Questions About The Shape of Darkness
by
Laura Purcell (Goodreads Author)
Reader Q&A
To ask other readers questions about
The Shape of Darkness,
please sign up.
Answered Questions (4)
This question contains spoilers...
(view spoiler)[What did everyone think of the ending? (hide spoiler)]
Sophie
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)[I honestly thought it was Simon. It was such a great twist I can't stop thinking about it. I also loved the Corset :) (hide spoiler)]
This question contains spoilers...
(view spoiler)[This is a true spoiler - so if you haven’t read this book, be warned!
I was a little confused about the ending - is it meant to be that Agnes was the killer, possessed by Constance? I assumed that meant that poor, dear old Simon (RIP) was killed by Agnes/Constance. (hide spoiler)]
I was a little confused about the ending - is it meant to be that Agnes was the killer, possessed by Constance? I assumed that meant that poor, dear old Simon (RIP) was killed by Agnes/Constance. (hide spoiler)]
Dean
Who Did It?
(And, Is this Schizophrenia or Supernatural?)
I examine the following quotes as clues to determine who or what did the killing and why they …moreWho Did It?
(And, Is this Schizophrenia or Supernatural?)
I examine the following quotes as clues to determine who or what did the killing and why they occurred.
1. “…23rd September Solomon Boyle, of Queen Square, alive. The unfortunate gentleman’s remains were found mutilated in the Gravel Walk not one week later.”
2. “…mistreated corpse was discovered buried beneath snow in Royal Victoria Park on 18th October. The body was later identified as belonging to one Edward Lewis of Weston”
3. “…the identical method of execution, which was uncovered despite concerted efforts on the part of the murderer to conceal it. Each gentleman suffered a single, horizontal laceration to the throat…The deductive mind cannot help but remember that Mr. Boyle and Mr. Lewis received wounds consistent with a knife attack.”
The biggest problem in suspecting Agnes is her physical condition. A frail woman would have difficulty killing Mr. Boyle and Ned by a physical attack. And, while we know Agnes was watching Commander Hargreaves, we are never afforded any information as to how long, or how she could have poisoned him, or get him into the river.
This latter point goes for Myrtle as well. Is it possible the death of Commander Hargreaves is merely a coincidence that fits other elements of the plot?
The weird part is that Mr. Boyle has his throat slit AND head bashed in. It’s too bad we can’t ascertain which happened first – the bashing or the cutting.
4. “Miss West’s name in connection to yet another death: the drowning of Commander Hargreaves in mid-October…Miss West allegedly spotted the Commander’s body in the water whilst crossing Dredge’s Victoria Bridge and raised the alarm. She was present when the corpse was finally stopped and retrieved at Weston Lock”
5. “Miss Meers would prove to be Miss West’s second victim, falling prey not to the blade, but to the cowardly weapon of poison.” “A post-mortem examination revealed that the child had suffered from chronic phosphorus poisoning through the prolonged ingestion of match heads.”
6. “Will you not admit to all your atrocities, Miss West? Guess I might as well, eh? In for a penny, in for a pound. Seems better to hang for five bodies instead of two. [Simon]”
Now, this statement by Simon is clearly an effort to have her take the blame for the other 3 – to cover Agnes’ tracks, or his own.
7. Mrs Campbell: “‘That is not being investigated as murder. The police believe Mrs Campbell tripped and fell onto the railway tracks in front of a train. There is no evidence of anyone pushing her.’ Seeing her astonishment…”
The narrative doesn’t really reveal who killed Mrs. Campbell. It’s ambiguous and possibly coincidence, but murder was speculative by the police and deemed not likely.
8. “She is surprised: Constance’s clothes always used to be too long and tight for her.”
She’s grown taller? Interesting….
9. “Constance Edith Carfax: 18th October 1810–23rd September 1840”
10. “Cedric Matthew Carfax, Agatha Darken: 23rd September 1840”
So here, we see the full extent of Agnes’ mental continuity and health. Physical evidence that her nephew and mother have been dead for 14 years. Now, was she delusional, or in fact, seeing ghosts?
11. “Miss West is prevailed upon to confess, and she does it with aplomb: admitting not just to the murders of Mr. Meers and Pearl, but to those of Mr. Boyle [Agnes?], Ned [Agnes?] and even Commander Hargreaves [Agnes?], despite the lack of evidence tying her to the crimes.” So, it would seem Myrtle ACTUALLY KILLED ONLY ONE person – Pearl.
12. “She knew nothing of this. Simon never told her he had seriously contemplated having Constance committed…The note is dated about a week before Constance’s death”
This I think is simply circumstantial in relation to Constance’s death. It seems unlikely that Simon would send an innocent child to scare the horses that resulted in everyone dying. On the other hand, he had no real connection to the boy either since he represented the liaison between Montague and Constance.
Agnes cannot stop thinking about what would have happened, were it not for the Accident
13. “She has a strange sensation of passing outside her body; of watching events unfold from her sister’s point of view…A voice within whispers, ‘How long before Simon turns on you?”
Is this her Schizophrenia, or actually Constance’s possession?
At this point, we also have to ask whether it was really Constance that kept hurting Agnes’ childhood friends.
14. “[Constance, before embarking from carriage] You belong with me, sister. Do not forget it.’
Agnes slammed the door on her. Just as she intended, the hem of Constance’s ashy pink gown and one end of her tippet were trapped inside the carriage.”
Here we see that Agnes is responsible for Constance’s death by intending to get Constance’s dress caught in the door.”
We also see another instance of Constance’s ownership over Agnes. However, this happens immediately preceding her death: “You belong with me, sister”
15. “Cedric told her about them. But Cedric was dead. She imagined that conversation.” Unless it really was the ghost of her nephew. Further: “It is only as she reaches to close the lid that she catches sight of a familiar face; or not precisely a face, but its outline, empty inside. The monochrome shape she recognizes as her own art...It is the hollow-cut of Ned.”
Simon confirms the truth, although Agnes is actually the killer, not Simon: “‘Miss West did not kill my clients,’ Agnes announces. ‘No.’ [Simon] She expected at least some denial. “
16. “…he breaks off, runs a hand across his sweating forehead. When he recommences, he sounds calmer, resigned. ‘No, you are right. I should have burnt it. I should have dissolved the bodies, too, rather than hiding them, but I thought their families deserved something to bury. …it all started to happen so quickly.’ “
“She should feel frightened of him, but she is strangely numb. ‘What did?’”
I think this statement that Agnes isn’t afraid of him is an indication that her subconscious may be asserting itself in a way that she unknowingly is aware that Simon isn’t actually the killer.
17. Two important quotes are offered her:
a) “He puts out his hands like he is trying to placate a rabid dog. ‘Do not worry, Miss Darken. We will find help. We will stop these spells of disassociation … I was wrong to attempt to handle them alone. My emotions got the better of me. I have a friend …’ He takes a step closer. ‘It is not your fault. You were not in control. After the pneumonia … there were times you were not yourself. “
b) “‘It must be in the blood,’ he mutters to himself. He is so near now that she can smell the birthing chamber on him. ‘A taint. I never thought you and your sister anything alike, but when it comes over you, I see her again …”
I think the narrative here represents a truthful response by Simon – of her disassociation, and her similarity to her sister. I accept these quotes at face value.
18. “‘Miss Darken, let me take those scissors.’ ‘I’m warning you, Simon!’ Her voice rises, beyond her control. Simon puts a foot forward. ‘You cannot be trusted with them,’ he explains. His blue eyes flick between her and the open blades. ‘When it has possession of you—’”
Here’s a subtle hint that Laura Purcell injects into the story that hints to the author’s intention. “When it has possession of you—, “seems like a normal thing to say, but it also has a peculiarity about it. If we replace the indefinite pronoun “it” with what Simon has referred to as “disassociation” we arrive to the following sentence: “When disassociation has possession of you.” The condition of disassociation is almost the exact opposite of possession. I argue that while Simon is inferring she is possessed by her condition, the author is actually taking the opportunity to reveal the true nature of Agnes’ infliction and is referring to Constance possessing Agnes.
19. “There is a sense of retraction, of snapping back into herself.”
Schizophrenia or possession..?
20. “Perplexed, hollow, she wanders from the room.”
The use of the term “hollow” – as though she feels an emptiness of something within her now gone: possession/presence?
21. “‘What has happened here? The lamp upon the desk is lit. By the light of its chimney, she sees that someone has left her a piece of paper. A painting, in fact – a shade. The sitter is Simon: there can be no doubt of that. His likeness has been taken as skillfully as if she had done it herself.
Clearly her skills have been used to create the likeness
22. “…this profile has not been brushed with her usual blend of ink and soot; the paint is thicker, rusty in hue. She runs her finger over the bridge of Simon’s nose. It feels like a crust. Words are written beneath in the hand she recognises from the notes: Now he will never part us.”
But the nature of the writing (like the notes written in Constance’s writing (confirmed by Simon who acknowledged the resemblance) seems to be Constance’s, not Agnes’ and would imply possession.
From earlier:
“Well. The writing that I saw … on the note you showed me … That belonged to someone else. Someone we both knew, Miss Darken.’
‘Who?’
‘It was the hand of … my wife.’
Constance.
He is right. Memory dawns on her, sickening but irrefutable. That is why she
recognised the writing. Constance has been gone so long, she did not think to
associate the notes with her. ‘But how—’”
Conclusion: Now, here is where I think it’s actually a possession of Agnes by Constance for the following reasons:
- Agnes’ fraility. If her condition is as bad as we’re lead to believe by both Simon and Agnes, then she could not have killed Mr. Boyle, and an even younger more fit, Ned. This also includes fighting Simon off for the scissors.
- Cedric’s revelation regarding Simon’s “fishing hooks” and so forth. The story is structured in a way that Agnes could not have known what those implements were when she found them to connect the dots. Simon’s admission to what they were and acknowledging (albeit indirectly) that he was somehow “covering” for Agnes’ actions. He loved her so much that he felt he was protecting her.
- The ending definitely demonstrates her forgetfulness, and is consistent with schizophrenic/bipolar disorder. Events are occurring outside of one of her personalities. I would be tempted to acknowledge this, if it weren’t for the other facts included here.
- Agnes is definitely an unreliable narrator. But, the second séance (upstairs, not attended by Myrtle) did leave tracings in the dust. There are no clues to suggest that Agnes, Myrtle or Pearl were there prior to make those marks. AND, while Pearl couldn’t read, she did acknowledge their existence, relying on Agnes to read them aloud.
- Simon is culpable, but only for interfering with dead bodies and letting a murderess run around freely. The narrative and plot would seem he was only trying to cover up her murders.
- “His likeness has been taken as skillfully as if she had done it herself.” And “Words are written beneath in the hand [Constance’s] she recognizes from the notes: Now he will never part us.”
- In the end, there is only one conclusion that Agnes was in fact the one committing the murders. Based on spiritual information that could only have come from the dead, Constance’s handwriting that Agnes herself wrote, and the required physical strength beyond her own frailty to subdue and murder Mr. Boyle, Ned and Simon, she would have needed supernatural assistance to accomplish the murders.
(less)
(And, Is this Schizophrenia or Supernatural?)
I examine the following quotes as clues to determine who or what did the killing and why they …moreWho Did It?
(And, Is this Schizophrenia or Supernatural?)
I examine the following quotes as clues to determine who or what did the killing and why they occurred.
1. “…23rd September Solomon Boyle, of Queen Square, alive. The unfortunate gentleman’s remains were found mutilated in the Gravel Walk not one week later.”
2. “…mistreated corpse was discovered buried beneath snow in Royal Victoria Park on 18th October. The body was later identified as belonging to one Edward Lewis of Weston”
3. “…the identical method of execution, which was uncovered despite concerted efforts on the part of the murderer to conceal it. Each gentleman suffered a single, horizontal laceration to the throat…The deductive mind cannot help but remember that Mr. Boyle and Mr. Lewis received wounds consistent with a knife attack.”
The biggest problem in suspecting Agnes is her physical condition. A frail woman would have difficulty killing Mr. Boyle and Ned by a physical attack. And, while we know Agnes was watching Commander Hargreaves, we are never afforded any information as to how long, or how she could have poisoned him, or get him into the river.
This latter point goes for Myrtle as well. Is it possible the death of Commander Hargreaves is merely a coincidence that fits other elements of the plot?
The weird part is that Mr. Boyle has his throat slit AND head bashed in. It’s too bad we can’t ascertain which happened first – the bashing or the cutting.
4. “Miss West’s name in connection to yet another death: the drowning of Commander Hargreaves in mid-October…Miss West allegedly spotted the Commander’s body in the water whilst crossing Dredge’s Victoria Bridge and raised the alarm. She was present when the corpse was finally stopped and retrieved at Weston Lock”
5. “Miss Meers would prove to be Miss West’s second victim, falling prey not to the blade, but to the cowardly weapon of poison.” “A post-mortem examination revealed that the child had suffered from chronic phosphorus poisoning through the prolonged ingestion of match heads.”
6. “Will you not admit to all your atrocities, Miss West? Guess I might as well, eh? In for a penny, in for a pound. Seems better to hang for five bodies instead of two. [Simon]”
Now, this statement by Simon is clearly an effort to have her take the blame for the other 3 – to cover Agnes’ tracks, or his own.
7. Mrs Campbell: “‘That is not being investigated as murder. The police believe Mrs Campbell tripped and fell onto the railway tracks in front of a train. There is no evidence of anyone pushing her.’ Seeing her astonishment…”
The narrative doesn’t really reveal who killed Mrs. Campbell. It’s ambiguous and possibly coincidence, but murder was speculative by the police and deemed not likely.
8. “She is surprised: Constance’s clothes always used to be too long and tight for her.”
She’s grown taller? Interesting….
9. “Constance Edith Carfax: 18th October 1810–23rd September 1840”
10. “Cedric Matthew Carfax, Agatha Darken: 23rd September 1840”
So here, we see the full extent of Agnes’ mental continuity and health. Physical evidence that her nephew and mother have been dead for 14 years. Now, was she delusional, or in fact, seeing ghosts?
11. “Miss West is prevailed upon to confess, and she does it with aplomb: admitting not just to the murders of Mr. Meers and Pearl, but to those of Mr. Boyle [Agnes?], Ned [Agnes?] and even Commander Hargreaves [Agnes?], despite the lack of evidence tying her to the crimes.” So, it would seem Myrtle ACTUALLY KILLED ONLY ONE person – Pearl.
12. “She knew nothing of this. Simon never told her he had seriously contemplated having Constance committed…The note is dated about a week before Constance’s death”
This I think is simply circumstantial in relation to Constance’s death. It seems unlikely that Simon would send an innocent child to scare the horses that resulted in everyone dying. On the other hand, he had no real connection to the boy either since he represented the liaison between Montague and Constance.
Agnes cannot stop thinking about what would have happened, were it not for the Accident
13. “She has a strange sensation of passing outside her body; of watching events unfold from her sister’s point of view…A voice within whispers, ‘How long before Simon turns on you?”
Is this her Schizophrenia, or actually Constance’s possession?
At this point, we also have to ask whether it was really Constance that kept hurting Agnes’ childhood friends.
14. “[Constance, before embarking from carriage] You belong with me, sister. Do not forget it.’
Agnes slammed the door on her. Just as she intended, the hem of Constance’s ashy pink gown and one end of her tippet were trapped inside the carriage.”
Here we see that Agnes is responsible for Constance’s death by intending to get Constance’s dress caught in the door.”
We also see another instance of Constance’s ownership over Agnes. However, this happens immediately preceding her death: “You belong with me, sister”
15. “Cedric told her about them. But Cedric was dead. She imagined that conversation.” Unless it really was the ghost of her nephew. Further: “It is only as she reaches to close the lid that she catches sight of a familiar face; or not precisely a face, but its outline, empty inside. The monochrome shape she recognizes as her own art...It is the hollow-cut of Ned.”
Simon confirms the truth, although Agnes is actually the killer, not Simon: “‘Miss West did not kill my clients,’ Agnes announces. ‘No.’ [Simon] She expected at least some denial. “
16. “…he breaks off, runs a hand across his sweating forehead. When he recommences, he sounds calmer, resigned. ‘No, you are right. I should have burnt it. I should have dissolved the bodies, too, rather than hiding them, but I thought their families deserved something to bury. …it all started to happen so quickly.’ “
“She should feel frightened of him, but she is strangely numb. ‘What did?’”
I think this statement that Agnes isn’t afraid of him is an indication that her subconscious may be asserting itself in a way that she unknowingly is aware that Simon isn’t actually the killer.
17. Two important quotes are offered her:
a) “He puts out his hands like he is trying to placate a rabid dog. ‘Do not worry, Miss Darken. We will find help. We will stop these spells of disassociation … I was wrong to attempt to handle them alone. My emotions got the better of me. I have a friend …’ He takes a step closer. ‘It is not your fault. You were not in control. After the pneumonia … there were times you were not yourself. “
b) “‘It must be in the blood,’ he mutters to himself. He is so near now that she can smell the birthing chamber on him. ‘A taint. I never thought you and your sister anything alike, but when it comes over you, I see her again …”
I think the narrative here represents a truthful response by Simon – of her disassociation, and her similarity to her sister. I accept these quotes at face value.
18. “‘Miss Darken, let me take those scissors.’ ‘I’m warning you, Simon!’ Her voice rises, beyond her control. Simon puts a foot forward. ‘You cannot be trusted with them,’ he explains. His blue eyes flick between her and the open blades. ‘When it has possession of you—’”
Here’s a subtle hint that Laura Purcell injects into the story that hints to the author’s intention. “When it has possession of you—, “seems like a normal thing to say, but it also has a peculiarity about it. If we replace the indefinite pronoun “it” with what Simon has referred to as “disassociation” we arrive to the following sentence: “When disassociation has possession of you.” The condition of disassociation is almost the exact opposite of possession. I argue that while Simon is inferring she is possessed by her condition, the author is actually taking the opportunity to reveal the true nature of Agnes’ infliction and is referring to Constance possessing Agnes.
19. “There is a sense of retraction, of snapping back into herself.”
Schizophrenia or possession..?
20. “Perplexed, hollow, she wanders from the room.”
The use of the term “hollow” – as though she feels an emptiness of something within her now gone: possession/presence?
21. “‘What has happened here? The lamp upon the desk is lit. By the light of its chimney, she sees that someone has left her a piece of paper. A painting, in fact – a shade. The sitter is Simon: there can be no doubt of that. His likeness has been taken as skillfully as if she had done it herself.
Clearly her skills have been used to create the likeness
22. “…this profile has not been brushed with her usual blend of ink and soot; the paint is thicker, rusty in hue. She runs her finger over the bridge of Simon’s nose. It feels like a crust. Words are written beneath in the hand she recognises from the notes: Now he will never part us.”
But the nature of the writing (like the notes written in Constance’s writing (confirmed by Simon who acknowledged the resemblance) seems to be Constance’s, not Agnes’ and would imply possession.
From earlier:
“Well. The writing that I saw … on the note you showed me … That belonged to someone else. Someone we both knew, Miss Darken.’
‘Who?’
‘It was the hand of … my wife.’
Constance.
He is right. Memory dawns on her, sickening but irrefutable. That is why she
recognised the writing. Constance has been gone so long, she did not think to
associate the notes with her. ‘But how—’”
Conclusion: Now, here is where I think it’s actually a possession of Agnes by Constance for the following reasons:
- Agnes’ fraility. If her condition is as bad as we’re lead to believe by both Simon and Agnes, then she could not have killed Mr. Boyle, and an even younger more fit, Ned. This also includes fighting Simon off for the scissors.
- Cedric’s revelation regarding Simon’s “fishing hooks” and so forth. The story is structured in a way that Agnes could not have known what those implements were when she found them to connect the dots. Simon’s admission to what they were and acknowledging (albeit indirectly) that he was somehow “covering” for Agnes’ actions. He loved her so much that he felt he was protecting her.
- The ending definitely demonstrates her forgetfulness, and is consistent with schizophrenic/bipolar disorder. Events are occurring outside of one of her personalities. I would be tempted to acknowledge this, if it weren’t for the other facts included here.
- Agnes is definitely an unreliable narrator. But, the second séance (upstairs, not attended by Myrtle) did leave tracings in the dust. There are no clues to suggest that Agnes, Myrtle or Pearl were there prior to make those marks. AND, while Pearl couldn’t read, she did acknowledge their existence, relying on Agnes to read them aloud.
- Simon is culpable, but only for interfering with dead bodies and letting a murderess run around freely. The narrative and plot would seem he was only trying to cover up her murders.
- “His likeness has been taken as skillfully as if she had done it herself.” And “Words are written beneath in the hand [Constance’s] she recognizes from the notes: Now he will never part us.”
- In the end, there is only one conclusion that Agnes was in fact the one committing the murders. Based on spiritual information that could only have come from the dead, Constance’s handwriting that Agnes herself wrote, and the required physical strength beyond her own frailty to subdue and murder Mr. Boyle, Ned and Simon, she would have needed supernatural assistance to accomplish the murders.
(less)
Brooke Olivares
Yes! Every one of her books is an amazing gothic adventure. She is unbelievable. Read them all if you a gothic historical thrill fan. I wish there wer…moreYes! Every one of her books is an amazing gothic adventure. She is unbelievable. Read them all if you a gothic historical thrill fan. I wish there were more.(less)
This question contains spoilers...
(view spoiler)[Constance was killed when she was dragged by the carriage? Agnes killed her mother and Cedric and Simon 14 yrs later? (hide spoiler)]
Kelly B
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)[No.
Constance was dragged by the carriage, but at the same time Cedric was killed by the horses. The mother saw all this happen out the parlor window and died of a heart attack. (hide spoiler)]
Constance was dragged by the carriage, but at the same time Cedric was killed by the horses. The mother saw all this happen out the parlor window and died of a heart attack. (hide spoiler)]
Unanswered Questions (1)
This question contains spoilers...
(view spoiler)[So I presume in the end that Agnes had a double personality a type of schizophrenia and committed all the crimes??..I put the rating 0.5 down because I'm not sure of the ending...Simon just got rid of the bodies..he didn't kill them?? And Myrtle ??she only killed her sister!! (hide spoiler)]
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more