The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins

I read this book in early December. I should probably say that I reread this book.

I love this book! It is considered to be the first English detective novel. The brilliance of the book is that it is written in several first person narratives. There is a mystery surrounding the disappearance of a huge yellow diamond (the Moonstone of the title). The diamond is an important cultural artifact in India and it was taken by an Englishman during a conflict. The diamond is said to bring misfortune to anyone who keeps it away from its important spot in a statue. The man who took it ends up bequeathing it to his niece in order to get back at his sister. Anyhow, that's just the opening chapter or two.

What keeps me returning to this book is the way that it was written. Usually mysteries are not very interesting once you've discovered "whodunit." This one is still because of the realistic character development. Even supposedly minor characters are fully drawn in the narrative. Many characters get the opportunity to speak for themselves in their own portions of the book. Gabriel (I'm probably misspelling this) is the old butler who gets to write a significant portion of the text. He's probably my favorite. There's also a hilarious section of the book written by a religious zealot. She ends up leaving religious pamphlets in bizarre places in order to help save the souls of those around her. That doesn't help advance the plot in any way, but it is an example of how Wilkie Collins sprinkles real life into the book so effectively that it's like the reader is watching a real life story advance rather than reading a mystery novel.

One thing I noticed on rereading the book is that the character names give the reader the very first impression of how they should be received. For example, Gabriel Betteredge is a favorable character. He is supposed to have a "better edge" on what's happening than others. In reality, he is very observant in that he notices tons of details and picks up on characters' reactions to things. The comical part is that though he notices the details and reports them to the reader, he often misinterprets them. He is a trusty narrator in that we the reader trust him to be a good person. In all actuality, though, his in an untrusty narrator because we can't 100% believe his view of what happened. That sort of complication is what makes the book so wonderful and enjoyable even on a third reading.