retired British officer tentatively courts charming local widow of Pakistani descent Unexpectedly entertaining, with a stiff-upper-lip hero who transcends stereotype, this good-hearted debut doesn’t shy away from modern cultural and religious issues, even though they ultimately prove immaterial.”)</p>
<p>The paperback edition just came out at the end of November.</p>
<p>(Disclosure - I read it last May, but would be okay with reading it again. :))</p>
<p>Ignatius, great that you have read it already. Do you think it is a good book for “book discussion”? I know that’s hard to judge, but you might have a sense about it.
For instance, I don’t think the little jaunt in Breakfast with Buddha would be a good book discussion book, because it’s just a nice little book. Did you ever get around to reading it?</p>
<p>I’m okay with Major Pettigrew’s Last Stand. I bought it when I bought The Moonstone after it was recommended for this month. I haven’t read it yet, but just pulled it out to start. I am also open to other suggestions.</p>
<p>SJCM: I think you first brought the site Book Movement to everyone’s attention. The book club reviews seem positive.</p>
<p>[Major</a> Pettigrew’s Last Stand: A Novel by Helen Simonson Book Club Discussion Guide from BookMovement --Book Clubs, Book Reviews, Discussion Questions, Book Lists](<a href=“Invalid record”>http://www.bookmovement.com/app/readingguide/view.php?ratings&readingGuideID=13103)</p>
<p>and</p>
<p>[LitLovers</a> - Major Pettigrew’s Last Stand Discussion Questions - Book Club Guide](<a href=“http://www.litlovers.com/guide_major_pettigrews_last.html]LitLovers”>http://www.litlovers.com/guide_major_pettigrews_last.html)</p>
<p>We’ve mentioned Major Pettigrew’s Last Stand previously, but waited for the paperback. We first discussed it when SJCM posted Elaine Newton’s Critic’s Choice 2010-2011 Summer Reading List.</p>
<p>I consider this title only the first of many suggestions to follow. I enjoy the book discussions and think Mary13 has a knack for deciding final choice. I’ll read (or reread) whatever.</p>
<p>SJCM - I still have Dreamers of the Day and Breakfast with Buddha on my list to read. However, my list of books to read sometimes overwhelms me. Scary!</p>