I just finished reading this today and I really had trouble putting it down once I had started. It does make me want to read The Moonstone eventually. I think the only boring part of the novel was the Count's explanation of what he did at the end. That seemed kind of redundant. It's also a shame that Marian's character was a lot more interesting than her sister. Anyways, it was a fun read.

What a great quote, thanks! :-)

For everyone who loves Count Fosco, here is an extract from a review by contemporary author Margaret Oliphant...


"...The Charm of the book...is Fosco. He is a new type of perennial enemy of goodness. But there is no resisting the charm of his good nature, his wit, his foibles, his personal individuality. To put a man so diabolically in the wrong seems a mistake somehow - though it is evident that an innocent man could never have been invested with such gifts. No villain of the century, so far, comes within a hundred miles of him: he is more real, more genuine, more italian even, in his fatness and size, in his love of pets and poetry, than the whole array of conventional Italian villains, elegant and subtle, whom we are accustomed to meet in literature. Fosco from his first entrance is master of the scene - his noiseless movements, his villainous bland philosophies, his enjoyment of life, his fine waistcoats - every detail about him is necessary to his perfection...The reader shares in unwilling liking to which, at his first appearance, he beguiles Marian Halcome; but the reader, notwithstanding the fullest proof of Fosco's villainy, does not give him up, and take to hating him, as Marian does. The fact is, that he is by a very long way the most interesting personage in the book, and that it is with a certain sensation of sympathetic triumph that we watch him drive away in safety at last..."

I couldn't agree more!

Ally

I got my mum reading this now and she is loving it too! Yay! Another Collins convert.

I almost wonder if Collins purposely made Laura and Walter a bit bland so Marian had her chance to shine. In my mind, she is the true star of the book (along with Fosco, but for very different reasons!) and I agree that all kudos to Collins for creating such a strong female character especially given the era. It's almost as if Laura and Walter are "stock characters"--even his name, as if his HEART is in the RIGHT place reminds me almost of a melodrama character's name. But, having said all that, I was still rooting for them! :-)

I agree except for Marian and Count Fosco. They are the reason I loved WiW, rather than just enjoying it. I really give Wilkie credit for creating a strong, smart, three dimensional woman in a time when there were few such role models. And for having created a villain who was nonetheless, in my opinion, charismatic and sympathetic. There wasn't much of that, in Dickens; you were either bad or good. I sense that when he created Marian and Fosco the characters took wing and became what they wanted to be, rather than what the author had initially planned they should be; which to me is the very opposite of stock characters.

I thought briefly about the use of IDs and DNA with the mystery aspect, but what I loved about the book was the unexpected twists and secrets, which I didn't anticipate because I live in a different time. I was waiting for someone more scandalous, more outrageous than simply the falsified birth records.

Now I somewhat feel that the thrillers in literature and movies of today have desensitized me to the rich drama of a different time. It's like, for example, the first time I watched "The Dick VanDyke Show" about 2 years ago, and was happily amazed that each episode actually ends happy. Such a novel concept!

Nicki wrote: "I should also add that despite the lack of depth in the characters, I found this book to be quite satisfying. What it lacks in character development it makes up for in plot and suspense. "

Exactly. That's why I thought WiW is a good thriller but not great literature. Stock characters, but good plotting. The writing is just average (at least for me).

I should also add that despite the lack of depth in the characters, I found this book to be quite satisfying. What it lacks in character development it makes up for in plot and suspense.

I found the second half of the book to be less engaging than the first. I attribute this to the narratives of Walter being less emotionally resonant than those of Marian, in the first half. I think the emotional detachment was starting to get to me a little by the second half of the book.

Marian is really the only character in the book who has any emotional depth. Her narrative is the only one that reveals more than just the facts and sequences of events.

That said, I couldn't help but love the deceptively charming and proper Count Fosco.

Whatever the reason for the lack of explanation in regard to Walter and Laura's marriage, it certainly added to the dramatic effect of his heroism. When Walter faces the Count, Fosco flippantly remarks that he knows Walter has come because of "a lady's interests," to which Walter responds, "my Wife's Interests." This adds to the seriousness of Walter's actions, which is recognized by the Count.

Yeah, I couldn't agree more about the problems of Laura and Walter being so boring. I think he solved those problems in The Moonstone, where the characters are much more individuated.

Sandybanks wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Sandybanks wrote: "Boof wrote: "Kathryn, I kept thinking about DNA test etc when reading it too and thinking how much easier it must have been to get away with things back then...."

Well, I must confess that, for me, Count Fosco is one of the most villainous creatures to ever appear in fiction! Also, I think that Marian is an incredibly complicated, complex, and rich character. While Dickens, Eliot, and the Brontes may form the pinnacle of Victorian writing, I have always maintained that perhaps the most under-rated novel in that period is Collins's TWIW. It is original, complicated, and loaded with social commentary; and for me that makes it great literature. Again, just my two-cents worth. Cheers! Chris

Christopher wrote: "Sandybanks wrote: "Boof wrote: "Kathryn, I kept thinking about DNA test etc when reading it too and thinking how much easier it must have been to get away with things back then. The other thing tha..."

Chris, I agree that human relationships are crucial to the well-written mystery. I'm simply pointing out that the mystery plot of WiW (which relies on the confusion of identities in a world without verifiable IDs or photos) won't work today. It is perfectly plausible in the era in which Collins wrote, though.

That said, I must admit that I don't consider the characters in WiW to have much depth. They're just stock characters in a mystery (the damsel in distress, the mustache-twirling villain, the good guy etc.), especially Hartright and Laura. That doesn't prevent WiW from being a throughly enjoyable mystery (with some social commentary about women's position in marriage thrown in). It's a good Victorian mystery/thriller, high literature it ain't. Just a personal opinion. : )

Chris, I would agree with that. I think that may be why I loved both Collins and Braddon as at the end of the day they're both such good fun - I love all that drama and the red herrings and when you can almost hear the swishing of a cloak and a "mwahahahaha!" in in the mist. I like modern day detective novels too and you're right, the technical details may differ but the formulas are the same.

I went on a Collins binge the other day and bought The Haunted Hotel (currently reading), The Moonstone, No Name and Armadale all of which I can't wait to read.

Sandybanks wrote: "Boof wrote: "Kathryn, I kept thinking about DNA test etc when reading it too and thinking how much easier it must have been to get away with things back then. The other thing that is really dated i..."

You know, I don't know that that is true? Actually, I think what has changed is that mystery/detective authors today have to write about all of the technical details (like garnish or dressing on a salad); but really a mystery is down at the base-level -- it is human behavior, human feelings, and interactions/inter-relationships between people that really drives the well-written mystery; don't you think? That, to me, is what makes Collins's novels, or the novels of Mary Elizabeth Braddon so darned timeless. Just my two-cents though. Cheers! Chris

Boof wrote: "Kathryn, I kept thinking about DNA test etc when reading it too and thinking how much easier it must have been to get away with things back then. The other thing that is really dated is Sir Perciva..."

One of the most interesting thing for me is how the plot relies on the confusion or falsification of identities (no IDs and no photos --- Collins really made a meal out of that), and how easy was it to alter official documents. Today mystery/thriller writers have to work so much harder in creating their plots!

Kathryn wrote: "I read this book over the summer and really, really enjoyed it (though I think I liked "Moonstone" better). I thought I would post my review here as a contribution to the discussion :-)

I thought..."

Frankly, the writing didn't do much for me (sorry, Wilkie!), but the mystery kept me reading. Fosco is an interesting villain, but Walter and Laura are just bland, with hardly any discernible personalities. It's an enjoyable thriller, though, once I got past the tedious parts. And that threesome thing with Walter and the two women is just funny.

Heidi wrote: "Boof wrote: "Kathryn, I kept thinking about DNA test etc when reading it too and thinking how much easier it must have been to get away with things back then. The other thing that is really dated i..."

Heidi, I would agree with your assessment of Collins's The Moonstone. The appearance of one of the very first 'detectives' in fiction too! A couple of other really good Collins novels include: No Name, and the novella, The Haunted Hotel: A Mystery of Modern Vencie. Happy reading all! Cheers! Chris

Boof wrote: "Kathryn, I kept thinking about DNA test etc when reading it too and thinking how much easier it must have been to get away with things back then. The other thing that is really dated is Sir Perciva..."

But wasn't the point of not wanting people to know that if they did he'd lose his inheritance because he wasn't who he said he was? That wasn't a moral question.

Also, Boof, I highly recommend the Moonstone. It is generally considered the second best Wilkie.

Absolutely! People often tell me I was born in the wrong decade, but I swear I was born in the wrong century!

Oh, yes, I, too, loved the "dated" aspects :-) It would have been really cool to have been part of the sensibilities of the day (well, in terms of getting even more thrills from the story, I mean!)

Kathryn, I kept thinking about DNA test etc when reading it too and thinking how much easier it must have been to get away with things back then. The other thing that is really dated is Sir Percival's "secret". What a big deal it was then! These days those victorians would have a stroke knowing the looser morals of today! These dated aspect just made it all the more wonderful for me though.

I read this book over the summer and really, really enjoyed it (though I think I liked "Moonstone" better). I thought I would post my review here as a contribution to the discussion :-)

I thought the last half of the book was definitely five-stars--WOW! I had SO much fun guessing things out along with Hartright--sometimes I was right, sometimes almost-right, and sometimes completely surprised!!! It was also a great book to read with my husband as we could try to puzzle out the mystery together, too. What fun we had!!! I also found it a fascinating glimpse into history--I mean, so many of the novel's plot twists and intrigue is so passe now that we have all these forms of ID and DNA testing, etc.--and yet, it was quite absorbing and a fabulous mystery even so.

I give the entire book four stars, though, because some of the earlier chapters were rather boring and tedious. I appreciated the caged-bird monotony feeling we got at Blackwater Park--for awhile!--but it just went on too-too long and there was even a spell (albeit, when we were extremely busy with other things) we seriously considered quitting the novel before we were half-way through (granted, we'd still read a few hundred pages, though!) I'm very glad we hung in there and we were richly rewarded! (Thanks to my friends who had read the novel already and encouraged us to keep with it!!!)

Finally, I really think Collins is a master of characterization and this story contains a few remarkable literary creations. I will not soon forget Marian's strength and intelligence, nor Hartright's steadfast determination and kindness, nor that amazing, amazing Count Fosco--with his ego and his corpulence and his birds and mice and brains--whom I could not really like but absolutely LOVED reading about!!! That letter at the end--WOW!

I finished this a yesterday and I just loved it. I am a new convert to Wilkie Collins and I have already started on The Haunted Hotel . I just loved the whole thing - this would have been so exciting to read when it was serialised.

Scott wrote: "Paula wrote: "Scott wrote: "The contrast of Marian to her sister and how we give up on the looks and look to her intellect gives us a heroine of a different type for sure. ..."

Scott asked that ..."
The relative absence of Marian as a strong active heroine in the second half of the story made the novel less intersting to me. I really didn't care all that much how things ended except as they related to Marian, and only when Collins described her as re-gaining some of her original spirit did I feel an interest. Sigh, sometimes even in life we see "good characters" lower their potential to help someone weaker for whom they feel a strong attachment. Three characters--Marian, Glyde and Anne are all set up against each other (and against Laura and Walter) in the first half, then mostly abandoned in the second half, where the story becomes almost entirely Walter vs. Count Fosco. Laura is never more than a foil and a pawn.

What he did to betray the society remains a mystery within the book, because no one knows but him, and he does not reveal it, as well to protect Pesca, Walter remains vague upon the nature of the society but Pesca does suggest that it was a society which was established to fight the tyranny of the government and fight for justice.

Near the beginning of the story Fosco did express some concern as he questioned if there were any other Italians in the area when he first arrived within England and it is suggested by Walter later in the book that it is possibly he altered his appearance, he could have gained the weight later, and might not have always been so large, and could have colored his hair, and so on.

While Pesca does not recognize him, he had indeed recognized Pesca, given that Pesca's on appearance was not disguised, and thus upon believing he had been spotted by one of the party, he knew they would come after him for what he had done, though ironically, while Pesca had no idea who he was, it just so happened the "man with the scar" was also a party member and found Fosco through the attention Walter drew to him by pointing him out.

Silver wrote: "Scott wrote: I might have missed this but who was Count Fosko an agent for? Which country? Italy? another?

He belonged to some sceret society in Italy. "

I too would like to establish exactly how Fosco went against this secret society (un-named) and why he was killed. Collins was vague about this. Since Pesca was also a member of the same society, and since he is a positive character, I assume the society had something to do with seeking justice, standing up to tyranny, all those good things. Then at some point Fosca, who had joined earlier pledging to fight injustice, whatever, was disloyal to the society... by doing what? Maybe he ratted to the government? (Presumably this group was anti-government or it wouldn't have to be secret?) Or did he give away secrets of the society to other COUNTRIES? And if he was on some wanted list, why wasn't he found before? It wasn't as if he was UNOBTRUSIVE. He had a very distinctive height, corpulence... He stood out. Why was it that just from seeing Pesca, who didn't recognize him in any case, Fosco felt as if 'the game was up'? Maybe someone can illuminate me, because it feels as if Willkie Collins didn't think this through as thoroughly as he might.

Scott wrote: I might have missed this but who was Count Fosko an agent for? Which country? Italy? another?

He belonged to some sceret society in Italy.

The doctor in attendence on Anne when she died lists an anuerism as a cause of death on the death certificate.

I just finished the book and I have to say that I loved it. It truly was a wonderful and remarkable work. Collins expertly handled the prose and the story and the idea of the various different narratives was so unique and helped puzzle the story together in a most intriguing way.

The story had so much to offer, some of the characters were really quite humorous, and there was mystery, and suspense, as well as a touch of the gothic. There were a few times I was on the edge of my seat so to speak unable to wait to find out what was going to happen next.

I am curious what other's thought of the way in which Walter was able to exact his revenge while still keeping his hands clean. It sort of reminded me of Jane Eyere in a way, how inconvenient characters die to the ultimate advantage of the hero without the hero having to be held responsible or have the blood upon their hands for the death.

It was a bit convenient how Walter led to the deaths of his foes, without having to claim any true responsibility for the death, and even Farlie was killed off in the end to his own advancement.

It reminds me of something one of my teachers said regarding Jane Eyere, how she could step over the body of Bertha, to ascend into her "rightful" place, now that Bertha was conveniently removed as an obstacle in her way.

Particularly after considering Possession and the ideas that Byatt brought up, it seems the Victorians were influenced by fairy tales, as many of their books appear to end in that sort of "happily ever after" way in which all the loose ends are eventually tied up and the good guys triumph ultimately without having to sully themselves.

I might have missed this but who was Count Fosko an agent for? Which country? Italy? another?

I have to say though, Collins seems to have had a high respect for secret organizations and not to mess with them. That was a swift and deadly penalty that the Count got.

yeah, convenient for Laura! Someone to run the household and take care of the kids while she paints, I guess. In all fairness, the situation is pretty ideal for Marian, given that she has no private fortune and clearly no respectable man who values her enough to marry her. If you have to be a Victorian spinster, it doesn't get much better than this. But what a life . . .

I wonder though, from a certain class perspective - were there many others of Collins' social class living with a partner but not getting married? From the basics that I know of Victorian society, that was not altogether common.

Darcy wrote: "Well, I think it definitely says something that Walter's ideal of beauty is so utterly conventional. And, frankly, pretty boring. For me, that makes him a less than reputable judge of beauty, I gue..."

Was Collins idea of beauty closer to Walters or the Count?

Paula wrote: "Wait, he helped one of his own real-life mistresses get married? Wow.

Mentioning that he lived with two women really helps me see why Walter living with Marian and Laura was acceptable to Colli..."

I am sure there were others living that way, no? I can't imagine Collins was a rarity.

Sandybanks wrote: "Darcy wrote: "ah, sorry, my post was a bit confusing. All I meant was that there was nothing to inhibit Walter from marrying a woman with the name of Laura Glyde, provided she had witnesses who wou..."

It would have been interesting to end it where he doesnt get married. It is true they had this strange 3 some going. I remember Laura did not want Marian to marry anyone but to stay with them forever. ;-)

Annie wrote: "I agree Maggie. I thought there might have been a plot twist in there for Marian and Walter to finally get together, I though it might be Laura is really Lady in white and they go on pretending tha..."

haha... that is cool. I almost thought that He would love Marian in the. She sometimes seemed that she wanted him to.

huh. Sue, that's such a great question. Seems pretty obvious, now that you mention it.

That said, a heart condition might have been difficult to diagnose in the 1850s. The stethoscope wasn't invented until 1816 and it wasn't widespread until the last quarter of the century, so listening to a heart was pretty dependent on the quality of the doctor's hearing. If the heart condition was diagnosed based on Anne's symptoms (rapid pulse, weakness, shortness of breath, etc.) then those things might show up in Laura even though she doesn't have a heart condition. I don't know, though--does anyone remember how Collins describes Anne's condition?

I have about 10 pages left, and have really enjoyed this book. I was skimming through the comments, and I didn't see the following thought---if I missed it, and it I am repeating--sorry. Why couldn't Laura have been identified by NOT having a heart condition? Anne was known to have this heart condition, that was going to lead to her death---Laura did not. To me, that would have been an easy way to distinguish between the two. Did I miss something in the story?

lol. I'd completely forgotten about Sonya and the mustache! So funny.

Too bad Collins didn't pair Marian off with a fictional Tolstoy--someone who could really appreciate a good "downy lip."

Laurele wrote: "Sandybanks wrote: Speaking of women with mustaches in 19th century literature, I can't help to be reminded of the 'little princess' (Prince Andrei's first wife) in War and Peace --- but Tolstoy con..."

Tolstoy surely had a thing for women with mustaches....

Sandybanks wrote: Speaking of women with mustaches in 19th century literature, I can't help to be reminded of the 'little princess' (Prince Andrei's first wife) in War and Peace --- but Tolstoy considered her mustache to be charming and she is thought to be the most beautiful woman in St. Petersburg. LOL


And remember how romantic things became when Sonya put on a mustache and rode home with Nicholas?

Darcy wrote: "Well, I think it definitely says something that Walter's ideal of beauty is so utterly conventional. And, frankly, pretty boring. For me, that makes him a less than reputable judge of beauty, I gue..."

Speaking of women with mustaches in 19th century literature, I can't help to be reminded of the 'little princess' (Prince Andrei's first wife) in War and Peace --- but Tolstoy considered her mustache to be charming and she is thought to be the most beautiful woman in St. Petersburg. LOL

And I totally agree with you about the menage a trois between the three. Yeah, it isn't sexual, but Marian basically fills in half of the wifely duties that Laura can't, like running the household or providing intelligent conversation ;) The craziest part to me about Collins's relationships is that he ends up helping one of the women get married, although I can't remember which one. So funny. I imagine that was a bit of an awkward dinner conversation.

I found that to be quite funny. I thought that emotionally and intellectually, Walter is so much more suited to Marian than Laura. If only that Walter didn't think that she was 'ugly'....

Paula wrote: "Wait, he helped one of his own real-life mistresses get married? Wow.

Mentioning that he lived with two women really helps me see why Walter living with Marian and Laura was acceptable to Colli..."

According to the bio in my edition, she later left her husband and returned to Collins. He maintained two separate households for the two women (and their children) at the same time.

Paula, maybe you're right that he was trying to test the waters with WiW, but then either chickened out or was told to marry them to make the book acceptable for the Victorian public. I'm not sure whether he's already living with the two mistresses when he wrote WiW, though.

Well, I think it definitely says something that Walter's ideal of beauty is so utterly conventional. And, frankly, pretty boring. For me, that makes him a less than reputable judge of beauty, I guess. Not to mention, Walter decides her beauty almost solely on her face. He admits she has an incredible figure, but it's the face that matters most to him.

WiW wasn't originally illustrated, but I can't help but wonder how Marian would have been depicted in the images. I bet money that she wouldn't have had the mustache Walter claims she has.

Maggie wrote: "I really liked Marian and didn't see her as ugly. I thought at some point in the story that Walter would turn his affections to her - she's a much stronger and attractive character than her sister."

But I think, at least from my view, that Collins was making a definite point that it depended on the viewpoint of the characters and readers as to whether or not Marian was ugly or not. Also whether any of the characters were trully bad, ugly, pretty, or good. Several times in the book i questioned what i really thought of character or not. Marian could have been quite ugly for all we know, but in the end it doesnt really matter as we learn to like her more or less in the end. Though I still believe she is weaker in the end of the book then the beginning. She seemed to have lost some will at the end.

Wait, he helped one of his own real-life mistresses get married? Wow.

Mentioning that he lived with two women really helps me see why Walter living with Marian and Laura was acceptable to Collins. Perhaps it became a way to 'test the social waters' of his own situation? Publish a book that includes the same situation as his own real-life situation, and gauge the response by the public's reaction to his book?

It is pretty incredible, isn't it, how easy it was to switch identities? And even when records were available, they were fairly unreliable. After all, they were hand-written copies of copies (and in some cases, copied a third or fourth time)--plenty of room for mistakes. Kind of like the Internet today, where it is so easy to fabricate documents and pass yourself off as twenty different people, if you want. Paula's basically right--at the base of Laura Glyde's supposed death certificate is nothing more than one person's oath that the woman is named Laura Glyde. Crazy.

And I totally agree with you about the menage a trois between the three. Yeah, it isn't sexual, but Marian basically fills in half of the wifely duties that Laura can't, like running the household or providing intelligent conversation ;) The craziest part to me about Collins's relationships is that he ends up helping one of the women get married, although I can't remember which one. So funny. I imagine that was a bit of an awkward dinner conversation.