Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.08 AVERAGE
4.08 AVERAGE
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
A big baggy monster of a book about a big baggy monstrous subject.
Mantel’s detailed research and knowledge of the subject is clear but is worn lightly. You don’t necessarily need to know the history, but you do have to pay attention. For example, the revolutionaries decided to change the calendar to help remove all associations of the old regime. The characters mention this in passing, but it isn’t spelled out. For a period both calendars are used (as they would have been) and if you don’t pick up what is going on it could be confusing.
Equally, don’t expect detailed descriptions of the big events, these often happen offstage, or through sleight of hand. Instead, this is an oddly domestic book, and the women behind the famous men are given equal weight. Even though Danton and Desmoulins were at the massacre of the Champs de Mars, at that point we’re in Gabrielle Danton’s head so we only get the information she gets. This isn’t history as hindsight but as lived events.
It starts off at a meander but by the end hurtles towards its climax. I got through 875 pages in less than a fortnight. I totally get why people find this a slog, reading a few pages a day before bed would kill it, but, if you have the time and headspace it’s thrilling.
Overall, it’s a brilliant study of character, how events can overtake intentions, and how high moral principles can lead to terrifying acts.
Mantel’s detailed research and knowledge of the subject is clear but is worn lightly. You don’t necessarily need to know the history, but you do have to pay attention. For example, the revolutionaries decided to change the calendar to help remove all associations of the old regime. The characters mention this in passing, but it isn’t spelled out. For a period both calendars are used (as they would have been) and if you don’t pick up what is going on it could be confusing.
Equally, don’t expect detailed descriptions of the big events, these often happen offstage, or through sleight of hand. Instead, this is an oddly domestic book, and the women behind the famous men are given equal weight. Even though Danton and Desmoulins were at the massacre of the Champs de Mars, at that point we’re in Gabrielle Danton’s head so we only get the information she gets. This isn’t history as hindsight but as lived events.
It starts off at a meander but by the end hurtles towards its climax. I got through 875 pages in less than a fortnight. I totally get why people find this a slog, reading a few pages a day before bed would kill it, but, if you have the time and headspace it’s thrilling.
Overall, it’s a brilliant study of character, how events can overtake intentions, and how high moral principles can lead to terrifying acts.
I feel like there are some books out there that we are supposed to be in awe of, just because of who wrote them or because a bunch of critics with very biased opinions praised them.
Would this entry mean that I disliked ‘A place of greater safety’? No. Does it mean I liked it? Also no. If a book can be definition of having a massive crush on a historical character while trying NOT to become another AO3 writer and also teasing readers with important events that get less than two sentences in description, then here is the book.
750 pages of the author dealing with her crush on the most pathetic man I read about. Camille Desmoulins. I read a lot about the French Revolution, I deep-dived many times into Wikipedia, I read biographies. Knowledge wise, I feel like I am not a historian, but as someone with a passion for history who is fascinated by this period of time, I know a bit. And oh boy, no one spoiled for me the French Revolution more than Hilary Mantell. I cannot get over how she makes very interesting men and very fascinating events into a story of Camille and Lucille, and how everyone fancy Camille and does Camille loves Danton, does Danton loves Camille, do they have a threesome with Lucille or not. Women in this book mostly serve to second the whatever homoerotic tension is between their husbands who cheat on them openly, while they cheat on them and everyone talks about politics, but actually you cannot pinpoint the moment when Robespierre gains more power.
Things happen. Lots of things. There is a great focus on Danton and Camille, on Mirabeau, don’t expect much to learn about the royal couple, because they aren’t important here. The writing is great and I deeply enjoyed the first 50% of this book, it felt lively, beautifully written, jumping from a poem, to drama, to prose, to letters, to chronicles. Good stuff, I love how this massive book was broken into a more attention-keeping narration.
But personally, there was one thing I really wanted to see and learn more about and maybe that’s why I am so bitter - Robespierre. Him becoming a despot, a figure in power, it's so sudden, without much of explanation, without psychological background that Hilary Mantel tries to develop with everyone else, that it’s just strange. He starts as the “Candle from Arras” and then out of the blue he becomes extremely popular, when for tens of pages, Mantel couldn’t stop reminding us of how boring, long and monotonous his speeches are, how people had no respect for him.
And then out of the blue, he’s popular and in power. At first, he’s nearly in love with Camille and Lucille (as fucking everyone in this book, honest to God) and then people start calling him a despot and tyrant. Excuse-moi, what? Weren’t you trying to explain to us for pages how not important he is, how weak he is, how full of love he is and then boom, to the guillotine my friends?
My point is, that author just skips a lot. The same with Danton, there is a specific image of him in this book, but typical of British fashion, we need to avoid showing people having too many emotions because that’s unbecoming, so if you are excited for a scene of Danton trying to dig out his dead wife and have a mental breakdown over her dead body, then no no no.
This leads me to another conclusion, that yes, indeed - everyone acts very British with their emotions on a leash, without the great outbursts about which one can learn in other historically focussed books. Then there is also never ending mention of the UK, while the powers that actually threaten Revolutionary France (like freaking massive Austrio-Hungerian army!) are so not important because we are oh so involved with the Brits, they are the only other great power in Europe, not this huge massive empire next to us that for ages had a taste for France.
So here is my final conclusion. Dear whoever is going to read this spit of thoughts, this book is not about the French Revolution and the people who made it. It's about Camille Desmoulins being a pathetic little shit of a man. Also, I will not hide, because NO ONE is going to read this, that I only grabbed this book after I found out that my psychopathic ex-boyfriend, decided to form his whole personality around Camille because HIS great ex-love (who he tried to shape me into, by convincing me for years to get more into French Revolution), was so deeply in love with Camille in this book that she couldn’t stop posting about this on Facebook and Instagram.
Trust me, you don’t need to live during revolutionary times to end up in fucked up situation.
So, this book was a bit of a let down to me, but at least now I got the bragging rights that I read this behemoth of literary fanfiction.
Would this entry mean that I disliked ‘A place of greater safety’? No. Does it mean I liked it? Also no. If a book can be definition of having a massive crush on a historical character while trying NOT to become another AO3 writer and also teasing readers with important events that get less than two sentences in description, then here is the book.
750 pages of the author dealing with her crush on the most pathetic man I read about. Camille Desmoulins. I read a lot about the French Revolution, I deep-dived many times into Wikipedia, I read biographies. Knowledge wise, I feel like I am not a historian, but as someone with a passion for history who is fascinated by this period of time, I know a bit. And oh boy, no one spoiled for me the French Revolution more than Hilary Mantell. I cannot get over how she makes very interesting men and very fascinating events into a story of Camille and Lucille, and how everyone fancy Camille and does Camille loves Danton, does Danton loves Camille, do they have a threesome with Lucille or not. Women in this book mostly serve to second the whatever homoerotic tension is between their husbands who cheat on them openly, while they cheat on them and everyone talks about politics, but actually you cannot pinpoint the moment when Robespierre gains more power.
Things happen. Lots of things. There is a great focus on Danton and Camille, on Mirabeau, don’t expect much to learn about the royal couple, because they aren’t important here. The writing is great and I deeply enjoyed the first 50% of this book, it felt lively, beautifully written, jumping from a poem, to drama, to prose, to letters, to chronicles. Good stuff, I love how this massive book was broken into a more attention-keeping narration.
But personally, there was one thing I really wanted to see and learn more about and maybe that’s why I am so bitter - Robespierre. Him becoming a despot, a figure in power, it's so sudden, without much of explanation, without psychological background that Hilary Mantel tries to develop with everyone else, that it’s just strange. He starts as the “Candle from Arras” and then out of the blue he becomes extremely popular, when for tens of pages, Mantel couldn’t stop reminding us of how boring, long and monotonous his speeches are, how people had no respect for him.
And then out of the blue, he’s popular and in power. At first, he’s nearly in love with Camille and Lucille (as fucking everyone in this book, honest to God) and then people start calling him a despot and tyrant. Excuse-moi, what? Weren’t you trying to explain to us for pages how not important he is, how weak he is, how full of love he is and then boom, to the guillotine my friends?
My point is, that author just skips a lot. The same with Danton, there is a specific image of him in this book, but typical of British fashion, we need to avoid showing people having too many emotions because that’s unbecoming, so if you are excited for a scene of Danton trying to dig out his dead wife and have a mental breakdown over her dead body, then no no no.
This leads me to another conclusion, that yes, indeed - everyone acts very British with their emotions on a leash, without the great outbursts about which one can learn in other historically focussed books. Then there is also never ending mention of the UK, while the powers that actually threaten Revolutionary France (like freaking massive Austrio-Hungerian army!) are so not important because we are oh so involved with the Brits, they are the only other great power in Europe, not this huge massive empire next to us that for ages had a taste for France.
So here is my final conclusion. Dear whoever is going to read this spit of thoughts, this book is not about the French Revolution and the people who made it. It's about Camille Desmoulins being a pathetic little shit of a man. Also, I will not hide, because NO ONE is going to read this, that I only grabbed this book after I found out that my psychopathic ex-boyfriend, decided to form his whole personality around Camille because HIS great ex-love (who he tried to shape me into, by convincing me for years to get more into French Revolution), was so deeply in love with Camille in this book that she couldn’t stop posting about this on Facebook and Instagram.
Trust me, you don’t need to live during revolutionary times to end up in fucked up situation.
So, this book was a bit of a let down to me, but at least now I got the bragging rights that I read this behemoth of literary fanfiction.
Sigh. Good, but not quite Wolf Hall (though you can see the roots of it, stylistically), and there are just so many people in it... I had to put it aside to read the history of the Caucasus, for some clarity and light relief, which tells you something. Back into it now.
EDIT: crawling painfully towards the finish. Every word, phrase, paragraph is inspired, but my god, in the whole, it's a drag.
EDIT: Halleluja.
I really struggled with this (and always develop an irrational antipathy towards books that block me). I came to it because I love Hilary Mantel and because [b:Pure|10116927|Pure|Andrew Miller|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1343662367s/10116927.jpg|15014490], on a smallish corner of the Revolution, left me very flat and wanting some real, historical detail and some internal lives. No question that this provided mountains of both... but just too much, until it became a cacophony of interiors. Seriously, pruning shears, editors!
The voices (remarkably similar to Cromwell's? or can't I say that??) are individually strong but just about all the same (except for Robespierre and Annette, and one or two other women who I forget now) and there are janky passages that don't seem true - or maybe I was missing the tone, hardly a wonder as it's rather choppy. Really I should read it again but that is not going to happen until I am marooned with my kindle and have read and re-read everything else.
Despite this, the building of suppressed terror and chaos - a la Stalinist Russia - is undeniable, and I still think Hilary is a rare and wonderful writer... but this (her first, long-unpublished book) is the working out of her superb talent, rather than the flourishing of it.
Those who rate it more highly than I do - I'd be interested to know how you see past these difficulties to the superior book that is undoubtedly behind them.
EDIT: crawling painfully towards the finish. Every word, phrase, paragraph is inspired, but my god, in the whole, it's a drag.
EDIT: Halleluja.
I really struggled with this (and always develop an irrational antipathy towards books that block me). I came to it because I love Hilary Mantel and because [b:Pure|10116927|Pure|Andrew Miller|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1343662367s/10116927.jpg|15014490], on a smallish corner of the Revolution, left me very flat and wanting some real, historical detail and some internal lives. No question that this provided mountains of both... but just too much, until it became a cacophony of interiors. Seriously, pruning shears, editors!
The voices (remarkably similar to Cromwell's? or can't I say that??) are individually strong but just about all the same (except for Robespierre and Annette, and one or two other women who I forget now) and there are janky passages that don't seem true - or maybe I was missing the tone, hardly a wonder as it's rather choppy. Really I should read it again but that is not going to happen until I am marooned with my kindle and have read and re-read everything else.
Despite this, the building of suppressed terror and chaos - a la Stalinist Russia - is undeniable, and I still think Hilary is a rare and wonderful writer... but this (her first, long-unpublished book) is the working out of her superb talent, rather than the flourishing of it.
Those who rate it more highly than I do - I'd be interested to know how you see past these difficulties to the superior book that is undoubtedly behind them.
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
dark
informative
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:
Complicated
adventurous
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Woof. One of the hardest books I've ever read. Light reading? No. Incredible feat in writing historical fiction? Absolutely. I learned a lot about Danton, Desmoulins, Robespierre, revolution, counterrevolution, and an overwhelming cast of other historical figures from the turbulent time period in France, but had a hard time staying invested in the story. Would make an excellent mini-series on television.
challenging
dark
informative
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes