Customer Reviews

The Beetle (Wordsworth Mystery & Supernatural) (Tales of Mystery & the Supernatural)

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Bram Stoker's "Dracula" and Richard Marsh's "The Beetle" were both published in 1897. Surprisingly, "The Beetle" outsold Stoker's novel three-fold in the first few years of their publication. So why has this novel faded into relative obscurity? Because it does not translate well to modern times. Where Stoker's novel still holds many chills for its reader, "The Beetle" is so dated with its blaring xenophobia and chauvinism that the things which are meant to scare us do little more than provide mild amusement.

At this point you may be asking why, if I feel this way, did I give this novel four stars? The answer is simple: it is a wonderful piece for its time and, if viewed through a historic lens, one can see why it was so wildly successful. In many ways, one can compare it to "Dracula", what with its shifting narrators, tightly woven plot, and shape-changing antagonist. If you're into supernatural fiction, Victorian fiction, or some some combination thereof, this is a wonderful book. If you're looking for a terrifying read I doubt you will find this novel satisfactory.

The Beetle is one of those rare books that positively throb with symbolism and significance - while gripping you by the throat with a terrific tale. In 1897 it was a popular sensation outselling Dracula, which was published the same year.

The characters are well drawn: Paul Lessingham, a budding cabinet minister with an ominous gap in his past; lovely Marjorie Linton, a witty New Woman caught between her Radical lover (Paul) and her Tory father; madcap young scientist Sydney Atherton who also adores Miss Linton and is meanwhile working on weapons of mass destruction for the glory of the British Empire; Robert Holt, down-and-out clerk who falls into the clutches of the Beetle.

As for the Beetle, this amorphous, androgynous nightmare transmigrates at will between a barely human form and a sadistic Egyptian scarab. An accomplished mesmerist, the Beetle can make a slave of almost anyone (including the reader). Why is it hiding out in civilized London instead of pursuing its hideous prehistoric rituals back in Egypt? Paul Lessingham, to his horror, is the unwilling magnet drawing the vengeful Beetle ever closer.

The plot offers a steady stream of dramas and crises peppered by exciting chases on foot, by cab and by rail. There are quite a few comic moments, despite the heavy nature of the threat to everyone's life and sanity. That, in fact, is one of the most remarkable aspects of the book. It's both a Kafkaesque plunge into paranoia and a Shakespearean comedy of errors, a confrontation with unsavory eroticism and a pure love story.

I'd recommend the Broadview edition above all others because of its readable format and thought-provoking scholarly content.

But don't read the introduction before the book. Save those insightful interpretations of The Beetle for dessert! Approach The Beetle without preconceptions and have your own visceral experience of the Uncanny, just as readers did in 1897.

Richard Marsh's novel _The Beetle_ is the story of a British statesman, Paul Lessingham, who is haunted by his youthful indiscretions in Egypt. A shape-shifting figure follows him from Egypt, intent upon getting revenge on Lessingham. While the book has some interesting aspects, it lacks important plot elements. For example, (spoiler alert) the book builds up to a confrontation between the "good guys" (Lessingham and company) and the "bad guys" (the Beetle). Yet, that confrontation never occurs. The end of the book also leaves some loose ends.

Despite the plot problems, and the archaic attitude toward race mentioned by other reviewers, the book has some fascinating aspects. The character of Sydney Atherton, a lovestruck mad scientist, is especially compelling. He narrates the second section of the novel; later, we read other characters' impressions of him. This dual view gives a fascinating portrait of Atherton's character.

The novel also differs from most canonical Victorian fiction. It openly mentions nakedness more often than I've seen in any other novel from this time period. It also grapples with interesting questions of gender, especially the gender of the villainous Beetle.

Overall, I'd say that the book has some compelling moments and characters, although it lacks a strong overall plot.

This book was assigned for me to read in my 19th Century British Literature class. When I read the first part of this book, I didn't know whether to be freaked out/repulsed or intrigued. I couldn't tell if I liked the book so far or if I found it too weird to go on reading. But, of course since this was a book I had to read because my grade depended on it, I kept reading. Part 2 gave the story a new light and I found myself unable to put the book down. I wanted to figure out the mystery of the Beetle SO badly! What a great read it was. My only complaint is the ending...it seemed to end so abruptly and I would have liked to see some kind of battle or confrontation of the men and the Beetle. I also would have liked to see Paul save Margery...that would have been cute and romantic. Despite those complaints, the book is awesome. It is worth the read!

Great riveting book i had an Englishmen accent computer voice read it to me
the latter part is slow for some people but i loved the details
i produced war of worldsWar of the Worlds (Dramatized)

The Beetle, a novel of the occult by Richard Marsh, was, at one time, outselling Bram Stoker's Dracula. Today, it is far less known, but still worth belonging in any collection of weird horror tales. The development is episodic, done from different character's viewpoints, much as Stoker's Dracula was, but the tale is much briefer. We are never given quite the 'in your face' explanation that Stoker had for his novel; instead, we are left with a mysterious being whose origin and nature are tantalizingly hinted at but never fully explained, which is just fine by me. The occasional Victorian sentiments about women and certain cultures must be taken with a grain of salt; after all, they are a product of their time All in all, a worthy read.

"The Beetle" may have outsold "Dracula" when it first came out, but it's easy to see after reading it why "Dracula" is the one best remembered. The idea of a man turning himself into a beetle at will is too bizarre to fall into the "it could have once happened" category, while with "Dracula" every part of the world has some form of the vampire legend.
The one place where "The Beetle" does better than "Dracula" is in the narration. Marsh limits his tale to three narrators whose stories overlap, where Stoker jumps back and forth between various letters and journals. Unfortunately, the characters are poorly drawn and prone to utter nonsense intended to be either witty or clever and come across as neither. And Marsh has no van Helsing to explain things. The closest he has is the detective at the end, who should have entered the picture sooner since he seems to be the only one with any sense.
"The Beetle" isn't a bad book, but it's no classic either. It reads more as a cross between an expanded "Weird Tales" adventure and a condensed "Penny Dreadful".