Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
KEV67

Victober

Recommended Posts

I thought I would be able to read a Penny Dreadful online for nothing, but I am having difficulty finding anything, particularly Spring Heeled Jack, which I planned to read. Also, Philip Pullman has written a version of the story, which I want to avoid. I think I managed to read the first chapter of Spring Heeled Jack and I thought it was bobbins. I have been looking on Amazon. I considered Claude Duval, but that came out in 1902, therefore Edwardian. Then I considered Black Bess, but then I ordered The Frozen Crew of the Ice Bound Ship, Or The Terrors of the Arctic Regions.

Edited by KEV67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, lunababymoonchild said:

No, I genuinely thought that was it. Amazon have it listed as coming out in August next year. 
 

  Reveal hidden contents

Agreed. I can’t wait to see how it ends! August feels like a very long time…

 

19 hours ago, KEV67 said:

Philip Pullman has written a version of the story, which I want to avoid

I didn’t know that! I’m quite intrigued. I wonder what he changed!? 
 

19 hours ago, KEV67 said:

I considered Claude Duval, but that came out in 1902, therefore Edwardian.

Although we do tend to talk about the Victorian era as the literal reign of Queen Victoria, a lot of people would say the Edwardian era doesn’t start until about 1914. So you’d be safe with that still! 


 

19 hours ago, KEV67 said:

but then I ordered The Frozen Crew of the Ice Bound Ship, Or The Terrors of the Arctic Regions.

That sounds good though! It reminds me a bit of Frankenstein!

 

I read the first two chapters of Lady Audley’s Secret last night and I think I’m going to like it! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Hayley said:

Although we do tend to talk about the Victorian era as the literal reign of Queen Victoria, a lot of people would say the Edwardian era doesn’t start until about 1914. So you’d be safe with that still! 

King Edward VII was dead four years by 1914. How could the Edwardian period start then? Books started to change after WW1. You get all those Modernists and experimental writers. Edwardians seem different to Victorians in that they have motor cars, although in other ways Edwardians seem more like late Victorians than late Victorians seem like early Victorians, at least in literature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, KEV67 said:

King Edward VII was dead four years by 1914. How could the Edwardian period start then? Books started to change after WW1. You get all those Modernists and experimental writers. Edwardians seem different to Victorians in that they have motor cars, although in other ways Edwardians seem more like late Victorians than late Victorians seem like early Victorians, at least in literature.

 

It says here : The Edwardian Era: 1901-1910 – Lillicoco that :  After Queen Victoria’s death, her eldest son Prince Edward VII immediately ascended to the throne. His brief reign lasted only nine years (1901 to 1910) but the Edwardian era is seen by most historians to include both his tenure as Prince of Wales (starting from 1880 when he rose to popularity given Queen Victoria’s absence from the public) until the start of the First World War in 1914.

 

Somewhat fluid in the dates there.

 

21 hours ago, Hayley said:

I read the first two chapters of Lady Audley’s Secret last night and I think I’m going to like it! 

 

Oh you so are going to enjoy it, it's fabulous!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lunababymoonchild said:

 

It says here : The Edwardian Era: 1901-1910 – Lillicoco that :  After Queen Victoria’s death, her eldest son Prince Edward VII immediately ascended to the throne. His brief reign lasted only nine years (1901 to 1910) but the Edwardian era is seen by most historians to include both his tenure as Prince of Wales (starting from 1880 when he rose to popularity given Queen Victoria’s absence from the public) until the start of the First World War in 1914.

 

Somewhat fluid in the dates there.

 

 

Oh you so are going to enjoy it, it's fabulous!

Really, that's the first time I've heard that! I can understand extending the Edwardian era to 1914, but myself I would not extend it into Victoria's reign.

 

I read Lady Audley's Secret last year. At first I thought it was just entertainment, but I found it quite thought provoking by the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am beginning to find East Lynne a bit dull. I hope someone succumbs to temptation soon. Either that or they make some progress in uncovering the mystery.

With Dracula I am getting turned on by the thought of Lucy Westenra in her night gown. That aspect of the book is fairly Hammer House of Horror. One odd thing is that for all the film adaptions of Dracula I have seen I don't think any have stuck to the book. There was the film with Winona Ryder and Gary Oldman, but I am not sure they stuck to the story neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KEV67 said:

King Edward VII was dead four years by 1914. How could the Edwardian period start then? Books started to change after WW1. You get all those Modernists and experimental writers. Edwardians seem different to Victorians in that they have motor cars, although in other ways Edwardians seem more like late Victorians than late Victorians seem like early Victorians, at least in literature.

 

5 minutes ago, lunababymoonchild said:

Somewhat fluid in the dates there.

Yep, hugely fluid! It's because the era can be defined by the reigning monarch or recognisable movements in culture (which are really hard to pin down!). As you said, Kev, the big obvious change in literature is around the first world war, so that's why some historians use 1914.

 

1 hour ago, lunababymoonchild said:

Oh you so are going to enjoy it, it's fabulous!

I feel like I'm on the edge of a good bit at the moment, although I'm not very far in! 

 

17 hours ago, KEV67 said:

I am beginning to find East Lynne a bit dull. I hope someone succumbs to temptation soon. Either that or they make some progress in uncovering the mystery.

Fingers crossed! I do find it really frustrating when there's a mystery to be solved but the narrative takes you away from that mystery for a long time.

 

18 hours ago, KEV67 said:

There was the film with Winona Ryder and Gary Oldman, but I am not sure they stuck to the story neither.

I have seen that one but it was a long time ago and I can't really remember how accurate it might have been. I do remember that they made a big point of Lucy being a lot more sexualised than Mina, which I know some people say is why she gets the fate she does in the book. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder whether Dracula was as erotic a book as could be published in 1897. The following is slightly spoilery. Yesterday I was thinking that all Lucy's three suitors had transferred their bodily fluids to her, as had van Helsing. Then I wondered whether I was reading a bit too much into that, not having a degree in English literature or cod psychology. Then today I read Lucy's fiance say he regarded himself as having married her after giving blood to her. Dr Seward and van Helsing resolve not to tell him about the other transfusions. So in effect Lucy had been figuratively gang-banged by her male friends. I hope her blood group was AB+; otherwise she would probably have reacted badly to one of her blood transfusions, unless they were all 0-, which is unlikely. There was another steamy bit where Dr Seward and van Helsing put Lucy in a warm bath to warm her up. Dr Seward writes that they put her in the bath as she was, which I assume means in her nightdress, but then her nightdress would have gone transparent. Then he writes that they dried her off with a towel, so they must have taken her nightie off then. Of course Dr Seward and van Helsing are medical men, not dirty, old men like me. They would not have been affected by the sight of Lucy's beautiful, nineteen-year-old body as I would have been.

 

Edited by KEV67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have finished Lady Audley's Secret and oh my what a book! No spoilers so that's all I can say

 

 

On 12/10/2021 at 8:07 PM, KEV67 said:

One odd thing is that for all the film adaptions of Dracula I have seen I don't think any have stuck to the book. There was the film with Winona Ryder and Gary Oldman, but I am not sure they stuck to the story neither.

 

6 hours ago, Hayley said:

I have seen that one but it was a long time ago and I can't really remember how accurate it might have been. I do remember that they made a big point of Lucy being a lot more sexualised than Mina, which I know some people say is why she gets the fate she does in the book. 


I recall vaguely watching a documentary on the Dracula films and being told by same that none of the films followed the book and that that had happened so often it was now a tradition. I loved Gary Oldman in the role and went to see it in the cinema when it came out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, KEV67 said:

I wonder whether Dracula was as erotic a book as could be published in 1897. The following is slightly spoilery. Yesterday I was thinking that all Lucy's three suitors had transferred their bodily fluids to her, as had van Helsing. Then I wondered whether I was reading a bit too much into that, not having a degree in English literature or cod psychology. Then today I read Lucy's fiance say he regarded himself as having married her after giving blood to her. Dr Seward and van Helsing resolve not to tell him about the other transfusions. So in effect Lucy had been figuratively gang-banged by her male friends. I hope her blood group was AB+; otherwise she would probably have reacted badly to one of her blood transfusions, unless they were all 0-, which is unlikely. There was another steamy bit where Dr Seward and van Helsing put Lucy in a warm bath to warm her up. Dr Seward writes that they put her in the bath as she was, which I assume means in her nightdress, but then her nightdress would have gone transparent. Then he writes that they dried her off with a towel, so they must have taken her nightie off then. Of course Dr Seward and van Helsing are medical men, not dirty, old men like me. They would not have been affected by the sight of Lucy's beautiful, nineteen-year-old body as I would have been.

 


 

I have never found Dracula erotic, either the films or the book. Perhaps that's just me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I  think the Gary Oldman version did stick more closely to the book than a lot of the other film versions have done.

 

I guess the whole transfer of blood issue can be seen as an erotic metaphor, and the Oldman version was a bit more explicit too, and I agree about Lucy's character being more sexualised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am now intrigued by Mina Harker's knowledge of railway timetables. She tells Van Helsing that if he gets the 10:30 train from Exeter, he will get to Paddington by 2:35. I sometimes have to travel back via Exeter St Davids by rail to Reading, which takes about two hours. You would have to add about another half hour to get from Reading to Paddington. However, I expect the 1897 train stopped at more stations. After Taunton the modern service does not stop until Reading. Van Helsing always stays at the best hotels, so I expect he travels first class in one of those six seat compartments. Probably a good call if he could afford it. In second class, he would not be subject to other passengers' interminable phone conversations and noise from their electronic devices, but there were probably just as many noisy buggers on the trains, and probably more kids.

Edited by KEV67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KEV67 said:

 

I am now intrigued by Mina Harker's knowledge of railway timetables. She tells Van Helsing that if he gets the 10:30 train from Exeter, he will get to Paddington by 2:35. I sometimes have to travel back via Exeter St Davids by rail to Reading, which takes about two hours. You would have to add about another half hour to get from Reading to Paddington. However, I expect the 1897 train stopped at more stations. After Taunton the modern service does not stop until Reading. 

 

 

It's probably simpler than that; the steam trains of 1897 didn't go as fast as the IEP trains do today.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had as much Victorian as I can take for now so I'm going to break it up with something else.  I only have the Penny Dreadful part of it to go so Vinny The Vampire is going to have to wait a wee while until I get started.  It's so big that I couldn't have finished in October anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, KEV67 said:

I am now intrigued by Mina Harker's knowledge of railway timetables.

 

15 hours ago, Raven said:

It's probably simpler than that; the steam trains of 1897 didn't go as fast as the IEP trains do today.

I agree with Raven. The type of train they'd have been using was a lot slower. The single train may well have made more stops too, but the speed would mainly explain why it takes so long in Dracula (although, compared to their past forms of travel, that was very fast!). There's actually a really interesting thing I read about travel in Dracula, but I can't tell you what it is without spoiling the ending!

 

On 13/10/2021 at 9:02 PM, lunababymoonchild said:

I recall vaguely watching a documentary on the Dracula films and being told by same that none of the films followed the book and that that had happened so often it was now a tradition. I loved Gary Oldman in the role and went to see it in the cinema when it came out.

That's a pretty amazing fact - so no two Dracula's are the same! I've only seen the Gary Oldman one but it was a good film. 

 

20 hours ago, lunababymoonchild said:

I have had as much Victorian as I can take for now so I'm going to break it up with something else.  I only have the Penny Dreadful part of it to go so Vinny The Vampire is going to have to wait a wee while until I get started.  It's so big that I couldn't have finished in October anyway.

I still can't believe how quickly you read Lady Audley's Secret! I still haven't fully decided on my Penny Dreadful, or if I want to try to read the whole thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Hayley said:

I still can't believe how quickly you read Lady Audley's Secret! 


It can get a bit intense, though. It wasn't hard though, I was desperate to find out what happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things have started happening in East Lynne. I think it was partly down to the three volume structure Victorian novels used to follow. The first volume sets the scene. Things move on in the second volume. Everything is tied up in the third.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bram Stoker lays the erotic allusions on a bit thick. I wondered why Van Helsing did not bring a lantern with him rather than lighting candles. It was so the hot sperm could fall on the coffin. He could have used an oil lantern, or a wax candle, maybe a tallow candle, but he had to use a candle made of spermaceti. It was a superior candle, but all the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting comments coming out! And I haven't even got started yet! Been sidetracked by matters medical and practical. 

Lady Audley's Secret sounds great. And also I thought I had read Dracula before but I don't remember actually reading it the way I can recall other books;

so maybe I have just absorbed the basic plot through all the various films. In that case I MUST read it for this challenge!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/10/2021 at 6:04 PM, lunababymoonchild said:

It can get a bit intense, though. It wasn't hard though, I was desperate to find out what happened. 

Yeah I understand what you mean now!

 

22 hours ago, KEV67 said:

Things have started happening in East Lynne. I think it was partly down to the three volume structure Victorian novels used to follow. The first volume sets the scene. Things move on in the second volume. Everything is tied up in the third.

It was a three volume novel, so that makes sense! It was serialised before that too though. I wonder if anything was changed between the serialised version and the three volume print!?

 

12 hours ago, KEV67 said:

I think Bram Stoker lays the erotic allusions on a bit thick. I wondered why Van Helsing did not bring a lantern with him rather than lighting candles.

I'd forgotten about that bit. I suppose the Gothic was all about breaking rules and making people feel uncomfortable!

 

6 hours ago, vodkafan said:

And I haven't even got started yet! Been sidetracked by matters medical and practical.

I hope things are calmer now so you can get some reading time!

 

6 hours ago, vodkafan said:

Lady Audley's Secret sounds great. 

It is so good so far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×