Scan barcode
vanillabbt's review against another edition
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
mysterious
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
As a product of the Bridgerton series, Queen Charlotte's story was written in an entirely different light compared to the previous books. I certainly enjoyed the change in tone and pace, especially since I've found some of the Bridgerton books to have excruciatingly long chapters. š„¹ I also loved how this story was told in three perspectives, which really helped with world-building. This story was more than just a love story ā it's a tale about taking charge and welcoming change. Inspired by British history, it wasn't a secret that King George was ill but his sickness was a great mystery. I liked how Julia Quinn's book depicted his episodes, and how she didn't mince how he acted or what he felt during these fits. While most would say that the book showed his illness way lighter than it actually was, I liked how Charlotte never saw it as a reason to turn him away. The one thing that I didn't like about this read were probably the torture scenes by Dr Monro, I know that this was a different time from 2024 but it was painful for me to want to read the book during these parts. š I also wished that I got more out of Brimsley and Reynold's love story (please, Julia Quinn!) too.
bookylex's review against another edition
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
gubler2003's review against another edition
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
Best Bridgerton book by far. The love is everlasting.
jackthelad's review against another edition
emotional
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
susannas_booknook's review against another edition
1.0
I wanted to DNF this book, but Iām reading it for a book club, so I pushed through.
My first question is simply why? Why was this book written? It is clearly a transcript of the tv show and I canāt figure out what it adds other than providing another source of revenue for Julia Quinn and Shonda Rhimes. They didnāt even change the episodic nature of the story so that it would flow better in written form. But more on this later.
Before I get into this,, I KNOW this is fiction inspired by fact, but this was physically painful to read at times. Itās not really inspired by fact - itās inspired by the Bridgerton tv show, which is about as far from fact as one can get.
I get that the reason why Charlotte is black is because they are trying to justify making her black in Bridgerton, but I found the āGreat Experimentā purely laughable. Itās all well and good to claim that they are making waves and changing the world, but this is 1761 and slavery wasnāt abolished until 1834. Also, I found it a bit funny how slavery was just completely ignored in the book. It seemed a little bit convenient to me.
Georgeās madness was based on factā¦ except it didnāt happen until 1788-89. It was not something from childhood and it certainly didnāt play out like it did in this book. Also, I swear that the treatment scenes were literally lifted from the play and film āThe Madness of King Georgeā - particularly the scene from the film where George is strapped to the chair and demands that he is king before the doctor gags him and tells him he is no one. Sound familiar? Yeah, I thought so too. Also, Dr Munro is clearly based off Dr Francis Willis, who did treat George (and features in āThe Madness of King Georgeā). There even is a reference to King Lear, which is also part of āThe Madness of King Georgeā - it honestly feels like Queen Charlotte just plagiarized that movie for the scenes of madness! Also, the epilogue was a bit cute, but it never happened because, at that point, George was in Windsor, completely mad (he never really resurfaced), and Charlotte was on her deathbed in Kew palace and dead in eighteen days.
Furthermore, what little fact the book sticks to they still somehow manage to mess up. For instance, Mozart performs at Buckingham House in 1761. Mozart did go to England and perform for the King and Queen, but it was not until 1764. Also, Lady Danbury is wearing a Nigerian Topazā¦ except Nigeria did not become a country until 1960 and the word Nigeria was not coined until the late 19th century. Itās honestly so frustrating because this information is readily available in a basic Google search. Itās not hard!
But, historical complaints aside, this just was not well written. I have loved Julia Quinnās books because they are witty, romantic, and full of entertaining scenes. I have read the Bridgerton series and the Rokesby series (which I am planning on rereading soon) and I adored both series for how much fun they are. I regularly found myself laughing while reading them. But all that I loved in those books was just missing from this. The witty dialogue was missing and the romance felt nonexistent for most of the book and somewhat forced for the rest. None of the characters were compelling and there were many times where I found Charlotte absolutely insufferable. The scenes were not memorable because I honestly canāt remember most of it.
So, Iām honestly just annoyed and disappointed. I expected more from Julia Quinn and, while I was prepared somewhat for the historical inaccuracies, not even the writing could make up for it.
My first question is simply why? Why was this book written? It is clearly a transcript of the tv show and I canāt figure out what it adds other than providing another source of revenue for Julia Quinn and Shonda Rhimes. They didnāt even change the episodic nature of the story so that it would flow better in written form. But more on this later.
Before I get into this,, I KNOW this is fiction inspired by fact, but this was physically painful to read at times. Itās not really inspired by fact - itās inspired by the Bridgerton tv show, which is about as far from fact as one can get.
I get that the reason why Charlotte is black is because they are trying to justify making her black in Bridgerton, but I found the āGreat Experimentā purely laughable. Itās all well and good to claim that they are making waves and changing the world, but this is 1761 and slavery wasnāt abolished until 1834. Also, I found it a bit funny how slavery was just completely ignored in the book. It seemed a little bit convenient to me.
Georgeās madness was based on factā¦ except it didnāt happen until 1788-89. It was not something from childhood and it certainly didnāt play out like it did in this book. Also, I swear that the treatment scenes were literally lifted from the play and film āThe Madness of King Georgeā - particularly the scene from the film where George is strapped to the chair and demands that he is king before the doctor gags him and tells him he is no one. Sound familiar? Yeah, I thought so too. Also, Dr Munro is clearly based off Dr Francis Willis, who did treat George (and features in āThe Madness of King Georgeā). There even is a reference to King Lear, which is also part of āThe Madness of King Georgeā - it honestly feels like Queen Charlotte just plagiarized that movie for the scenes of madness! Also, the epilogue was a bit cute, but it never happened because, at that point, George was in Windsor, completely mad (he never really resurfaced), and Charlotte was on her deathbed in Kew palace and dead in eighteen days.
Furthermore, what little fact the book sticks to they still somehow manage to mess up. For instance, Mozart performs at Buckingham House in 1761. Mozart did go to England and perform for the King and Queen, but it was not until 1764. Also, Lady Danbury is wearing a Nigerian Topazā¦ except Nigeria did not become a country until 1960 and the word Nigeria was not coined until the late 19th century. Itās honestly so frustrating because this information is readily available in a basic Google search. Itās not hard!
But, historical complaints aside, this just was not well written. I have loved Julia Quinnās books because they are witty, romantic, and full of entertaining scenes. I have read the Bridgerton series and the Rokesby series (which I am planning on rereading soon) and I adored both series for how much fun they are. I regularly found myself laughing while reading them. But all that I loved in those books was just missing from this. The witty dialogue was missing and the romance felt nonexistent for most of the book and somewhat forced for the rest. None of the characters were compelling and there were many times where I found Charlotte absolutely insufferable. The scenes were not memorable because I honestly canāt remember most of it.
So, Iām honestly just annoyed and disappointed. I expected more from Julia Quinn and, while I was prepared somewhat for the historical inaccuracies, not even the writing could make up for it.
ttwbraswell's review against another edition
emotional
hopeful
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
3.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Mental illness
laura_doheny's review against another edition
3.0
After loving the Bridgerton books, this story was disappointing. It did, however, make me more curious to read about the real King George and Queen Charlotte.
anyia's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual content