Tea, Tonic & Toxin

Send us Fan Mail

Tea, Tonic, and Toxin is a book club and podcast for anyone who loves mysteries and detective stories. We’re making our way through the 19th-century stories that helped the genre evolve. Next up: Israel Zangwill’s 1892 novel, The Big Bow Mystery.

Set in London’s working-class East End, The Big Bow Mystery is one of the earliest examples of the locked-room mystery genre. In the story, two detectives race to solve a murder, an innocent man is condemned, and only at the very end is the startling solution revealed.

How to Read It: Buy it on Amazon, find a copy at a used bookstore, or read it for free (courtesy of Project Gutenberg).

Estimated Reading Time: 3 hours. Share your thoughts and check out the questions below!


Rival Detectives. Two rival detectives try to solve the case. Here, we have retired policeman George Grodman and Inspector Edward Wimp of Scotland Yard. When Wimp shows up at a liberal rally to arrest Tom Mortlake, the narrator says, “Wimp had won; Grodman felt like a whipped cur.”

Several books we’ve read (The Mystery of a Hansom Cab and A Study in Scarlet) have focused on the rivalry between detectives. Did this trope develop during this time period? Is it still common in detective novels? Who are your rivals?

Red Herrings. Zangwill offers up several possible solutions and suspects. Did Denzil Cantercot commit the murder, as Grodman seems to suspect? Or did Tom Mortlake do it? Did these red herrings fool you?

Fair Play. In the preface, Zangwill introduces the idea of fair play: “The indispensable condition of a good mystery is that it should be able and unable to be solved by the reader, and that the writer’s solution should satisfy.” Fair play is a key tenet of Golden Age detective fiction (1920-39). How would you compare Poe’s solution in “The Murders in the Rue Morgue” (1841) with Zangwill’s?

Foul Play. Readers have access to the same clues as the characters. Mrs. Drabdump entered Constant’s room with “her hands before her as if to ward off the dreadful vision.” After Grodman bust open the door, he spread a handkerchief over Constant’s face. It’s a sort of conjuring trick. However, readers face a hurdle that the characters don’t: misdirection. What do you think about the narrator keeping secrets?

The Eye Sees What It Expects to See. Grodman says people go through life without eyes, and their observation and judgment are impaired by irrelevant prejudices. He knew Mrs. Drabdump, like most women, would cry murder: “She habitually takes her prepossessions for facts, her inferences for observations. … The key to the Big Bow Mystery is feminine psychology.” So much to unpack here …

Means (Capability), Motive (Desire), and Opportunity. Tom Mortlake goes to trial, where his guilt was “as clear as circumstantial evidence could make it.” At the end, he’s rescued from the gallows, and we learn the least likely suspect committed the crime. The killer tells the Home Secretary, “There came on me the desire to commit a crime that should baffle detection.” Were you thrown by the killer’s motive?

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

Set in London’s working-class East End, this 1892 book is one of the earliest examples of the locked-room mystery genre. In The Big Bow Mystery by Israel Zangwill, two detectives race to solve a murder, an innocent man is condemned, and only at the very end is the startling solution revealed.

Locked Room Mysteries. The Big Bow Mystery is generally seen as the first locked room mystery novel. In a locked room mystery, a crime is committed in a room locked from the inside. How could any murderer have committed the crime and then escaped? It seems impossible. Writers have developed many ingenious solutions to locked room murders, but Israel Zangwill took the locked room device to a new level. 

Dickensian Influence. The novel’s style is reminiscent of Dickens, including the use of funny character names, such as Edward Wimp and Mrs. Drabdump. The book also highlights the lot of the working man and the fight for workers’ rights. Like Bleak House, the book even begins with a description of a dense morning fog …

Humor. Zangwill has a dry wit. In the intro, he called the book’s humor too abundant and that “Mysteries should be sedate and sober. There should be a pervasive atmosphere of horror and awe such as Poe manages to create.” Do you agree?

Comparisons with Fergus Hume’s Mystery of a Hansom Cab (1886). Big Bow opens with an inquest, followed by press frenzy, public speculation, and proposed solutions in letters to the editor. Jessie Dymond may save Tom from the gallows if she can be found in time (much as Sal Rawlins saves Brian Fitzgerald in Hansom Cab).

All the Theories. The book was serialized in The Star, a popular paper known for sensationalizing Jack the Ripper’s Whitechapel murders (1888-91). The burning question in Big Bow: how did the murderer commit the crime? Various theories are suggested in the book, including:

1. Small monkey with a razor came down the chimney
2. Removal and replacement of a windowpane cut with a diamond
3. Door panel sliced and replaced
4. Powerful magnets used to turn the key and push the bolt
5. Secret passages and trapdoors
6. Arthur Constant swallowed the razor he used to cut his own throat
7. The murderer hid and escaped when the door was broken down
8. The murderer got in when Grodman and Mrs. Drabdump entered
9. Wimp’s theory: the broken bolt and a loose key (or key on the floor)

Rival Detectives. Two rival detectives try to solve the case. Here, we have retired policeman George Grodman and Inspector Edward Wimp of Scotland Yard. When Wimp shows up at a liberal rally to arrest Tom Mortlake, the narrator says, “Wimp had won; Grodman felt like a whipped cur.”

Several books we’ve read (The Mystery of a Hansom Cab and A Study in Scarlet) have focused on the rivalry between detectives. Did this trope develop during this time period? Is it still common in detective novels? Who are your rivals?

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

The “consulting detective” Sherlock Holmes and his trusty sidekick, Watson — two of the most famous characters in English literature — make their first appearance in this tale, which forever changed the way mystery novels were written.

Reasoning Backwards: Holmes says that if you describe a train of events, most people “will tell you what the result would be. They can put those events together in their minds, and argue from them that something will come to pass. There are few people, however, who, if you told them a result, would be able to evolve from their own inner consciousness what the steps were which led up to that result.” Is the ability to reason backward the key skill of the consulting detective?

Honor, Justice, and Credit Where Credit Is Due:

Jefferson Hope won’t kill in cold blood. He says, “[Drebber and Stangerson] should each have a draw out of one of these [pill]boxes, while I ate the pill that remained.”

Watson describes Enoch Drebber as “baboon-like.” He says, “If ever human features bespoke vice of the most malignant type, they were certainly those of Enoch J. Drebber, of Cleveland.” Nonetheless, Watson “recognized that justice must be done, and that the depravity of the victim was no condonement in the eyes of the law.”

Holmes asks the name of Jefferson Hope’s accomplice. Hope says, “I can tell my own secrets, but I don’t get other people into trouble.”

Holmes is initially reluctant to take the case because he knows Gregson and Lestrade will take the credit. At the end, Watson tells Holmes, “Your merits should be publicly recognized. You should publish an account of the case. If you won’t, I will for you.”

Tea, Tonic, and Toxin is a book club and podcast for people who love mysteries, thrillers, introspection, and good conversation. Each month, your hosts, Sarah Harrison and Carolyn Daughters, will discuss a game-changing mystery or thriller from the 19th and 20th centuries. Together, we’ll see firsthand how the genre evolved.

Along the way, we’ll entertain ideas, prospects, theories, doubts, and grudges, along with the occasional guest. And we hope to entertain you, dear friend. We want you to experience the joys of reading some of the best mysteries and thrillers ever written.

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

Tea, Tonic, and Toxin is a book club and podcast for anyone who loves mysteries and detective stories. We’re making our way through the 19th-century stories that helped the genre evolve. Next up: Arthur Conan Doyle’s 1887 novel, A Study in Scarlet.

The “consulting detective” Sherlock Holmes and his trusty sidekick, Watson — two of the most famous characters in English literature — make their first appearance in this tale, which forever changed the way mystery novels were written.

How to Read It: Buy it on Amazon, find a copy at a used bookstore, or read it for free (courtesy of Project Gutenberg).

Estimated Reading Time: 3 hours. Share your thoughts and check out the questions below!

Knowledge Is Power: Sherlock Holmes is ignorant of the Copernican Theory and of the composition of the solar system. “That any civilized human being in this nineteenth century should not be aware that the earth travelled round the sun appeared to me to be such an extraordinary fact,” says Watson. What does Holmes know, and how does this knowledge serve him?

The Brain Attic: Holmes says, “A man’s brain originally is like a little empty attic, and you have to stock it with such furniture as you choose. A fool takes in all the lumber of every sort that he comes across, so that the knowledge which might be useful to him gets crowded out, or at best is jumbled up with a lot of other things so that he has a difficulty in laying his hands upon it. Now the skilful workman is very careful indeed as to what he takes into his brain-attic. He will have nothing but the tools which may help him in doing his work, but of these he has a large assortment, and all in the most perfect order.” What do you think about the brain attic?

The Consulting Detective: Holmes is the one and only consulting detective. Why does he prefer the consulting detective gig? Why not simply become a Scotland Yard detective or a private detective?

Throwing Down the Gauntlet: Holmes calls Edgar Allan Poe’s Auguste Dupin an “inferior fellow. He had some analytical genius, but he was by no means such a phenomenon as Poe appeared to imagine.”

The Dearth of Both Detectives and Criminals: Holmes says, “No man lives or has ever lived who has brought the same amount of study and of natural talent to the detection of crime which I have done. And what is the result? There is no crime to detect, or, at most, some bungling villainy with a motive so transparent that even a Scotland Yard official can see through it.”

Biased Judgment: “It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment.” Sarah and Carolyn very much agree.

Story Structure: Part Two is a complete departure from Part One. An unnamed third-person narrator takes the place of John Watson. This new story starts in 1847, roughly 34 years before the events of Part One. We then catch back up with the ending of Part One and continue the present-day story. Does this structure work? Why or why not?

The Mormon Faith: There’s some controversy about the story told in Part Two. What’s your take on the way Mormonism is presented?

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

Australia’s first literary sensation, The Mystery of a Hansom Cab sold hundreds of thousands of copies worldwide upon publication. Set in the charming and deadly streets of Melbourne, this 1886 thriller highlights class and social issues as a crime is committed by an unknown assassin.

1. Legitimacy — Frettlby was married to Rosanna, and Sal was conceived in wedlock. Madge is Frettlby’s illegitimate daughter. How did this turn of events strike you, and what do you think about the lengths people go to protect Frettlby’s “good name”?
   
   
2. Fate — Men discovered the deity Nemesis wasn’t “altogether useless as a scapegoat upon which to lay the blame of their own shortcomings, so they created a new deity called Fate and laid any misfortune which happened to them to her charge. Her worship is still very popular, especially among lazy and unlucky people, who never bestir themselves on the ground that … their lives are already settled by Fate.” Thoughts?
   
   
3. Plot Holes — Was Frettlby ever going to tell his father that he married Rosanna and had a child? Why didn’t Rosanna tell her mother she was married? Why did Rosanna allow Frettlby to believe she and their child were dead, and why didn’t he confirm these stories? Why did Moreland wait so long to start blackmailing Frettlby?

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

Tea, Tonic, and Toxin is a book club and podcast for anyone who loves mysteries and detective stories. We’re making our way through the 19th-century stories that helped the genre evolve. Next up: Fergus Hume’s 1886 novel, The Mystery of a Hansom Cab.

Australia’s first literary sensation, The Mystery of a Hansom Cab sold hundreds of thousands of copies worldwide upon publication. Set in the charming and deadly streets of Melbourne, this thriller highlights class and social issues as a crime is committed by an unknown assassin.

1. So Many Mysteries — Who is the dead man, why was he killed, who killed him, and is the man who killed him the same guy who hailed the hansom cab? And what is Brian Fitzgerald hiding? The complex plot has many twists and turns, along with several suspects and red herrings. And don’t forget the “exotic” setting. What are your thoughts about this Australian sensation?
   
   
2. “One of the Cleverest of the Melbourne Detectives” — Mr. Gorby is the first detective we meet. Is he really “one of the cleverest of the Melbourne detectives”? What do you think of his process of detection and the conclusions he reaches?
    
3. All the Other Detectives — Calton, Madge Frettlby, Fitzgerald, and Kilsip all play the role of detective in the story. What do you think of their detective work? How do they compare with Gorby?
4. Was Nero a Pleasant Man? — The narrator says some see Nero’s cruelties as the result of an “overflow of high spirits and regard Henry VIII in the light of a henpecked husband unfortunate in the possession of six wives. These people delight in expressing their sympathy with great scoundrels of the Ned Kelly order. They view them as the embodiment of heroism, unsympathetically and disgracefully treated by the narrow understanding of the law. If one half the world does kick a man when he is down, the other half invariably consoles the prostrate individual with halfpence.” Thoughts?
   
   
5. The Author’s Take on Women — Women love to shop for things they don’t want or need. Men can’t possibly understand women. Women prattle on and draw upon feminine instincts instead of reason. Women often suffer from brain fever caused by mental strain. Women’s highly strung nerves are the reason they age faster than men. How did these comments make you feel?
   
   
6. The Insane Among Us — The doctor says “there are more mad people at large than the world is aware of. [T]here are many people … whose lives are one long struggle against insanity, and yet who eat, drink, talk, and walk with the rest of their fellow men, apparently as gay and lighthearted as they are.” 
7. The Land of Opportunity — Mark Frettlby came to Australia “determined to become a rich man.” Brian Fitzgerald “had that extraordinary vivacious Irish temperament, which enables a man to put all trouble behind his back, and thoroughly enjoy the present.” What were their lives like back in England and Ireland, and how did they become wealthy in Australia?
   
   
8. The Class System — The novel points out the differences between fashionable Melbourne (including the Frettlbys), men of few means (Oliver Whyte and Roger Moreland), the working class (the hansom cab driver, the landlady, and Sal Rawlins), and “guttersnipes” (scruffy, badly behaved street urchins like Mother Guttersnipe). How did the narrator and characters feel about these class distinctions? How did you feel about them?

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

This masterpiece includes a stolen Indian gem with a bloody past, plot twists, red herrings, a small circle of suspects, and a couple amazing detectives. It’s a serious page-turner.

T. S. Eliot described The Moonstone as the “first … and greatest of modern English detective novels.” The story includes several features of contemporary detective fiction and helped establish many of the genre’s conventions.

1. Betteredge references the promise of youth in his narrative. Franklin had promised to be tall, but he didn’t keep that promise. Penelope had promised to be beautiful, and she did keep that promise. What did your parents consider your “promise” as a child, and did you keep it? What sort of expectations do we place on children? Is it fair? Can we help it?

2. The narrators often refer to themselves as superior to reason. Betteredge is superior to reason because he knows and loves the family he works for. Miss Clack is superior to reason because she believes her religion is on her side. Are these claims ridiculous, or do they have some merit?

3. Miss Clack is clearly in love with Godfrey, though she disguises it with admiration for his Christian virtues. When have you deceived yourself over your true motivations?

4. Let’s talk about the characters’ morality and motivations. Miss Clack is painted in a rather absurd light in the way she speaks about her genteel family members. She tries to get them to read tracts and books and participate in her bizarre charities. And she often seems misguided. And yet she has her points. 

5. Her family does seem lazy and absurd, at least to the average working class Londoner. Why aren’t they concerned with helping others?

6. The only one who participates in charitable efforts is Godfrey, and he’s seen as a bit of a shammy ladies man. Is he?

7. And then there’s the doctor’s ridiculous recommendations not to exert oneself and only think of frivolous things. I agree with Miss Clack on the absurdity of that prescription. Did he only recommend such things to women? What should one think about as one nears the close of life?

8. Was Wilkie Collins intending to merely portray Miss Clack as a hypocrite, or did he agree with her on some points? Does Collins seems to lack Dickens’ biting sarcasm over neglect of the poor?
9. When Godfrey proposes to Rachel, he asks her, “Do you know many wives … who respect and admire their husbands? And yet they and their husbands get on very well. How many brides go to the altar with hearts that would bear inspection by the men who take them there? And yet it doesn’t end unhappily — somehow or other the nuptial establishment jogs on. The truth is, that women try marriage as a Refuge, far more numerously than they are willing to admit; and, what is more, they find that marriage has justified their confidence in it.” Whoa. Thoughts?

10. Gabriel Betteredge has what he calls “detective-fever,” where the “horrid mystery hanging over us in this house gets into my head like liquor, and makes me wild.” Characters like Rosanna behave as though subconsciously intoxicated by outside forces. What are your thoughts about “detective-fever”?

11. It’s implied at the beginning that the original perpetrator, John Herncastle, probably killed several Indians and stole their sacred moonstone, contrary to a direct command, under threat of death. No one could definitely prove it until he died and the moonstone came out of hiding to be bequeathed to Rachel. Then comes so much indecision, and plotting, and hiding, and suspecting the Indians of trying to get it back. At what point did it become British property? It was stolen, and the theft came to light when the thief died. Why wasn’t it returned to the Indians? Is this a representative example of historical looting?

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

Tea, Tonic, and Toxin is a book club and podcast for anyone who loves mysteries and detective stories. We began with Edgar Allan Poe’s Dupin stories, Dickens’ Bleak House, and Wilkie Collins’ The Woman in White. Next up: Collins’ 1868 novel, The Moonstone.

This masterpiece includes a stolen Indian gem with a bloody past, plot twists, red herrings, a small circle of suspects, and a couple amazing detectives. It’s a serious page-turner. 

T. S. Eliot described The Moonstone as the “first … and greatest of modern English detective novels.” The story includes several features of contemporary detective fiction and helped establish many of the genre’s conventions.

1. The Moonstone was originally published in 32 weekly parts in Charles Dickens’ magazine All the Year Round. How do you think this schedule affected the way Wilkie Collins structured the book and its chapters?

2. Sarah loves when old books reference other old books. Gabriel Betteredge seems to use Robinson Crusoe as his bible. For example, he shares this quote: “Now I saw, though too late, the Folly of beginning a Work before we count the Cost, and before we judge rightly of our own Strength to go through with it.” He goes on to share many other quotes, including, “To-day we love what to-morrow we hate” and “Fear of Danger is ten thousand times more terrifying than Danger itself.” Why do you think the author chose Robinson Crusoe and these particular quotes? And do you have any books you revere and quote like this?

3. Betteredge writes, “I am asked to tell the story of the Diamond, [and instead] I have been telling the story of my own self. … I wonder whether the gentlemen who make … a living out of writing books, ever find their own selves getting in the way of their subjects …?” In what ways do we bring ourselves into the stories we tell?

4. Franklin Blake grew up in many homes and many nations. Rather than being wedded to any one philosophy or belief system, he continually asks questions and searches for the truth. Are you like him? Do you wish you were like him?
5. Betteredge says gentlefolk have it tough because they spend their time searching for something to do. He says, “thank your stars that your head has got something it must think of and your hands something that they must do.” Do you agree? He also writes that “People in high life have … the luxury of indulging their feelings. People in low life have no such privilege. Necessity, which spares our betters, has no pity on us. We learn to put our feelings back into ourselves and to jog on with our duties …” Do you agree?

6. Sherlock Holmes first appeared in print in 1887, nearly 20 years after The Moonstone. In what ways were Arthur Conan Doyle and other writers influenced by Wilkie Collins’ storytelling techniques and whip-smart detective Sergeant Cuff?

7. In the 1799 family paper, John Herncastle’s cousin writes, “It is my conviction or my delusion … that crime brings its own fatality with it.” The story hinges on this idea. This line was also in The Woman in White. Fosco and Percival teased Laura and Marian about their morality. Is this a true saying? Do you identify with this idea? What do you believe?

 8. Let’s talk about the women. The sanctimonious Miss Clack. The spirited Rachel Verinder, who’s “unlike other girls her age.” Rachel’s alter ego, the tragic Rosanna Spearman, an unattractive servant with a prison record and a physical disability who falls in love with a man outside her class. Rosanna writes, “Suppose you put Miss Rachel into a servant’s dress, and took her ornaments off”? Good question …

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

The Notting Hill Mystery (1862-1863) by Charles Warren Adams is often called the first detective novel. In it, the wife of Baron R** dies after drinking acid. It looks like an accident until insurance investigator Ralph Henderson discovers that Baron R** took out several life insurance policies on her. From there, the plot continues to thicken.

Readers see everything Henderson sees, including letters, diary entries, witness interviews, a marriage certificate, and a map of the crime scene. The New York Times Book Review called The Notting Hill Mystery “both utterly of its time and utterly ahead of it.”

Had you ever heard of the Notting Hill Mystery before now? What parts felt dated? How might the story have been told differently today?

The forensic techniques used to gather and analyze evidence in the story would have felt fresh and new to a 19th-century reading audience. Examples include diary entries, letters, and witness depositions. As the British Library notes, these innovative techniques “would not become common features of detective fiction until the 1920s.” Did you enjoy being able to review all of these materials? Did the forensic feel of the book interest you? Bore you?

In Section VI, Ralph Henderson writes, “Unless the case can be made to stand out clearly, step by step, in all its details, from the commencement to the end, its isolated portions become at once a mere chaos of coincidences.” The case he builds leads to a “conclusion so at variance with all the most firmly established laws of nature” that, it seems almost impossible to accept. Did some parts of the case seem impossible for you to accept? Why?

Some details are deemed immaterial to the story. For example, how and why was Rosalie kidnapped? Are we really meant to believe Baron R** really just met Rosalie by accident? To whom was Rosalie’s Notting Hill letter addressed (Section IV)? Would the housemaid Sarah really have fessed up to poisoning Madame R** to avoid being blamed for tasting marmalade? Did these details bother you, or did you willingly suspend your disbelief?

Mesmerism is key to the novel. When direct manipulation isn’t possible (due to questions of propriety), Baron R** experiments with secondhand manipulation with the help of a medium named Rosalie. We see the power Baron R** wields, along with broader implications related to the sympathy of twins. In what ways does Henderson’s (and others like Dr. Marsden and Mrs. Ellis, the mesmerized sick nurse) disdain for and disbelief in mesmerism ultimately enable Henderson to build a strong case about mesmerism and twin connections?

Secrecy plays a role in this story. Mrs. Anderton and those around her never mention the kidnapping of her twin sister. Mrs. Anderton also conceals the biweekly leaden taste in her mouth. No one tells Rosalie that she’s sleepwalking, and the housemaid Susan Turner doesn’t tell anyone what she and her beau witnessed even after Madame R** takes ill. In each case, this information is deemed too dangerous to share or too upsetting to hear. In what ways does the desire to “protect” others often lead to terrible outcomes?

Catherine Boleton (Rosalie) is sold twice: once to Signor Leopoldo at the Olympian Circus for 5£ and once to Baron R** for 50£. Slavery was made illegal in England in 1807. The young “spinster” (see the marriage certificate) then marries Baron R**. What gives?

START READING!

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...

Send us Fan Mail

In The Woman in White, Wilkie Collins tells the story of a woman locked away in an insane asylum. Well, sort of.

This 1860 thriller is considered to be among the first mystery novels (along with Bleak House, among others) and among the first and finest sensation novels. The story includes a ghostly woman, a secret society, switched identities, foreign agents, paranoia, bribery, blackmail, and conspiracies. Seriously, what’s not to love?

Count Fosco, “a man who could tame anything,” became the model of modern crime novel villains. Why are men like this so terrifying?

Hartright says Marian is ugly: “Never was the fair promise of a lovely figure more startlingly belied by the face and head that crowned it. Her complexion was almost swarthy, and the dark down on her upper lip was almost a moustache.” In what way do her looks factor into the story being told?

Marian is repelled by Fosco, who nonetheless “has attracted me, has forced me to like him.” Despite Marian’s looks, Fosco adores her. “At sixty, I worshipped her with the volcanic ardour of eighteen. All the gold of my rich nature was poured hopelessly at her feet.” Thoughts?

Marian tells Laura, “Our endurance must end, and our resistance must begin to-day.” Marian climbs out a window and crosses the roof of the verandah – in the rain – to eavesdrop on Sir Percival and Count Fosco, which is pretty awesome. Why does Marian increasingly focus on revenge against Fosco as the novel progresses? In what ways does this fixation feel real and human?

For all her admirable traits, Marian is a product of the 19th century. Many readers find her both inspiring and frustrating. How about you?

At the end, Count Fosco calls Marian the “first and last weakness” of his life. In what ways does this admission feel real and human?

Are Marian and Fosco the true protagonists of The Woman in White? How does the story end for Hartright, Marian, and Fosco?

Support the show

https://www.instagram.com/teatonicandtoxin/
https://www.facebook.com/teatonicandtoxin
https://www.teatonicandtoxin.com

Stay mysterious...