Scan barcode
read_with_g's review against another edition
3.0
In my opinion, to read a book by Salman Rushdie one really has to be in the mood to read a book by Salman Rushdie. This holds true especially for his fiction, not non-fiction. Happily for me, I was in just such a mood when I began reading The Enchantress of Florence.
Whenever I read Rushdie’s fiction, an image is created in my mind of him as a conductor of an orchestra comprising of fact, fiction, fantasy, abundant knowledge, extensive research and a humbling command of the English language. Picking and choosing these ‘instruments’ as he sees fit, he composes symphonies of magical, fantastical stories.
The Enchantress of Florence is a bold undertaking, in which Rushdie uses some of the greatest figures, as well as important historical events of the 15th and 16th centuries, to weave a story that connects them all, across continents.
Akbar the Great, Niccolo Machiavelli and Amerigo Vespucci’s cousin to name a few of Rushdie’s chosen characters are part of this fantastical tale, set mainly in India (Sikri) and Italy (Florence) with several other well known and not so well known actual historical figures and events making appearances.
I really enjoyed the first part of the book, which mainly revolves around Akbar and is set at the time when Fatehpur Sikri was at the height of its glory. Most of the second and third parts of the book were for me a bit tedious and involved too many historical intricacies, which I personally would have preferred in not so much detail. Perhaps somebody well versed or with a keen interest in 15th century European / Italian history may have enjoyed this part more. I also often found the writing at these parts of the book to be more of a ramble and a rant and quite confusing at times. However, the last 75 to 100 pages of the book captivated me again and the story and writing were once again most enjoyable. It’s almost like the book was written by two different people! So my rating was actually 4 for the parts I enjoyed and 2 for the parts I didn’t and hence the average of 3.
I liked the way Rushdie portrays the character of Akbar not only as a great warrior, leader and man of immense ambition and power but also simultaneously as one who examines his power, has moral dilemmas, quirks, weaknesses, fears and doubts. I mostly liked that he showed him as one who introspects.
If, like me, your knowledge of the historical events around which the story revolves is abysmal, you might, like me, find that Wikipedia is a helpful companion in navigating this book. And yes, please do make sure you are in a Salman-Rushdie-work-of-fiction-mood before you begin!
Whenever I read Rushdie’s fiction, an image is created in my mind of him as a conductor of an orchestra comprising of fact, fiction, fantasy, abundant knowledge, extensive research and a humbling command of the English language. Picking and choosing these ‘instruments’ as he sees fit, he composes symphonies of magical, fantastical stories.
The Enchantress of Florence is a bold undertaking, in which Rushdie uses some of the greatest figures, as well as important historical events of the 15th and 16th centuries, to weave a story that connects them all, across continents.
Akbar the Great, Niccolo Machiavelli and Amerigo Vespucci’s cousin to name a few of Rushdie’s chosen characters are part of this fantastical tale, set mainly in India (Sikri) and Italy (Florence) with several other well known and not so well known actual historical figures and events making appearances.
I really enjoyed the first part of the book, which mainly revolves around Akbar and is set at the time when Fatehpur Sikri was at the height of its glory. Most of the second and third parts of the book were for me a bit tedious and involved too many historical intricacies, which I personally would have preferred in not so much detail. Perhaps somebody well versed or with a keen interest in 15th century European / Italian history may have enjoyed this part more. I also often found the writing at these parts of the book to be more of a ramble and a rant and quite confusing at times. However, the last 75 to 100 pages of the book captivated me again and the story and writing were once again most enjoyable. It’s almost like the book was written by two different people! So my rating was actually 4 for the parts I enjoyed and 2 for the parts I didn’t and hence the average of 3.
I liked the way Rushdie portrays the character of Akbar not only as a great warrior, leader and man of immense ambition and power but also simultaneously as one who examines his power, has moral dilemmas, quirks, weaknesses, fears and doubts. I mostly liked that he showed him as one who introspects.
If, like me, your knowledge of the historical events around which the story revolves is abysmal, you might, like me, find that Wikipedia is a helpful companion in navigating this book. And yes, please do make sure you are in a Salman-Rushdie-work-of-fiction-mood before you begin!
brian_loane's review against another edition
Salman Rushdie’s The Enchantress of Florence is one of the greatest pieces of “historical” fiction that I have ever read. I use quotes around historical because, while much of the book is indeed based around real characters and events, Rushdie introduces just enough myth and surrealism to divorce his story from total credibility. Rushdie uses this story of Renaissance Italy and India during the reign of Emperor Akbar “The Great” to investigate the phenomenon of globalization that has gripped our world.
Rushdie uses a frame to tell this story. In the beginning of the book, a mysterious and young Italian traveler arrives in the court of Emperor Akbar claiming to be his uncle. The rest of the novel attempts to explain this claim. Throughout the course of the story you will meet fictional characters such as charismatic sailors and soldiers, as well as historical beings like Machiavelli and Vlad Dracul. At the center of the book stands the woman who ties Renaissance Europe to Mughal India: the long-lost princess Qara Koz, known as the Enchantress of Florence.
She is a fascinating character—fiercely independent and deeply romantic. After leaving the Mughal family, she traverses the world. She becomes the lover of a Persian king and helps to rule his empire. Eventually, she falls in love with the warrior Ago Vespucci, and their exciting adventures as lovers dominate the novel. Rushdie weaves a story of great imaginative power through his blending of loads of historical research with fabulistic elements.
Rushdie also uses his story to report on and explore the concept of globalization. How does the world connect? The entire world has become smaller, and this topic has become Rushdie’s favorite to examine, which he does strikingly with the character of the princess. She links two disparate parts of the world together, and her story brings new insight to this period of history.
The writing in this novel is also breathtaking. To get a sense of its magnificence, just read his description of Emperor Akbar (sorry for the length, but it is just so spectacular): “The emperor Abul-Fath Jalaluddin Muhammad, king of kings, known since his childhood as Akbar, meaning “the great,” and latterly, in spite of the tautology of it, as Akbar the Great, the great great one, great in his greatness, doubly great, so great that the repetition in his title was not only appropriate but necessary in order to express the gloriousness of his glory—the Grand Mughal, the dusty, battle-weary, victorious, pensive, incipiently overweight, disenchanted, mustachioed, poetic, oversexed, and absolute emperor, who seemed altogether too magnificent, too world-encompassing, and, in sum, too much to be a single human personage—this all-engulfing flood of a ruler, this swallower of worlds, this many-headed monster who referred to himself in the first person plural.”
Rushdie is a master of storytelling—the great novelist of our time, in my opinion. When you read his work, you feel as though you are being personally addressed, and I always find that when others speak of him, I want to tell them to stop talking about my author. His brilliance manifests itself on every page.
Rushdie uses a frame to tell this story. In the beginning of the book, a mysterious and young Italian traveler arrives in the court of Emperor Akbar claiming to be his uncle. The rest of the novel attempts to explain this claim. Throughout the course of the story you will meet fictional characters such as charismatic sailors and soldiers, as well as historical beings like Machiavelli and Vlad Dracul. At the center of the book stands the woman who ties Renaissance Europe to Mughal India: the long-lost princess Qara Koz, known as the Enchantress of Florence.
She is a fascinating character—fiercely independent and deeply romantic. After leaving the Mughal family, she traverses the world. She becomes the lover of a Persian king and helps to rule his empire. Eventually, she falls in love with the warrior Ago Vespucci, and their exciting adventures as lovers dominate the novel. Rushdie weaves a story of great imaginative power through his blending of loads of historical research with fabulistic elements.
Rushdie also uses his story to report on and explore the concept of globalization. How does the world connect? The entire world has become smaller, and this topic has become Rushdie’s favorite to examine, which he does strikingly with the character of the princess. She links two disparate parts of the world together, and her story brings new insight to this period of history.
The writing in this novel is also breathtaking. To get a sense of its magnificence, just read his description of Emperor Akbar (sorry for the length, but it is just so spectacular): “The emperor Abul-Fath Jalaluddin Muhammad, king of kings, known since his childhood as Akbar, meaning “the great,” and latterly, in spite of the tautology of it, as Akbar the Great, the great great one, great in his greatness, doubly great, so great that the repetition in his title was not only appropriate but necessary in order to express the gloriousness of his glory—the Grand Mughal, the dusty, battle-weary, victorious, pensive, incipiently overweight, disenchanted, mustachioed, poetic, oversexed, and absolute emperor, who seemed altogether too magnificent, too world-encompassing, and, in sum, too much to be a single human personage—this all-engulfing flood of a ruler, this swallower of worlds, this many-headed monster who referred to himself in the first person plural.”
Rushdie is a master of storytelling—the great novelist of our time, in my opinion. When you read his work, you feel as though you are being personally addressed, and I always find that when others speak of him, I want to tell them to stop talking about my author. His brilliance manifests itself on every page.
gnothiseauton's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
An absolutely stunning book with a surprisingly human portrait of Machiavelli at its center. Be forewarned though this is definitely an r/menwritingwomen post contender
paperpix's review against another edition
4.0
By far one of the more exciting books I have read lately. Could have been its strong connection to Indian history - questioning the very existence of a Queen - or the fast paced nature of the book which is not what I really expected from rushdie. he usually takes his time. A pleasurable read.
simonh's review against another edition
5.0
Rushdie didn't let me down with this novel, though once more the book commanded my full attention. The way he crafts his sentences, the way he takes deliberate sidetracks during his storytelling like a rambling comedian, all combine to demand total concentration at all times. Try reading this book with your kids around and you'll have no idea what is going on!
But how lucky I was to have the time to read this glorious story. Above all, he created the delightful Qara Koz, a woman who even now that I've finished, I find myself pining after. This story has it all, and once more, Rushdie shows his mastery of the craft.
The Enchantress of Florence is one of the greatest, most rewarding novels I have ever read. I'm so glad I read more Rushdie after the disappointment of The Satanic Verses.
But how lucky I was to have the time to read this glorious story. Above all, he created the delightful Qara Koz, a woman who even now that I've finished, I find myself pining after. This story has it all, and once more, Rushdie shows his mastery of the craft.
The Enchantress of Florence is one of the greatest, most rewarding novels I have ever read. I'm so glad I read more Rushdie after the disappointment of The Satanic Verses.
annakmeyer's review against another edition
3.0
The only other Salman Rushdie book I've read is The Satanic Verses for a college class. I had a difficult time getting into that book, and I have never figured out why. To a lesser extent, I had that problem with The Enchantress of Florence as well. There were certain sections of the book that I just loved, though, and others that I didn't care for or about. I'm not sure if maybe it's that I have difficulty with the fantastical mixed with reality. Perhaps in a few years I'll pick it up again with better results. Though I'm glad I read it.
neela's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
slow-paced
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
i did enjoy this but i found it hard to keep up with all the characters until about halfway through
fun descriptions tho
kinda old style of writing so wasn’t that relaxing until i got into it
ur whole life based on an incestuous lie
fun descriptions tho
kinda old style of writing so wasn’t that relaxing until i got into it
bookishuniverse's review against another edition
2.0
Apparently there was some uproar about this not being nominated for a Booker. Um, why? It was nothing special and if anything, unoriginal and too long. Basically the story is about a woman who is super beautiful and can enchant men, and also she knows magic so she can stay young. And all these guys fight wars over her. And then some son, or cousin, or nephew of hers or something tells her story in an attempt to get in on the royal bank. Oh, and two of the "characters" in the story are Amerigo Vespucci and Niccolo Machiavelli. B. F. D.
claudia_is_reading's review against another edition
3.5
Not my favourite book by Rushdie, that's for sure.
This one goes more into fantasy territory and, although there are parts of it that are wonderful and the writing is, as usual, breathtaking, other parts are, putting it simply, boring.
The best word I can find to define this book is uneven. The story is rich in historical details, creating a tapestry of reality and fantasy that, at times, it's hard to untangle. The story about execution-by-elephant got me thinking a lot because I was sure I had read about something similar a long time ago until I finally remembered! I read about it when I was a kid, in one of Salgari's books (Don't judge me! I WAS a kid *laughs*). Same thing with some of the fairy-tale aspects of the narrative, which left me with an I-know-about-this sensation.
And then, we have the awful misogyny that comes loud and clear in this story. It's quite telling that only the woman who's a figment of a male imagination is actually the only one with some agency :P
Anyway, I enjoyed it by moments, therefore, that it is: not a marvellous book, only a readable one.
This one goes more into fantasy territory and, although there are parts of it that are wonderful and the writing is, as usual, breathtaking, other parts are, putting it simply, boring.
The best word I can find to define this book is uneven. The story is rich in historical details, creating a tapestry of reality and fantasy that, at times, it's hard to untangle. The story about execution-by-elephant got me thinking a lot because I was sure I had read about something similar a long time ago until I finally remembered! I read about it when I was a kid, in one of Salgari's books (Don't judge me! I WAS a kid *laughs*). Same thing with some of the fairy-tale aspects of the narrative, which left me with an I-know-about-this sensation.
And then, we have the awful misogyny that comes loud and clear in this story. It's quite telling that only the woman who's a figment of a male imagination is actually the only one with some agency :P
Anyway, I enjoyed it by moments, therefore, that it is: not a marvellous book, only a readable one.
jdsatori's review against another edition
5.0
Just so beautiful. Two messages flow through each other within the book, right up to the last sentence. 1: Love is universal and replenishable. 2: Love ends.