Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.88 AVERAGE
3.88 AVERAGE
dark
informative
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child death, Confinement, Death, Infertility, Miscarriage, Pregnancy
Moderate: Violence, Grief, Suicide attempt
Minor: Torture, Blood, Injury/Injury detail
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
No surprise, another goodie from Philippa Gregory. As far as I’m concerned, the woman can do no wrong. I said what I said.
It’s no secret that Plantagenet and Tudor fiction is a beloved sub-genre of mine, and The King’s Curse is one of the best in this hefty series from a favorite author. We follow Margaret Pole this time, and she is the kind of female lead who I just really enjoy. She’s smart, calculating, a little daring, and always the matriarch.
I thought the pacing was done well, and I liked the overlap we saw with Elizabeth of York, Katherine of Aragon, and Princess Mary. Historically, Margaret Pole would have witnessed a lot of change throughout Henry VIII’s reign, so seeing a fictitious recounting of events through the eyes of a constant presence felt very full and complete.
I only have two novels left in this series, and I’ve enjoyed it so much that I’m sure it’ll warrant some rereads with The King’s Curse being one installment that I’ll look forward to visiting again.
There were several things I really liked about this book, and a few things that I really didn't. I start out with the things I didn't, since they are minor and are relatively petty complaints.
This book was just too long. There were several chapters that did not contribute to moving the story along and could have easily been cut. I felt as if I was reading the same chapter over and over again.
Ms. Gregory's portrayal of Margaret was also kind of irritating. I found some of the thoughts attributed to Margaret to be out of character based on what I know about her. Granted, I'm applying modern standards to a medieval woman, but I find it unlikely that a devout woman like Margaret would constantly refer to women as "whore" and "slut".
One of the things that I loved about this book is that Ms. Gregory shares my fairly controversial opinions regarding the death of the princes in the tower and about Arthur and Katherine's short marriage. While both of her views (and mine) are conjecture, I loved reading a scenario that agrees with my own interpretation of the historical record.
Overall, a good read. Definitely enjoyed the unique spin of having Katherine portrayed as a real woman rather than a saint.
This book was just too long. There were several chapters that did not contribute to moving the story along and could have easily been cut. I felt as if I was reading the same chapter over and over again.
Ms. Gregory's portrayal of Margaret was also kind of irritating. I found some of the thoughts attributed to Margaret to be out of character based on what I know about her. Granted, I'm applying modern standards to a medieval woman, but I find it unlikely that a devout woman like Margaret would constantly refer to women as "whore" and "slut".
One of the things that I loved about this book is that Ms. Gregory shares my fairly controversial opinions regarding the death of the princes in the tower and about Arthur and Katherine's short marriage. While both of her views (and mine) are conjecture, I loved reading a scenario that agrees with my own interpretation of the historical record.
Overall, a good read. Definitely enjoyed the unique spin of having Katherine portrayed as a real woman rather than a saint.
I am a big Greggory fan. However, this novel was so disappointing. The king's curse offers very little new drama after The constant Princess (which tells the exact same story). I found her protagonist boring and 2-D. I really question why she felt the need to tell this story at all.
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I absolutely love Philippa Gregory’s books. Historical fiction is not my typical jam, but the way she develops relatively unknown and/or ignored historical characters, and builds a world around them is so intriguing. Especially historical women, of whom little information is broadly known.
I had never even heard of Margaret Pole, but her role along side Henry VIII, Katherine of Aragon, and Mary Tudor gives a wonderful, fanciful, and grim insight in the lives of the Plantagenet nobility after the War of the Roses.
I had never even heard of Margaret Pole, but her role along side Henry VIII, Katherine of Aragon, and Mary Tudor gives a wonderful, fanciful, and grim insight in the lives of the Plantagenet nobility after the War of the Roses.
I picked this up cheap when I went shopping the other day, I know it's not the first in the series but I figured I could read the books out of order. It's been a while since I've read a Philippa Gregory book (almost 10 years!) but I was interested to see if I'd still enjoy them. I really enjoyed The Other Boleyn Girl and The Boleyn Inheritance but got bored and didn't finish The Virgin's Lover.
The King's Curse was certainly readable, I managed to get through it in only a couple of days, but it was just okay. I went into this book knowing that the author likes to change stuff around and rewrite parts of history to fit in with the story she wants to tell, so it didn't bother me too much. I do think it's interesting to see other peoples interpretations of historical events even if I don't believe them and I try not to let that bother me. For example in this book (and I'm assuming the rest of the series), it's the Tudor's who are responsible for the murders of the princes in the tower. It's interesting to follow that thought even though I don't believe it's true. It's fiction. Not a history book.
My main issues were that Margaret was boring, I swear that there was nothing to make her standout, nothing about her voice changed over the space of 40 something years (in fact barely any of the characters changed in any way. If there weren't dates and stuff, you wouldn't have realised that so many years had passed), and I just did not give a crap about her. I was waiting for her to die.
The pacing was odd. Parts dragged and then other parts were skimmed past when they would have been much more interesting that the parts that were dragged out. There was a lot of repetition. AND THERE WAS SO MUCH LISTING OF PEOPLE'S RELATIONS. My cousin, the queen, Elizabeth did this. You must obey your father the king. My son Henry cousin to. My cousin Henry earl of whatever the kings cousin. AND THIS CONTINUED THROUGHOUT THE BOOK. It's like the readers are too dumb to realise who was who. Yes, there are a lot of characters with the same name but it's unnecessary. Some variations in how characters are written might have done a lot to help. It really bugged me.
I'll probably read some more of the books, they are easy to read and I love the time period, but I'm going to go in with low expectations I think.
The King's Curse was certainly readable, I managed to get through it in only a couple of days, but it was just okay. I went into this book knowing that the author likes to change stuff around and rewrite parts of history to fit in with the story she wants to tell, so it didn't bother me too much. I do think it's interesting to see other peoples interpretations of historical events even if I don't believe them and I try not to let that bother me. For example in this book (and I'm assuming the rest of the series), it's the Tudor's who are responsible for the murders of the princes in the tower. It's interesting to follow that thought even though I don't believe it's true. It's fiction. Not a history book.
My main issues were that Margaret was boring, I swear that there was nothing to make her standout, nothing about her voice changed over the space of 40 something years (in fact barely any of the characters changed in any way. If there weren't dates and stuff, you wouldn't have realised that so many years had passed), and I just did not give a crap about her. I was waiting for her to die.
The pacing was odd. Parts dragged and then other parts were skimmed past when they would have been much more interesting that the parts that were dragged out. There was a lot of repetition. AND THERE WAS SO MUCH LISTING OF PEOPLE'S RELATIONS. My cousin, the queen, Elizabeth did this. You must obey your father the king. My son Henry cousin to. My cousin Henry earl of whatever the kings cousin. AND THIS CONTINUED THROUGHOUT THE BOOK. It's like the readers are too dumb to realise who was who. Yes, there are a lot of characters with the same name but it's unnecessary. Some variations in how characters are written might have done a lot to help. It really bugged me.
I'll probably read some more of the books, they are easy to read and I love the time period, but I'm going to go in with low expectations I think.
dark
informative
tense
slow-paced
I enjoyed this book. Looking at the reign of Henry VIII through Margaret Pole’s eyes was refreshing.
emotional
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes