Wow this was hard to read. Incredibly dated as it was published the same year as Dracula. The whole hypnotism and Egyptian scarab thing was introduced and never really throughly was examined. Can't recommend this one.

During my second year at University I took a course on Victorian literature and was surprised by the variety of books published during that era. One of these books was The Beetle, which remained in some obscurity, despite immense popularity in its heyday, due to the growing fame of Stoker's Dracula, published in the same year. The Beetle has had a weird pull on me ever since 2014, hence why a re-read felt completely timely. Thanks to Poisoned Pen Press and NetGalley for providing me with a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. Gratitude also for the patience.

The Beetle is a typical example of Victorian literature which placed evil outside of Britain. A lot of Gothic books of the time did this, since it allowed them to imagine England as a pure and civilised place which is threatened by uncivilised danger from outside. Imperialism and racism are therefore an almost natural element of these books and that can be difficult to swallow for modern readers. In and of itself, however, that is exactly what makes it valuable reading! It is so important to realise how unconscious and conscious biases slip into our cultural productions, because it lays bare how many things seem natural. In The Heart of Darkness Joseph Conrad did so purposefully, showing the power of such thinking on a "normal" man who technically does know better. The Beetle has no such insight, it simply is a product of its culture and reflects what certain classes considered acceptable and obvious. It's a fascinating product of history because of that and does deserve to be read. I'm therefore glad it has recently been republished by different outlets, including Poisoned Pen Press.

The Beetle is told from four different perspectives. First comes Robert Hold, a man down on his luck. He enters a house he shouldn't, meets a horrifying creature that strips him and then... changes him. Second comes Sydney Atherton, a scientist in love with the wrong person. Through him we meet Marjorie Lindon and Paul Lessingham, the latter of whom is what I would call the real main character. He too encounters a horrifying creature. Third comes Marjorie, who is engaged to Paul. Concerned about her fiancé, she is the one who draws Sdney into figuring out what is going on and what has London, but especially Paul, so freaked out. Our last narrator is Augustus Champnell, who is asked for help by Paul. Is he the one who can figure out what is going on? The reason I have laid the plot out like this is because it demonstrates one of my favourite writing techniques, which is this neat folding in of narratives and narrators. In my opinion Mary Shelley does it best in Frankenstein, which is stunningly circular. But The Beetle is also fascinating in how it uses its different narrators to reveal new layers to the mystery and unearth new motivations.

The choice of structure discussed above really helps The Beetle be more fascinating than it perhaps, entirely, deserves. It's kind of like Pulp Fiction in that way, in the sense that both, if told in a normal, chronological, single narration would be a bit boring, but due to how it's structured becomes fascinating. In the end The Beetle is kind of pulp Gothic and utterly dramatic in a way that may seem a bit odd to readers used to 21st-century hyper-realism. It's a timepiece, clearly of its period, but it can also be real good fun. What sets this edition apart from the edition I read before is its extensive background material. Most classics come with an introduction, but this Poisoned Pen Press edition also has a reading list, discussion questions, and annotations. As I mentioned above, I do think The Beetle is the kind of text that needs some background information to explain its weirder aspects.

The Beetle, while no older than Dracula, looks its age. A lot of its tropes, ideas, and language are outdated. And yet, it's quite a fun read once you come to terms with that. It's beautifully over the top and the way its structured really elevates the material to a higher level.

I'm really into lesser-known Victorian horror, so this was a treat to read. It was extremely creepy and over-the-top in only the way that particular era of horror was. This would make an interesting counterpoint to a screening of the original "The Mummy' film with Karloff.

Classic, Gothic Horror....
Classic, Gothic horror and an entertaining piece which, within reason, stands any test of time. Altogether and all at once fantastical, melodramatic, eerie and intriguing.. A worthwhile read.

It's amazing this book was first published in 1897.

This piece of gothic literature was decent enough. I didn't love it and I didn't hate it either. The pieces of terror sprinkled throughout were pretty good and I love the setting. That felt very atmopheri.c.

I'd like to thank the publisher and netgalley for providing me a copy of this book.
Really liked this book!

The story is interesting and raises interesting questions about the society in which the author lived. Gender roles, sexuality, even social strata make an appearance. However, the writing style made the reading go uphill. It is full of unnecessary passages that lengthened the novel without reason.

Full review in my blog (April 15): https://tintanocturna.blogspot.com/2020/04/resena-review-beetle.html

When I saw that this was published in the same time frame as Dracula and was for a time even more popular than Bram Stoker's masterpiece I knew I had to read it. Now for me that comparison is a high standard to live up to, and The Beetle did not quite make it.
A homeless man climbs through a window of what he thinks is an empty dwelling, in a desperate attempt to find shelter from the cold rain. Instead he finds himself under the control of a strange being with supernatural powers. After this fascinating start it began to lose me towards the middle and just did not measure up to it's contemporary. Others may enjoy it more than I did.

Starving, penniless and refused a roof over his head even from the casual ward (the section of a workhouse where tramps and beggars could pay in manual labor for a night's shelter) Robert Holt finds himself collapsed against the low wall surrounding a house of not much better appearance than his own.

In the words of Mr. Holt himself: "If only death had come upon me quickly, painlessly, how true a friend I should have thought it!", so desperate and in such agony was he, when his weary eyes fell upon his salvation: an open window.
The house was, to say the least, in poor shape and the darkness within was so impenetrable that it seemed almost impossible, but it would offer shelter from the rain, and it would offer some warmth just for having walls and soon it was that Robert Holt found himself inside.
It would not be long after that, that he would have great cause to regret his actions.

Robert Holt is but the first narrator, and through him and the subsequent three narrators we're told the story of Mr. Paul Lessingham, though only in the final chapters are we told the story's beginning.
This trick, of telling a story almost backwards, doesn't always work for me - there have been plenty of books where this method has irritated me beyond reason - but it does work in The Beetle.
Part of that, I think, is the way which Richard Marsh has of telling his story: the language is 'aged' but not dated; most sentences, written or spoken by characters, are flowery and embroidered (as shown in the quote above) which I found entertaining to read.

I actually found all but one character (Sydney Atherton) likeable, but even "the one" made for interesting read and I think it adds to the story that not all the characters are agreeable; it gave it more depth.
And I love the mix of creeping dread and comical quips.

The Beetle by Richard Marsh
4 stars ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Publication Date: April 7, 2020

Thank you, #Netgalley for the opportunity to read this ARC! I loooooove classic horror and had never heard of this book until recently. I discovered that it was published the same year as Dracula (one of my favorites), and actually sold more copies at the time, but then faded into obscurity. What a shame!! Thankfully, #PoisonedPenPress is breathing new life into forgotten classics and this gem is being re-released!!

This book was told in 4 parts with 4 different narrators, each sharing their part of the same story. I enjoyed the characters, the building suspense and the mystery woven throughout. The ending is not perfectly explained, which I actually preferred in this case, as I feel it leaves it open to reader’s interpretation. I think the author explained a great deal, but left a little bit for the reader to puzzle together how best they see fit — which works perfectly in this case!!

I look forward to reading all of the resurrected tales that Poisoned Pen Press re-releases under “Haunted Library Horror Classics”!!!!

Please check out more of my reviews on Facebook @Book Nerd’s Book Reviews!!

#Netgalley
#PoisonedPenPress
#TheBeetle
#RichardMarsh
#HauntedLibraryHorrorClassics
#BookNerdsBookReviews

This one was not for me. It's a book in 4 different parts that was published around the same time as Dracula. Very Gothic and creepy but also can be quite slow and repetitive in some parts. This would be a good one for big fans of Victorian-era horror, although not quite as engaging as Dracula was.

I'm not sure how to rate this. It's a reissue of a long forgotten book which some might think would have been fine left in the dusty attic. Others, however, will enjoy this as an example of a gothic. It's told from four different perspectives, all of whom are connected. It's a slow read (lots of descriptions) but worth your time. Thanks to Netgalley for the ARC.

Part 1 – good
Part 2 – not good
Part 3 – not good
Part 4 – good
I read somewhere once that authors used to get paid by the word. This book is a great example of this policy. There is a lot of filler here. I would have liked this much more as a novella or even a short story. The middle section of this book dragged for me and there were a few times I thought about DNF’ing. Another review stated that this book came out at the same time as Dracula and for a while was more popular. I can see after having read both of them why Dracula has stood the test of time while this one faded into the background

This book was interesting. It is a book that was originally published in the same year as Dracula and has the Gothic, horror feel. Unfortunately, it had pacing issues and ups and downs in plot that through me off in the enjoyment of the story. It started out great, really drawing you into the story but then dropped the plot too far. It wasn't until the end where it sort of picked up again, but by then, it was hard to be excited about that.
Not a book for me.
Thank you for the early copy to review. #Netgalley #PoisonedPenPress

I just did not like this book at all found it very hard going to the point I gave it up about a third in.
It was compared to Dracula and outsold it in its first year but I can see why it became a forgotten book.
Sorry

Great for fans who like the resurgence of books published now that are homages to previous classics such as "Dracula" and the stories of "Sherlock Holmes." The language is dated and a bit stilted to follow at times, but it's mostly an interesting read with cool ideas from the time, and kind of reminded me of the same adventurous spirit of "The Mummy." Interestingly, when it was published, 'The Beetle' was considered more popular than Bram Stoker's 'Dracula' which came out the same year (1897). While Dracula remained a classic (and does so to this day), 'The Beetle' has kind of been forgotten and it has only been in recent years that there has been more scholarship and interest into other books of the era.

Not really what I was expecting. Unfortunately I found it not scary or atmospheric at all. We get lots of descriptions and I had a hard time with fluently reading it, without re-reading passages.
It is definitely a classic, but I prefer Dracula to this. If you enjoy classic "horror", give this one a go. Not my kind of book sadly.

It's a forgotten classic, eclipsed by the popularity of Dracula. Fans of Victorian horror should check it as it's rather interesting. Maybe not fully chilling, but there's a lot to like about it. Unfortunately, the long-winded descriptions may tire modern horror readers.

Trivia: Which horror novel was released the same year as Dracula and outsold it in its initial release? If you guessed The Beetle by Richard Marsh, you’d be correct.

The Beetle does share similar themes with Dracula: a supernatural presence arriving from a foreign land (Egypt, in this case); gothic horror settings; a young woman in danger; a group of men determined to destroy the creature; and various narrators. Where Dracula is vampiric, the Beetle is parasitic.

I read this one quickly and liked it a lot, but slower readers may find the start-and-stop momentum of the four narrators somewhat frustrating.

This book was sent to me by @poisonedpenpress and I’m really appreciative because I didn’t know this book even existed. This is a gift to fans of Dracula, even though the two books are different in literary style.

This edition, from the Horror Writers Association’s Haunted Library of Horror Classics, hits bookstores in April.

I loved the nineteenth-century language in this book. Well-written horror that lets your imagination enjoy every detail. The characters are well-developed, and the setting feels like stepping back in time. I’m so glad this older tale is being reprinted, as I would have otherwise missed this classic horror story.