I approached this book with a high degree of ambivalence. On the one hand, I have read Dan Simmons’ Hyperion and Fall of Hyperion, two books that I loved, and was therefore contemplating a well written and hopefully meaningful story.

On the other hand, I am always dubious about authors using well known historical figures as key characters in their novels. Dan Simmons has written Drood from the view point of Wilkie Collins and Charles Dickens is the primary character of interest.

To prepare myself properly for reading this lengthy tomb, I read Dickens’ The Mystery of Edwin Drood first. I also read the notes included in my volume of Dickens’ last novel regarding the various discussions and theories that prevailed after the author’s death about how he would have finished his novel had he lived to do so. With the benefit of hindsight I should also have read Collins The Moonstone and The Lady in White, both being volumes in my “to be read” pile for some considerable time. (Warning, Drood contains comments that give away the supposed mystery ending of The Moonstone.)

Now, I am not a person who will finish a book that I am not enjoying so the fact that I finished the 771 page Drood means I must have gained something from the novel. I shall first present the positive elements, then state the points I found off putting, and finish with the conclusion of my opinions on this book. Where any potential “spoilers” are present I will give advance warning so the reader may avoid same.

The Positives

As one would expect from an author of [Dan Simmons]’ calibre, the book to all intents and purposes has represented historical events accurately. Also, where the author includes letters in his story the language used is true to that found in Dickens’ letters as published by his daughter and sister-in-law following his death. Looking at the author’s list of sources presented on the acknowledgements page it is clear the research carried out for this book was extensive, and I must say I was not presented with any glaring factual mistakes or incongruities in tone of speech or content of dialogue.

Nor did the characters prove anything other than credible, well, (spoiler warning – skip to next paragraph) that is all the characters that were supposed to be normal human beings.

What [Drood] has given me is a desire to read more of Dickens and Collins work; and also a yearning to read about the lives of both authors. I have already purchased a couple of brief biographies of Dickens and am searching out a suitable volume on Collins. Whatever my view of Drood as a novel, I can hardly fault it for awakening an interest in the lives and works of two famous authors that I have all but ignored to date.

The Negatives (Warning - contains spoilers)

A key element to the story is the relationship between Collins and Dickens. Not having read all the sources available, I am in no position to judge how accurately this relationship is represented. However, the representation in the book does not do any credit to either of the characters involved. In addition, Drood implies murderous intent in both main characters. I would suggest this is totally fictitious, and is merely part of the story.

Simmons uses extracts from The Mystery of Edwin Drood and has also borrowed characters, such as the stonemason at the cathedral, from the book. I found this a little off putting when I first came across it.

The biggest negative I found, was that the story is not sufficiently significant to support 771 pages. I was particularly disappointed that, while the story involved real, well-known characters, it missed the opportunity to provide a really good tale.

Conclusion

Apart from raising an awareness of things Dickensian it is not a great story. If you are an ardent fan of Dickens work, or a scholar of Dickens life, you will probably find the book distasteful.

This is not a, “must read” book, but it is mildly interesting. If you are to read this book, you should consider it purely as a fiction. Read if for what it is; a work of fiction. ( )

Drood is a fictional account of the last five years of Charles Dickens' life. Little is known about Dickens at that time, so Simmons was able to take excellent creative license.

The story is narrated by author Wilkie Collins ( The Woman in White, The Moonstone) and the story is as much about his life as it is Dickens'. Wilkie and Dickens were long time friends, collaborators and competitors.

The book starts out with a train accident at Staplehurst involving Dickens and in retelling the story to Wilkie, we first hear of the horrific looking man named Drood. Dickens becomes obssessed with finding Drood and drags Wilkie along to late night excursions into Undertown; a city of catacombs and home to those too wretched to live among the poor in above ground London. There are also opium dens and a myriad of crypts.

On the night Wilkie and Dickens go to Undertown, they find a river of sewage that they can not cross. It is here that a boat pulls up to take Dickens, and only Dickens to meet with Drood. Wilkie does not hear of the story until later and has only Dickens word of what transpired. A former inspector, Fields then tries to blackmail Wilkie into sharing all the Dickens will tell him about Drood, as Fields states that Drood has been responsible for hundreds of murders in the last several years. Collins feels like a pawn between the inspector and Dickens and does not know what to believe.

my review:

I thought this book was excellent and addictive and I barely noticed that it was almost 800 pages long. Wilkie is fascinating; he is an opium addict and his jealousy of Dickens grows pathalogical. As he is so unreliable as narrator, the reader is uncertain if parts are true or figments of Wilkie's opium dreams or envious nature. Though I think one can appreciate the book on another level if well-read with Dickens and Collins' novels, I had not yet read anything by Collins and did not feel that I missed anything. However, it does take us through Collins' writing of The Moonstone and spoiled the mystery for me. I still want to read it though.

This was an amazing mix of historical fiction, mystery, and psychological terror. I also really appreciate all of the research that must have gone into this novel and to still make a page turner is quite feat. I also felt that Simmons captured the atmosphere and writing of the period. I can not recommend this enough, it is a must read.

my rating 5/5 ( )

the relationship between collins and dickens is interesting, their lives are interesting but the drood story is so confused and stupid that i couldn't really follow it. ( )

Chilling and haunting story revolving around Charles Dickens and his relationship with author Wilkie Collins. The story is totally original as it tries to explain the elusive last years of Dickens' life as well as the unfinished novel left by Dickens...The Mystery of Edwin Drood. Absolutely fascinating... ( )

Before reading this book, you really need to read:

* The Mystery of Edwin Drood by Charles Dickens
* David Copperfield by Charles Dickens (The semi-autobiographical novel)
* The Woman in White by Wilkie Collins
* Moonstone by Wilkie Collins

That should be enough to get you started. The narrator of Drood is Wilkie Collins, the contemporary of Dickens who was his friend and collaborator. Collins also had a problem with laudanum (opium), a plot point that figures prominently in Moonstone and Simmons Drood.

Dicken’s Drood was unfinished, of course, and this novel is an entertaining attempt to explain the unfinished mystery of Dickens’ novel by assuming that it was based on actual people and events in Dickens’ life.

Drood is also massive. The edition that I read weighs in at ~770 pages, a size and heft that would make Dickens’ and Collins’ proud. By the time you read all the prerequisites for Drood you will have finished off almost three thousand pages. But the reading is so much fun, it’s worth it. ( )