Moonstone, The by Wilkie Collins ~ April/May Book Club Online

[JoanP]

The Book Club Online is  the oldest  book club on the Internet, begun in 1996, open to everyone.  We offer cordial discussions of one book a month,  24/7 and  enjoy the company of readers from all over the world.  Everyone is welcome.

The Moonstone
Wilkie Collins

In T.S. Eliot called The Moonstone "the first and greatest English detective novel." Told from the standpoint of several, very different, very British characters, it is the funny, irreverent, dramatic, romantic, very British story of the theft of an Indian jewel taken from the eye of an idol and then stolen again from a very British country house by mysterious Indians. Come and join us: I'll bet you can't guess "whodunit" and what they did!     Discussion Schedule: April 15-21: Through section XI in Gabriel Betteredge's narrative, ending with: "A day or two after, however, the darkness lifted a little.  How, and with what result, you shall presently see." April 21-?:  The rest of Betteredge's narrative, up to THE END OF THE FIRST PERIOD, stopping when you come to Miss Clack's narrative. Related Links::Gutenberg electronic text

For Your Consideration
April 15-21: Through section XI 

1. What function does Betteredge's long introduction serve? How would you describe the mood that he sets?  What point is Collins making with his use of Robinson Crusoe?

2. What recent event of that time would have made the three Indians particularly sinister to Collins' readers?

3. Is "the Shivering Sands" a real place? Do you know any such place?

4. What would you say is the main characteristic of each of the characters?

5. Do you find Betteredge racist? Sexist? Why, or why not?

6. Do you have any theories as to how the jewels were stolen? (No fair telling, if you've read the book!)

7. Why do you think Rachel is acting so strangely after the robbery?

8. What ground did Franklin and Godfrey have for their opposite opinions of the police's competence? What does this tell us about their character?

9. What kind of police organization existed at the time?

DISCUSSION LEADERS: JoanK &  PatH

[JoanP]

It occurs to me as I reread the dialog you posted, Pamela - that it just might be in this little boy's interest to play along and  pretend he's seeing something...to keep the Indians' interest in his abilities alive and well.  What do you think?  He didn't really give them much solid, verifiable information, did he?

[Scottieluvr]

[…]And by the way telling us several times that Franklin was always in need of money. That's such an obvious clue. And how proud he is of his ability to get the cooperation of women, young and old. Except for his departed wife, with whom he always disputed the right of way on the stairs in the house.

Great point of reference, and let me point out Franklin’s eagerness to go to the magistrate.  My thinking is he secreted away the diamond before why not again… 

[Scottieluvr]

It occurs to me as I reread the dialog you posted, Pamella - that it just might be in this little boy's interest to play along and  pretend he's seeing something...to keep the Indians' interest in his abilities alive and well.  What do you think?  He didn't really give them any solid, verifiable information, did he?

Definitely! Whether the boy's intentions are honorable or otherwise, he's a survivor. 

[JoanK]

Hmmm. So some of you think that Franklin took the jewel because he needed money. What do the rest of you think? (No fair answering if you've read the book. I've read the book, but forgotten a lot about the solution.)

[PatH]

What is Franklin really like, anyway?  What does anyone think?  He has charm, is good-looking, a spendthrift, is he a good guy or a bad guy?

And Rachel has another suitor, too--Godfrey Ablewhite.  What do you think of him?

By the way, you notice that both suitors are her first cousins.

[Frybabe]

JoanK, the thought that Franklin took it also crossed my mind. I was thinking that because it was suggested that the diamond be put into the local bank vault in the morning for safe keeping, because Rachel was careless about announcing where she would put it for the night (in an unlocked cabinet/box as I recall), and to throw the Indians off he decided to swipe it. At any rate, I wonder if he could have convinced Rachel to let him put it in the bank considering the way she was mesmerized by the thing. Why on earth would she be so careless about putting it in an unsecured place? Wouldn't you be more careful with such a valuable piece? I would.

[Scottieluvr]

JoanK, the thought that Franklin took it also crossed my mind. I was thinking that because it was suggested that the diamond be put into the local bank vault in the morning for safe keeping, because Rachel was careless about announcing where she would put it for the night (in an unlocked cabinet/box as I recall), and to throw the Indians off he decided to swipe it. At any rate, I wonder if he could have convinced Rachel to let him put it in the bank considering the way she was mesmerized by the thing. Why on earth would she be so careless about putting it in an unsecured place? Wouldn't you be more careful with such a valuable piece? I would.

Great perspective Frybabe’s. Yes, Rachel’s blunder in letting everyone know where she was storing it was foolish. But if Frank did steal the diamond to protect it, this act shines a more positive light on him.

[Scottieluvr]

What is Franklin really like, anyway?  What does anyone think?  He has charm, is good-looking, a spendthrift, is he a good guy or a bad guy?

From the read I envision Frank being debonair, worldly, and accustom to being respected because of his wealthy status.

And Rachel has another suitor, too--Godfrey Ablewhite.  What do you think of him? […]

I think there’s some thing off about Godfrey. The description Betteredge uses to describe Godfrey sparks my discomfort of this man:

“He stood over six feet high; he had a beautiful red and white colour; a smooth round face, shaved as bare as your hand; and a head of lovely long flaxen hair, falling negligently over the poll of his neck.”

He almost sounds angelic, beautiful even, which in a man makes me think of one thing: a gigolo. This is supported by his only being associated with women’s legal issues and organizations:

“Female benevolence and female destitution could do nothing without him. Maternal societies for confining poor women; Magdalen societies for rescuing poor women; strong-minded societies for putting poor women into poor men's places, and leaving the men to shift for themselves;—he was vice-president, manager, referee to them all. Wherever there was a table with a committee of ladies sitting round it in council there was Mr. Godfrey at the bottom of the board, keeping the temper of the committee, and leading the dear creatures along the thorny ways of business, hat in hand.[…]”

He represents the typical Victorian lothario found in modern historical romance novels. *LOL*

[salan]

Still here.  Have gotten a little behind, but am on chapter 8.  I am enjoying the book so far; but have been busy.  Still having problems since my surgery.  Wound won't heal & looks like infection is back.  I have an appt with an infectious disease specialist next Wed. 
On a lighter note; I am going to spend the next few days in Dallas with my daughter & family.  Just needed to get away for a while.  I am taking my Kindle & will hopefully catch up then.
Sally

[PatH]

Oh, dear, take good care of yourself, Sally.  I'm glad you''re enjoying the book.

[JudeS]

Since this is the first Mystery Novel,  perhaps Franklin would be the VERY FIRST red herring?

No mystery that respects itself, or its readers would be so obvious that the perpetrator of the crime is given up in the first hundred pages of a four hundred page book.
 
If it is Franklin I will be sorely disappointed.

[Scottieluvr]

Since this is the first Mystery Novel,  perhaps Franklin would be the VERY FIRST red herring?

No mystery that respects itself, or its readers would be so obvious that the perpetrator of the crime is given up in the first hundred pages of a four hundred page book.
 
If it is Franklin I will be sorely disappointed.

So true, JudeS... so true. 

[JoanK]

SALLY: so sorry you are having trouble. {{{{{{{{{HUGS}}}}}}}}}
Hope you have a great time with your daughter and the Moonstone. Let us know.

The first Red Herring! I hadn't thought of that. Now, "red herrings" are part of the Mystery genre: clues that lead the reader down a false trail, sometimes very cleverly done.

Now where did that phrase come from? Off to find out.

[JoanK]

I'm back with Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

In addition to the meaning we're using, wiki also refers to a logical fallacy, where an argument is used sounding like it's backing up an assertion, but actually being irrelevant.

It had been assumed that the term came from a practice in training English hunting dogs of dragging a "red herring" (kipper) across the trail to confuse them. Now, some think that the so-called practice was a literary fiction.

Mythbusters tested to see if a red herring would confuse a hunting dog (I love Mythbusters!). The dog stopped and ate the fish, then continued tracking. Busted!

[JoanP]

Thanks for that link, JoanK.  Will keep in mind what was said in that link..."there is no such thing as a "red herring"  

At this point, I'm torn...JoanK, you ask if we believe Franklin took the diamond because he needs the money. It sure appears that WilkieC wants us to believe that he is involved in its disappearance in some way...though a motive isn't clear at this point.

Then Jude's comment makes me feel a bit defensive for Wilkie, who set out to write a  "romance" if we are to believe the title he gave to his novel..The Moonstone, a Romance.. He did include a mysterious stone, its disappearance and a detective force to locate it, which later became the ingredients of a detective mystery.

Jude, since this was later came to be regarded as the first mystery novel, I really don't think Collins' readers would have been as disappointed as you would be...if "the perpetrator of the crime is given up in the first 100 pages" - they have no other mysteries to which to compare this novel.\!

It is interesting to watch Wilkie put his pilot in motion.  In the back of my mind I'm thinking of Jonathan's "spoiler" - Dickens' "tedious and wearisome" comment.  He does add that the public is buying up each installment as fast as they are printed.

Does anyone have a mental picture of this multi-colored door to Rachel's boudoir, which she has been working on with cousin Franklin?  Does anyone remember if  painting the door was Franklin's idea?  Could this be important?

Take it easy, Sally.  I'm so happy to hear you are with your daughter to care for you.  I'm glad too that you have a good book to keep you company!

[Jonathan]

'It is interesting to watch Wilkie put his plot in motion.' JoanP

I like that. I like what all of you are seeing in this book. Isn't there a ton of stuff to speculate about. What was Collins trying to do with this story about a diamond? Who stole it? So easy, too, with Rachel putting it into an unlocked drawer. Think of what John Herncastle had to do to acquire it. And then lived in fear and animosity for fifty years. Is he knowingly making trouble for others when he wills it to his niece? Who gets it in the end? The Hindu goddess?

I suppose everything between the covers is part of the plot. Including the gout suffered by the author who even dared to write about the cursed diamond. And the cursed lives. It struck me as interesting that the author himself wonders about his fictional creation, in the preface. Wondering himself if the theme is character or circumstance. And how the two are related.

Dickens found it tedious. All he saw in it was storytelling tricks, including the red herrings, such as the painted door, which allowed the author to fill up fifty pages looking for a gown with a paint smudge!! Or asking who would make a better match for Rachel: Godfrey or Franklin? Godfrey with his casket for Rachel. Franklin with his modest trinket. Penelope thinks it should be Franklin. Her father thinks it should be Godfrey. Or is it the other way around? Godfrey is such a solid citizen, with great appeal for all women. And so much comment on the plight of some women in 19c England. Even someone like Gladstone, the Prime Minister, walked the London streets at night looking for fallen women whom he could set straight.

[JoanK]

Jonathan: "Dickens found it tedious." I quoted TS Eliot (secondhand above as calling The Moonstone "the first and greatest English detective novel." I saw the quote elsewhere as "The first, LONGEST, and greatest...." (caps mine). What about you all. Does anyone find it tedious. I don't -- I enjoy B's rambling. But I can understand if someone doesn't.

Since it was serialized, I wonder if Collins himself had decided at this point who the guilty person was?

[Scottieluvr]

I'm back with Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

In addition to the meaning we're using, wiki also refers to a logical fallacy, where an argument is used sounding like it's backing up an assertion, but actually being irrelevant.

It had been assumed that the term came from a practice in training English hunting dogs of dragging a "red herring" (kipper) across the trail to confuse them. Now, some think that the so-called practice was a literary fiction.

Mythbusters tested to see if a red herring would confuse a hunting dog (I love Mythbusters!). The dog stopped and ate the fish, then continued tracking. Busted!

Love your Wiki finds, JoanK! 

[Scottieluvr]

Does anyone have a mental picture of this multi-colored door to Rachel's boudoir, which she has been working on with cousin Franklin?

It may not be Michelangelo, but it sounds rather intriguing, colorful and “busy”. Page 36,

Miss Rachel then covered the surface, under his directions and with his help, with patterns and devices—griffins, birds, flowers, cupids, and such like—copied from designs made by a famous Italian painter, whose name escapes me: the one, I mean, who stocked the world with Virgin Maries, and had a sweetheart at the baker's.

Does anyone remember if painting the door was Franklin's idea?  Could this be important?

Yes, Franklin was the one to suggest painting the paneling on the boudoir’s door. Page 36:

As for Mr. Franklin and Miss Rachel, they tortured nothing, I am glad to say. They simply confined themselves to making a mess; and all they spoilt, to do them justice, was the panelling of a door.
Mr. Franklin's universal genius, dabbling in everything, dabbled in what he called "decorative painting." He had invented, he informed us, a new mixture to moisten paint with, which he described as a "vehicle." What it was made of, I don't know. What it did, I can tell you in two words—it stank. Miss Rachel being wild to try her hand at the new process, Mr. Franklin sent to London for the materials; mixed them up, with accompaniment of a smell which made the very dogs sneeze when they came into the room; put an apron and a bib over Miss Rachel's gown, and set her to work decorating her own little sitting-room—called, for want of English to name it in, her "boudoir."

It would provide Franklin an opportunity in convincing Rachel to let him hide the stone; because of the men following him in London. It would take some convincing on his part as Rachel is not easily influence.  It’s stated that she can hold her own whether it’s within convention or not. Any way, the time spent painting may be suitable for this undertaking. 

[Scottieluvr]

Think of what John Herncastle had to do to acquire it. And then lived in fear and animosity for fifty years. Is he knowingly making trouble for others when he wills it to his niece? Who gets it in the end? The Hindu goddess?

When discovering Herncastle left the cursed stone to his niece (Rachel), I confess to believing he did this as vengeance against his sister’s continued snubbing.

As for who gets the stone in the end…I’m casting a vote for the Indians who will return it to the Hindu goddess. But my choice is conventional as I feel the diamond belongs to India’s people.

[Scottieluvr]

Jonathan: "Dickens found it tedious." I quoted TS Eliot (secondhand above as calling The Moonstone "the first and greatest English detective novel." I saw the quote elsewhere as "The first, LONGEST, and greatest...." (caps mine). What about you all. Does anyone find it tedious. I don't -- I enjoy B's rambling. But I can understand if someone doesn't.

I read the way an author writes. I hold no expectation that an author should write “for me”. The testament then is whether the author’s imagination successfully retains my interest. If s/he does, great; if not where’s the next book. 

Betteredge’s rambling on about those around him, background stories and other observations adds captivating pizzazz to my experience.


[quote*L author=JoanK link=topic=3772.msg189963#msg189963 date=1366327656] Since it was serialized, I wonder if Collins himself had decided at this point who the guilty person was?[/quote]

He could have… or he flipped-flopped with “villianizing” other characters throughout the story, until settling on “The One”. 

[JoanK]

And we discuss the way Collins wrote: taking our time and enjoying all the bits and pieces.

Like this one:

"copied from designs made by a famous Italian painter, whose name escapes me: the one, I mean, who stocked the world with Virgin Maries, and had a sweetheart at the baker's."

[JoanK]

But we are starting on the second half of Betteredge's narative on the 21st (Sunday. See the heading) so get your reading hats on.

Meanwhile, what do we think of the police work so far? In the next section, we will meet our "Sherlock Holmes".

[JudeS]

Although I have the book on my Nook, I picked up a copy of The Moonstone from the library. This is a Signet paperback edition with a Forward by a professor of Literature and an afterwood (which I have refrained from reading for fear of knowing too much since I am sticking to the suggested schedule.) by a Professor of British Lit. who has written especially on the use of Robinson Crusoe in The Moonstone.

The Professor who wrote the foeward also gives us a lot of information on the use of Defoe's book in the Moonstone. (To be more sucinct I will refer to Robinson Crusoe as RC from now on.)

"The Shivering Sand is a kind of metaphor for life itself, waiting to grab off the unwary , ever present beyond the reaches of the estate. Itis, in fact, the other , a wild side of RC, ...".

"The seeemingly anomalous role of RC reinforces the past upon the present.  As against the Indians and the Indian past of the Diamond, Gabriel Betteridge offers the rationality of Defoe. Whatever appears inexplicable in this adventure can be explained reasonably by Crusoe. But the significantuse by Collins goes further, deep into Collins efforts to create and transform the detective genre. Betteredge, who himself is a kind of loyal Friday to Lady Verinder, finds in RC those most typical apothegms which would appeal to the yeoman Englishman i.e. 'Today we love what tomorrow we hate' ...Crusoe comforts him, as he should, since Crusoe is the epitome of the righteous Englishman who Betteredge wishes to serve. The  association with RC moves the narrative well beyond the mystery into the mainstream of the English novel , since the Defoe work comes at the beginning and helps set the terms......"

There is much , much more, but I will add it only if there is someone besides myself  very interested.
 I was happy to find out that a favorite childhood book came into such play in this novel.                           

[JoanK]

That's very interesting. "

"The  association with RC moves the narrative well beyond the mystery into the mainstream of the English novel , since the Defoe work comes at the beginning and helps set the terms......"

[PatH]

I, for one, would be interested in more about RC.  Anyone who isn't can always skim it.

[Jonathan]

One has to wonder about Dickens's literary judgment when he says that he found The Moonstone 'wearisome beyond endurance'. It simply outclassed him and he couldn't appreciate that. Only kidding. Dickens must have had other things on his mind.

Jude mentions the foreward to her edition of The Moonstone. There are many editions of the book with forewards by many distinguished writers and scholars. I devoured the book as a teenager and I'm still carried away now by the 'captivating pizzazz' as Pamela so colorfully puts it.

Can we begin to suggest suspects? How about Lady Verinder? After what the diamond has done to the family, she doesn't want it in the house.

'Rachel,' she asked, 'where are you going to put your Diamond tonight?'

And just before that, at the beginning of Chapter XI, the author mentions all those present in the room: My Lady and Miss Rachel. Godfrey and Franklin. The serving man Samuel. And of course Betteredge.

Rachel says she'll put the diamond into the Indian cabinet in her sitting-room.

'My dear! your Indian cabinet has no lock to it,' says my lady.

So, it has to be one of the six. The whereabouts of the three Indians is also accounted for.

[Scottieluvr]

I, for one, would be interested in more about RC.  Anyone who isn't can always skim it.

Here! Here!  Give us more, please JudeS.  I enjoyed reading what you wrote so far...

[Scottieluvr]

The  association with RC moves the narrative well beyond the mystery into the mainstream of the English novel , since the Defoe work comes at the beginning and helps set the terms......"

JudeS,

Curious… how does Robinson Crusoe set the terms of the novel? And what are those “terms”?

[Scottieluvr]

But we are starting on the second half of Betteredge's narative on the 21st (Sunday. See the heading) so get your reading hats on.

Meanwhile, what do we think of the police work so far? In the next section, we will meet our "Sherlock Holmes".

From what I remember the police work seems imperfect and unremarkable.  However, it’s only the beginning, Superintendent Seegrave may become more spirited further into the read.

[Scottieluvr]

Can we begin to suggest suspects? How about Lady Verinder? After what the diamond has done to the family, she doesn't want it in the house.

Right now, as witnessed from my previous posts, I’ll flop around like a fish-out-of-water on who the suspect is [suspects are]. *LOL* I’m not skilled in rooting out the villain so soon in the mystery. In other words, I need more evidence. *S*

But I’ll bite anyway on placing Lady Verinder as suspect. From my perspective she doesn’t present as a prominent suspect. But accessibility, influence over Rachel lends to her taking the diamond, though only in protection of her family. She could have insisted that the diamond be removed from the house by Franklin, upon her daughter’s inheritance. So still begging the question, why steal it?

[JoanP]

Well, someone has taken the diamond from its hiding place.  A number of people know where it was hidden for the night.  Can we rule out Rachel herself?  She's acting very strange, isn't she?  When she turned down Godfrey's proposal, it seemed she was choosing Franklin. (She only has cousins to choose from?  What is the rush?  When a girl turns 18, she needs to find a husband?)  But suddenly she's furious with him.  What has happened between them?  Wilkie seems to be pointing to Franklin, but he's a little too obvious.  Maybe all of the suspects were in on the disappearance of the diamond in some way.  

Have we completely ruled out the Indians?  They couldn't have entered the house.  Betteredge had checked all the locks - and let those dogs loose!   Police Superintendent Seegrave seems to think the servants might have been acting with the Indians. NOBODY wants to get their hands on that diamond as badly as the Indians do!
 Hmm... Seegrave is local and knows the people involved, but I am losing confidence in his abilities...just as Franklin is.

I was interested in one of the questions in the heading...

2. What recent event of that time would have made the three Indians particularly sinister to Collins' readers?

Do you have any idea?  Was this mentioned - and I forgot?  Hoping to find something of the recent relations between the British and the Indians, I came up with this information on the Indian Revolt of 1857, just a few years before Wilkie wrote his novel -

The Sepoy Mutiny was a violent and very bloody uprising against British rule in India in 1857. It is also known by other names: the Indian Mutiny, the Indian Rebellion of 1857, or the Indian Revolt of 1857.   During the uprising,  women and children were butchered in cold blood and their bodies bodies were flung into a well.
"Never in our history had such a cry for vengeance arisen as when the story of that hideous crime was told."
The mutiny brought the end of the old order. It convinced the government at home that the time had definitely come for ending the old East India Company and transferring the government of India to the Crown."   http://history1800s.about.com/od/thebritishempire/ss/The-Sepoy-Mutiny.htm

I'm not sure how this would have figured into WilkieC's story - but perhaps it explains the suspicion that  the Indians, if not  "jugglers,"   were persons of interest to the Police...and  possibly "sinister" to everyone else... How dangerous do you think they are if unable to retrieve the diamond?

[PatH]

Right, JoanP.  The Sepoy Mutiny doesn't figure in Collins' story, but it affected the attitude of the British public toward Indians; they were even more likely than before to be thought of as murderous and dangerous.

[JoanK]

JoanP: That's am amazing picture.

[PatH]

That's an excellent link, JoanP, clear and concise.  In addition to the dramatic picture you posted here, the one on page 3 of the article, an Englishwoman defending herself during the mutiny, is very amusing.  Notice the murderous look of the Indian at the lower right.

[Jonathan]

Right. The doors were all locked and the dogs let loose. It had to be an 'inside job.' Franklin, I believe, suggests someone, one of the Indians, may have been hiding under a bed and then exited through a window, but it's determined that was unlikely.

Every reader must have had a vivid memory of the atrocities committed by the rebellious sepoys. That was a traumatic event in British Empire history. Actually there is not a hint of it in the book. Is there? When the butler Betteredge thinks foreign, he thinks German, Italian and French, in the unEnglish thinking he finds in Franklin.

Why Rachel's fury in her relationship with Franklin? Good question. The two of them were having such fun with their art work on the door. Working well together.

Her mother turned her brother away when he came to share the fun of the birthday party. She didn't want him in the house. Much less would she want his cursed diamond within a million miles. Perhaps she conspired with another servant to remove it. Throw it into the quicksand for example. As they would have said in the family: trouble follows it around. We heard all about it in the Prologue. The book, after all, is an attempt to get to the bottom of it all.

[JoanP]

I could see Lady V. conspiring with the Indians...to get the diamond and all of its implications out of the their lives, out of their house - back to India...

[Scottieluvr]

[...]Maybe all of the suspects were in on the disappearance of the diamond in some way.

NOW!! There is a strong probability...   

[Scottieluvr]

2. What recent event of that time would have made the three Indians particularly sinister to Collins' readers?

Do you have any idea?  Was this mentioned - and I forgot?  Hoping to find something of the recent relations between the British and the Indians, I came up with this information on the Indian Revolt of 1857, just a few years before Wilkie wrote his novel - […]

I thought it was Frybaby who mentioned this war, or one like it. Sadly, I cannot locate the post – quickly – to support my claim.    

Any how, when answering that question myself, I noted this skirmish as reason for hostilities between the two cultures: ”A colonized India served as the main base for Britain’s international trade across the Asian continent, during the late 1800’s; specifically the East India Company. At the time of this writing (1868), Indians were fighting to regain their country back from the Brits, so were not trusted due to adverse allegiances between the two cultures.”

In my experience distrust can develop into prejudice.