'historical' fiction with an agenda
919317
Whenever I mention my love of Biblical fiction, people often respond with "Oh, well I've read The Red Tent!" I'd heard the novel by Anita Diamant several times; so I finally picked up a copy at my local Salvation Army for 20 cents and thought I'd give this " classic" a fair go. It wasn't worth the 20 cents.  It is truly sad that this novel has become the paragon of the genre.
Check out the rest of my review: [...]
3401068
Heresy is a historical novel that follows a period in the life of Giordano Bruno, an ex-monk who has developed a reputation as a philosopher and gained status through his relationship with King Henri III of France. This book covers a time he spent at Oxford in England. He's been brought to the university to debate with the head of the school, Rector Underhill. But while Bruno is at Oxford a number of brutal murders occur and he is recruited by Underhill to look into the crimes.

The book is interesting because it covers the period in English history after the Church of England separated from the Roman Catholic Church, but does not look at that time through the point of view of the monarchy. Instead it focuses on how the conflict between the two churches affects the students and faculty at Oxford. There's violence, deception, and quite a few compromised values.

The problem with putting historical characters in a fictional environment is that the author has to develop personalities for the characters while remaining true to the real people. In this case, the characters suffer because they lack strong emotions. Everyone in the book, with the exception of Bruno and his well-connected friend, Philip Sydney, seems to be one dimensional and self-serving. This was a time when people believed that choosing the wrong side would be the same as denying God. Yet there was little passion shown in their choices. The rector has a beautiful daughter named Sophia whom everyone wants to protect, but the only romantic relationship is talked about rather than shown and also lacks passion.

The decisions the characters make often seem abrupt and without rationalization. There's a gate keeper who helps Bruno without any explanation as to why he's decided to trust a stranger over the people he knows and works for. And Rector Underhill's decision to ask Bruno to investigate the crimes also seems out of the blue.

Yet, despite the issues I mentioned, I enjoyed the novel. The subject matter is fascinating and the mystery works well. It's a good read for people who enjoy historical fiction.

Steve Lindahl  author of Motherless Soul and White Horse Regressions
4891754
Nancy Horan's historical novel about the scandalous affair between Frank Lloyd Wright and Mamah Borthwick is an interesting debut she should be proud of.

The Good:
- The historical events and personal drama are appropriately balanced; after reading the novel you feel as if you have learned about Frank Lloyd Wright's history as an architect, but have also obtained an interesting perspective on his and Mamah's personalities.
- Another note on history, Nancy Horan must be given credit for the amount of research put into the text, both in regards to her characters and the actual events described.
- The novel is full of struggle, with multiple viewpoints represented. Mamah and Frank deal with the backlash of abandoning their families, Frank's money troubles are clearly depicted, and the role of women during the beginning of the 19th century is discussed in great deal, with Ellen Key's philosophy used as a vehicle.

The Bad:
- Nothing about the novel stands out as far as the actual prose. Given the characters and context, I think Horan could have been a bit more creative with her narrative decisions. In the beginning it seems as if she might veer away from the standard linear, but ultimately decides not to.
- The diary angle is unnecessary and only partially executed.

The Ugly:
- The cover. I'm sorry, but it doesn't match what's inside.

As a whole, the positive exceeds the negative, as the story itself kept me reading. I must defend the text against those that argue with the characters' decisions- keep in mind this is based on a true story, therefore Horan didn't feel at liberty to rewrite Frank and Mamah's past.
4165456
If your ideal historical novel is a plain vanilla chronicle, one by Jean Plaidy and her heirs (or latter-day novelists like Sharon Penman, Michelle Moran, C.W. Gortner or others) in which historical characters talk against a recognizable backdrop, you'll probably want to avoid this offering like the plague. Even fans of Hilary Mantel may want to approach with caution: while Hermione Eyre is employing new literary techniques to bring to life long-dead historical figures (in this case, far less well known than was Thomas Cromwell before Mantel turned him into a post-mortem celebrity in&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Wolf-Hall/dp/0312429983/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Wolf Hall</a>), she goes far beyond Mantel and approaches the world of metafiction in her recounting of the struggles of the legendary early 17th century beauty Venetia, Lady Digby, to hang onto her charms.

To Eyre, this clearly is a subject for the ages: a woman who has relied on her beauty: "girls and beardless boys would wait for hours for the chance to see her pass", and even the description of Venetia's behavior -- "sometimes she wore her hair loose and half-tangled, sometimes she slouched and sucked her cheeks. Sometimes she danced when there was no music" -- is reminiscent of the celebrity beauties of our day. But while they can turn to Botox and plastic surgeons, Venetia had no such remedies when her charms began to flag and even page boys began to show signs of disbelief that she was a legendary beauty while she was still only in her early 30s. Her much-loved husband, an alchemist and enquiring scientific mind of his era, Sir Kenelm Digby, could, if he wished, conjure up some "viper wine" for her -- but in his eyes, at least, she is still the woman he married. That blindness may blind him, too, to Venetia's growing reliance on the potions of one of dangerous figures all too eager to make lavish promises to court ladies desperate to maintain their beauties, a reliance that will have tragic consequences.

I found this fascinating, if not always the kind of novel I couldn't put down and itched to pick up at every spare second. Kenelm Digby, a man "haunted by the future", particularly intrigued me -- as did the way that Hermione Eyre chose to portray him, as a man engaged as much with the future as with the past. Even as he struggles with the legacy of being the son of a would-be regicide (his father executed for his part in the Gunpowder Plot), Kenelm dreams and imagines of what the futures has in store. Eyre plays with that: in her portrayal of him, he holds a "press conference" after his return from a voyage (at which Eyre herself appears as a questioner); he cites Neil Armstrong and David Bowie. There are references to turning base metal into gold, and to JavaScript.

Where does historical fiction end, and fantasy begin? Eyre plays with that line in this novel, and injects a postmodern element of metafiction into the mix. The result is something that a lot of traditionalists will find alienating -- sure, there is a linear plot line, as Kenelm and others delve into the iniquities of apothecary Lancelot Choice, Venetia's "supplier" of viper wine, but it's mixed with a gothic mashup of sorts that can be tougher to navigate. I didn't always love it, but I usually found it intriguing. Guardedly recommended.
1408615
One of Susan Howatch's earlier historical novels, this uses the same template found in later works such as Cashelmara and The Wheel of Fortune.  A set of historical figures (in this case, English King Henry II, his wife Eleanor of Aquitaine, Henry's illegitimate son Geoffrey, Richard the Lionhearted, and King John) are transposed into more recent times (1890-1945).

Set in Cornwall, the plot closely parallels the story of Henry II (although there is no Becket).  For most of the novel, this works well: the Cornish setting is beautifully described, the characters are sharply drawn, and Howatch's first-rate prose keeps the narrative flowing.

Unfortunately, the story begins to run out of steam towards the end.  Part of the problem may be that Howatch is trying to trace the pattern of historical events too closely, limiting the plot.  But the tension between the characters dissipates and the final chapter is more a series of events than a plot, lacking suspense and becoming excessively talky.

As with The Wheel of Fortune (which I read first), the focus is on relationships, and historical events have little impact on the characters.  World War I has the largest effect, as certain characters do not survive, but World War II is almost an afterthought.  More importantly, the immense changes in English life between 1890 and 1945 are glancingly referred to, but play little part in the story.  So as a historical novel, it doesn't really bring the period to life.

The novel is at its best in the first three parts, and slows down after that.  I actually skimmed the last 30 pages just to find out what happened; but for a 735-page book, that's faint criticism.  This is a good one to read if you're more interested in characterization and relationships than historical events.
2220133
I was not familiar with this author, so did not know exactly what to expect.  Good historical fiction is a difficult balance between sketching out the details of a culture and time far removed, and developing characters and a narrative that capture our interest.  The historical details I expected, after reading the author's background and research efforts.  But the characters also captured my attention, although in my opinion, none of the three women were particularly sympathetic (well, have to concede that many of the men were even less so, and a couple were downright despicable).  But all in all, a truly absorbing tale, set against the backdrop of Christianity's growing influence over the Scandinavian culture of exploring and raiding in the 10th century.

What I liked:  I appreciated that the viking culture was not overly romanticized.  I thought telling this story through three women would be a limitation, but, in the end, I did not find it so.  The portrayal of how women, particularly captives or "thralls," were treated was harsh, but I believe accurate for the times.  The Christian influence was not always a positive one; obviously good and bad people are/were everywhere throughout history, so in the end I was fine with the darker side portrayed here.  The development of the daughter, Bilbrau, I found disquieting but also compelling; like a loaded gun waiting to go off.  I'm not a 10th century historian, but the details of how this culture was portrayed seemed to ring true, and again, were not overly sentimental.

What I didn't like:  Some of the male characters seemed a bit one dimensional, and their development seemed to suffer compared to the women.  And, although I do not say I disliked this aspect per se, some of the scenes were disturbing, and the culture of violence and oppression that prevailed at that time will be unsettling for some readers, accustomed to more modern sensibilities.

Overall, I'm not sure I would call this a "great" novel, but it definitely exceeded expectations (mine at least).
1585357
In this historical thriller by Peter Prange, Sophie is a young girl betrayed by her neighbors and the church at an early age, suffering through tragedy and religious persecution.  In the wake of that betrayal, Sophie moves to Paris and, years later (in the mid-1700s), is working as a waitress at Caf Procope, a cafe where many radical philosophers and "freethinkers" meet and confer.  Although Sophie tries to maintain a low profile and distance from the cafe patrons, she unwittingly falls in love with one of her regular customers, Denis Diderot, a famous philosopher (who also happens to be married).  As the romance develops, so too does the plot of the revolutionaries.  Diderot and his cohorts are developing an encyclopedia, something that those in power would consider revolutionary and threatening.  Sophie becomes embroiled in the scandal and her very life and freedom are threatened (along with her heart).

I very much enjoyed the political and religious underpinnings of this novel.  The backdrop of revolutionary France is described with acute and vivid detail and the premise is interesting and historically significant.  It is particularly jarring to think that something as basic (in modern times) as an encyclopedia could be so explosive and politically charged.  The dread of discovery and persecution by the characters is profoundly felt and adds a lot to the plot of the novel. That said, I thought the book was a little slow-starting and the romance between Sophie and Diderot a little bit overblown.  Anyone who likes historical fiction, particularly historical fiction involving religion-oriented power struggles, will like this book but it was a little lacking in narrative flow and authenticity in the romance plot to be truly spectacular.  If I could give half-stars, I would probably give this a 3.5 but overall I give it a 4 for strong historical content.
3131885
The best part of "The Tulip Eaters" for me was the historical fiction part wherein the story of the heroine's mother, father and a man named Abram during Nazi occupied Holland. To me, that is when I liked the story the most.

Unfortunately, author van Heugten has a story set in 1980 that is a murder mystery. The story opens with heroine Nora happy to be coming home to her baby daughter and mother when she finds her mother murdered, her daughter gone and a man dead on the ground.

Local authorities don't seem of much use to her in finding her daughter and clues point to Holland so she goes to Holland, where she and her parents emigrated following the war. It is in Holland where Nora will find out how the past directly influenced the murder.

As noted, I liked the historical fiction parts because I have never known much about what happened in Holland during World War 2 beyond Anne Frank and Corrie Ten Boom. But this story has renewed my curiosity. On the other hand, I really did not like the story revolving around the murder itself. It just fell flat to me and Nora herself was an inconsistent character and the ending seemed both ludicrous and pat.

If Antoinette van Heugten had written a story set in World War 2 with Anneke, Hans and Abram as the central characters, I'd have no problem with recommending the book, but that's not the case and the story in the forefront just isn't strong enough for me to recommend.
2527661
I'd like to give this work 3 or 4 stars, but I just can't quite do it for several reasons listed below. But first, I'll remind that this book is by Jeff Shaara, and appears to be a follow-on to his father Michael's TERRIFIC work, The Killer Angels. It may simply be unfortunate circumstances that Jeff's efforts do not compare (and comparisons may be unfair to Jeff, anyway). But my point is, having read The Killer Angels first - it was written much earlier - I read The Last Full Measure semi-consciously expecting similar clarity, succinctness, and most importantly, a similar balance between the characters (their motivations, interactions, feelings, personalities, etc) and the events (the "history", if you will)...
Some specific critiquing points:

1) The timeline is too great. The Killer Angels was about Gettysburg. Michael Shaara kept things focused on an event, but with proper background about the event; and wove generally accepted character traits (what is known about their personalities, with some of their feelings) into the story. Jeff's effort, by contrast, covers a long timeline and tries to describe too many battles and characters in his novel. He does focus in on important people, but in the end the scope of the work is too great to make a good sequel to his father's book.

2) I mentioned personalities and "feelings" above. To me, Jeff goes into way too much detail on what too many characters thought. Their thoughts/feelings to that level of detail can only be speculation, and even if it is accurate speculation it takes away from the book - there's just too much of it, IMHO. It makes this historical novel more like 75% novel versus 25% history, where The Killer Angels was more like 70% history, 30% novel. (My actual numbers aren't important; its the "balance" that bothered me. Again I admit its probably unfair to compare the two, coming from two different authors).

3) There aren't enough dates in the openings of various chapters for an historical story covering this timespan. If the reader doesn't already know the general timespan, there's a danger of compressing the events. In places it seems to take a while to realize there's been a "fast-forward"; that what you're now reading is weeks or months later.

4) One example of possible imbalance: General John Gordon (Confederate) seems to magically appear as a major character and as a critical player in Lee's command (and a favorite subordinate), without explanation. I mean, we have certain background on all the other major commanders, but not Gordon. This seemed awkward to me. Perhaps it was because Gordon was not a professional (West Point) soldier that he was shorted. Then again, Joshua Chamberlain was not a professional army man, yet his background is understood, and is a highly developed character (possibly overdeveloped) - no doubt in large part due to The Killer Angels. By the way, this suggests that Jeff was indeed tying his work into his father's book.

5) I did appreciate the maps - they were enough but not overdone.

Summary: Was it intended to be an historical novel, or a drama-novel?? I dunno. Timeline is too long, the character's personal thoughts often get tedious, and it may be an attempt to capitalize on his father's work, which I find a bit disagreeable if true.
3115664
Good story using history. However, there are some inaccuracies, and it seems all the women are beautiful (unrealistic) and oversexed (also, unrealistic). Highly opinionated about historical figures and at times doesn't understand American nuances. If you can overlook all this, it can be an enjoyable read.
1485693
I enjoy stories whose authors take an historical figure about whom little is known, and try to fill in the blanks with talent, imagination, and solid research. This is such a story. The positives about it are the author's research, which seems solid, and her attempt to make the characters come alive on the page. The main negative was that the black evil and debauchery of the "bad guys" was so extreme that it left a kind of two-dimensional, almost flat ,impression.  That flatness may have been inevitable because the story was told in the first person. The protagonist herself was pretty believable because we were able to get "inside her head," to know her thoughts and emotions. Having said that, however, a couple of things did bother me. The first was the emphasis on the queen's virginity. The story makes much of showing the Sanhedrin the bloody sheets of the marriage bed to prove that the queen was a virgin. But this was he second marriage. She was supposed to have been in an unconsummated  marriage for several years before her first husband was killed. Why hadn't the Sanhedrin insisted on similar  proof from the wedding night with that first husband?  My second criticism is that the queen lived in a palace, yet we read very little hint of palace gossip or palace intrigue.  For example, couldn't palace gossips inform the queen--or sympathetic members of the Sanhedrin--about a plot to kill the first king? Wouldn't palace servants loyal to a popular queen keep t here informed of her second husband's secret activities or the Sanhedrin's plots? She certainly saw some of the  open defiance if one of her goals was to keep peace in Jerusalem, she would have used he servants to advantage. Such details would have fleshed out the story, made it more credible.  But regardless, the story is a good one, and a decent addition to the literature.
4920345
Title: To kill a Tsar
Author: Andrew Williams
Form: Historical novel (closely following real history)
Content: Petersburg around turn
  of century, first iterations of socialist movement. Tsar Nikolai is killed
  which led to the 'white terror'. Good character development, excellent
  research, the novel suffers from the fact that it follows history so
  closely that it is unbelievable unless you are aware those things REALLY
  happened. Well, truth is stranger than fiction for sure.
  The style is solid albeit not innovative or highly engaging.
Target Audience: anyone with interest in Russian history/revolution
Overall: above medium read, interesting facts coupled with decent writing
3565982
The story moves quickly along and it is set in an interesting time period.  However, it soon becomes exceedingly preachy.  The characters are fairly one-dimensional and although the author does seem to understand the period and appears to have done extensive research, I get the feeling it is merely to set forth a conclusion that the author had predetermined.
2891634
The third of the Follett 20th Century trilogy cannot be fairly described as historical fiction.  It is written well, is entertaining, and so forth, but it is remarkable distortion of all cause and effect.  Any strong measures by the USA, or any Republican or conservative, or even a moderate, against Communism is disparaged as being counter productive.  All good things came from liberals.  The book is Alternative History Fiction; or just Fiction Fiction.  I have read every one of Follette's books, and i realize he is a liberal; and that has never been a problem, because though it creeped in at every opportunity it didn't control the story.  Also, it came out in his characters, not also in the narrator's comments.  This is a tome for those who want a make believe history of why and how things happened in the 20th Century.  I am amazed at his logic, or lack of it, as he interprets the great events involving the fall of communism.  If Communism wasn't opposed at most every turn, if it had spread throughout the globe, it could last forever.  There would be no alternate reality which people could see, so as to realize that freedom and free markets outperformed Leninism, Stalinism, and Communism in every form.  Yet Follette trys to make you believe that Communism would have collapsed regardless of the US military strength and their willingness to fight Communism.  Follette is still a fine writer, but he has attempted to rewrite history; and the question is why.  Sadly, like Oliver Stone, he just takes 2 plus 2, adds some fake theory and factual distortion, and comes up with 5. I now wonder if the fine historical fiction i have read of his in the past is similarly distorted and twisted beyond all reason.  I hope and think not; simply because there is no leftist angle to describing Cathedral building (Pillars of the Earth), etc.  But i am disappointed in the second half of this book which discredits the bonafides of Follette to be able to write an entertaining AND valid novel of historical fiction.  In one word BEWARE---it appears  one of my favorite authors has lost his desire to entertain and is now trying to propagandize his followers.  It is truly sad.
Paul Hass, JD
Franklin, Indiana
2913282
Slanted viewpoint masquerading in a charming bit of historical fiction.  Disappointing.
2014158
Dracula vs. Hitler is a mash-up of a historical novel, a horror novel, and a romance.  In an effort to make the read an interactive experience the author wrote it as if he'd discovered historical documents in a warehouse somewhere.  These documents (composed of diary entries by Van Helsing, Johnathan Harker (grandson of the original Johnathan), and Hitler himself, plus communiques between German officers and lastly, an unpublished romance novel written by Van Helsing's daughter, Lucille) are supposed to convince the reader that characters in Bram Stoker's novel, Dracula really existed and Abraham Van Helsing (an old man now), and his daughter Lucille are resistance fighters in Romania during World War II.  With this premise established, the reader is then led to believe that if Van Helsing exists, that Dracula may also be real.  And when Van Helsing's resistance group finds itself losing badly in the war, Van Helsing comes up with the bright idea of resurrecting Dracula to help rid his country of Nazis.  The reader is along for the ride as the resistance fighters blow up bridges and barracks, and Dracula leaves a bloody trail of human limbs and entrails in his wake.  His rampages make it a horror novel.  His growing attachment to Van Helsing's daughter, Lucille, who is a formidable fighter herself, makes it a romance.  The writer's attention to historical details makes it a historical.  I enjoyed it.  But the tiny font in some diary entries made it a difficult read, especially when the writing was supposed to be in cursive.  Pages: 506.
3715585
there is an underlyng political agenda to the book, but overall
interesting read. Characters could have a little more depth.