Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.51 AVERAGE
3.51 AVERAGE
I found the historical aspect really interesting because to me that period of English history has always been a blur of Jameses and Charleses and you start to wonder if the British monarchy was in danger of running out of names, along with its other problems. You read about the Catholics who were never reconciled to Elizabeth despite her ability to unify the country and the Protestants who detested any hint of monarchical Catholicism, but Thackeray does a wonderful job of personalizing all of that. I had never considered how confusing it must have been for the aristocracy to have these continually changing allegiances religious and governmental. That said, Thackeray of course assumes you are steeped in the history of the period and so as much as it reveals, it is also hard to keep up with who is up and who is down. The frame story about the injustices of class and the need for impoverished nobility to marry wealth is an old one and less interesting. The convolutions to establish why Henry Esmond is simultaneously not a bastard but universally believed to be one are tortuous. And the insufferable goodness of his aunt/mother does get to you after a while. Most interesting really for an analysis of how people felt during all of these power shifts and how they accommodated their religious lives to suit the court.
Forgot to mention too the very modern feeling horror of war -- how it seemed to require its participants to level villages and murder innocents, women and children primarily, as an example. He rails against poetry glorifying war as glossing over the horror and you have to admire that.
Forgot to mention too the very modern feeling horror of war -- how it seemed to require its participants to level villages and murder innocents, women and children primarily, as an example. He rails against poetry glorifying war as glossing over the horror and you have to admire that.
Henry Esmond is a shitty, bitter dude and his ideas about women suck. This book took me 2 months to read and it was mostly a waste of time. Maybe you'll like this book if you really love Jacobite history and repetitive character building and subplots, but it's not for me.
I loved Pendennis, but I'm over Thackeray after Henry Esmond for the following reasons:
-Women are treated like absolute crap, in ways that are excessive even for this book's time. (& If Beatrix is such a bad person, why does Henry want her for THE ENTIRE BOOK? Beatrix clearly isn't the one with issues here. At least she was always honest about what she was up to. Give her a freaking break.)
-The romantic ending of this book is creepy and predictable, and yet somehow Thackeray failed to build up to it enough to make it believable.
-The narrator is bearable for the first half of the book but becomes pompous and self righteous by the end.
-There's a lot of war and it's boring.
-omg Henry either give up your title and stop whining or take it and use it. You can't have it both ways.
-HE KEEPS CHASING THE SAME GIRL FOR THE WHOLE BOOK AND DOES NOT DEVELOP AS A CHARACTER IN ANY WAY.
I loved Pendennis, but I'm over Thackeray after Henry Esmond for the following reasons:
-Women are treated like absolute crap, in ways that are excessive even for this book's time. (& If Beatrix is such a bad person, why does Henry want her for THE ENTIRE BOOK? Beatrix clearly isn't the one with issues here. At least she was always honest about what she was up to. Give her a freaking break.)
-The romantic ending of this book is creepy and predictable, and yet somehow Thackeray failed to build up to it enough to make it believable.
-The narrator is bearable for the first half of the book but becomes pompous and self righteous by the end.
-There's a lot of war and it's boring.
-omg Henry either give up your title and stop whining or take it and use it. You can't have it both ways.
-HE KEEPS CHASING THE SAME GIRL FOR THE WHOLE BOOK AND DOES NOT DEVELOP AS A CHARACTER IN ANY WAY.
"to inform him... of a thousand great schemes, hopes, ambitions, that were alive in the gallant heart, beating a few hours since, and now in a little dust quiescent." This seems like Thackeray's own purpose in this book, and like the book's own sad fate. It tells the reader of great battles in the War of the Spanish Succession (which all but assiduous students of history have forgotten) and of the intrigues between the supporters of the Stuarts and the Hanovers that seem further away in time and in memory than the feud between the Montagues and the Capulets.
Yes, the bildungsroman and the love story are the still-beating heart of the book, and Henry's cousin Beatrix has something of the boldness of Becky Sharp that made [b:Vanity Fair|5797|Vanity Fair|William Makepeace Thackeray|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1344386439l/5797._SY75_.jpg|1057468] so enticing. Henry, as memoirist, has his own sharp eye, although he may disclose more of his own foibles--not just those of the nobility--than he means to show.
Ultimately, however, Henry Esmond is a sort of ventriloquist's doll for the author himself, and his prejudices remain unexamined. His story is worth reading if you're fond of historical novels. Now that I've read it, however, I can't say I'm that much edified or entertained.
Yes, the bildungsroman and the love story are the still-beating heart of the book, and Henry's cousin Beatrix has something of the boldness of Becky Sharp that made [b:Vanity Fair|5797|Vanity Fair|William Makepeace Thackeray|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1344386439l/5797._SY75_.jpg|1057468] so enticing. Henry, as memoirist, has his own sharp eye, although he may disclose more of his own foibles--not just those of the nobility--than he means to show.
Ultimately, however, Henry Esmond is a sort of ventriloquist's doll for the author himself, and his prejudices remain unexamined. His story is worth reading if you're fond of historical novels. Now that I've read it, however, I can't say I'm that much edified or entertained.
900 pages long and the wrong guy gets the girl. ugh.
my modern sense can't help but be squicked by the hero marrying his mother figure, no matter how much Victorian purity and submissiveness she'd attained, but if one sets that aside, it's interesting—especially when Esmond is away from the women. I always find historical novels written by people who are historical from my vantage quite fascinating; Thackeray gets deeply into custom of the late 1600s and early 1700s, making careless reference to habits that are remote to our time, unless one has read a great deal, and his predictions of who would remain in collective memory are quite interesting as well, underscoring his Victorian views. (The 'good' women are firmly Victorian, the bad very much like women of the time, which is perpetrated by modern writers often enough.) In short, the use of history is more interesting than the story, which does get tedious.
lighthearted
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I am so sad. This book was my friend and now it is finished. If you love Vanity Fair and want to meet Thackeray, here is your chance.