Scan barcode
sophiezhu's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
hgb's review against another edition
2.0
Everyone else has given a fine plot summary for this book, so I won't waste any time doing that. Something I notice not a lot of people commenting on, however, which I found highly aggravating, I think I do need to mention.
I found this book to be INCREDIBLY sexist. Before I go into details, let me first say: I'm a History major, so I do understand that the time period was in many ways inherently sexist, and I also have no trouble believing that a Sultan and a fictional Machiavelli, among others, were themselves sexist.
However, this book is entitled the EnchantRESS of Florence, so I assume I can be forgiven for my presumptions that somewhere along the way we would meet a strong, powerful woman, or at least that a modern writer like Rushdie wouldn't stoop to the prejudices of the time.
Every woman in this book is either a whore or is treated as one. Reviewers have commented that the overwhelming sexuality of the book can be off-putting; it is that overwhelmingly sexual because there is not a single female character who is doing anything BUT have sex. The men fight wars, contemplate the meaning of life and power, travel, paint, hunt, read, write, and listen to stories, before getting back to their women who have sex.
If a woman's not having sex, she's contemplating sex, or venting her frustration about the fact that she's not having sex, or showing her jealousy that her husband really wants to have sex with other women more than her. In fact, most of the book seems to be about women who aren't good enough at having sex, and so the men have to go off and imagine other women (or find prostitutes) who are good at having sex.
And our Enchantress, for whom the book is named? Guess what her wonderful, magic powers are? She makes men want to have sex with her! This is called, in Rushdie's elegant prose, "falling in love," but in the end no one actually ever gets to know her, so how on earth can they be in love with her?
She's slightly different from the others, though, because she happens to also have sex with another woman. WOAH. Talk about empowering. I'm so glad all those feminists worked so hard for us to achieve equality, so that our literary sisters could have sex with not just men, but also women.
I read the entire book, because I felt I couldn't properly judge it otherwise, and I desperately hoped it would get better, but it doesn't. If you're the kind of person for whom this would be a bother, I definitely do not recommend this book. If, on the other hand, a narrative that degrades females at every opportunity sounds like your kind of thing, enjoy.
I found this book to be INCREDIBLY sexist. Before I go into details, let me first say: I'm a History major, so I do understand that the time period was in many ways inherently sexist, and I also have no trouble believing that a Sultan and a fictional Machiavelli, among others, were themselves sexist.
However, this book is entitled the EnchantRESS of Florence, so I assume I can be forgiven for my presumptions that somewhere along the way we would meet a strong, powerful woman, or at least that a modern writer like Rushdie wouldn't stoop to the prejudices of the time.
Every woman in this book is either a whore or is treated as one. Reviewers have commented that the overwhelming sexuality of the book can be off-putting; it is that overwhelmingly sexual because there is not a single female character who is doing anything BUT have sex. The men fight wars, contemplate the meaning of life and power, travel, paint, hunt, read, write, and listen to stories, before getting back to their women who have sex.
If a woman's not having sex, she's contemplating sex, or venting her frustration about the fact that she's not having sex, or showing her jealousy that her husband really wants to have sex with other women more than her. In fact, most of the book seems to be about women who aren't good enough at having sex, and so the men have to go off and imagine other women (or find prostitutes) who are good at having sex.
And our Enchantress, for whom the book is named? Guess what her wonderful, magic powers are? She makes men want to have sex with her! This is called, in Rushdie's elegant prose, "falling in love," but in the end no one actually ever gets to know her, so how on earth can they be in love with her?
She's slightly different from the others, though, because she happens to also have sex with another woman. WOAH. Talk about empowering. I'm so glad all those feminists worked so hard for us to achieve equality, so that our literary sisters could have sex with not just men, but also women.
I read the entire book, because I felt I couldn't properly judge it otherwise, and I desperately hoped it would get better, but it doesn't. If you're the kind of person for whom this would be a bother, I definitely do not recommend this book. If, on the other hand, a narrative that degrades females at every opportunity sounds like your kind of thing, enjoy.
rebeccabateman's review against another edition
2.0
If rare rubies and diamonds were buried in a barrel of sewage would you reach through the depths and grasp them? Or would you shudder and recoil?
I'm not sure I would encourage this acquisition; just as I'm not sure I can recommend this book.
Still, I waded through the filth and found beautiful gems. (I just need to go take a shower now.)
I suppose [a:Gabriel Garcia Marquez]'s [b:One Hundred Years of Solitude|320|One Hundred Years of Solitude|Gabriel García Márquez|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327881361s/320.jpg|3295655] prepared me for this book. Once you understand Magical Realism, you have a greater appreciation for what is being accomplished, and this work of Salmon Rushdie's has a very similar feel to OHYOS (including warped sexual themes and oodles of misogyny).
Here are two early examples of his wonderful use of imagery (there were more throughout, but I became so engrossed at those times, that I forgot to note them:
Language upon a silver tongue affords enchantment enough.
There were so many chains winding around him that he could imagine, in the darkness, that he had somehow been encased in a larger body, the body of a man of iron.
However, despite some lovely moments, and some fascinating correlations of history that made me want to do more research, Rushdie failed to develop any of his characters. They were all hollow one and two dimensional figures. His style of prose was beautiful but also tediously repetitive and rambling.
The jewels of this novel are sublime, but how they would have sparkled with more editing and less detritus.
Note: He uses the F Bomb more than he uses punctuation.
I'm not sure I would encourage this acquisition; just as I'm not sure I can recommend this book.
Still, I waded through the filth and found beautiful gems. (I just need to go take a shower now.)
I suppose [a:Gabriel Garcia Marquez]'s [b:One Hundred Years of Solitude|320|One Hundred Years of Solitude|Gabriel García Márquez|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327881361s/320.jpg|3295655] prepared me for this book. Once you understand Magical Realism, you have a greater appreciation for what is being accomplished, and this work of Salmon Rushdie's has a very similar feel to OHYOS (including warped sexual themes and oodles of misogyny).
Here are two early examples of his wonderful use of imagery (there were more throughout, but I became so engrossed at those times, that I forgot to note them:
Language upon a silver tongue affords enchantment enough.
There were so many chains winding around him that he could imagine, in the darkness, that he had somehow been encased in a larger body, the body of a man of iron.
However, despite some lovely moments, and some fascinating correlations of history that made me want to do more research, Rushdie failed to develop any of his characters. They were all hollow one and two dimensional figures. His style of prose was beautiful but also tediously repetitive and rambling.
The jewels of this novel are sublime, but how they would have sparkled with more editing and less detritus.
Note: He uses the F Bomb more than he uses punctuation.
blchandler9000's review against another edition
4.0
The second of my "hospital books", which I saved all summer to read during what ended up being my 9 day marathon at Weiss.
I love Rushdie. What especially captures me while I'm reading his work is his passion for the English language. He plays with it, crafts it. He's like a chocolatier for prose. This novel is no exception. The language and ideas here are frequently on display, so much so that the book made me smile at its cleverness countless times. (And its cleverness never seemed obnoxious, just delightful.)
The book features a story within a story format, where a young European man arrives at the court of the Indian emperor Akbar and proceeds to weave a yarn involving three Florentine friends. One of them grows up to be Machiavelli, another a solitary homebody, another a Turkish mercenary. Along the way they encounter beautiful women, the last one on that list being the woman of the book's title.
Clearly this book was heavily researched, for almost every character (save a few big ones) has an historical counterpart. Even imaginary queens dreamed up by Akbar have some kind of cultural precedence.
My only qualm with the book is that it has no plot device that follows through the whole book. It is, instead, a series of adventures and experiences (much like life, admittedly) made by the three friends. The beginning mystery of the book (the European visitor claims he is Akbar's uncle, a chronological and geographical conundrum) gets lost in the stories and I found myself reading not for the tale, but the writing.
I love Rushdie. What especially captures me while I'm reading his work is his passion for the English language. He plays with it, crafts it. He's like a chocolatier for prose. This novel is no exception. The language and ideas here are frequently on display, so much so that the book made me smile at its cleverness countless times. (And its cleverness never seemed obnoxious, just delightful.)
The book features a story within a story format, where a young European man arrives at the court of the Indian emperor Akbar and proceeds to weave a yarn involving three Florentine friends. One of them grows up to be Machiavelli, another a solitary homebody, another a Turkish mercenary. Along the way they encounter beautiful women, the last one on that list being the woman of the book's title.
Clearly this book was heavily researched, for almost every character (save a few big ones) has an historical counterpart. Even imaginary queens dreamed up by Akbar have some kind of cultural precedence.
My only qualm with the book is that it has no plot device that follows through the whole book. It is, instead, a series of adventures and experiences (much like life, admittedly) made by the three friends. The beginning mystery of the book (the European visitor claims he is Akbar's uncle, a chronological and geographical conundrum) gets lost in the stories and I found myself reading not for the tale, but the writing.
megan_eightball's review against another edition
4.0
This books takes its time getting to its point, which made it controversial at bookclub. We agreed that it was not a page turner. Its characters meander across countries and Rushdie takes his time describing scenes and anecdotes along the way, poetically and with humor but not with urgency. It's good for sitting down and immersing oneself. It's not good bus reading, and those who tried to skim got confused by the windy sentence structures, profusion of characters, and dubious reliability of the narrator. I thought it was beautifully written, and worth slowing down to savor.
In the end, I found the characters were sympathetic, but it was only in the latter half of the book that they were developed enough for me to start caring about what happened to them. I found the character of the king to be the most deeply developed, and his choices interesting.
There was a whole lot of magical realism, paired with characters who exaggerate. I enjoyed the fairytale quality that it produced.
It was Arabian Nights-ish, where it seemed to be many episodes and anecdotes that loosely fit together to eventually answer a mystery. A chapter a night before bed might have been an ideal way to read it. I wouldn't have executed the storyteller midway.
In the end, I found the characters were sympathetic, but it was only in the latter half of the book that they were developed enough for me to start caring about what happened to them. I found the character of the king to be the most deeply developed, and his choices interesting.
There was a whole lot of magical realism, paired with characters who exaggerate. I enjoyed the fairytale quality that it produced.
It was Arabian Nights-ish, where it seemed to be many episodes and anecdotes that loosely fit together to eventually answer a mystery. A chapter a night before bed might have been an ideal way to read it. I wouldn't have executed the storyteller midway.
rdebner's review against another edition
4.0
I love books where there is a story (or two or three) within a story. It takes a while for this book to get to that point -- the set-up sometimes felt a little clunky and I was starting to wonder if the book was going anywhere. Once it gets into the main story within a story, the book really moves along and is quite engrossing. There is a fine tradition of books like this - e.g., the Decameron, Red Earth and Pouring Rain, among many others. I don't think it is quite as good as these, but it is still a fine novel.
tabularasablog's review against another edition
4.0
Despite being a bit rushed at times and slightly dull at others; despite bordering, sometimes, on pretentious; many stories in this book left a huge impression on me. I have always been fascinated by the Mughal history of India and having grown up on tales of Birbal and his antics in Akbar's court, the book brought back the fondest memories of my childhood.
http://peskypiksipesternomi.blogspot.in/2013/09/the-enchantress-of-florence-by-salman.html
http://peskypiksipesternomi.blogspot.in/2013/09/the-enchantress-of-florence-by-salman.html
saxamaholly's review against another edition
4.0
I was going to give this book five stars, but it seemed to get kind of bogged down in the last 100 pages. Still love Rushdie's writing style, and loved this book.
alexctelander's review against another edition
3.0
history and fable, making it seem like an enchanting tale á la "1001 Nights" that leaves one wondering which parts of it are true and which are from the imaginative mind of Rushdie. An enigmatic character from distant Florence pays a visit to the Mughal emperor Akbar the Great. Through Rushdie's eyes, we see two very difference worlds: the high renaissance of Italy juxtaposed with that of India.
The magic in this story is indirect and subtle, lending it a romantic and fantastic air that simply adds to the setting and plot. It is Salman Rushdie at his best, telling wonderful, moving, magical stories within stories.
For more book reviews and exclusive author interviews, go to BookBanter.
The magic in this story is indirect and subtle, lending it a romantic and fantastic air that simply adds to the setting and plot. It is Salman Rushdie at his best, telling wonderful, moving, magical stories within stories.
For more book reviews and exclusive author interviews, go to BookBanter.