Scan barcode
alexmpeachey's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
4.75
Hated the characters, loved the book.
azagee's review against another edition
1.0
Not good enough to make up for the gross way they refer to each other as siblings, constantly, even though they are only related through marriage.
doriastories's review against another edition
3.0
The language ranges from elevated to saucy, and the twists and turns are clever, as one would expect from Aphra Behn. But this is a long, sad, and sordid tale that ends badly for everyone involved. The book is most interesting from a historical perspective, in that it may be - scholars debate this point - the first published English novel, made more piquant by virtue of the fact that it was written by a notorious female playwright.
In fact, the tortuously drawn-out love affairs of the ostensible two main characters, whose relations become increasingly toxic to each other and everyone around them, functions as an elaborate backdrop to the real story. This is a thinly disguised semi-historical account of a seeming secondary character, Prince Cesario, who is based on a historical personage, the ill-fated Duke of Monmouth, bastard son of King Charles II of England. It is only at the tail-end of the third part of the Love Letters that "Cesario" (Monmouth) takes center stage, and his story is told - somewhat elaborately, and wit a fair amount of stagecraft, as befits a playwright-cum-novelist.
Not really to my taste, and probably not to the taste of contemporary readers, whose sensibilities are far removed from Aphra Behn's original 16th century audience. But interesting nonetheless for anyone wanting to test the literary-historical waters of a different time and place.
In fact, the tortuously drawn-out love affairs of the ostensible two main characters, whose relations become increasingly toxic to each other and everyone around them, functions as an elaborate backdrop to the real story. This is a thinly disguised semi-historical account of a seeming secondary character, Prince Cesario, who is based on a historical personage, the ill-fated Duke of Monmouth, bastard son of King Charles II of England. It is only at the tail-end of the third part of the Love Letters that "Cesario" (Monmouth) takes center stage, and his story is told - somewhat elaborately, and wit a fair amount of stagecraft, as befits a playwright-cum-novelist.
Not really to my taste, and probably not to the taste of contemporary readers, whose sensibilities are far removed from Aphra Behn's original 16th century audience. But interesting nonetheless for anyone wanting to test the literary-historical waters of a different time and place.
emilyclairem's review against another edition
4.0
I think, like a lot of people, I associate pre-19th century literature with boring and dry reads. That doesn't necessarily mean bad, and I have read exceptions to this, but that's what I expect from a book written in the late 1600s. Boy, was I ever wrong with this book. It is one of the most buckwild things I've ever read. I didn't see any of the plot twists coming, and though in retrospect they're perhaps not as wild as they felt at the time, I gasped far too often while reading it. Of all things, I did not expect this to be a page turner, but it was. And I felt so strongly about the characters! Sylvia is THE problematic fave and Philander is the biggest fuckboy I've ever seen in my life. Clearly, all I needed to reassess my opinion of the long 18th century literature was to read Aphra Behn.
I knocked one star off just because I could absolutely care less about the politics in the book. I know it's such a crucial part of understanding the novel, and I completely appreciate how well it's done here, but I've never been able to make myself care about political stuff. Especially towards the end of the novel, my eyes completely glossed over the words anytime Cesario was mentioned.
Despite my own failings with that, I am so pleasantly surprised by this work!
I knocked one star off just because I could absolutely care less about the politics in the book. I know it's such a crucial part of understanding the novel, and I completely appreciate how well it's done here, but I've never been able to make myself care about political stuff. Especially towards the end of the novel, my eyes completely glossed over the words anytime Cesario was mentioned.
Despite my own failings with that, I am so pleasantly surprised by this work!
ldjdbooks's review
adventurous
challenging
informative
reflective
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? It's complicated
3.5
More...