You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.75 AVERAGE
3.75 AVERAGE
Wow. Seriously. Wow!!! The first historical mystery I have actually loved. My congratulations to you, sir! No wonder the name Iain Pears eclipses the title in size.
The mystery was intriguing. The characters were compelling. The writing was expert. And up until the end I was still in the dark on how exactly Stone died. There were quite a few twists that I never really saw coming but tied a lot of things together after they were revealed.
The structure itself was excellent. The story is told in three parts with three different narrators. It also goes chronologically backwards. This works surprisingly well. Although you know what the future entails (which sometimes leads to delicious ironies that the characters are yet unaware of) the past unveils secrets that throws new light on events that occur in the "future." Each part was both a self-contained story and drops you further into the rabbit hole.
The first part is a classic historical mystery. It's set in 1909 London when young crime reporter Matthew Braddock is hired by the widow of the powerful, wealthy industrialist John Stone to find the child referenced in her husband's will. Stone plays a shadowy role in this section, as he is already dead, and is only known by what others say about him. His grieving widow, Lady Elizabeth Ravenscliff (Stone had become a baron before his death), is a femme fatale of the highest order. Braddock, naturally, becomes obsessed with her. He also gets caught up in the mystery of how Stone died and a possible conspiracy surrounding Stone's death. At the end Braddock "solves" the mystery - but does he really? (don't worry, you'll find out the answer by the end of the book)
The second part is a spy thriller and I think my favorite. It's set in 1890 Paris and follows Henry Cort as he begins the career in espionage that leads him to become Britain's spymaster by the time Braddock encounters him in 1909. Cort is by far my favorite protagonist: ruthless, cunning, and yet with goodness buried (sometimes deep) within him. He's the kind of anti-hero I adore. Plus, he wasn't a frickin' lapdog to Elizabeth like Braddock was (I have issues with Elizabeth). Stone is a supporting player in this story, as he meets and falls in love with Elizabeth and takes part in the economic conspiracy of the Panic of 1890.
The third part is where Stone finally speaks in his own voice. He's in Venice in 1867 and the events in this part shape the destinies of all the key players in the coming decades. Henry Cort's parents (and a toddler Henry) are present in Venice, as well as the man who would later be Henry's spy teacher. Stone also encounters the torpedo creator that sets Stone on the path to being a weapons magnate.
The only thing I didn't love about the book was Elizabeth (Stone's wife). She’s the sort of belle dame sans merci that I hate and male authors seem to adore (see: [b:The Name of the Wind|186074|The Name of the Wind (The Kingkiller Chronicle, #1)|Patrick Rothfuss|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1270352123s/186074.jpg|2502879]). All men love her and all women hate her. As my friends and I have agreed, there is something wrong with a woman who has no female friends. Being utterly incapable of making friends of your own gender says something negative about you. Because, really, no woman is so beautiful or so charming that every woman will hate her on principle. The most popular girl in school has female friends. The most stunning actress has female friends. What it really means is that the woman is a bitch but that men overlook it because they are thinking about other things. It annoyed the hell out of me that Stone in the end was all, “Elizabeth is such a good person. She has done nothing really wrong.” SHE USES PEOPLE, STONE. Really no more than he does, but she is a selfish, cruel, manipulative human being. She has had a harsh life and is a survivor, but that doesn’t make her actions in any way good. Why won’t people admit that she is terrible? Oh, right, because they are men and they are quickly charmed out of their common sense. Stone and Elizabeth are a formidable pair. They have their good and bad points but are really anti-heroes if anything. I just wish the author would admit this, instead of only having the scorned lovers see Elizabeth as she truly is (instead of what she portrays). Elizabeth and all the fawning over her are really the only bad points of the book, though it did slow a bit when it talked about industry.
This is a financial thriller with ambiguous characters, huge twists and solid writing. Keep it up, Pears!
The mystery was intriguing. The characters were compelling. The writing was expert. And up until the end I was still in the dark on how exactly Stone died. There were quite a few twists that I never really saw coming but tied a lot of things together after they were revealed.
The structure itself was excellent. The story is told in three parts with three different narrators. It also goes chronologically backwards. This works surprisingly well. Although you know what the future entails (which sometimes leads to delicious ironies that the characters are yet unaware of) the past unveils secrets that throws new light on events that occur in the "future." Each part was both a self-contained story and drops you further into the rabbit hole.
The first part is a classic historical mystery. It's set in 1909 London when young crime reporter Matthew Braddock is hired by the widow of the powerful, wealthy industrialist John Stone to find the child referenced in her husband's will. Stone plays a shadowy role in this section, as he is already dead, and is only known by what others say about him. His grieving widow, Lady Elizabeth Ravenscliff (Stone had become a baron before his death), is a femme fatale of the highest order. Braddock, naturally, becomes obsessed with her. He also gets caught up in the mystery of how Stone died and a possible conspiracy surrounding Stone's death. At the end Braddock "solves" the mystery - but does he really? (don't worry, you'll find out the answer by the end of the book)
The second part is a spy thriller and I think my favorite. It's set in 1890 Paris and follows Henry Cort as he begins the career in espionage that leads him to become Britain's spymaster by the time Braddock encounters him in 1909. Cort is by far my favorite protagonist: ruthless, cunning, and yet with goodness buried (sometimes deep) within him. He's the kind of anti-hero I adore. Plus, he wasn't a frickin' lapdog to Elizabeth like Braddock was (I have issues with Elizabeth). Stone is a supporting player in this story, as he meets and falls in love with Elizabeth and takes part in the economic conspiracy of the Panic of 1890.
The third part is where Stone finally speaks in his own voice. He's in Venice in 1867 and the events in this part shape the destinies of all the key players in the coming decades. Henry Cort's parents (and a toddler Henry) are present in Venice, as well as the man who would later be Henry's spy teacher. Stone also encounters the torpedo creator that sets Stone on the path to being a weapons magnate.
The only thing I didn't love about the book was Elizabeth (Stone's wife). She’s the sort of belle dame sans merci that I hate and male authors seem to adore (see: [b:The Name of the Wind|186074|The Name of the Wind (The Kingkiller Chronicle, #1)|Patrick Rothfuss|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1270352123s/186074.jpg|2502879]). All men love her and all women hate her. As my friends and I have agreed, there is something wrong with a woman who has no female friends. Being utterly incapable of making friends of your own gender says something negative about you. Because, really, no woman is so beautiful or so charming that every woman will hate her on principle. The most popular girl in school has female friends. The most stunning actress has female friends. What it really means is that the woman is a bitch but that men overlook it because they are thinking about other things. It annoyed the hell out of me that Stone in the end was all, “Elizabeth is such a good person. She has done nothing really wrong.” SHE USES PEOPLE, STONE. Really no more than he does, but she is a selfish, cruel, manipulative human being. She has had a harsh life and is a survivor, but that doesn’t make her actions in any way good. Why won’t people admit that she is terrible? Oh, right, because they are men and they are quickly charmed out of their common sense. Stone and Elizabeth are a formidable pair. They have their good and bad points but are really anti-heroes if anything. I just wish the author would admit this, instead of only having the scorned lovers see Elizabeth as she truly is (instead of what she portrays). Elizabeth and all the fawning over her are really the only bad points of the book, though it did slow a bit when it talked about industry.
This is a financial thriller with ambiguous characters, huge twists and solid writing. Keep it up, Pears!
Shipbuilder, arms merchant, industrialist, conqueror of the financial markets, Lord Ravenscliff strangely falls out a window of his London mansion one night to his death. His younger widow, who adored him, hires a young reporter to find out the truth of a new secret revealed in her husband's will. To get to the truth, the reporter looks into the life of the man who was born John Stone.
The twists and turns discovered by Matthew Braddock are only the beginning. For both Stone and his wife, a mysterious, beautiful woman who fascinates Braddock, the secrets continue to be uncovered until the last page. Lady Ravenscliff is an Irene Adler-type character, destined to not settle for the dregs of life and able to get out of the most complex pickles.
But it's not just the twists, turns and secrets that make this a rewarding read. It's the way they are used to explore ideas about the relationship between finance and government, loyalty and sabotage, money and love, that make STONE'S FALL highly entertaining. John Stone, for example, is a man who came from nothing to be a titan of industry. It's finding ways to outwit the system to discover new ways of making money that attract him. At one point, this arms dealer and shipbuilder, whose companies outfit navies around the world, tells someone that it is government's business to make his companies more secure, not for his companies to protect Britain. The question of whether everything in this world really does have a price becomes important to nearly every character, especially the person Stone loves most in the world, his wife.
The implications of Stone's financial dealings, a hornets' nest that threatens to become unraveled at his death, find counterparts in modern financial markets. Pears makes them clear to those of us without Ivy League economic degrees or Wall Street backgrounds.
At the same time, the finance is not the main focus of this story. And neither is John Stone. His widow, Elizabeth, becomes fundamental to Stone's life and its trajectory in a way not foreseen at the beginning of the tale. And that secrets continue to be revealed until the end, in a novel told in segments that go backward, rather than forward, in time is as masterful an accomplishment as Pears's ability to explain stock markets shares.
It's not often an 800-page novel can be called riveting and a page-turner, but STONE'S FALL meets that test. This is a worthy successor to Pears's publishing phenomenom, THE INSTANCE OF THE FINGERPOST.
The twists and turns discovered by Matthew Braddock are only the beginning. For both Stone and his wife, a mysterious, beautiful woman who fascinates Braddock, the secrets continue to be uncovered until the last page. Lady Ravenscliff is an Irene Adler-type character, destined to not settle for the dregs of life and able to get out of the most complex pickles.
But it's not just the twists, turns and secrets that make this a rewarding read. It's the way they are used to explore ideas about the relationship between finance and government, loyalty and sabotage, money and love, that make STONE'S FALL highly entertaining. John Stone, for example, is a man who came from nothing to be a titan of industry. It's finding ways to outwit the system to discover new ways of making money that attract him. At one point, this arms dealer and shipbuilder, whose companies outfit navies around the world, tells someone that it is government's business to make his companies more secure, not for his companies to protect Britain. The question of whether everything in this world really does have a price becomes important to nearly every character, especially the person Stone loves most in the world, his wife.
The implications of Stone's financial dealings, a hornets' nest that threatens to become unraveled at his death, find counterparts in modern financial markets. Pears makes them clear to those of us without Ivy League economic degrees or Wall Street backgrounds.
At the same time, the finance is not the main focus of this story. And neither is John Stone. His widow, Elizabeth, becomes fundamental to Stone's life and its trajectory in a way not foreseen at the beginning of the tale. And that secrets continue to be revealed until the end, in a novel told in segments that go backward, rather than forward, in time is as masterful an accomplishment as Pears's ability to explain stock markets shares.
It's not often an 800-page novel can be called riveting and a page-turner, but STONE'S FALL meets that test. This is a worthy successor to Pears's publishing phenomenom, THE INSTANCE OF THE FINGERPOST.
Очень неплохой роман. Немного менее динамичный, чем это написано в аннотации, но с действительно интересным сюжетом, раскрывающимся с каждой частью все больше и больше.
Shaken up and struck breathless. Iain pears writes with depth. Not an easy read. I had to revisit sections of the novel to keep up with the places and characters. Pears's humor reminds me of Somerset Maugham - there is an edge and irony associated with it. Thoroughly enjoyed it.
dark
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Audible
A mystery that goes backwards chronologically.
A mystery that goes backwards chronologically.
Wonderful story. Wonderful writing. The way he pulled everything together by going backward in time was great.
I am hooked. Just hooked. It is not a compulsive read but it is very compelling. What happened to John Stone and who is he? We know his wife is nutz....
I was sure it was going to be 5 stars, but the end spoiled it all. Still a very good book, well written, witty and intricate as only Pears writes.
