Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.93 AVERAGE
2.93 AVERAGE
The quote on the cover states: “If you loved Wolf Hall, you will delight in The Courier’s Tale“, I did like “Wolf Hall” by Hilary Mantel a lengthier book than “The Courier’s Tale” with more intricate Machiavellian scheming. Whilst “Wolf Hall” focused on Thomas Cromwell and the period of King Henry VIII’s reign, where he went from being married to Katherine of Aragon to his marriage to Anne Boleyn, “The Courier’s Tale“, is slightly later with a longer time frame, focusing on Cardinal Pole and his courier Robert Throckmorton and extending from Anne Boleyn sitting on the throne to the end of Queen Mary’s Reign.
The Courier’s Tale is easier to follow than Wolf Hall, having not such a confusion of Thomases. Thomas Cromwell is again a key player but Thomas Wolsey, Thomas More and Thomas Boleyn are absent.
more
The Courier’s Tale is easier to follow than Wolf Hall, having not such a confusion of Thomases. Thomas Cromwell is again a key player but Thomas Wolsey, Thomas More and Thomas Boleyn are absent.
more
mysterious
medium-paced
I'm not usually interested in history, so historian fiction is way out of my comfort zone. My first language is also not english so it took me longer to read the book. I thought the book was very interesting but I have only one question left: is it historically accurate? It is told as if it were the stories of the courier Michael Throckmorton about his work for Reginald Pole, now I looked it up and Pole did exist but his courier was probably not of enough importance to receive a wikipedia page, so did the story actually happen this way or is it the author's view on the Tudor period?
Disappointing. Started the book with high hopes because the review on the cover said "If you liked Wolf Hall, you'll like The Courier's Tale". I've read Wolf Hall, and I really liked it, which features Mantel's artfully written poetry-like prose. To compare this book with that, it's so laughable, it's hilarious. So many things to say, but where to start?
1) The book assumes the reader's familiarity with the Tudors and Plantagenets
I, for one, am quite familiar, having read a number of books and done research on the period. And I'm already thrown off guard by random secondary characters, without understanding much of their background. Throckmorton, the protagonist, meets all the new, secondary characters with a lack of empathy. There's no excitement... the characters are just introduced.
And if I had difficulty initiating myself with the characters, I can't imagine a reader new to the history.
2) Modern tone of voice
Comparing between books is a double-edged sword, while you may attract similar audiences, and securing a fan base, you will also risk disappointing those that are already fans of the book you're comparing it to. This is no different. The writing in Wolf Hall, as I've mentioned, is vastly different, because Mantel's narration relies heavily on conversations, and sometimes it reads like a play. Mantel's characters are witty, sharp and spare no mercy in their banter. In Courier's Tale, you have modern speech, which is fine, but it's not anything out of the ordinary.
3) “Documentary” style
Walker said in the afterword that this book reads almost like a documentary. One point I couldn't agree more. The years fly by page after page. Henry VIII dies with little fanfare, there was very little mention of Edward VI, before Mary I ascended the throne after he died. Despite the accelerated pace, with characters growing up and dying in a matter of pages, Throckmorton seems trapped in adolescence and curiously maintains his naiveté of the world and women. Hardly charming as a protagonist, really.
1) The book assumes the reader's familiarity with the Tudors and Plantagenets
I, for one, am quite familiar, having read a number of books and done research on the period. And I'm already thrown off guard by random secondary characters, without understanding much of their background. Throckmorton, the protagonist, meets all the new, secondary characters with a lack of empathy. There's no excitement... the characters are just introduced.
And if I had difficulty initiating myself with the characters, I can't imagine a reader new to the history.
2) Modern tone of voice
Comparing between books is a double-edged sword, while you may attract similar audiences, and securing a fan base, you will also risk disappointing those that are already fans of the book you're comparing it to. This is no different. The writing in Wolf Hall, as I've mentioned, is vastly different, because Mantel's narration relies heavily on conversations, and sometimes it reads like a play. Mantel's characters are witty, sharp and spare no mercy in their banter. In Courier's Tale, you have modern speech, which is fine, but it's not anything out of the ordinary.
3) “Documentary” style
Walker said in the afterword that this book reads almost like a documentary. One point I couldn't agree more. The years fly by page after page. Henry VIII dies with little fanfare, there was very little mention of Edward VI, before Mary I ascended the throne after he died. Despite the accelerated pace, with characters growing up and dying in a matter of pages, Throckmorton seems trapped in adolescence and curiously maintains his naiveté of the world and women. Hardly charming as a protagonist, really.
4,5/5
Mijn eerste boek over Tudor-Engeland in 2017. En het speelt zich dan nog voor het grootste deel af in Renaissance Italië. Dit kon niet misgaan.
Het boek wordt op de omslag vergeleken met Wolf Hall. Gevaarlijke vergelijking, maar ik snap het wel. Walker neemt net als Mantel een ietwat aparte figuur uit de Tudorgeschiedenis als focus. In dit geval is dat Cardinal Pole, een man die de geschiedenis is ingegaan als hij die voor zijn geloof en overtuiging de levens van heel wat protestanten heeft verwoest en zijn eigen familie heeft opgeofferd. Wel, maak hem dan maar menselijk als auteur he!
Dit boek is een historische roman. Maar het is niet spannend. Het is nooit romantisch. Het is zelfs niet wat avontuurlijk. Dit boek is puur politiek. Intriges, wisselende machtsverhoudingen, bedrog. Geruzie tussen koningen en pausen, tussen katholieken en protestanten. Ik hou daarvan. Sorry!
Het verhaal wordt verteld vanuit Michaël Trockmorton. Een man die per toeval courier wordt van Pole. Hij weet niet zo heel veel van politiek, hij is ook niet altijd in Engeland. Dit maakt dat hij soms belangrijke historische gebeurtenissen vermeldt in 1 zin of toespeling. Ik denk dat je voor dit boek de geschiedenis best kent. Anders ga je niet elke boodschap mee hebben.
Man, ik heb met dit boek gelachen! Nooit eerder was een historisch boek zo grappig. Michael beschrijft bekende personen zoals ze zijn - inclusief hun lelijke kant - en lacht met hun gedrag. Ironie, I loved it!
En top dat de auteur een uitgebreide noot schrijft op het einde: hij vertelt hoe het verder gaat, hij vertelt waarom Pole door ons zoveel jaren later "gehaat" wordt, hij vermeldt duidelijk zijn bronnen. En damn hij heeft zijn research goed gedaan!
Ow ja en Michelangelo deed hier ook gewoon in mee!
I loved it!
Mijn eerste boek over Tudor-Engeland in 2017. En het speelt zich dan nog voor het grootste deel af in Renaissance Italië. Dit kon niet misgaan.
Het boek wordt op de omslag vergeleken met Wolf Hall. Gevaarlijke vergelijking, maar ik snap het wel. Walker neemt net als Mantel een ietwat aparte figuur uit de Tudorgeschiedenis als focus. In dit geval is dat Cardinal Pole, een man die de geschiedenis is ingegaan als hij die voor zijn geloof en overtuiging de levens van heel wat protestanten heeft verwoest en zijn eigen familie heeft opgeofferd. Wel, maak hem dan maar menselijk als auteur he!
Dit boek is een historische roman. Maar het is niet spannend. Het is nooit romantisch. Het is zelfs niet wat avontuurlijk. Dit boek is puur politiek. Intriges, wisselende machtsverhoudingen, bedrog. Geruzie tussen koningen en pausen, tussen katholieken en protestanten. Ik hou daarvan. Sorry!
Het verhaal wordt verteld vanuit Michaël Trockmorton. Een man die per toeval courier wordt van Pole. Hij weet niet zo heel veel van politiek, hij is ook niet altijd in Engeland. Dit maakt dat hij soms belangrijke historische gebeurtenissen vermeldt in 1 zin of toespeling. Ik denk dat je voor dit boek de geschiedenis best kent. Anders ga je niet elke boodschap mee hebben.
Man, ik heb met dit boek gelachen! Nooit eerder was een historisch boek zo grappig. Michael beschrijft bekende personen zoals ze zijn - inclusief hun lelijke kant - en lacht met hun gedrag. Ironie, I loved it!
En top dat de auteur een uitgebreide noot schrijft op het einde: hij vertelt hoe het verder gaat, hij vertelt waarom Pole door ons zoveel jaren later "gehaat" wordt, hij vermeldt duidelijk zijn bronnen. En damn hij heeft zijn research goed gedaan!
Ow ja en Michelangelo deed hier ook gewoon in mee!
I loved it!
informative
slow-paced
A well-researched book spanning the reigns of Henry the VIII through to the end of Bloody Mary's short reign. I found the politics and morality in it complex and engaging. I appreciated the use of documents to trace all these movements and shifts in loyalty and the fact that noone was completely the hero nor were people 2-dimensionally painted as villains.
Here it comes, my gripe with so many books (especially ones written by men). The few and mostly off-stage women were all defined by not getting what they want in love. No motivations were ascribed to them apart from love/romance and in this they were all tragic failures. There was a monochrome goodness to most of them too and particularly unsatisfactory was the too-good-to-be-true doormat Agnes. Considering how peripheral to life love was in terms of the men characters (something I can relate to) and the fact that they saw family and love as something they can return to for ease and comfort, I really think there would have been more to the women than just being crossed in love. Mary herself- an interesting historical figure elsewhere, here is solely motivated by her fear of rejection and abandonment and her consequent clinging love to her husband. At least the males might have greed or cowardice or power as motivators or might (like Pole and Throckmorton) be morally complex.
It's a big gripe, I can't get past it. It's a bit lazy too to use (perhaps) the lack of documentary evidence of women to reduce them quite so much.
If I read as a man (which I can easily do) then the flow and interest of the book was everything. The shortness of the chapters was very appreciated as was the balance between descriptions of place but more reflections on theology, art, philosophy, politics, etc. I did like that neither violence or sex (both of which occurred in the book) were lingered over, this was a book about conversations and letters more than more physical things. Weather and food were almost incidental to the plot too as was sickness (though heavily featured). In that sense it was a perfect book for someone as "in the head" as me.
I enjoyed learning about history through so many direct quotes from the records we have of the time. The same thing done less misogynistically would be perfect.
Here it comes, my gripe with so many books (especially ones written by men). The few and mostly off-stage women were all defined by not getting what they want in love. No motivations were ascribed to them apart from love/romance and in this they were all tragic failures. There was a monochrome goodness to most of them too and particularly unsatisfactory was the too-good-to-be-true doormat Agnes. Considering how peripheral to life love was in terms of the men characters (something I can relate to) and the fact that they saw family and love as something they can return to for ease and comfort, I really think there would have been more to the women than just being crossed in love. Mary herself- an interesting historical figure elsewhere, here is solely motivated by her fear of rejection and abandonment and her consequent clinging love to her husband. At least the males might have greed or cowardice or power as motivators or might (like Pole and Throckmorton) be morally complex.
It's a big gripe, I can't get past it. It's a bit lazy too to use (perhaps) the lack of documentary evidence of women to reduce them quite so much.
If I read as a man (which I can easily do) then the flow and interest of the book was everything. The shortness of the chapters was very appreciated as was the balance between descriptions of place but more reflections on theology, art, philosophy, politics, etc. I did like that neither violence or sex (both of which occurred in the book) were lingered over, this was a book about conversations and letters more than more physical things. Weather and food were almost incidental to the plot too as was sickness (though heavily featured). In that sense it was a perfect book for someone as "in the head" as me.
I enjoyed learning about history through so many direct quotes from the records we have of the time. The same thing done less misogynistically would be perfect.
Very entertaining. Interesting to read not long after "Bring Up the Bodies", since Cromwell is a bad guy.
Told from the perspective of Michael Throckmorton, it's a picaresque chronicle of his life in Italy and his work as a courier for Reginald Pole. Who, after telling off Henry VIII (his cousin), the Pope, the Emperor and the King of France, ends up as the close counsel of Bloody Mary in her last days.
But it's funny and lyrical as well.
Walker used primary resources where he could and the dialogue he brings to that narrative is believable and well done.
Told from the perspective of Michael Throckmorton, it's a picaresque chronicle of his life in Italy and his work as a courier for Reginald Pole. Who, after telling off Henry VIII (his cousin), the Pope, the Emperor and the King of France, ends up as the close counsel of Bloody Mary in her last days.
But it's funny and lyrical as well.
Walker used primary resources where he could and the dialogue he brings to that narrative is believable and well done.