The temptation to finish the tale seems irresistible. In the beginning, everything seems to lead toward a predictable solution - but then the plot thickens. After some digressions that shrewdly delay the action and raise the level of suspense, and after some florid editorializing (e.g.,on professional philanthropy, on female intuition vs. male obtuseness, etc.) Dickens introduces some new characters, and the mystery deepens: Who is Datchery? Is he one of the previous players in disguise, or a Sherlock Holmes-like figure? Who is Tartar? What is Bazzard up to? What does the opium dealer know or suspect? Who is the "fellow traveller"? Did Jasper murder (or try and fail to murder) Drood - or did he commit the deed only in an opium dream?
My own hunch is that Drood is not dead. There is no body - at least not yet; and it would seem so much more like Dickens to have a man given up for dead re-emerge triumphantly after many trials and tribulations, and after much dissimulating on the part of characters "in the know" (cf."Our Mutual Friend"). But since we don't know what Dickens planned, we are free to spin our own yarn and weave our own tapestry. Isn't that a lot more fun?

It is a tribute to Charles Dickens' reputation that to this day this unfinished novel, a mystery no less, still garners such speculation as to who allegedly murdered Edwin Drood. There are organizations created for the sole purpose of analyzing the novel and to theorizing whom the culprit may have been, if indeed there really was a culprit. After all, only Drood's watch and his shirt pin are produced, not his body.

As in all of Dickens' novels, the characterizations are the thing. You have the innocent young woman with the somewhat eccentric guardian and his Bob Cratchitlike assistant. There is the dark, possibly unfairly accused, but hot headed antagonist of Drood. Then there is Drood's brooding choirmaster uncle, John Jasper, who frequents opium dens, and who may or may not have ulterior motives in his seeking revenge. Durdles, the stone mason, and a somewhat weird character, provides some chilling comic relief in cemetery scenes with his stone throwing assistant. There are also the typical Dickensian characters, which includes a snooty older woman, a class conscious, spinsterish school mistress, and in a hilarious restaurant scene, an unappreciated, hard working "flying waiter" and a lazy, wise acre "stationary waiter."

It is a shame that Dickens died before he could complete "Edwin Drood." What is here are the beginnings of an exploration of man's dual nature, a journey into "the heart of darkness" so to speak.

This novel has stayed on my mind ever since I read it. It's so frustrating that Dickens died before completing this novel. On the other hand, the fact that this classic British mystery was never finished has created a great opportunity for literary critics and mystery lovers alike to try to solve the mystery for themselves. We'll never know who Dickens really had in mind as the murderer, or if indeed there was a murder after all. That's a huge loss. But it's a great ride for readers to try to make up their own minds.

I still haven't made up my mind about who did it. Sure, there is a very obvious suspect in Jasper, but that doesn't mean Dickens thought he did it. Some people have speculated that Dickens wrote this novel as a tribute to his friend Wilkie Collins' "The Moonstone," so perhaps the opium addiction would have played a huge part in the mystery. It's even possible that Dickens saw a bit of himself in Jasper's tortured love life because of the way it paralleled his own life. After all, Cloisterham is supposed to be based on Dickens' Rochester. Then again, just because Dickens sympathized with someone, that doesn't mean that character was innocent, either, does it? Now you see why this story continues to torment mystery lovers.

Like any other Dickens novel, this one has lots of memorable characters, from the suspicious and tormented Jasper to the Reverend Crisparkle to Princess Puffer. And of course, the enigmatic Datchery. The gravedigger and his obnoxious but perceptive boy assistant provide both Dickensian eccentric characters and possible clues.

The power of this book even today is clear in the way it inspired an award-winning Broadway musical where the audience got to solve the mystery on their own. (By the way, 1935 movie with Claude Rains was good, but some of the main characters were cut out, and others seemed little like the characters in the book, even if they were fine actors.)

Anne M. Marble
All About Romance and Holly Lisle's Forward Motion Writing Community