Scan barcode
jficele's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
theatretenor's review against another edition
4.0
I was gonna go three stars up until the end. The end was a little more exciting. And then the afterword by whoever Gregory Benford is really sealed it for me. He basically explained that Wells knew he wrote piece of shit character in Griffin (the invisible man) and talked about how and why. And how Griffin was a megalomaniac and really didn’t get any better throughout the whole book and maybe reasons as to why. And that helped me. Cause GOD Griffin is a world-class asshole and an A+ douche canoe. And yes this book is dry as hell a lot of the time, but that’s to be expected. But overall I find I DID enjoy it, surprisingly. The Time Machine made me want to rip my eyeballs out and I had to DNF, but I’d like to try and soldier through it at some point. Onto War of the Worlds and then a reread of The Island of Dr. Moreau.
ihateprozac's review against another edition
4.0
Took a while to get into the heart of the plot and storyline, but it was interesting enough once it happened. I loved the scientific process behind how the Invisible Man came to be, and the drawbacks to being invisible.
theogspiderman's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
halleymalley1's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
mayamcc's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
3.0
“alone- it is wonderful how little a man can do alone!”
great concept, i liked how him becoming invisible was explained using principles of physics to make it seem plausible. the main character has a power trip when he realises his existence is removed from society but that’s also his downfall cause people cannot exist entirely independently… he gets so carried away with scientific innovation that he forgets the practical side of things. i really didn’t like him and his moral superiority over everyone yet i was supposed to emphasise with him…turning to murder was not the answer also it was self inflicted stop acting like the victim!
great concept, i liked how him becoming invisible was explained using principles of physics to make it seem plausible. the main character has a power trip when he realises his existence is removed from society but that’s also his downfall cause people cannot exist entirely independently… he gets so carried away with scientific innovation that he forgets the practical side of things. i really didn’t like him and his moral superiority over everyone yet i was supposed to emphasise with him…
julicke95's review against another edition
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
What struck me most about this novel was the myriad of ways in which people would disbelieve their own eyes when encountering the invisible man. To the point of doubting their own sanity before they would believe what they saw. It's quite marvellous what the human brain will do to preserve its current understanding of the world.
I enjoyed the fact that the story was told from the perspective of the bystanders, as this gave an air of mystery and unpredictabiluty to the invisible man. The disadvantage of this is that this made the invisible man's descent into moral depravity due to the tempting power of invisibility rather sudden. Because of the way the story was told, he seems to go from a neurotic scientist who wanted to rub his breakthrough invention in the face of academia to a hotheaded homocidal villain out to terrorize the world in a heartbeat. Had we gotten more of his thought processes earlier, this change and the corresponding message of the dangers of people abusing science for their own gain would have been more impactful.
There also just wasn't the same level of tension as in War of the Worlds. This was just one man against the world and it was clear from day one that he would be caught eventually, even if he was invisible.
I enjoyed the fact that the story was told from the perspective of the bystanders, as this gave an air of mystery and unpredictabiluty to the invisible man. The disadvantage of this is that this made the invisible man's descent into moral depravity due to the tempting power of invisibility rather sudden. Because of the way the story was told, he seems to go from a neurotic scientist who wanted to rub his breakthrough invention in the face of academia to a hotheaded homocidal villain out to terrorize the world in a heartbeat. Had we gotten more of his thought processes earlier, this change and the corresponding message of the dangers of people abusing science for their own gain would have been more impactful.
There also just wasn't the same level of tension as in War of the Worlds. This was just one man against the world and it was clear from day one that he would be caught eventually, even if he was invisible.
dakota0509's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
forgottensecret's review against another edition
3.0
'The stranger came early in February, one wintry day, through a biting wind and a driving snow, the last snowfall of the year, over the down, walking from Bramblehurst railway station, and carrying a little black portmanteau in his thickly gloved hand.'
H.G. Wells and Jules Verne are often called 'the father(s) of science fiction'. For his work, Wells was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature four times. He published 'The Invisible Man' in 1897, departing from his use of the first-person narrator as he had done in the earlier 'The Time Machine'.
I quite enjoyed following The Invisible Man. He begins in Iping, a village in East Sussex, and we wonder why he has 1001 bottles and how a person becomes invisible. Soon, we realise that he shares none of the congeniality of Sue Storm from 'The Fantastic Four', and acts more like a rougher Joe Pesci in 'Goodfellas' - quick to anger, and spurning human connection. He is eventually betrayed by a tramp, Thomas Marvel, who steals the three notebooks which contain the experiments and science behind his invisibility.
We learn all about The Invisible Man, née Griffin, after he luckily takes refuge in a home that belongs to an old friend from university, Dr Kemp. It is in the resulting conversations with Dr Kemp that Griffin explains how he used physics to erase the lumber of visibility. He is again betrayed, this time by the doctor who he attempts to enlist in his bid to terrorise the country. By this point, after the experiments on cats and the experiments on himself, Griffin is both lawless and bitter. After promising 'A Reign of Terror' and killing a man and shooting another, he dies at the hand of a mob.
While reading this, I couldn't help but think this would have been a better novel if Dostoyevsky wrote it. Except during the big reveal with Kemp, we don't really get to enter the psychology of The Invisible Man, and a novel from his perspective, much as Dostoyevsky did for Raskolkinov in 'Crime and Punishment' would have been a deeper read. This book has also forced me to seriously reflect before choosing 'invisibility' as my answer in a game of 'Would you rather...?'
H.G. Wells and Jules Verne are often called 'the father(s) of science fiction'. For his work, Wells was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature four times. He published 'The Invisible Man' in 1897, departing from his use of the first-person narrator as he had done in the earlier 'The Time Machine'.
I quite enjoyed following The Invisible Man. He begins in Iping, a village in East Sussex, and we wonder why he has 1001 bottles and how a person becomes invisible. Soon, we realise that he shares none of the congeniality of Sue Storm from 'The Fantastic Four', and acts more like a rougher Joe Pesci in 'Goodfellas' - quick to anger, and spurning human connection. He is eventually betrayed by a tramp, Thomas Marvel, who steals the three notebooks which contain the experiments and science behind his invisibility.
We learn all about The Invisible Man, née Griffin, after he luckily takes refuge in a home that belongs to an old friend from university, Dr Kemp. It is in the resulting conversations with Dr Kemp that Griffin explains how he used physics to erase the lumber of visibility. He is again betrayed, this time by the doctor who he attempts to enlist in his bid to terrorise the country. By this point, after the experiments on cats and the experiments on himself, Griffin is both lawless and bitter. After promising 'A Reign of Terror' and killing a man and shooting another, he dies at the hand of a mob.
While reading this, I couldn't help but think this would have been a better novel if Dostoyevsky wrote it. Except during the big reveal with Kemp, we don't really get to enter the psychology of The Invisible Man, and a novel from his perspective, much as Dostoyevsky did for Raskolkinov in 'Crime and Punishment' would have been a deeper read. This book has also forced me to seriously reflect before choosing 'invisibility' as my answer in a game of 'Would you rather...?'