Becky's Reviews > Katherine

3.5 stars

So, you might notice a theme this year (hopefully, if I don't suck and give up halfway through the year, as I'm often wont to do), which is that I'm trying to dust off some of the ancient books I own and actually read them, instead of using them to just keep my bookcases from floating away. This book is one that I've owned for going on 9 years, so...


I feel like I haven't been reading much Historical Fiction lately, though I just counted and last year I read six (well, five, and one I DNF'd), plus several historical non-fiction books. Oddly enough, the only one I didn't finish is the only one that also had a heavy romance aspect... and that romance aspect was pretty much WHY I didn't finish it (instalove and love triangles, UGH!). This book had both of those things... in a sense. But it was not just "As soon as their eyes met, sparks flashed and she knew she'd never love another man but him" trite nonsense. There was a BIT of that, later, but it never felt like the instalove that I loathe so much. It never really ever felt like a love triangle, either, even though technically there was one. In other words, this book was well-written, whereas many others are not.

That's not to say that this was a perfect book, because I didn't think so. Well-written in this case means that the characters were fleshed out as fully as possible, and seemed realistic to me, based on their personalities and environments and situations. It felt real, the characters and 14th century England, and the political landscape, and regardless of how historically accurate or not this may be (I'm not a stickler), that's what's important to me.

But at the same time, there were definite pacing issues. I found myself feeling at times like reading this book was like trudging through molasses. I'd be reading for what seemed like hours, and check the page count and have only gotten through 8 pages. WHAT??! The level of detail, and description, was just edged past the point of my tolerance at times. For instance, after the attack on the Savoy, Katherine lost herself in religious penitence, and UGGHHH was it BORING. I get it, I get it... but man... that was like 100 pages that felt like it dragged on for DAYS. And then at other times, the story was so exciting that it seemed to fly by. The end resolution again dragged on for, in my opinion, too long. It felt like there just wasn't much story to tell, but certain things had to be wrapped up nicely, and so in order to avoid it seeming like the bow was too hastily tied, it was padded out. To be fair, I would definitely have complained had the ending resolutions been too quick, but I think, perhaps there could have been a longer afterword, rather than dragging out the main story ending.

Aside from the pacing issues, I will say that this was a really well constructed story. There is a huge amount of detail that went into it, from the characters, to the time period, to the political situation and uprisings and, for the most part, all of that worked really well. I never felt confused by what was happening, or who was who, which is always a risk when you have multiple characters named the same or similar things, or nobles whose titles and lands change, thus changing their names. Seton did well keeping everything straight and as clear as possible. However, there were some errors that I found in the book, which might be due to the edition or printing - little things like Roger Leech vs Roger Leach.

Regarding the actual story, I was surprised to find that I felt really very sorry for Hugh, Katherine's first husband, which I didn't expect at all. I expected to hate him based on our first impression of him. He definitely did NOT make a good first impression, but I came to realize that he just didn't know how not to. His life was pretty unfair to him. He had a title, but that was about it, and all he knew was how to be a knight. He couldn't help his ways, and it's not like in the 14th century that men were very sensitive to women's emotional needs. (Even John, who was by far the most attuned and sensitive man depicted, at least regarding Katherine, was obtuse as hell at times.) But it was a mark of the excellent characterization that I understood and empathized with both Hugh AND Katherine. I can definitely understand her loathing and repulsion of him - this huge, uncouth guy whose first interaction with her was attempted rape of a 14 year old, and then who was woefully inept at not emotionally scarring his young bride when their marriage was consummated by force. It surely wasn't a pleasant experience, and but for the conventions of the time, where a wife must submit to her husband in every way, it would be rape. It WAS rape. But accepted, sanctified, and expected rape, because they were married, whether she liked it or not.

I kept thinking of Khal Drogo as I read Hugh. (I mean, come on, who doesn't just think of Khal Drogo on the regular?) The parallels between Hugh and Drogo's sexual brutality of their early marriages is pretty clear. But the difference is that Danaerys guided him to change, and Katherine just shut down and endured her fate. Now, I know that Dany is fictional, and Drogo was played by Jason Momoa so YUM, but to Dany, he was just as terrifying and rough at first as Hugh was to Katherine. She accepted her marriage to Hugh, and she endured it, but had she made an effort to guide him to being gentler, I think he would have responded. He truly did love her, and wanted to be with her, but she was too young and bitter about him to allow herself to feel anything but indifference toward him. She walled herself off.

I could understand that if he truly was a brutal man, but he wasn't. His "brutality" existed purely in the realm of fumbling desire and a lack of finesse and skill... and attractiveness. Some of those things can be remedied... if one tries. And her indifference, I would argue, hurt him more than he ever hurt her. Her indifference made her situation worse, it made him afraid to be near her, but impossible to stay away because he loved and desired her, which caused him to be angry and frustrated and even more rough because of that. It caused him to be impotent (though to be fair, this could have had physiological cause as well), and eventually, even caused his death. She was faithful to him, and obeyed him, and cared for him... but only out of duty, and I think that was unfair to him, considering the social norms of the time, and the fact that he married a girl with nothing, and gave her everything he had or could or knew how to give.

At one point, late in his life, the Duke reminisces on how his love for Katherine was different than anyone else he'd ever been with, and that was because she brought nothing to him - no power, no money, no titles, no lands, nothing. She was just herself. The same can be said of her relationship with Hugh - she brought him nothing at all either... but with him, she didn't even bring herself. She was an obedient body and nothing more, and I think that he deserved better than that, despite everything. He just didn't know how to be better. That makes me sad for him.

I appreciated that the romance between John and Katherine wasn't just all roses and delight - they had real conflict and issues that at times intruded and kept them apart. I liked that Katherine's sense of morality guided her, and that she tried to be a good person regardless of others' judgement or condemnation of her. I did find her to be naive and biased regarding the serfs and their situation, which was a bit surprising to me considering that if not for her looks, she'd have been one of them - you'd think that a little bit of empathy might have entered into the situation there. But she could only see things from her own current perspective, and that included a sort of ingrained deference and awe of nobility. It's easy to judge when looking back though. She lived her own experience, and that's all she could do.

I also found it really perplexing that the serfs were anti-nobility, but pro-king. I mean, by all means, make all men equal, but that should include the king, to me. It's just strange that their animosity was aimed at those who, yes, had power over them, but completed glanced off the king which had power over those who had power over them. I think that was their mistake... they wanted to stop the abuses perpetrated against them, over-taxation, slavery, cruelty, and poverty, but put their faith in a young king who knew nothing but his own power and entitlement. And that hurt them, badly.

Finally, I know that this is a romance, but that aspect of the story was one of the least interesting to me. I liked the way that it branched off and affected people, politics, and history, but it seemed, and maybe this is just because of the way it was told, that they were destined to be together, so the actual "being together" parts were less interesting to me. Still, the whole of the story was mostly really good, and I was absorbed in it for good chunks of time, when it wasn't dragging, anyway. So on the whole, I'm glad I read it.