Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
lighthearted
relaxing
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
In a sweeping story based on the works of Dutch Golden Age painter Sarah van Baalbergen, Dominic Smith goes from 17th Century Holland, to mid-20th century New York and ends in 21st century Australia. Find out why I found this book so fascinating in my review here. https://tcl-bookreviews.com/2016/04/28/landscapes-of-deception/
art history meets mystery & intrigue. i enjoyed the read though it was slow paced at times
Loved the time and place! I would recommend to anyone who liked [b:Girl With a Pearl Earring|2865|Girl With a Pearl Earring|Tracy Chevalier|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1327197580s/2865.jpg|3358875]. The story is told both in the historical time and modern time periods which made for a stronger connection to the artwork for me.
3.5 ish. Honestly, if there ever was an audience for this book, I'm it. To a scary degree. I'm a Dutch-American professional painter obsessed with studying art and cultural history who grew up with NYC in my backyard and my family is from Heemstede. It's pretty surreal. Not a single reference, painting, technique, material or location (outside of Australia) went over my head. Which is a crazy feeling, like being in on a joke. That said, this book was alright.
It warmed up slowly and cooled off just as slowly. The author seemed acutely aware of the way he set you up for assumptions and in the direct next sentence he would dispell what you were expecting, and it came off as self consciousness. Rather than write the story through or take a different tact, he spelled it out and then essentially said 'it's not what you're thinking.'
Also, the ending was awfully predictable. Which goes right back to his patterning things out in predictable ways. The writing style, however, is witty and (I rarely say this) pretty brilliant. That's the biggest reason I kept going. A bit heavy, slogging, and overwritten at points (legit, did not need to know the lamp in the lounge was blown glass, you could've saved me my mind working over every tedious detail), but it was a good book to savor. I just wish there'd been more action and emotion to it and it was less cerebral. There was so much talk of anger, but none of it materialized apart from academic acts of rougery or a terse comment. Someone needed to smash something, not just drink too much wine and take a nap. It just all felt so lukewarm.
Worth the read I want to say, obviously the author is a beyond talented wordsmith and meticulous, but he should listen to more jazz (maybe throw in a joint) and really loosen up a bit more. Also, I feel like I'm seriously taunting while living in a glass house here, but that cover image, not the best.
It warmed up slowly and cooled off just as slowly. The author seemed acutely aware of the way he set you up for assumptions and in the direct next sentence he would dispell what you were expecting, and it came off as self consciousness. Rather than write the story through or take a different tact, he spelled it out and then essentially said 'it's not what you're thinking.'
Also, the ending was awfully predictable. Which goes right back to his patterning things out in predictable ways. The writing style, however, is witty and (I rarely say this) pretty brilliant. That's the biggest reason I kept going. A bit heavy, slogging, and overwritten at points (legit, did not need to know the lamp in the lounge was blown glass, you could've saved me my mind working over every tedious detail), but it was a good book to savor. I just wish there'd been more action and emotion to it and it was less cerebral. There was so much talk of anger, but none of it materialized apart from academic acts of rougery or a terse comment. Someone needed to smash something, not just drink too much wine and take a nap. It just all felt so lukewarm.
Worth the read I want to say, obviously the author is a beyond talented wordsmith and meticulous, but he should listen to more jazz (maybe throw in a joint) and really loosen up a bit more. Also, I feel like I'm seriously taunting while living in a glass house here, but that cover image, not the best.
While I quite enjoyed the main plot, I felt it was plodding in some spots.
I started out liking this book a lot and then not so much. First-- it has the settings I would like: 17th Century Netherlands, 1950's Manhattan, and present day Sydney. It's about little known 17th century Dutch women artists, and Vermeer is discussed a lot. It's about women's lack of recognition in the art world-- not just as artists, but as museum curators and restorers. It's about the nature of forgery and creation. So far everything's a win. Then a wealthy, older, white man finds out that his heirloom (one that he doesn't even like that much) has been stolen and forged and seeks payback from the young, vulnerable female college student who was manipulated by another unscrupulous man into creating forgery. Of course, what he takes from her in exchange is far greater than his painting and his pride. At that point I started skimming the rest of the book. I was frustrated by the author who put forth a rather feminist text only to fall back on the same old trope of man putting woman into place and basically getting away with it scot-free, but who also didn't want to acknowledge that this is what he did as an author. It's like he wants to be a feminist storyteller, but cannot punish the man for his wrong-doing.
Two stars only for the nice descriptive writing. I have just remembered that it is not fun to read about women damaged by men, when a man is writing about it. Apologist and relentlessly depressing.
"“Her dissertation on Dutch women painters of the Golden Age sits unfinished in her apartment, a half-typed sheet of paper mildewing in the mouth of a Remington. It's been months since she worked on it and she sometimes finds herself staring at the machine's bullnose profile or the chrome-plated carriage return, thinking: Remington also makes rifles.”
I read this for a book club, and there are so many ways into this novel with the various timelines, Dutch life and painting in the 17th century, the mystery of the forgery, and a love of art. The one I connected with most was probably Ellie in the 1950s New York timeline, before a certain large plot development happens and when we spend time with her painting and (not) writing her dissertation. But the parts never quite came together for me into something larger.
Although between this and [b:The Goldfinch|17333223|The Goldfinch|Donna Tartt|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1378710146l/17333223._SY75_.jpg|24065147] I feel like I know way more about 17th Century Dutch paintings and forgery than I did before.
I read this for a book club, and there are so many ways into this novel with the various timelines, Dutch life and painting in the 17th century, the mystery of the forgery, and a love of art. The one I connected with most was probably Ellie in the 1950s New York timeline, before a certain large plot development happens and when we spend time with her painting and (not) writing her dissertation. But the parts never quite came together for me into something larger.
Although between this and [b:The Goldfinch|17333223|The Goldfinch|Donna Tartt|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1378710146l/17333223._SY75_.jpg|24065147] I feel like I know way more about 17th Century Dutch paintings and forgery than I did before.
I wavered between a 3.5 and 4 on this.
The modern parts were generally more interesting than the parts involving Sara de Vos' life itself- her pieces were there to keep the steady trickle of information flowing and forming for what was going on in the other two pieces of the story (set in the 1950s and 2000s). However, it felt mostly there to aid the story of those two time periods and their characters, rather than enriching on its own.
The modern parts were generally more interesting than the parts involving Sara de Vos' life itself- her pieces were there to keep the steady trickle of information flowing and forming for what was going on in the other two pieces of the story (set in the 1950s and 2000s). However, it felt mostly there to aid the story of those two time periods and their characters, rather than enriching on its own.