Submitted by Baffled by Drood (Jul 04, 2009)

I quite liked The Terror and was excited about Drood. I thought the first half was excellent, and it seems from your review that most of what you liked came from the early sections when Dickens and Collins are hunting for the eponymous bad guy. But weren't you troubled by the lack of resolution? Even with unreliable narrators, the reader's often allowed to deduce what the story is all about, but in this case, nothing is quite certain. Are we meant to believe the content of Dickens' confession near the end of the novel? And if so, is that ending in any way dramatically satisfying? Or even supported by the facts about Dickens that we've come to learn from the preceding 700 or so pages? I'd say no to those questions. I don't have problem with unlikable main characters, even in books written in the first person where the unlikable main character is the also the narrator, but I thought Simmons may have erred by making Wilkie too unappealing to have him take us through such a long story. I'd say this was a weak entry in the Dan Simmons canon, and more than a little disappointing given how compelling the premise was.

To the commenter, or should I say, My Dear Reader from the Future, As someone who has read all of Dan Simmon's books, I assure you that this is not indicative of Simmons' other extremely delicious novels (ie Hyperion, The Fall of Hyperion, Olympus, Illium, etc). Simmons does have a side, in which, he loves to dangle his big brain in front of the reader like an intelllectual porn star (ie. his last two historical fictions -The Terror, and Drood), but he also can be as readable as Stephen King. I am reluctant to recommend this novel to even the most ardent Simmons' fans, and , at times, wanted to burn this novel in effigy of all of Dan's work. That being said, I enjoy the mind of Simmons and see the place for Drood in his wonderful catalogue of work. In relation to this, Drood must be read, but as a first stroll through the vast plains of the works of Dan Simmons, I laugh at you out loud.

I just could not disagree more with your assessment of this novel. I got about half way through it and wondered why in the world I was still reading it... I thought it might get better so I continued on to the end only to wish I had never picked it up in the first place! I also disagree with your thoughts on Wilkie Collins. His arrogance made it even more painful to have to read through his point of view...not to mention the fact that you never knew if he was being truthful or not. I have not read a book that was this awful in a very long time. This was the first Dan Simmons book I've read and it will certainly be the last.

The fact that I am posting here atests to my confused sense of this book. I've read some two thirds of the novel. At one point, it seemed to be mainly psychological horror. Later, I decided that the real monster in the book was not Drood, but the narrator's jealousy of Charles Dickens. The book meanders quite a bit, then suddenly tightens up in a dramatic and horrifying way. It was at this juncture that I started looking for other people's opinions. I don't know what to make of the damn thing. The writing itself is quite good: rich, evocative and with enough 19th century flavor that you really do hear the famous author of The Woman in White in your head as you read. But the narrator becomes more repulsive the further you read and- perhaps I should finish the book. My real point here is that the main review struck a chord, but so did the following negative comment.