First Impressions: The Moonstone, Wilkie Collins (1868)

Thursday 31 December 2009 20:00 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Mr Wilkie Collins's new book is very suggestive of a game called "button", which children used to play.

A number of little folks being seated in a circle, each with hands placed palm to palm in front of him, one of the party, who holds a button, comes in turn to each of the others, and drops it into his closed hands. Of course, but one of the party can receive it, but in each case the same motions are gone through with; and having made his rounds, the principal performer enquires, "Who's got the button?" Each one, including him who has it, but who intentionally misleads the rest, guesses at the puzzle, and he who guesses right carries the button at the next trial. The Moonstone riddle is so like in its essential features to this child's-play, that it might very well have been suggested by it. Mr Collins's art consists, in this particular case, in converting the button into a yellow diamond, worth 30,000 pounds, which turns out at last, like most of Mr Collins's mysteries, to have no vital connection with his characters, considered as human beings, but to be merely extraneous matter thrown violently into the current of his. It would perhaps be more correct to say that there is no story at all, and that the characters are puppets, grouped with more or less art around the thing the conjurer wishes to conceal until the time comes for displaying it.

One might say of the book, that it is like a pantomime the characters appear to speak but say nothing. Mr Collins ventriloquises behind each of his puppets, in order to give a sufficient number of misleading sounds. But his art is bad, and he has not art enough – his voice always betrays him, and the reader is never deceived into thinking that it is anybody but Mr Collins that is talking. We do not know of any books of which it is truer than of Mr Collins's to make the damaging remark, that nobody reads them twice, and that when the end of the first perusal is reached, everybody thinks his time has been wasted.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in