You know those books, where you look at the
book, then look at reviews, then back at the book and think, “Am I reading the right book?” The
Woman in Black was one of those books for me. It seems like everyone loves
it, my edition is even part of the Vintage Classics* range, but I didn’t enjoy it at all. It was a chore to
get through. Maybe I just wasn’t in the
right mood for it… or
maybe it’s just not the
right book for me.
The premise is enticing: a young solicitor
goes to stay in an old mansion to sort out the paperwork of the recently
deceased owner, only to discover it’s haunted by a mysterious woman in black. Doesn’t that sound thrilling? Alas, it is
not. Not one bit. Of the 160 pages (yes, this book is tiny), it felt like only
about five of them contained something actually interesting. The rest
was filled with Arthur walking, Arthur eating, Arthur thinking about walking
and eating, Arthur talking about walking and eating, Arthur looking around,
Arthur riding a bike, Arthur talking about looking around and riding a bike and
Arthur thinking and talking and walking a little bit more. The actual scares were few and far between, and when they came I was so close to falling asleep
from the long, descriptive passages that I barely mustered a goosebump.
I like descriptive writing when the thing
that is being described is interesting or beautiful, or the writing itself is
interesting or beautiful. But Arthur describes everything and everyone he comes
across, even if he only spends five minutes in a room or never meets that
person again. It was all just so tedious. The writing itself was dull, and although it's in the style of a Victorian novel, it felt rather forced in several
places, and jarred with the un-Victorian setting.
That’s right, don’t let
the movie posters fool you – this book is not set in Victorian times. It’s actually never exactly clear what time period
it’s set in. I’m guessing the early 1900s. Arthur
refers to the Victorian period as though it was a fair while in the past, and
speaks of a “pony and
trap” as though it’s a novelty over a car. There’s electricity everywhere and apparently
a battery-operated torch. But there’s no mention of World War I, something which would have shaped
Arthur’s life and
personality had the book taken place during or after that period.
There’s not much of a secondary cast to speak of – in fact, my favourite
character was the dog. She was adorable, and the scariest scene for me actually involved her. There were a few other parts which were mildly creepy,
but my butt remained firmly far back from the edge of my seat. The central
mystery around the woman in black was so predictable, and even though I was
waiting for it, the climax felt rushed and ultimately unsatisfying.
I’m trying to find something positive about my reading experience but
to be honest I can’t think
of anything. I’m hoping
the movie is better. It won't take much.
Rating: 2/5
Fine Print
Published: 2007, Vintage Classics (this edition)
Get It: AbeBooks
*Random note: How old does a book have
to be to be dubbed “vintage”? This one was first published in 1983.
Not what I’d call a
“vintage classic”, even if it is written in ye olde language.
Oh no, It's a shame you didn't enjoy this book. But prepare to rage by the movie :P
ReplyDeleteYeah I really thought I'd like it but oh well. I'm curious about what will make me rage in the movie now!
DeleteI read and reviewed this book a while ago and I didn't like it either! It felt too mock Victorian for me and didn't scare me at all- I don't understand how other people find this scary! Like you, I loved the dog the most! x
ReplyDeleteSo glad it wasn't just me! Mock Victorian is a great way to put it.
DeleteGreat review Belle. I've been interested since I saw the movie was coming out. I still haven't seen the movie, but I think I'll be watching it over the book now! :)
ReplyDeleteYeah I'll have to watch and compare!
Delete