Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

The Body Snatcher by Robert Louis Stevenson, was selected as our Monthly Short Story for February 2020. The discussion thread is located in the Monthly Short Story Folder:

Beware Short Story Discussions will have Spoilers.

I got it from the library and plan to read it in the next few days. Very excited!

Just checked Project Gutenberg and Librivox and they both have this story, so I'll probably read or listen tomorrow (it's 41 minutes long).

I'm also hoping to get to this in the next few days. Depends on life--which is anything but predictable right now.

This link takes you to the title page of a free edition of the story on the internet archive:

https://archive.org/details/novelstal...

I read this a few days ago. I've enjoyed everything else I've read by Robert Louis Stevenson, but I didn't connect this as much as I would have hoped. I'll pop back in to make some more specific comments after others have gotten into it.

I've just read this - I thought the opening was great, but then it ended up less creepy than I was hoping. In fact, I liked the moral dilemma aspect more than the 'chiller' aspect. I'll also pop back once others have read and commented.

I think the ending was the weakest part of the story, it was quite suspenseful until then.

I felt the story was mainly about a man being haunted by his guilty conscience. It was ironic that the medical community--which should be devoted to saving lives--was willing to overlook the taking of lives to suit their needs. Once the light went out in the cemetery, it signaled a change in mood to a supernatural story.

The story is based on the real Edinburgh crime case involving William Burke and William Hare so it was also interesting from a historical outlook. I won't write any more about the case since some people have not read the story yet.

Reading this one shortly after The Cask of Amontillado makes me appreciate Poe’s style even more. It seems to me, Poe managed the same amount creepiness but with 1/3 of the words.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Reading this one shortly after The Cask of Amontillado makes me appreciate Poe’s style even more. It seems to me, Poe managed the same amount creepiness but with 1/3 of the words."

These were written to take up time, there wasn't a lot else to do.

@Jazzy Lemon, that is totally true!

I just finished and I liked it. I will probably give it 3 stars. The end was ok for me. It wasn't as impressive as I guess it was the author's intention, but it was ok.
I didn't find it too creepy, and I agree that probably the moral dilemma is more interesting that anything else.

Connie wrote: "It was ironic that the medical community--which should be devoted to saving lives--was willing to overlook the taking..."

This struck me, too. Healers relying on killers to learn to be healers. He not only put the two extremes side by side, but intertwined them. And I felt Macfarlane was deliberately corrupting Fettes. I think Stevenson may have been laying out the process of moral corruption in this story step by step.

I actually found the end compelling. That last page had me hypnotized.

I read The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson in High School as a class assignment. I did not like it. We also read Frankenstein and Dracula, plus Stephen King was a hot new author and I had just read his first book Carrie. I really learned to despise this genre in High School. Over time I have slightly mellowed to it, but still do not watch scary movies.

That being said, I will rate this 3 stars. It is interesting to me that if you look at The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and this story together, Stevenson seems to have a disdain for the medical profession. He clearly brings out the dual nature of healer vs. ghoul just as John Dishwasher mentions. Perhaps he was just cashing in on the sensation the Burke and Hare that Connie mentioned. I wonder if there was some other personal reason that Stevenson felt that way toward the medical profession?

Answered my own question with Google....
Born to respectable middle class parents, Stevenson was an only child. He spent a difficult childhood suffering chronic health problems due to which he was mostly confined to bed. Entering into youth, Stevenson was highly influenced by Allison Cunningham, his nurse who would often read the Pilgrim’s Progress and The Old Testament to him.

Perhaps in his childhood he saw the attending physicians who came to him as ghouls or tormentors.

That is very interesting information, Lynn.
I plan to read Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde next month with the group.

Interesting history, Lynn--thanks! I can see how a child could come to feel that way. I also thought the intertwining of killers and healers was interesting, as John Dishwasher and Connie said.

I can see that it is about guilt, but it seemed to me more kind of investigative journalism in the form of a story. The narrator tells us "perhaps there is now no other man alive who could narrate to you the following foul and unnatural events."

What struck me the strongest was this revelation of what was really going on--historically, as Connie mentions above. In a story, we get the motivations behind it and the lasting impacts, which tell us more than straight news can.

I don’t have much to say on this Stevenson story not already said by previous posters. I’ve always liked Stevenson’s writing style (widely admired by other writers of his era, e.g., Oscar Wilde and Rudyard Kipling) and that style is in evidence in “The Body Snatcher”. The story highlights Stevenson’s abiding interest in questions of human morality; without hitting the reader over the head, the author shows how his characters, neither wholly good nor evil, attempt over time to rationalize their unsavory actions. I also enjoy the way in which the author cleverly ratchets up the tension during the tale’s final scenes. I know quite a few people have aesthetic problems with the way in which Stevenson suddenly injects a supernatural element into the story’s final moments, but that tactic worked for me — it’s the very unexpected nature of this intrusion that I personally find so delightful and which makes it so effective.

✭✭✭✭✭

I like his writing style, and part of my reaction may be that I don't always connect with horror or short stories so there are two strikes against it, but I didn't love this story. I will probably rate it two stars.

Connie wrote: "I felt the story was mainly about a man being haunted by his guilty conscience. It was ironic that the medical community--which should be devoted to saving lives--was willing to overlook the taking..."

Lynn wrote: "I read The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson in High School as a class assignment. I did not like it. We also read [book:Frankenstein|35..."

Interesting thoughts, ladies. A frustrating ending for sure.

Below is the link to my review:

goodreads.com/review/show/3162985072

I enjoyed this one via Serial Reader app (my first Robert Louis Stevenson) and gave it 4/5 ⭐️ I read it in January and thought it was macabre and atmospheric.

I am finding that some classics you really have to pay attention to or you can just completely miss the story. I listened to this via LibriVox and based on my first comment, I listened to it three times, the third without distraction. This read definitely had a "Poe" feeling to it with the twist at the end and also left you with questions unanswered. So who did they dissect if it wasn't Gray? Where did the heavy set woman in the grave go? Will they be caught? Stories like this (and often Poe) leave you wondering what happens next.

I rather liked this one with the Poe-like element having some appeal for me. It would have been a less interesting story for me without the eerie ending. Stevenson, obviously, writes well and the story had nice flow.

I enjoyed it until the end. Finding Gray in the bag was a weak/quick ending in my opinion.

Ann wrote: "So who did they dissect if it wasn't Gray? Where did the heavy set woman in the grave go?..."

From the description of the detached head and body parts in the sack, I understood this to be the dissected body of Gray.

To me, their reaction was less fear of the supernatural than the realisation that their activity had been discovered. Whoever notified them of the body that could be obtained was sending them a message.

They had collected the body in the dark. The night was so dark that they had lit a lamp to provide some light on their journey to the graveyard. They lost that light during the process of recovery so I don't think they could really be certain that the body was a woman. They just assumed it was.

Liesl, I read this a little differently than you did.

I think there would have had to have been something supernatural, since the body of Gray was not just chopped up but dissected, and the head was given to Richardson to extract the brain. Weeks had passed between the dissection of Gray and the final incident. Finally, what they put into the bag was a body, not body parts. They lifted the body out of the grave "the body inserted in the dripping sack and carried between them to the gig."

The final line of the story "the body of the dead and long-dissected Gray" which is seen when they pull the sacking away. I believe this implies an intact body.

I also think there is a supernatural event in the story. Besides everything Sara pointed out, there is something in the scene where Fettes and McFarlane meet in the tavern. It reads:

"for even as he was passing Fettes clutched him by the arm and these words came in a whisper, and yet painfully distinct, 'Have you seen it again?'"

This suggests to me that they both think Gray was a ghost or something of the kind that came back that night to haunt them, and that could have done it again or do it in the future. Or at least is what it suggests to me.

I love these different viewpoints! Really allows me to get more out of the story. Great catch, remembering that earlier scene, Sandra--I had forgotten, but now remember when I read it wondering what it referred to. Yes!

Well, I admit when I finished the story I remembered Fettes saying something, but I couldn't remember what was, so I came back to the begining. :)

Sara wrote: "Liesl, I read this a little differently than you did.

I think there would have had to have been something supernatural, since the body of Gray was not just chopped up but dissected, and the head w..."

Sara you are right. For some reason, I thought they had lifted the body out of the grave already in the sack. I just went back and read that part again and saw the line you quoted.

Ignore my previous comment.

I'm glad you made your comment, Liesl, because it made me stop and think about the story in more depth. My immediate reaction was that you could have been right, but when I went to the story I realized the supernatural was the only explanation. You sparked the conversation, which is what these threads are all about!

Sandra, thanks for the reminder about Fettes comment. I had forgotten.

Sara wrote: "I'm glad you made your comment, Liesl, because it made me stop and think about the story in more depth. My immediate reaction was that you could have been right, but when I went to the story I real..."

That is very kind of you, Sara.

Sandra wrote: "I also think there is a supernatural event in the story. Besides everything Sara pointed out, there is something in the scene where Fettes and McFarlane meet in the tavern. It reads:

"for even as ..."

I've been thinking about Fette's comment. I think he sees the face of Gray often. It is probably why he drinks so much. I'm not sure what they saw that night but I wonder if what he continues to see is a vision in his conscience rather than actual visitations.

That would certainly explain his question and would also explain his choice, after being such a promising student, to become a drunkard. That his conscience has been his undoing is clear. Like the man in the Tell-Tale Heart, he cannot escape the guilt for what he has done. Also, we only have his version of the story, so perhaps he saw Gray...but what did McFarlane see? And, fleeing him, a drunkard from the past who knows you are a murderer, would explain McFarlane's reaction to him. That would certainly be a non-supernatural explanation that could be supported by the story.

I'm liking this story more as we discuss it...I might have to revise my rating up one star.

Kathleen makes a great point in her review of this story. We have benefited as a society from the practices of the grave robbers and perhaps even from the murdering of people for medical dissection. There is certainly a moral line that is crossed by MacFarlane, but there is also the girl, Jane, who is brought in earlier and presumably is killed by someone else who supplies bodies. The official stance is not to see what is going on, as if that absolves the university from any guilt. Well, we see that all the time in our own society, don't we? If we don't discuss it, it didn't happen.

I was thinking the grave robbing was a lesser sin until the end when I had to envision burying my mother and then having someone come and take her body for such a foul fate. That the farmer's wife would not be lying with her loved ones shook me somehow. This was the desecration of someone who was loved and mourned. Does the end justify the means?

I haven't thought about that possibility. It certainly can be guilt haunting Fette and not an actual ghost. And it is also true that we do not know what McFarlane thinks of this.

I agree discussion is making this story better.

I’m in the same camp as Sara and Sandra in their view of the ending. Attempts to impose a non-supernatural explanation on the story’s finale, while often ingenious, strike me as highly unlikely, akin to trying to force a square peg into a round hole. It’s perhaps not surprising that much of the discussion in this thread has focused on the story’s final moments. Horror scholar S. T. Joshi, in his book Icons of Horror and the Supernatural , makes the point that Stevenson’s decision to introduce the supernatural into his story at the last moment has always been a bit controversial with readers and critics.

Lynn said (in part):

I wonder if there was some other personal reason that Stevenson felt that way toward the medical profession?....Perhaps in his childhood he saw the attending physicians who came to him as ghouls or tormentors.

I’m not sufficiently knowledgeable about Stevenson to know much of anything for sure, so certainly there may be at least some truth in your hypothesis. Both it’s also true that as an adult he expressed sincere admiration for and thanks to at least some members of the medical profession who treated his incurable and chronic lung ailments. He, for example, dedicated one of his books to one of his doctors, Dr. Chapnell.

How the same experience and vision impacts the two men certainly creates an interesting contrast.

Sara, I think you are right and the whole thing is pretty horrific. (Frankly, I'm sitting here relieved that my family members were cremated.)

And what an excellent point: The official stance is not to see what is going on, as if that absolves the university from any guilt. A way-too-familiar refrain in our own times.

I’m thinking I may have judged this to harshly. Thanks to this discussion, I feel I need to reread this. Perhaps I can squeeze it in this weekend. A great discussion.

Stevenson's personal relationship with doctors is very interesting. I can imagine that having a life-long illness, he would have seen some of both kinds. Another element to consider in evaluating this work.

Bob--I did the same and found it was much more meaningful after the discussion and the second read.

Kathleen wrote: "How the same experience and vision impacts the two men certainly creates an interesting contrast..."

Yes, I think the juxtaposition of the two men is very interesting. Both begin in the same profession (or at least training for that profession) but one turns his back on it because he cannot live with the guilt of immoral activities that he has participated in. The other, who is always shown to be comfortable with questionable nature of the corpses that arrive, continues on in a successful career.

As the story is unfolding, there is also a wonderful illustration of the descent that takes place when one participates in an illegal activity. Initially, after Fettes recognises the corpse of the young woman and continues to manage the process of obtaining new corpses, he is only a minor accessory in an illegal activity. After MacFarlane turns up with Gray's corpse, Fettes becomes an accessory to covering up a murder.

MacFarlane, in contrast, not only accepts the process of obtaining the corpses but actually commits murder and uses the process to cover up the act.

Perfect assessment, Liesl.

Not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but there is a film version! It stars Boris Karloff and Henry Daniell (with a small role for Bela Lugosi). Really atmospheric and a lot of fun! Definitely liked this better than the short story (although, I will admit that I enjoyed the short story, too!)

Emmy said (in part):

Not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but there is a film version!

Yes! Directed by Robert Wise and produced by Val Lewton. Lewton produced a string of very good low-budget films for RKO back in the 40s, many of which have gone on to enjoy cult status, including Cat People (1942), I Walked with a Zombie (1943), and the aforementioned The Body Snatcher (1945).

Sounds delicious, Emmy. I love the campy Boris Karloff films and having Bela Lugosi in it is icing on the cake.

Canavan wrote: "Lynn said (in part):


I wonder if there was some other personal reason that Stevenson felt that way toward the medical profession?....Perhaps in his childhood he saw the attending physicians wh..."


Oh very nice. I did not know that he had dedicated a book to a physician he felt fondly toward.

Lynn wrote: "Canavan wrote: "Lynn said (in part):


I wonder if there was some other personal reason that Stevenson felt that way toward the medical profession?....Perhaps in his childhood he saw the attending..."

All interesting comments above! I was completely unprepared for the turn into the supernatural and had to read the story again. Even on the second read the story was rather good. I actually prefer the psychological angle to overt horror.

I was a medical student once and did have to deal with those scares on the anatomy table. As stated before, we do owe so much to the early doctors and explorers of human nature, but the true history behind it is rather gruesome at times.

Annette wrote: "I enjoyed it until the end. Finding Gray in the bag was a weak/quick ending in my opinion."

I agree. The story was interesting, but although I work in research, and even with human tissue samples a few years ago, this is so far from today's reality, that (together with the disappointing ending) it probably won't leave a lasting impression on me.