I didn't know what this book was about when I decided to read it. I had no idea it was a mystery or that I would enjoy as much as I did.

My only problems with this book are the ones I have with older books like this and it's mainly the way women are portrayed and treated. But, as I said I understand because of the time period. My other problem with older books like this is the rambling aspect. Two chapters of nothing but explanations and useless rambling could in all reality fit on 1 page. 

Despite the few issues I had, I rather actually enjoyed the two part mystery. Mystery one of who is the Woman in White is and later on the mystery involving Laura Fairlie were both on their own interesting but the way the author combined them was very well done. You have characters you like/love and characters you absolutely hate (if you read it you know who I mean) and it's done in a way that you have a real reason for disliking them. 

Anther problem I had with he book was some of the revels. I felt very confused by a couple of the big revels and had to look up what was actually happening because the language and hidden meaning completely flew past me.

I would recommend the audiobook. The narrator has a soothing voice that is honestly perfect for the story in my opinion.

If 50% of the flowery language had been removed, I think this book would’ve been at least 30% shorter, something it would’ve benefited from.

I didn’t care about Walter’s love and only really got interested in the story after he left it. After that, I kept losing interest when things inevitably dragged on before a new plot point was introduced. Also, while the ending was more or less what I’d hoped for, I wasn’t exactly satisfied—maybe because it took too long to get there?

 

TITLE—The Woman in White 

AUTHOR—Wilkie Collins 

PUBLISHED—1860 

 

GENRE—gothic literature; “sensation novel”; epistolary format in multiple POVs 

SETTING—Victorian era England 

MAIN THEMES/SUBJECTS—mental illness, lunacy & institutionalization; misogyny & Patriarchal oppression & manipulation; Romanticism; female agency; oneiromancy (dream prophecy/divination); epistolary format; commentary on human nature 

 

WRITING STYLE—⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ 

CHARACTERS—⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ 

STORY/PLOT—⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ 

BONUS ELEMENT/S—Reading this parallel to John Harwood’s The Seance was a stroke of excellent luck! Highly recommend! 

PHILOSOPHY—⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ 

 

 

Whew this is a long one, but quite readable! Once I got the hang of the Victorian writing style (which isn’t my usual thing) I enjoyed the book immensely and couldn’t put it down. There is something about Collins’s writing style that is a little humorous, almost tongue-in-cheek feeling in spite of the heavy, tense topics and plot. 

 

I loved the political undertones of the writing and his characters were phenomenal: incredibly unique and visceral representations of truly complex people who are at once very realistic and relatable and also a bit unusual and in some cases a bit larger-than-life seeming. Marian Halcombe was an easy favorite but Walter Hartright was also very lovable and Fosco and Mr. Fairlie were just entertaining AF—oh and Mrs. Catherick! Usually when secondary characters—especially villains—like that “have their say” in epistolary narratives or multiple POV narratives I get a little bored with the story but Fosco’s, Mr. Fairlie’s, and Mrs. Catherick’s POVs ended up being some of my favorite parts of the book. They are also the characters that seemed a bit larger than life—flamboyant, but without the modern connotations of that word. 😅 (I actually read that the character Fosco from this book was the source of Oscar Wilde’s Oxford days nickname as well. 😂 Love that. ❤️) 

 

<SPOILER>I also loved how the build up to the climaxes and endings belied the reality of what the actual situation of the story was, though hidden from the reader (and the characters, mostly). It was such a trip of the imagination to speculate about Percival’s “Secret” and the reason behind Mrs. Catherick’s complicity and Anne’s fate etc. etc. and then when all is revealed it’s as though Collins is saying: What? These are humans. What did you expect? As chaotic as the events in the narrative are and how often they bordered on the extreme—indeed, even the supernatural at times?—in the end it was all down to just very much the simple reality of human nature.</SPOILER> 

 

Honestly I’m still kind of surprised this book was written by a Victorian English cishet man. Obviously a very liberal-minded man as any bestie of Dickens is likely to be but wow. He depicted the true horror of the Patriarchy in a way that I just wouldn’t have guessed a man of that era would have truly seen let alone understood. Props, my dude. 

 

Overall a really satisfying read both in terms of the story, the characters, the philosophy, and the deeper commentaries on human nature. 

 

 

⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ 

 

TW // graphic, upsetting dog death; all the usual sort of offensive content in English classic literature: fatphobia, misogyny, gaslighting, xenophobia, racism, classism (Please feel free to DM me for more specifics!) 

 

Further Reading— 

Ooh what a perfect treat for these dark winter nights. I really enjoyed this book. The use of multiple narratives was very impressive, to be able to take on so convincingly the voices of so many characters in an age when that had never been attempted is quite a feat.

And what fabulous characters they were. Collins covers the whole gamut of Victorian class and status and his female characters, in particular, are really interesting.  Laura was almost a parody of a typical gothic heroine from the books of the 18th and early 19th century, beautiful but passive. All the male characters are instantly in love with her without much explanation why other than how she looks. Anne Catherick represents the dark side of the Victorian heroine where the hardships of her life have affected her mental and physical health to such an extent that she is almost other-worldly. But my favourite was of course, Marian, a much more modern heroine perhaps influenced by the contemporary Jane Eyre. I think the view of womanhood was already changing in the mid-19th century and lots of different types of women are reflected in this book.

The male characters were equally intriguing. The the villains, Glyde and Fosco, were wonderfully villainous and the secondary characters like Farlie, Pesca and even the clerk at the church were such fun characters that provided well-timed comic relief. 

Unfortunately, Collins nuanced take on the gothic heroine was not extended to the story's hero. Hartright was too perfect and good at everything: attractive, kind, loyal son, good friend, talented artist, amateur detective, competent in legal matters, physically strong, cross country runner, able to galvanise a crowd in a crisis.
No man is all of these things! It would have been more interesting if he had some faults or moments of failure at all.

Finally, what made this book was the atmosphere and the twists, just when you thought everything had been solved another layer of the story would be unravelled or a new shocking event would occur, this made the story thrilling and chilling and worth its length. A very deserved classic