User Profile

It is so funny when you find the same character in two different books yet in two different registers. It is good to meet them again, it is like re-encountering an old acquaintance. This historical novel has this and that – merchants, scribes, nuns, samurais, captains, the rich, the dispossessed, all so full of life, some even bigger than life. All bring to our attention issues like loyalty, honesty, corruption, fear, bravery, lust, religion. How unthinkably big power can get to be, yet how it can be defeated when enough people are determined to fight for justice and space for love no matter what.

I found especially touching how, when the main character seemingly looses everything because he refuses to be corrupted, he gains the sympathy and respect of all around him (except his bosses) all who again seemed ruthless and selfish at the beginning. May be that is why I loved it, because it gives us the triumph of good over evil that we all long for, in such a logical terms, like it is the natural thing to happen because alongside this triumph we have witnessed human and natural miseries too. And I thought the epilogue touching and emotional, not unnecessary at all.

I don't know what Mantel thought was wrong with Cromwell's name that she had to substitute it with a 'he' every time she refers to him. It would have made sense if there had been no other men in the narration, but there were and too many times it was necessary to re-read whole paragraphs to find out which 'he' she was talking about.

In a few occasions there were entire pages of irrelevant non-action and seemingly intentionally confusing writing, like when 'Liz Cromwell' seems to be flying (years after she's dead) and you're left wondering if you're reading some one's dream until a page or two later of the flight's description when it is finally explained that names of dead ladies have been given to birds.

A great novel and good historical fiction as the rest of the reviews show, but these unnecessary gimmicks that distract from the content of the novel make it a bit difficult to understand that it got so many awards.

In a few places it is a page-turner, but mostly it is not.

Good writing is that which is easy to read. This was not always.

I don't know what Mantel thought was wrong with Cromwell's name that she had to substitute it with a 'he' every time she refers to him. It would have made sense if there had been no other men in the narration, but there were and too many times it was necessary to re-read whole paragraphs to find out which 'he' she was talking about.

In a few occasions there were entire pages of irrelevant non-action and seemingly intentionally confusing writing, like when 'Liz Cromwell' seems to be flying (years after she's dead) and you're left wondering if you're reading some one's dream until a page or two later of the flight's description when it is finally explained that names of dead ladies have been given to birds.

A great novel and good historical fiction as the rest of the reviews show, but these unnecessary gimmicks that distract from the content of the novel make it a bit difficult to understand that it got so many awards.

In a few places it is a page-turner, but mostly it is not.

Good writing is that which is easy to read. This was not always

Another one of Mitchell. Like Cloud Atlas it makes a strong bet on how this world – or at least our world – will be / is bound to change beyond recognition. It is good that readers of a mainstream novel are reminded how lucky we are to have endless and reliable supply of things like heat, electricity, communication channels. Journalists in not-sto-lucky places don't transmit this enough when reporting how life is in war torn countries, or even not officially at war, where there is no internet and electricity is available randomly. The story itself falls in the fantasy genre, but tehre are themes of human interest that makes one put the book aside and think – the greatness of true love, teenage problems, family, tenderness, and the arrogance and privilege, revenge and sorrow. And personal sacrifice. The setback is that in too many passages there are sentences that are puzzles that will be solved only later in the plot. There are so many of them I only fully enjoyed and understood the book the second time I read it – but then it was sublime and most moving.

It is so funny when you find the same character in two different books yet in two different registers. It is good to meet them again, it is like re-encountering an old acquaintance. This historical novel has this and that – merchants, scribers, nuns, samurais, captains, the rich, the dispossed, all so full of life, some even bigger than life. All bring to our attention issues like loyalty, honesty, corruption, fear, bravery, lust, eligion. How unthinkably big power can get to be, yet how it can be defeated when enough people are determined to fight for justice and space for love no matter what.

I found especially touching how, when the main character seemingly looses all because he refuses to be corrupted, he gains the simpathy and respect of all around him (except his bosses) all who again seemed ruthless and selfish at the beginning. May be that is why I loved it, because it gives us the triumph of good over evil that we all long for, in such a logical terms, like it is the natural thing to happen because alongside this triumph we have witnessed human and natural miseries too.
And I thought the epilogue touching and emotional, not unnecessary at all.

The best bits are when a 'lowborn' (a dispossessed) gets the change to point out to a 'highborn' (a privileged) 'this is what happens to us when you lot play your game of thrones'. So universal and timeless.

Now, on with the merciless critique:

Endless lists and descriptions of things that seem to have no relevance for the scene in question, or anywhere else in the book for that matter. Then into the action, which has to be explained by flashback of events that happened in the past, some times interlaced so much with the 'present' that you don't know if you are in the room described or in the fields years ago.

Then the chapter stops in the middle of the action, or in the middle of a conversation, to leave you in a 'cliffhanger'.

The next chapter that will relate to that character will be a few chapters afterwards (or maybe a book later) and will invariably start again with a lengthy description of places, clothes and food, only to start off new action or dialogue months after that cliffhanger, about which you will find out (or not) in between paragraphs relating to current and past events.

However: an accurate depiction of how politics work in real life. Once you get used and over those shortcomings, I see it as a kind of 1984 only set in the past in order to explain how politics - and all human relations for that matter - work. From what I know of History, it is well applicable to nowadays politics and also all the way back to the time humankind settled down to plant food efficiently so that some privileged could spend time doing other, more fun, less useful things, while generally living a lot better.