Scan barcode
maria_pulver's review against another edition
5.0
The book follows the pattern of the first one of the series while the intrigue is different as the female heroine is.
This still works very well for the main moral line: too many people loose their freedom bit by bit without paying attention and they ignore horrors happening to others without any moral qualms or any inner driven need to help these oppressed.
This still works very well for the main moral line: too many people loose their freedom bit by bit without paying attention and they ignore horrors happening to others without any moral qualms or any inner driven need to help these oppressed.
jhouses's review against another edition
4.0
El Führer visita Inglaterra y va a asistir a una representación de Hamlet. Una conspiración de actores y comunistas prepara un magnicidio mientras el inspector Carmichael medra a su pesar en la nueva policia Inglesa.
tracey_stewart's review
3.0
I kind of liked the first book in this trilogy. I didn't like this one nearly so much. (I loathed the third one, but I'll get to that in due time.) It takes place not so long after the first one, and the story now centers around an actress who finds herself embroiled in an anarchist plot to kill Hitler. Meanwhile, she is slated to star as a revolutionary female Hamlet, and while that was almost a saving grace … the author's knowledge of Shakespeare, and Hamlet, let her down, which let me down.
"I imagine Claudius as a man bad enough to commit murder, but with enough conscience to come to feel guilty." Uh, no, that's not your imagination. That's the way he's written. That's exactly the way he's written.
The cast and crew is all stirred up about their iconoclastic production. "…The whole indecisive thing did make more sense for a girl, who wouldn't expect to inherit automatically. A son and heir being usurped would be a fool to do nothing about it…" Yeah, but ... That's not how it worked. There was no "inherit automatically". The kingship in Denmark in Hamlet's time period worked entirely differently. So – this is a non sequitur. And ignorant, for a dramaturg. And rather offensively sexist, I don't think I really need to add (although in a book I liked I'd be excusing that based on the setting).
I did enjoy this moment, regarding whether it makes more sense for Hamlet to be a woman: "Mrs. Tring laughed. 'If it made more sense, you can trust that Shakespeare would have written it that way round first off and saved a lot of trouble.' *hugs Mrs. Tring*
I think another small reason I began to dislike this series was the narration. The first book alternated between one male and one female character, and I liked both. Or at least became used to both. While the male character – and narrator - carry over for this second book, the female character (and thus narrator) is new, and I didn't enjoy her reading as much. (I believe it was she who pronounced Boedicea as "Bow-disha", which is an entirely new one on me.)
It might not have been so much the narrator, however, as that character, Viola. In a way, I liked the divided perspective she developed, with half of her continuing to work on her role as Hamlet – while all the time the other half of her is participating in plans that will destroy the play. And the theatre. And, hopefully, Hitler. She just wore out her welcome with me after a while. Rather like the heroine of the first book, she's not the sharpest crayon in the box, and … I just didn't like her. When one of her sisters died, she says at one point, "I went to the funeral, even though it was up in Yorkshire, and meant hours on a blacked out train". Gosh. And she was only your sister. That's mighty decent of you. Heroic, even. Here's a medal. She is simplistic about her motivations for her planned act of anarchy; granted, it doesn't require any complex reasoning to know Hitler is evil, but (like Lucy from [b:Farthing|183742|The Animals of Farthing Wood (Farthing Wood, #1)|Colin Dann|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1300273261s/183742.jpg|177574]) she's rather childlike.
"It was a detail that had always stuck with me, even when I thought it was just a horror story. It was the stuff of nightmare, being given soap and going into a shower but the soap is a stone and the showerheads vent poison gas."
And there is Inspector Carmichael again, being drawn deeper into a position which could endanger his relationship with his (male) lover (homosexuality being seen as nearly as bad a Judaism in this Nazi-riddled alternate world). He's kind of a hard-luck fellow – nothing seems to go his way. So when, toward the end, he is cheerful about the case being nearly over, it's a clear and certain sign that something is about to go catastrophically pear-shaped. He tells himself, "Not for very much longer now!" And I said, Uh oh.
I just didn't enjoy it much. I didn't like the taste going down, and I didn't like the aftertaste. But I'd already bought the sequel…
"I imagine Claudius as a man bad enough to commit murder, but with enough conscience to come to feel guilty." Uh, no, that's not your imagination. That's the way he's written. That's exactly the way he's written.
The cast and crew is all stirred up about their iconoclastic production. "…The whole indecisive thing did make more sense for a girl, who wouldn't expect to inherit automatically. A son and heir being usurped would be a fool to do nothing about it…" Yeah, but ... That's not how it worked. There was no "inherit automatically". The kingship in Denmark in Hamlet's time period worked entirely differently. So – this is a non sequitur. And ignorant, for a dramaturg. And rather offensively sexist, I don't think I really need to add (although in a book I liked I'd be excusing that based on the setting).
I did enjoy this moment, regarding whether it makes more sense for Hamlet to be a woman: "Mrs. Tring laughed. 'If it made more sense, you can trust that Shakespeare would have written it that way round first off and saved a lot of trouble.' *hugs Mrs. Tring*
I think another small reason I began to dislike this series was the narration. The first book alternated between one male and one female character, and I liked both. Or at least became used to both. While the male character – and narrator - carry over for this second book, the female character (and thus narrator) is new, and I didn't enjoy her reading as much. (I believe it was she who pronounced Boedicea as "Bow-disha", which is an entirely new one on me.)
It might not have been so much the narrator, however, as that character, Viola. In a way, I liked the divided perspective she developed, with half of her continuing to work on her role as Hamlet – while all the time the other half of her is participating in plans that will destroy the play. And the theatre. And, hopefully, Hitler. She just wore out her welcome with me after a while. Rather like the heroine of the first book, she's not the sharpest crayon in the box, and … I just didn't like her. When one of her sisters died, she says at one point, "I went to the funeral, even though it was up in Yorkshire, and meant hours on a blacked out train". Gosh. And she was only your sister. That's mighty decent of you. Heroic, even. Here's a medal. She is simplistic about her motivations for her planned act of anarchy; granted, it doesn't require any complex reasoning to know Hitler is evil, but (like Lucy from [b:Farthing|183742|The Animals of Farthing Wood (Farthing Wood, #1)|Colin Dann|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1300273261s/183742.jpg|177574]) she's rather childlike.
"It was a detail that had always stuck with me, even when I thought it was just a horror story. It was the stuff of nightmare, being given soap and going into a shower but the soap is a stone and the showerheads vent poison gas."
And there is Inspector Carmichael again, being drawn deeper into a position which could endanger his relationship with his (male) lover (homosexuality being seen as nearly as bad a Judaism in this Nazi-riddled alternate world). He's kind of a hard-luck fellow – nothing seems to go his way. So when, toward the end, he is cheerful about the case being nearly over, it's a clear and certain sign that something is about to go catastrophically pear-shaped. He tells himself, "Not for very much longer now!" And I said, Uh oh.
I just didn't enjoy it much. I didn't like the taste going down, and I didn't like the aftertaste. But I'd already bought the sequel…
lark_spur's review against another edition
4.0
I liked this better than Farthing, the first in the trilogy. With the world solidly established in the first book, any new bits of information about society and government serve to add more depth and scariness. The plot moves fairly quickly and once again the characters are interesting.
chirson's review against another edition
4.0
I don't read too many thrillers, but this one reminded me of the experience I would have with them as a teen, usually resorting to a thriller after I'd read through my stash and had to borrow books from camp friends. Summer, days before smartphones (or personal computers!), hardly any TV, no work school, reading hundreds of pages a day.
It was a bit more pessimistic than I like my books, but once again, perfectly fitting for 2016, reminding us of the danger of letting excessive fear guide your choices. Fascist Europe looks so very believable in this, and the evil-- so extreme and yet so easy to pretend not to see it (see also, 2016).
I loved the characters and, most importantly, the mood. The book is atmospheric and an ultimate page-turner. I loved the relatioships between the sisters; whenever Walton used the sisterhood to introduce retardations, it was captivating for me (maybe due to my own large family; I do have quite a few siblings). I was less convinced by some aspects of the plot but it wasn't a large issue, merely something that strained my suspension of disbelief briefly.
On to book three.
It was a bit more pessimistic than I like my books, but once again, perfectly fitting for 2016, reminding us of the danger of letting excessive fear guide your choices. Fascist Europe looks so very believable in this, and the evil-- so extreme and yet so easy to pretend not to see it (see also, 2016).
I loved the characters and, most importantly, the mood. The book is atmospheric and an ultimate page-turner. I loved the relatioships between the sisters; whenever Walton used the sisterhood to introduce retardations, it was captivating for me (maybe due to my own large family; I do have quite a few siblings). I was less convinced by some aspects of the plot
Spoiler
(the police seemed terribly ineffectual to me, and the fact that the plot was being investigated by the police rather than any special force seemed strange, although perhaps time-appropriate. Still, shouldn't they have read files on all the remaining actors?)On to book three.
afox98's review against another edition
4.0
Another chilling look from Jo Walton at what might have happened if Hitler had lived and made an uneasy truce with England. The main character in book 2 of this series, Viola, is so much less sure of herself than the main character in book one, but I think that was necessary for her to tell her story. England is sliding into fascism, and the story centers on the plot by a handful of people to try to turn things around in a violent way. It's bizarre to think of such a drastically different postwar world, but creative and interesting to read.
sarahd3's review against another edition
4.0
Better than the first book in the series. I think it was because I like Voila's character more than the woman in the first book.
sunflowerjess's review
challenging
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
The author did a fabulous job writing from two different characters' perspectives - first person for Viola and third person for Carmichael. Each had their own very unique voice, and flipping between these two characters really helped keep the tension mounting throughout the book. It's scary to think what could have happened if WWII had gone differently; this series is a thought-provoking study of one possible world. I will definitely read the third installment to this series.
leavingsealevel's review against another edition
3.0
Addicting. Even though I actively dislike most of the characters, and even though the premise is completely disturbing.