Well...this was The Affair of the Porcelain Dog but lesbian, with steampunk, in France and with an inexplicable Inspector Javert as side character. WhWell...this was The Affair of the Porcelain Dog but lesbian, with steampunk, in France and with an inexplicable Inspector Javert as side character. Which sounds like it would be very different but the bare bones are the same: lone wolf against the whole world and all odds. This time our lone wolf even gets a trophy girlfriend at the end, without any real development of their relationship during the book. They meet. She's hot. She gets abducted. MC saves her. Happy end for everybody.
I know there are people who are into that sort of thing, and I don't deny that it made for some nice train-reading it's like airplane reading but slightly cheaper but it was only interesting enough that I preferred finishing it to going through my e-reader library to search for something else....more
“There’s something in the air…” Madame d’Albret nodded. “It’s the calm before the storm. And when the storm comes, nothing will ever be the same again.”
I had put off reading this book for a while because I had only recently read the author’s Blood Sisters about three aristocratic sisters, caught up in the French revolution. The blurb of Before the Storm made it sound like it would be a very similar story. It’s true that I probably would have guessed that both books were written by the same author, even if I hadn’t known it. Adélaïde from Blood Sisters has much in common with Clementine from Before the Storm. They both grew up in a family with very traditional views about what women should and shouldn’t do and are unhappy with that. Both books feature a character that is a lady-in-waiting to the Queen and those character witnesses both the March on Versailles and the storming of the Tuileries. The descriptions of these events are very similar in both books. But then they do describe the same event. And while Adélaïde and Clementine have very similar characters, their journeys are very different. (And the other characters have much fewer similarities with those in Blood Sisters).
Before the Storm is a retelling of Edith Wharton’s The Buccaneers, a book I have not read, yet (but definitely want to do now). So I can’t tell how closely it resembles it and – more importantly – if some of the things that bothered me about this book are perhaps the ‘fault’ of the original. For example, in one chapter a character thinks about marriage and says that she might never want to marry. Then there’s a time-jump and in the next chapter, she has been unhappily married for a while. In hindsight, her motivations become a bit clearer but it still is clumsily done.
And being told things only after they happened is one of the general problems of this book. In one dramatic scene, one of the characters tells her husband that she intends to leave him. The next time they meet, she says she wants to make another attempt at saving their marriage. Then we are told that she has thought about how she would become a social outcast as a woman who left her husband and that she couldn’t bear that thought. A perfectly valid reason, especially in the 18th century, but we don’t see her making that decision, just the result of it. Some parts of the book could have benefitted from having more depth. Additionally, the book started off as one about a number of different women but over the course of it, most of them got sidelined. At the end, it was mostly about one of them and we got the occasional mention of what the rest had been up to in the meantime.
So do I wish this book had been longer and told us more about the things happening, instead of summing them up afterwards? Yes. Did I enjoy it anyway? Definitely. It was a fun read that kept me turning the pages (and grumble at anybody who tried to talk to me while reading because I need to know what happens next)....more
Life is too short and too fleeting to be spent waiting for something to happen or to lose sight, even for a moment, of the people you love.
This book does a great job of portraying (more or less) ordinary people caught up in a major historical event and an at-best mediocre job at telling the story of everything else that happened to these people.
It follows three aristocratic sisters through major events of the French Revolution: the storming of the Bastille, the women’s March on Versaille, the imprisonment of King and Queen, their execution, Danton’s trial and finally Robespierre’s execution. At least one of them is always caught in the thick of it (Lucrèce is a lady-in-waiting to the queen and with her the day she is arrested, Adélaïde is married to a fierce Republican who is friends with Danton…) The description of these events is very vivid and drew me right into it (despite not caring about that period that much) and had me biting my nails in anticipation of what would happen next. Even when I knew what would happen, the way the sisters were hoping and praying for a happy ending made me want to join in and I almost hoped that perhaps I had misremembered my French history.
But not everything that happens is directly connected to the French Revolution. The sisters also fall in love, marry, fall out of love again, grow up, discover family secrets and change their opinions about important issues. And that’s where the format of the story is working against it. It tells of events happening between 1789 and 1794 but not as one continuing story. In the first part, we learn how the sisters experienced the storming of the Bastille, in the second the women’s March and so on. But their life didn’t stop between all these events, rather the opposite: often quite major events and revelations happened in between but we’re only told a short summary of what happened at the beginning of each chapter. By that time major decisions are already made, any emotional fallout of huge revelations has happened…a lot of character-development happens between the chapters.
As a result, I could connect with the emotions of the characters but not so much with the characters as a whole since I only ever saw snapshots of them at different stages in their life. I didn’t see them grow, I saw how they had grown.
It's just boring. It's hard to believe that it's possible to make the diamond necklace affair boring, but this author manages it. The boDNF around 50%
It's just boring. It's hard to believe that it's possible to make the diamond necklace affair boring, but this author manages it. The book opens with two characters having a conversation about things they both know already, but discuss again for the reader's benefit. Then very little plot happens, then massive amounts of info dump (this time not even with as-you-know conversations, just plain 'let me tell you about all the things you need to know to understand this book which I couldn't be bothered to include in a more subtle way'), a bit more plot, a lot more info dump. Halfway through the book Marie Antoinette has refused the necklace and Jeanne has persuaded Rohan to buy it and that's it. The rest was the author letting us know what she knows and people talking. To be fair some of that was about the current situation in France and the author trying to make the connection between that, the affair and the upcoming revolution but when it's presented in a way that makes me skip whole pages because the writing is so dull that really doesn't help. And it's somewhat annoying that the author doesn't seem to like any of the characters...
(Fyi: this is a re-release of a book from the 20s, something that isn't exactly advertised and also nothing you'd suspect after looking at that 'oh my anachronistic dress histo-romance'-cover).
[image] Sadly, as this was an e-book I couldn't do this to the book even though I really, really wanted to for it was absolutely horrible. I was immedia[image] Sadly, as this was an e-book I couldn't do this to the book even though I really, really wanted to for it was absolutely horrible. I was immediately drawn to it when I heard it took some inspiration from The Scarlet Pimpernel, a book I really liked but The Duke of Andelot doesn't even come close to being that enjoyable. The Scarlet Pimpernel is a story about a French noblemen who rescues other noblemen from the clutches of the French Revolution. It was also written by a baroness so it is not the most balanced look at a time in which a lot of commoners killed a lot of noblemen. Still, it has some sympathy for the common people and also admits that not all nobles necessarily always acted...noble towards the lower classes. Compared with the portrayal of nobles and commoners in The Duke of Andelot, it reads like The Communist Manifesto.
[image]
With very few exceptions the nobles are all good people and charitable. They always help the poor, pet fluffy kittens and the sun is shining out of their arse... The exceptions are: - Gérard's father. But then he was nicer once but then evil lowlife commoners killed his wife and now he's a broken man and also hates those evil lowlife commoners - The random duke who engineered the French Revolution. Yeah, you read that right. The people didn't just start this revolution on their own. He bought all the grain, so the people would revolt, kill all the nobles (except him), then quietly sit down again and let him be king. I am not making this up. How did he think this would work? How did the author think this would work? Probably not at all which is why the Duke is mentioned only twice and the second time is to inform us that he was murdered. - The Marquis de Sade. Yeah. He's in the book. [image]
Don't ask me about that plotline. Let's just say that this man certainly enjoyed pain but certainly not the pain of being in a character in this idiotic book.
The commoners meanwhile just don't understand that all nobles are just the bestest people ever and just keep on killing them in gruesome ways. Stupid people. Never let them have any power, they need better people to keep them from doing something silly.
The exception is of course our heroine. Despite being one of 11 children of a butcher she has a proper education for some really contrived reason and is also really sympathetic towards the poor misunderstood nobles. However poor Thérèse has a problem: nobody appreciates her inner values, nobody sees past her stunning beauty and her large boobs
[image]
All men leave her presents like food in the hope that one day she will give them something in return. (Do I have to remind you that we're talking about (pre)revolutionary France here? People had lots of food to spare). Yes only in the hope because Thérèse never would be that kind of woman. Well until she meets Gérard who can offer a lot more than a few chickens: pearls, diamonds, money in general and a job at the theatre (she wants to be an actress). All that exchange for a bit of sex is quite a good deal so she agrees under the condition that he won't get her pregnant (she wants him to pull out in time). He agrees and remembers that for about 10 minutes...then he's too distracted by her big boobs, unearthly beauty and virginal sex-goddess skills to do that. She is obviously pissed and wants to leave. So he shows his charming side: "You belong to me now, Thérèse. Me. Because you said yes to me. Do you remember? You said Yes. And in saying yes to me, you are no longer allowed to say no." Isn't he a romantic? [image] For some reason that is not Thérèse's reaction. Instead they mope about each other for the rest of the book, more poor nobles get killed by evil commoners, people get tortured for months without any lasting psychological consequences, Thérèse's cycle is so irregular that she can't tell for four months if she's pregnant (also: after hating the idea of herself getting pregnant she's suddenly all about 'BUT WHEN WILL THERE BE BABIES???' when it comes to other women...because breeding is all we're good for) and probably more idiotic things that I have already blocked out again because all you can do after reading this book is consuming massive amounts of brain-bleach....more
Disclaimer: this book is only for very massive The Three Musketeers -geeks. I am not talking about 'I enjoyed the book and [(the movie with Michael YoDisclaimer: this book is only for very massive The Three Musketeers -geeks. I am not talking about 'I enjoyed the book and [(the movie with Michael York/Charlie Sheen)/Dogtanion and the three Muskehounds was a really nice show]'. I am talking about 'I have read the book and the sequels (possibly more than once), have spent an unreasonable amount of time hunting down and watching obscure movie-adaptation of it (including the one with David Hasselhoff let us not speak of this ever), once bought a bottle of wine just because it was called 'The White Musketeer' and still have the wrapper of that d'Artagnan chocolate-bar'-level geekery. (Obviously I would never do any of these things. I have a friend who does. Yep. She's also writing this review. Really. I am not a weird person at all. *tries to smile reassuringly* [image] SEE! Nobody can prove anything. Nobody!)
Anyway...back to the book. It is not particularly...thrilling. About 2/3 of it is "d'Artagnan gets into trouble because he couldn't keep his pants on but gets quickly out of it again because he is just that awesome". No seriously...this guy has more romantic adventures than all the Musketeers in all the various adaptations put together. [image] And yes, this includes BBC!Aramis
(I should clarify: 2/3 of the edition I was reading: a German translation where the translator pointed out in the afterword that he heavily edited/shortened it and that he considered the sexy adventures much more interesting than the description of battles and of political stuff (which Sandras got mostly wrong anyway apparently))
The rest is mostly about work he does for Cardinal Mazarin (and whining about how much of a penny-pincher he is) and the occasional trouble he got in for reasons other than 'could not keep his pants on' (those are rare...very rare). There is no actual red line in the book. With the exception of Mazarin there are almost no recurring characters, people appear for a few pages (if they're female d'Artagnan sleeps with them, if they're male they get angry at him for sleeping with their wives) and are never seen or even mentioned again. For a Musketeer-geek it's still interesting to see where Dumas got his inspiration from. Though if you expect this book to be a less polished version of The Three Musketeers you will also be disappointed. In the first quarter there is some stuff that will be familiar: the very beginning is quite similar to TTM, including the scene with Rochefort (who has a different name here), Athos, Porthos and Aramis are mentioned (though only two or three times), a character that was very likely the inspiration for Constance appears and so does Milady but that's it. Not much swashbuckling adventures, no secret letters that have to be delivered...so without a strong interest for Dumas (or perhaps the time-period this was written) you will probably be bored very quickly. But if you're enough of a nerd this is just the book for you at least my friend says so....more
This book was...OK...I guess. It's not that I didn't enjoy it. Emily was as great a character as in the first book and the mystery was actually betterThis book was...OK...I guess. It's not that I didn't enjoy it. Emily was as great a character as in the first book and the mystery was actually better. However I had trouble with two of the the sub-plots. At first we have the Emily has a stalker-subplot. And it is a stalker, not just a secret admirer who sends flowers now and then. He breaks into her house to leaver her "presents" and he sends angry notes and wilted flowers after he saw her with another man. Neither Emily nor the book itself treat that subject with the seriousness it deserves. That whole plotline and the resolution just didn't sit right with me.
Another one was just plain stupid. Ivy, one of Emily's closest friends is newly married but doesn't get pregnant. Not for any medical reasons but because Robert, her husband, never sleeps with her. He always comes home late and if Ivy is still awake by then he suggests she should take sleeping-powders because staying up so late must be bad for her health. Still he also joins the chorus of people nagging Ivy about when she will have an heir. I am not sure how Robert thinks babies are made. The resolution to that subplot also seemed far to rushed, as if a few pages before the end the author suddenly remembered that she also needed to do something about it. I have no clue what that I was supposed to think about that part. Was it a comic relief plot? It wasn't funny. Was it a commentary on Victorian sex-morals? If yes what was the author trying to say with it? Because apart from 'men are stupid' I didn't get anything out of it.
After so much complaining I feel that I have to point out again that overall I enjoyed the book. As said, the mystery was better than in the first book and not as easy to see through. Emily's character-development also continues to be interesting. She is still trying to figure out how far she is willing to go and what consequences of her actions she is willing to accept. In that aspect the series is one of the most realistic historical mysteries I know. The research that has been done for the book and the attention to detail is also amazing. But all that can't hide that I wasn't that overwhelmed by some parts of the book....more
Das Buch begann mittelmäßig aber nicht so, dass ich jegliche Hoffnung verloren hätte. Dann ging es einfach nur unglaublich langweilig weiter. Vor lautDas Buch begann mittelmäßig aber nicht so, dass ich jegliche Hoffnung verloren hätte. Dann ging es einfach nur unglaublich langweilig weiter. Vor lauter Rückblicken und Personen deren Relevanz für den Plot absolut nicht ersichtlich war hatte ich beinahe vergessen worum es eigentlich ging. Das ganze wurde nur übertroffen vom Schluss der...nun ja...sagen wir es mal so: Verbotene Liebe hatte realistischere Handlungsstränge.
Und damit ist schon das meiste gesagt. Ein Roman über eine der Verschwörungen gegen Richelieu hätte interessant werden können aber da der historisch interessierte Leser nun mal weiß, dass der Kardinal relativ friedlich im Bett gestorben ist kann man nicht so tun als wäre das Spannende 'wird es den Verschwörern gelingen oder nicht?'. Man muss die auftretenden Charaktere so sympathisch (oder vielleicht auch unsympathisch) machen, dass es egal ist ob man weiß was aus ihnen wird oder ein paar nicht-historische Charaktere dazuschmeißen um die sich der Leser sorgen kann. Kinkel macht beides aber beides gelingt nicht. Marie (Richelieus Nichte) zeigt ein paar gute Ansätze aber die meiste Zeit war sie nur nervtötend und ihre Entscheidungen nicht nachvollziehbar. Die nicht-historischen Charaktere...da war Charlotte die absolut keinen Einfluss auf die Handlung hatte (view spoiler)[ außer um sich am Ende um Maries uneheliches Kind zu kümmern (hide spoiler)] und die auch nicht dreidimensional genug wurde, dass ich mich um sie gekümmert hätte. Außerdem gab es noch Paul & Raoul, wobei letzterer hätte auch durch eine formschöne Topfpflanze ersetzt werden können (außer am Ende...aber da wäre er auch nicht nötig gewesen wenn Marie nicht spontan alle Gehirnzellen verloren hätte). Und Paul...sprechen wir nicht über ihn. Das ist das beste.
Des weiteren gibt es noch zwei Schiffskapitäne in Nebenrollen. Ihre Namen: Jean-Luc Picard und Riker. Warum? In einem eher humorvollen Roman wäre das eine amüsante Anspielung aber in einem Roman der gerne ernst genommen werden möchte dachte ich nur [image]
Ansonsten kann ich es auch überhaupt nicht ausstehen wenn Französische Phrasen in Dialoge eingestreut werden wenn das Buch sowieso in Frankreich spielt und die Figuren dementsprechend sowieso Französisch sprechen...eigentlich dachte ich das wäre eine Fanfiction-Unart aber wie alles Schlechte nimmt es wohl auch veröffentlichte Bücher in Besitz....more
First it should be noted that this is the second book in a series (Memoirs of a Physician/The Marie Antoinette Romances) and it's certainly a good ideFirst it should be noted that this is the second book in a series (Memoirs of a Physician/The Marie Antoinette Romances) and it's certainly a good idea to read them in order. You don't have to as each contains a separate story but there is the occasional allusion to events from the past book that can be confusing.
Shortly before I read this one I read a non-fiction on the diamond necklace affair (How to Ruin a Queen: Marie Antoinette and the Diamond Necklace Affair. Highly recommendable by the way) and I am not sure if it was a good idea. It's definitely not necessary to know the true story to understand the book as it's not accurate at all. (Which I assume is down to a combination of Dumas not knowing all the facts and not caring about those he knew). So all it did for me was having me go 'But that's not how it happened' every few pages. It is interesting to compare fact and fiction but if I had the choice again I might do it the other way round.
The book itself has many of the things you expect from Dumas. There is lots of falling in love on first sight (basically everybody does so with the Queen...), many intertwined side-plots (soap-operas have nothing on him) and perhaps a few more coincidences than are believeable. However, especially compared to The Three Musketeers it's a lot darker. Understandably so as the diamond necklace affair is by many considered to be the first step to the revolution that cost Marie Antoinette and Louis their lives. This impending doom is an almost constant presence in the book. Even though Dumas' Marie Antoinette of course knows about this as little as the real one, she is aware that the affair will have wider consequences. Marie Antoinette has more depth and feels more like a real character than Anne ever did in The Three Musketeers or Ten Years After (to be fair she wasn't a main-character in either). This book isn't a swasbuckling adventure and also nothing like The Count of Monte Cristo (except perhaps for the number of sideplots...why did we even need the fake Portugese thieves?) but it's still an entertaining read (that could have been a bit shorter)....more
This just didn't really work for me. It felt too short, more like a illustrated summary than a proper story. Even Jean Valjean's backstory felt rushedThis just didn't really work for me. It felt too short, more like a illustrated summary than a proper story. Even Jean Valjean's backstory felt rushed and it was worse with the rest of the characters. The revolution seems to come out of nowhere and it didn't really feel like it was important to any of the participants. I liked the drawing-style well enough and perhaps if it had been longer and the characters had been given more depth I could have enjoyed the book more but this way I really couldn't bring myself to care about any of them....more
We bought a new blender recently. The manual for it was more interesting than this book. I mean: it has recipes! For 'Cuban Milk' among other things. We bought a new blender recently. The manual for it was more interesting than this book. I mean: it has recipes! For 'Cuban Milk' among other things. That's just banana-milk with lemon if you're wondering. And no I have no idea what's Cuban about that either.
Can you tell that I really don't want to talk about this book? I'm just not sure what I can say about it. It's not bad in an entertaining way and (at least) also not in and offensive way, just in a very, very, very, very boring way.
The characters are all so flat that even at the end I still had trouble telling them apart. They are all amazing fighters and that's pretty much it. Marciac sticks out because he has an on-off-girlfriend (whom he treats like crap) and another character has dragon-blood in him which gets mentioned a lot. In fact I'm think he's referred to as 'Mix-blood' almost as often as by his real name which I found...unfortunate. Yes it is just a fantastical creature but I still felt uncomfortable with the obsession about his heritage.
Apart from that...have I mentioned how boring that book was? Cause it was. Most of the time our main characters fight. Usually alone against an overwhelming number of enemies. Of course they win. Always. The one time one of them doesn't it's because his opponent didn't fight fair and brought a gun to a swordfight. When they're not fighting they are...planning fights, Marciac has sex or one of the characters angsts about their tragic past. But mostly they are fighting. Or fighting. Or fighting. Or...oh right I mentioned that already. Now I don't mind fights, e.g. James Barclay's Raven-chronicles are also pretty packed with them. But there are two major differences: a) the Raven sometimes loses. People die or get seriously injured. As mentioned this doesn't happen in The Cardinal's Blades. So why should I worry about them? b) I actually care about the Raven. I don't want them to die. As mentioned above this doesn't happen in The Cardinal's Blades. So even if there was an actual sense of danger in the books my only reaction would be: great! one less character that bores me to death!
And the worst thing is: the author almost solely relies on the fact that his readers care about these characters and worry about them dying. Almost every chapter ends with some sort of cliffhanger that means danger for them. It often felt like reading fanfiction where the writer needs to make sure that the readers come back the next time. (Except that most fanfiction readers would have quit after that many three or four page-chapters in which nothing happens except fighting.) The same is true for the ending. We are treated to some more dramatic reveals about the characters and their backstories. I assume that is meant to hook us for the second part but I cared as little about these revelations as about any of the previous ones. ...more
If there was a less cliched way to describe the Affair of the Diamond Necklace I would but it's simply a story you couldn't make up. A Jeanne La MotteIf there was a less cliched way to describe the Affair of the Diamond Necklace I would but it's simply a story you couldn't make up. A Jeanne La Motte, a countess who is a close confidant of Marie Antoinette, approaches Cardinal Rohan and asks him to purchase an expensive diamond necklace in the name of the queen. Rohan was only to eager to oblige as this meant he was back in favour with her. (Marie Antoinette strongly disliked him since he displeased her mother during his time at the Court of Vienna). He hoped that by helping the queen he would also help his own political ambitions.
However, things weren't that simple. Marie Antoinette didn't even know that Jeanne existed, let alone consider her a friend. She had never asked her to find somebody to purchase the necklace for her and had no interest in it. Jeanne had taken advantage from the fact that Rohan was desperate to get back in favour with the queen and had spun a complex web of deceit around him. It involved countless forged letters, supposedly from Marie Antoinette and even a meeting between Rohan and the queen - played by a prostitute who looked a bit like her. Once Rohan had given the necklace to Jeanne she and her husband tried to sell the single diamonds.
Of course the jewelers noticed that no payment from the queen was forthcoming and the whole plot unraveled. As Jeanne hadn't been to subtle about her newfound wealth she was soon discovered and arrested. And so was Rohan - on the basis that nobody could be as stupid as he claimed to have been and so must have been a co-conspirator. But in the subsequent trial he was acquitted, while Jeanne and her husband were found guilty.
How to Ruin a Queen tells not only this story but also discusses the consequences the whole affair had. The court also found Marie Antoinette innocent from any knowledge of the plot but her hatred for Rohan was well-known. People suspected that she was behind the whole thing in an attempt to get rid of Rohan. Sympathies for the queen began to chill considerably afterwards and most historians assumed that without the affair the French Revolution might have ended less tragic for the French Royals. Jonathan Beckman gives a good description of the affair itself but also doesn't forget to discuss the consequences. In less detail of course but enough to understand why it was such a big deal.
The book is well-researched, in so far this is possible. Obviously none of the people involved was too keen on keeping anything that might implicate them so many documents were destroyed. That leaves the author with accounts from people that weren't directly involved (who also might not know the truth) or things like Jeanne's memoirs. In which she was also more than economical with the truth and tried very much to paint herself as a victim. Beckmann does point that out and most of the time he puts them into perspective but on some occasions I found he was not clear enough on which claims were to be taken with a grain of salt and which might have been true. Somewhere in the middle were also two chapters that didn't bring much new information. Instead they discussed Les Liaisons Dangereuses, Twelfth Night and The Marriage of Figaro and speculated on whether any of the people involved had read or seen them and match the characters from the stories with the real ones involved in the affair. If that was (at that length) really necessary is questionable but that doesn't take much away. If you're interested in French history that book is definitely reccomended....more
Für dieses Buch habe ich sehr lange gebraucht aber das lag nicht unbedingt daran, dass es so langweilig ist. Ich hatte auch eine längere Phase in der Für dieses Buch habe ich sehr lange gebraucht aber das lag nicht unbedingt daran, dass es so langweilig ist. Ich hatte auch eine längere Phase in der ich fast gar nichts gelesen habe bzw nur Fanfic aber das ist eine andere Geschichte. Ein bisschen den Spaß am Buch verleidet hat auch die Übersetzung. Sie scheint wohl etwas älter zu sein (aus den 70ern wenn mich mein Google-Fu nicht täuscht) und die Übersetzerin verwendet ab und an Begriffe, die damals wohl hip und modern waren, es heute aber nicht mehr sind. Das führt zu einer Reihe von Dingen die es schaffen gleichzeitig zu modern für die Zeit in der das Buch spielt zu sein und zu altmodisch für den modernen Leser. Das stört den Lesefluss doch sehr. Wenn man aber das ignorieren kann...oder einfach eine andere Übersetzung auftreiben kann bleibt doch ein interessantes Buch. Wer Dumas aber nur von den Drei Musketieren kennt und hier ähnliches erwartet wird entäuscht sein. Die Bartholomäusnacht ist kein Mantel und Degen-Abenteuer. Die (auch nur in der deutschen Übersetzung) titelgebende Nacht wird in den ersten paar Kapiteln abgehandelt und ist auch eher ein Schlachtfest als irgendwie vergleichbar mit den Duellen die die Musketiere kämpfen. Im Rest des Buches wird dann intrigiert. Und zwar heftig. Wem das gefällt der wird seine wahre Freude am Buch haben. Da gibt es ständig wechselnde Allianzen, es wird doppelt und dreifach hintergangen...alles was das Herz begehrt. Wer mehr Action möchte sollte aber ein anderes Buch suchen....more
I simply think that I'd be more interested in reading a really biography about Minette than a fictionalized version of her life. These things can workI simply think that I'd be more interested in reading a really biography about Minette than a fictionalized version of her life. These things can work but this book covers her life between the age of 11 and 17 and that results in two problems:
1) It's also a First Person POV and her voice doesn't sound like a eleven year old at all. I still hugely preferred that over the author trying to imitate a first person-narration of a young child (which honestly would have been annoying to me no matter if she managed to get it right or failed at it) but I still did a double-take the first time I read how old she was because what? Eleven? Seriously?
2) Nothing much happened to Minette during that time. OK that is perhaps the wrong thing to say. She still had a much more exiting life than any eleven year olds who aren't the daughters of an executed king and who life in exile but she still can't do much. Because she is so young (and because her mother is...a complicated character). So this book is her going to balls, her reacting to news about what her siblings are doing, more balls and some romance. Now I don't mind any of these things but I generally prefer less balls and more of the other.
Minette simply had almost no own agency which is logical and understandable considering the circumstances but for me that was still rather frustrating to read.
A second book about the rest of Minette's life is planned and since I like the author and from what I read Minette's life will become really interesting then* I will probably still read it.
*it's not even that the six years described in this book were boring. Just, as said, a biography might have been better since it could have put all the events in a bigger context....more
Well...this was fun. Plain and simple. I was quite surprised that the republicans and aristocrats weren't painted as black and white as you'd expect coWell...this was fun. Plain and simple. I was quite surprised that the republicans and aristocrats weren't painted as black and white as you'd expect considering this bookn was written by an aristocrat. In fact Marguerite and her brother still consider themselves republicans but the horrendous crimes commited during the Terror made them turn away from the French republicans. It is even admitted that some of the aristocrats perhaps didn't act in the most reasonable way. Though of course all the aristocrats that the Scarlet Pimpernel saves are good people and never did anything wrong, while Chauvelin, the antagonist is one of those people that even have an evil laugh (hey, I just said it was less black and white than expected, not that it was an in-depth look at the causes of the French Revolution). Anyway, as I said the book is simply lots of fun. It is very well written and one of those books where, even though I knew how it would end (well, there are more novels featuring the Scarlet Pimpernel), I was quite exited about how it would all end and it was very much a page-turner. ...more
Loading...
