The Mystery of Edwin Drood: A Review

-->

The North Carolina Ice Storm—which I’ve heard called Icetastophy—came through the South this week. And I can tell you this California girl was FREEZING! Thank goodness I didn’t have to leave the house. It gave me the chance to catch up on things like housework, schoolwork and, oh yeah, writing. I also had a chance to finally finish the BBC miniseries The Mystery of Edwin Drood (2012).

My older son and I sat down and watched part one months ago. Maybe even six months ago. For some reason, we never took the time to finish it. Can you tell we were riveted? So yesterday I remedied that problem.

For those of you who don’t know, The Mystery of Edwin Drood is adapted from the Charles Dickens novel of the same name. The thing about this novel is that it was unfinished at the time of Dickens’ death so there have been speculations ever since that time as to how the master would have concluded the story. Imagine reading this story in installments and in 1870 it just stops after twenty-something chapters due to the author’s death. And no ending?! Can you imagine the fan-fiction we’d have today?

A summary of the plot: An opium-addicted man, John Jasper, envisions murdering his nephew (Edwin Drood) who is engaged to Rosa whom Jasper is secretly in love with.  Edwin disappears and the rest of the story concerns discovering his whereabouts or his body.

You can see how an unfinished story of this kind would baffle readers for generations. In fact, it has been nearly 150 years and academics are still trying to figure out this mystery. The University of Buckingham has launched a project to have the average reader help solve the mystery. Here is a recent article on the project.

Even though the book lacked a denouement that didn’t mean it didn’t excite the imaginations of readers and movie watchers everywhere. Authors have been trying to conclude it since 1870. And film adaptations began as early as 1935. Even Doctor Who included an episode in which Dickens made an appearance and at the end he had come up with a finale to his book, The Mystery of Edwin Drood, giving a supernatural explanation to Edwin’s death.

The most obvious conclusion is that Jasper killed him and hid him in the family crypt. It’s the conclusion that has been drawn most frequently. There is evidence to support this conclusion. But I wonder even if Dickens began his story by telling a friend, “The story ... was to be that of the murder of a nephew by his uncle,” perhaps he changed his mind and came up with an ending that would surprise us all. He wouldn’t be the first author to do such a thing.

So, what of this latest adaptation (2012)? I liked the way they ended it because it gave it more of a happy ending. And I do love an HEA. I don’t want to spoil you, but it was a cleverly devised  plot that worked for the character of all concerned. It’s hard to say how Dickens would have concluded his final work. It was only half finished. And if you have any experience with a Dickens novel, the middle of the book is only the beginning of the ride on which he intends to take you.

Watch the 2-part miniseries. I enjoyed it. It’s free on Amazon Prime. 

Cookson Revisited

Last year, I watched my first Catherine Cookson movie based on one of her novels. I made a comparison of Cookson to Dickens in a blog last Fall. Basically, I just did not enjoy the characters or the story, but I waited to make a final judgement call until I'd watched some more. I do know people who love these and have encouraged me that if I watch period dramas I should give them a try. Well, I watched four more Cookson movies in the last two weeks. Has my opinion changed? Not really. They really aren't my cup of tea and even though I can watch a whole lot more of them on Netflix I am probably going to pass on them.

For me, I think these stories are just too violent, they don't contain many characters that I am attracted to and the plots are driven by all the most horrible and low parts of the human experience. It's not that I just need a fluffy Jane Austen plot to enjoy a period drama. For instance, I loved George Eliot's Daniel Deronda as well as Anthony Trollope's How We Live Now. But the Cookson plots go a step too far so that by the time you get to the end you wonder how this can conclude with a satisfying ending. Most often I am left wanting by the finish. Others may like Cookson but as for me I think I'll go back to Dickens and Austen.

Cookson or Dickens? Which is Your Cup of Tea??

I am a big period drama fan. So a few years ago, a friend who knew I liked period dramas asked if I’d ever watched one of the Catherine Cookson adaptations. I said that I hadn’t and my friend went on to tell me that I should and how Cookson writes these sweeping epic novels that make great adaptations.

Well, last week I noticed there was one of Cookson’s adaptations posted on Netflix. A Dinner of Herbs. I decided to watch it. I know there are those who absolutely love her films and novels so there had to be something to it. 

This week I am watching the 2005 version of Dicken’s Bleak House. My thoughts on the two series got me to thinking. Yes, these two authors lived nearly a century apart but they have both become beloved authors and the period dramas emanating from their works are many. They both focus much attention to the common man and the realities of life. But which do you prefer to watch?

I have to admit that when watching the Cookson series, I wasn’t completely impressed. Of course, I am making a judgement on only one series. After watching the first two or three parts, I realized I didn’t exactly care about any of the three leads and what happened to them. I forced myself to finish the series. However, I must admit the series grew on me as I finished it. I gave it three stars on Netflix. Afterwards, I got to thinking about the series and the plot and realized I really didn’t like it as I pulled it all apart in my mind.

Now I have read several Dickens books and watched many adaptations. I’ve loved them all. This week I started watching the 2005 Bleak House which was adapted by my favorite period drama screenwriter Andrew Davies. (Okay I hate what he did with the newest A Room with a View, but otherwise his films are terrific.) I found myself comparing the Dickens series to the Cookson series. I was excited to move on to each part in the Dickens. I cared about the characters and wanted to see what would happen next. 

I suppose, for one thing, it seems like Dickens gives you a good guy (or girl or both) to support and root for, occasionally a mystery to unravel and the baddies are to be reviled and hissed at. I didn’t feel like that while watching the Cookson series. Perhaps the Cookson characters were just too flawed for my taste. Some viewers and readers like that in their entertainment. I am just not one of them.

So which do you prefer, Dickens or Cookson? Love to hear your opinions. Maybe you have a recommendation of another Cookson series that will change my mind.

Classic Friday~Dickens' Characters: David Copperfield

Those who are not readers of classic literature will often ask, ‘What’s the big deal with Dickens?’ And my answer would be his characters. Dickens created some of the most enduring characters in all of literature.

We can all argue on which Dickens novel is best, but I don’t intend to discuss that today. One thing that I hope we can all agree on is that out of David Copperfield have come some of the best characters he ever penned. As an author myself, I know how important it is to have memorable characters. Characters tell our stories. Without them, no matter how exciting the plot, the book will fall flat. I’ve learned a lot about characterization from my love of classic literature and a big thanks goes to Mr. Charles Dickens.

David Copperfield is the title character and yet he is probably the most boring of the lot because…well, he is so infernally good. It is interesting that ten years later, Dickens would write Great Expectations with a similar story of a young boy and his journey to manhood. Yet, Pip isn’t the perfect young man that we see in David Copperfield.

The number of characters in the novel are overwhelming, but here are a few of the important ones. Wilkins Micawber (one of my favorites) is habitually in debt but with a good heart who eventually prospers, Uriah Heep is the hypocritical clerk whose plotting eventually leads to his downfall, Clara Peggotty the kind and devoted nurse of dear David, Edward Murdston the stern and cruel step-father, and of course Betsy Trotwood the unbending and austere great-aunt of David’s who becomes his salvation in his young life.

I encourage you if you have not yet read this novel to give it a try sometime soon. You might be surprised at the festival of characters waiting to be discovered. Happy Reading!

P.S. Don't devour Dickens--savor it. Do what I do, download the electronic version from Project Gutenberg and read it off your PDA or e-book reader (if you have one) a chapter at a time or when you have a moment. Or like me, before bed. It may take you a couple months that way but you might enjoy and remember it that much more. Another tip is to watch a movie version of the book before reading. It will help you understand the plot and figure out the characters before trying to go through it on your own. I suggest the 1999 version with Daniel Radcliffe, Maggie Smith, and Ian McKellan. (Even my 10 y/o enjoyed it.)