Sign up
Search
Advanced search settings

Search only in certain items:

Search results
All (382)
Content
People
Apps
Books
Orbs
Movies
Music
Podcasts
Shows
Tabletop Games
Tech
TV
Video Games
YouTube Channels
Videos
40x40

Deborah (162 KP) rated Queen of Silks in Books

Dec 21, 2018  
QO
Queen of Silks
Vanora Bennett | 2009
4
4.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
Overall I found this to be a well written novel with evidently a good deal of research into the silk industry. However, the depiction of real historical events became closely woven (no pun intended!) into the plot, but this for me was a weakness.

In some places the chronology just wasn't right. In other places the internal logic was weak. For example, over the instance of the execution of Hastings, in novels which cover this event the author needs to come up with their own explanation of this as the truth is covered over by time and Tudor propoganda. Bennett makes little or no explanation for the event and has 'Dickon' acting remarkably out of character in this one scene - and I mean that following her depiction in the book and not from my personal opinion. Additionally, for someone who has had a liaison with Dickon over a period of years, Isabel, the protagonist, shows remarkably little understanding of his character and I found her at times irritating and unsympathetic.

I also felt that in the wrapping up of the story, Elizabeth of York is shown to act in a ruthless way which doesn't match at all with what we know of her in her time as the first Tudor queen. Again, failures of internal and external logic for me.

To conclude, a well-written book, and I am not adverse by reading more from this author, but for me the historical event aspect didn't hang together well enough and was at times frustrating. I think it would have been a better novel if it left the larger political landscape well alone.
  
40x40

Deborah (162 KP) rated The Tudor Rose in Books

Dec 21, 2018  
TT
The Tudor Rose
Margaret Campbell Barnes | 2009
4
4.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
This book was written over 50 years ago, so I suppose we must make some allowances for light that has been shed on past events between now and then, but still, there were a number of silly errors in this book which didn't help its credibility: the pre-contract was with Eleanor Butler (nee Talbot) and for some odd reason the book gives her given name as Joan, and Edmund Tudor died of the plague and not in battle.

Overall the book follows a somewhat traditionalist stance, although Henry Tudor comes across as pretty cold and unlikeable. I wasn't convinced by some of the internal logic and some of the characterisation though. Anne Neville, for example. She is a figure we really don't know that much about, but it's hard to conceive she could be as simple and naive as she is portrayed here! Barnes does try it on a bit with trying to make us wonder if 'Perkin' is really Richard of York (and here the historical novelist has licence, because we really don't know!), despite having Bess keep adamantly stating that she knows her brothers are dead. We're also told that Elizabeth Woodville believes they died, which might lead one to question why she would have a finger in a rebellion against her daughter as queen consort? And if everybody really believed this, why did Sir William Stanley lose his head for saying he wouldn't fight against 'Perkin' if he was really a son of Edward IV - and that is in the historical record as well as this novel. There's an awful lot about Bess believing both Richard and Henry have potentially been culpable in acts of murder, but she herself in this novel is guilty of an act of treachery that is at least as bad!

Not a badly written novel, but I found it frustrating overall!