stapsreads: 'The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them' (Default)
Unusually for a Howatch, I let this lie for several months after I'd read the first section. This is the first of her super-epic-historical-romans-à-clef, and it seems she hasn't quite got into the swing of things yet. The historical period in question is the reign of Henry II and his two sons; Howatch has translated them to turn-of-the-century Cornwall, and made the realm of England a mouldering folly of a country house. Helpfully, she has included quotations from actual history books so you know who she's really talking about - it would have been useful if she'd kept that up in later books which would have made me feel less stupid. As the beauty of this particular style is how she translates the people, places and incidents, I don't want to give too much away, but I was particularly struck by how she manages Philip, the Richard I character, which is very bold but yet makes perfect sense in context.

Having been thinking a lot recently about unreliable narrators, it struck me how efficiently Howatch leads one up the garden path. One is inclined to trust the narrator; one does tend to identify the narrator, and the way she closes the door at the end of each section and lets an antagonist loose on the person who's just spoken can be quite a shock. She is good at characterisation, but bad at distinguishing voices (if I had a quid for every character in this book who says 'of course I realise that...' I could buy a couple of pints at least, and if I included her entire oeuvre it would be a couple of rounds).

But that's not news. What has struck - and disappointed - me in this particular book is the lack of resolution. A couple of times I have caught myself thinking 'oh, I must finish Penmarric...' before realising - I have. Perhaps finishing with King John was not a good idea.

http://www.bookcrossing.com/journal/10056864
stapsreads: 'The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them' (Default)
I've had a soft spot for Bleak House ever since I read it in my second year of university and discovered that Dickens was not all dire school productions of Oliver! and interminable dramatic readings of A Christmas Carol. That said, reading it now I find it more problematic than I did then. Particularly as I've become more involved in activism (of various stripes, but especially feminist) the portrayal of Mrs Jellyby and her friends has become increasingly infuriating. It's very sad that Dickens, who did so much for the poor, dismisses the efforts of many remarkable women as caricatures. Also more obvious as I get older is my sense that Mr Jarndyce is, in some ways, a rather creepy old man, though thank goodness he does the decent thing. (I remember debating this one in seminars: did Dickens mean him to be creepy?)

Generally enjoyed the re-read, though.

http://www.bookcrossing.com/journal/10120410/
stapsreads: 'The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them' (Default)
I still find Howatch's tales of the love lives of millionaires rather less compelling than her tales of the love lives of bishops. This may say more about me than it does about them. Anyway, this was still pretty compulsive. Sequel to "The Rich are Different" which I read last year (and failed, until I looked it up on Wikipedia, to connect to the lives of Caesar, Cleopatra and Antony, because I am a doofus and fail at allusion).

Usual generous Howatch helping of creepy men, though one at least sees the error of his ways in the end. But why does she not write any more about Lewis Hall?

Profile

stapsreads: 'The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them' (Default)
stapsreads

June 2013

S M T W T F S
      1
2345 6 78
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 26th, 2025 10:11 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios