Scan barcode
jessreadthis's review against another edition
4.0
I give it four stars for my overall enjoyment of the novel. Though, I was very disappointed in the ending. It felt rushed and extremely anticlimactic. For such a suspenseful build up... it fell flat for me. As I'm fairly new to Trollope, I have no idea if this is an accepted opinion or an unpopular opinion.
thesummer's review against another edition
2.0
I was obsessed with the first two novels in the series and was super excited for this one, but it was kind of a letdown. Obviously, it's Trollope, so even a meh Trollope is stellar for anyone else, but I was expecting more. The main problem is the lack of character movement or development. Lizzie Eustace is a very fun main character at first: scheming, ambitious, clever, beautiful, morally corrupt. But the problem is that that's all she is, and she doesn't change throughout the novel. So she's very fun when first introduced, but by the time we hit the halfway mark in the novel, just as how other characters tire of her superficial charm, so do we. The last half really dragged for me; there's a bit of excitement when the plot picks up for a few chapters, but without character movement, there's not a whole lot moving the book forwards.
The best example of how to write a character like this is Maria Edgeworth's Belinda: Lady Delacour is every bit the Slytherin that Lizzie Eustace is, but the difference is that she does have substance. Throughout the novel, you learn about her backstory and why she is where she is, finding her fun in the shallow world, and it gives her depth. And of course, she has a really excellent redemption arc that manages to give her substance, backbone, and principles without taking away the fun, sly, Slytherin factors.
Lizzie, on the other hand, doesn't change at all. She is shallow, unprincipled, and scheming at the beginning, and so she is at the end. So even though Trollope's writing, humour, and dialogue is better than Edgeworth's, Edgeworth's novel is a much more compelling read.
The other characters don't help any. The whole Frank Greystock thing was such a rehash of last novel's Phineas Finn romantic dilemmas that it wasn't interesting at all. And I guess we could root for Lucy Morris, but tbh I don't particularly care to root for a prissy girl with a pure heart of love. It felt for a bit that we might be getting somewhere with Lucinda, but it really wasn't fleshed out.
The previous two novels did a great job of having women with depth, principles, brains, and character, and aside from the Lady Glencora cameos, we really didn't have anybody like that here to drive the novel forward. Trollope of course satirizes all the characters to no end, and it's fun to read, but the first two novels also had substance, heart, and progress married to and interwoven with the satire. I just didn't feel that here.
The best example of how to write a character like this is Maria Edgeworth's Belinda: Lady Delacour is every bit the Slytherin that Lizzie Eustace is, but the difference is that she does have substance. Throughout the novel, you learn about her backstory and why she is where she is, finding her fun in the shallow world, and it gives her depth. And of course, she has a really excellent redemption arc that manages to give her substance, backbone, and principles without taking away the fun, sly, Slytherin factors.
Lizzie, on the other hand, doesn't change at all. She is shallow, unprincipled, and scheming at the beginning, and so she is at the end.
Spoiler
I get the sense that Trollope thinks we're supposed to be glad that she gets her just desserts at the end by marrying a greaseball of a dude who kind of screws her over, but it's not satisfying at all. It's not like I actually hate her; I just felt pity.The other characters don't help any. The whole Frank Greystock thing was such a rehash of last novel's Phineas Finn romantic dilemmas that it wasn't interesting at all. And I guess we could root for Lucy Morris, but tbh I don't particularly care to root for a prissy girl with a pure heart of love. It felt for a bit that we might be getting somewhere with Lucinda, but it really wasn't fleshed out.
The previous two novels did a great job of having women with depth, principles, brains, and character, and aside from the Lady Glencora cameos, we really didn't have anybody like that here to drive the novel forward. Trollope of course satirizes all the characters to no end, and it's fun to read, but the first two novels also had substance, heart, and progress married to and interwoven with the satire. I just didn't feel that here.
tome15's review against another edition
4.0
Trollope, Anthony. The Eustace Diamonds. 1873. Palliser No. 3. Knopf, 1992.
Almost a quarter century after William Makepeace Thackeray published Vanity Fair, a comic anatomization of English society that gave us Becky Sharp, a clever, lovable, and thoroughly amoral heroine, Anthony Trollope decided to try his hand at it with Lizzie Eustace. He is careful, though, to tell us that his heroine is not someone he or we should love. And we don’t. Lizzie lacks Becky’s wit and humanity. She gets by on her looks and artful tears. And it is Trollope’s point that looks and tears are all she needs to move from a small house in the suburbs to a castle in Scotland, because the men are so quick to judge her by her looks and so ready to make a trophy of her. The only exception seems to be a policeman who is immunized by a wife and seven children. There are at least a half dozen women in the novel who we care about, and each has her own brand of power. One of my favorites is Lucinda, a pretty teenager with a social-climbing mother who wants her to marry one of the fox-hunting crowd. On her wedding day she discovers she still has the power to say no. In a milieu that treated women largely as adornments, such power should not be dismissed. Although I liked many aspects of The Eustace Diamonds, I was put off by its transparent and unnecessary antisemitism.
Almost a quarter century after William Makepeace Thackeray published Vanity Fair, a comic anatomization of English society that gave us Becky Sharp, a clever, lovable, and thoroughly amoral heroine, Anthony Trollope decided to try his hand at it with Lizzie Eustace. He is careful, though, to tell us that his heroine is not someone he or we should love. And we don’t. Lizzie lacks Becky’s wit and humanity. She gets by on her looks and artful tears. And it is Trollope’s point that looks and tears are all she needs to move from a small house in the suburbs to a castle in Scotland, because the men are so quick to judge her by her looks and so ready to make a trophy of her. The only exception seems to be a policeman who is immunized by a wife and seven children. There are at least a half dozen women in the novel who we care about, and each has her own brand of power. One of my favorites is Lucinda, a pretty teenager with a social-climbing mother who wants her to marry one of the fox-hunting crowd. On her wedding day she discovers she still has the power to say no. In a milieu that treated women largely as adornments, such power should not be dismissed. Although I liked many aspects of The Eustace Diamonds, I was put off by its transparent and unnecessary antisemitism.
manwithanagenda's review against another edition
funny
reflective
sad
slow-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
2.5
Trollope informs readers early on that Lizzie Greystock is not meant to be the second coming of Becky Sharp. She certainly isn't, but her shameless self-interest and whirlwind (for Trollope) origin story concerning her marriage to the soon-to-die Lord Florian Eustace was entertaining. There is a large cast added to the Palliser novels here, including Lizzie's cousin Frank Greystock, M.P. who has seemingly inherited an ability to outspend his pockets, the dutiful and much-petted governess Lucy Morris, the dowager Lady Linlithgow and her observance to the letter of right without ever being good, and the wealthy hangers-on Lord Bruce and Mrs. Carbuncle, and the most tedious and angry pair of lovers I've seen in an age Sir Griffin and Lucinda Roanoke. Trollope can really set a stage. One of the notable things about this work, however, is the plot. Or, rather, what the plot could have been.
There was a nice break from politics in this novel, though Trollope has a bit of fun with the conservative M.P. Frank Greystock and his "nemesis" Lord Fawn. The real plot involves the widowed Lady Lizzie Eustace refusing to give up a valuable diamond necklace that is claimed to be a part of the Eustace estate and, therefore, not to be taken by a widow. Lizzie's insistence on the necklace being her own causes grief between her and Lord Fawn as a suitor, and the diamond's bright glitter attracts the attention of the unscrupulous. When the diamonds are stolen the novel turns away from a social comedy and (dry) legal thriller into a bit of a mystery novel complete with famous detective and cunning members of Scotland Yard competing to be the one to crack the case.
At least, it would have turned into a mystery novel if Trollope didn't somehow think it was ungentlemanly to hide facts from his readers. There is never really a mystery to the reader as to where the diamonds are, only a bit of fluff concerning the mechanics of the theft(s). This isn't a spoiler, the back cover of most editions say as much about the fate of the diamonds. Certain elements of this novel could have become something if Trollope had allowed himself to "trick" his readers, but such is not the behavior of a gentleman. Read 'The Moonstone' instead if you're looking for a fun, primordial mystery-novel from this era. It must be said, also, that there is strong anti-Semitic sentiment in the book. These were the attitudes of the time, but make a book with a turgid plot that much less enjoyable.
The Pallisers
Next: 'Phineas Redux'
Previous: 'Phineas Finn'
There was a nice break from politics in this novel, though Trollope has a bit of fun with the conservative M.P. Frank Greystock and his "nemesis" Lord Fawn. The real plot involves the widowed Lady Lizzie Eustace refusing to give up a valuable diamond necklace that is claimed to be a part of the Eustace estate and, therefore, not to be taken by a widow. Lizzie's insistence on the necklace being her own causes grief between her and Lord Fawn as a suitor, and the diamond's bright glitter attracts the attention of the unscrupulous. When the diamonds are stolen the novel turns away from a social comedy and (dry) legal thriller into a bit of a mystery novel complete with famous detective and cunning members of Scotland Yard competing to be the one to crack the case.
At least, it would have turned into a mystery novel if Trollope didn't somehow think it was ungentlemanly to hide facts from his readers. There is never really a mystery to the reader as to where the diamonds are, only a bit of fluff concerning the mechanics of the theft(s). This isn't a spoiler, the back cover of most editions say as much about the fate of the diamonds. Certain elements of this novel could have become something if Trollope had allowed himself to "trick" his readers, but such is not the behavior of a gentleman. Read 'The Moonstone' instead if you're looking for a fun, primordial mystery-novel from this era. It must be said, also, that there is strong anti-Semitic sentiment in the book. These were the attitudes of the time, but make a book with a turgid plot that much less enjoyable.
The Pallisers
Next: 'Phineas Redux'
Previous: 'Phineas Finn'
suzmac's review against another edition
4.0
One of Trollope's most lovable and approachable. An antiheroine to rival them all, Lizzie Greystock Eustace. Fun.
csd17's review against another edition
3.0
Not as riveting as some of Trollope's others. I grew tired of Lizzie's petulant air. There was also a lack of politics which, dry as they may sound, are actually quite riveting for me.
lydiagardiner's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
chelseavk's review against another edition
3.0
I love Trollope's writing style and characterization, however I never enjoy anti-hero/heroine stories.
ruthiella's review against another edition
3.0
The Eustace Diamonds is the third book in the Palliser series. The plot revolves around the titular diamonds and whether or not beautiful yet shallow Lizzie Eustace received them as a gift from her late husband or indeed stole them from the estate. Lord Fawn, a minor character last seen in Phineas Finn, is pulled into the controversy when he proposes marriage to the young, rich widow. In the meantime, Lady Eustace works her charms to manipulate her cousin, parliamentarian and lawyer Frank Greystock, while she actively works to discredit the plain governess Lucy Morris who loves Frank.
I agree, with my goodreads friend Steve that Trollope is uncharacteristically mean spirited throughout much of The Eustace Diamonds. And that endless back and forth over the diamonds in the first half of the book does grate. Luckily, the story picks up once the action moves to Portnay, Scotland and Lady Eustace’s rather dodgy new friends Lord George and Mrs. Carbuncle arrive on the scene. Bonus points too for cameos by fan favorites Lady Glencora and Madam Max Goesler.
I think, however, Lizzie may have successfully batted her crocodile-teary eyes to me as well, because by the end of the book, I didn’t want her to get her just deserts after all. And Frank…well, granted was lied to, but he behaved very badly and should have suffered more for it. That said, it is impossible for me to read Victorian literature without my 20th century (and increasingly 21st century) lenses on. So many Trollope novels revolve around money: who has how much or little, who needs more, how they manage to get more (if they do) or lose it and what such money affords them both literally and figuratively. The Eustace Diamonds is in that respect classic Trollope; money (Lizzie’s wealth, Frank and Lord Fawn’s comparative poverty) is the fuel that propels much of the story. But I also think, from a modern viewpoint The Eustace Diamonds really underscores the vulnerability of unmarried middle and upper-class women in the Victorian Era: Lucy, Lizzie and poor Lucinda, Mrs. Carbuncle’s niece, are very much at the mercy of men, more so if they are poor but even if they are not.
I agree, with my goodreads friend Steve that Trollope is uncharacteristically mean spirited throughout much of The Eustace Diamonds. And that endless back and forth over the diamonds in the first half of the book does grate. Luckily, the story picks up once the action moves to Portnay, Scotland and Lady Eustace’s rather dodgy new friends Lord George and Mrs. Carbuncle arrive on the scene. Bonus points too for cameos by fan favorites Lady Glencora and Madam Max Goesler.
I think, however, Lizzie may have successfully batted her crocodile-teary eyes to me as well, because by the end of the book, I didn’t want her to get her just deserts after all. And Frank…well, granted was lied to, but he behaved very badly and should have suffered more for it. That said, it is impossible for me to read Victorian literature without my 20th century (and increasingly 21st century) lenses on. So many Trollope novels revolve around money: who has how much or little, who needs more, how they manage to get more (if they do) or lose it and what such money affords them both literally and figuratively. The Eustace Diamonds is in that respect classic Trollope; money (Lizzie’s wealth, Frank and Lord Fawn’s comparative poverty) is the fuel that propels much of the story. But I also think, from a modern viewpoint The Eustace Diamonds really underscores the vulnerability of unmarried middle and upper-class women in the Victorian Era: Lucy, Lizzie and poor Lucinda, Mrs. Carbuncle’s niece, are very much at the mercy of men, more so if they are poor but even if they are not.