Scan barcode
A review by jamiehandy
The Creation of Eve by Lynn Cullen
4.0
Entertaining to read. I loved reading about the Spanish court. I thought the convergance of issues -- the protestant reformation, the inquisition, the morality of the court, the complexity of the relationship were all very interesting to read.
My main problem was this -- I know that in historical fiction liberties are taken -- but I took exception with the one main liberty that the author uses as the central point to the whole plot-- and it is in the first 20 pages of the book -- that Sofi -- the artist who studied under Michaelangelo and signed all her paintings Sofi, the virgin -- was not a virgin.
That just seemed like she was "sullying" the true facts of Sofi's life. Dirtying her reputation at a time in history where your sexual status was the crux of your reputation. If the author had any evidence at all of an improper sexual relationship then I could see including it in your historical fiction, but when no such evidence is presented well it just didn't sit well with me.
An equally interesting story could have been told preserving Sofi's virtue -- and I feel should have. Think of how intriguing Anne Bolyn is for not immediately sleeping with Henry VIII.
If Sofi -- felt so proud of her virtue that she signed her paintings recognising it -- then how can a writer in good conscience make her out to be less than that -- to me it is taking historical fiction too far.
And so I had to ask myself, WHY???? and I think she did it to make the character Sofi appeal more to the "loose" morality of readers of today. But it had the opposite affect on me. If you are going to do historical fiction, I think you need to be true to the time period. And actually value what they valued.
I just felt like 21st century morality was superimposed on a 16th century time.
My main problem was this -- I know that in historical fiction liberties are taken -- but I took exception with the one main liberty that the author uses as the central point to the whole plot-- and it is in the first 20 pages of the book -- that Sofi -- the artist who studied under Michaelangelo and signed all her paintings Sofi, the virgin -- was not a virgin.
That just seemed like she was "sullying" the true facts of Sofi's life. Dirtying her reputation at a time in history where your sexual status was the crux of your reputation. If the author had any evidence at all of an improper sexual relationship then I could see including it in your historical fiction, but when no such evidence is presented well it just didn't sit well with me.
An equally interesting story could have been told preserving Sofi's virtue -- and I feel should have. Think of how intriguing Anne Bolyn is for not immediately sleeping with Henry VIII.
If Sofi -- felt so proud of her virtue that she signed her paintings recognising it -- then how can a writer in good conscience make her out to be less than that -- to me it is taking historical fiction too far.
And so I had to ask myself, WHY???? and I think she did it to make the character Sofi appeal more to the "loose" morality of readers of today. But it had the opposite affect on me. If you are going to do historical fiction, I think you need to be true to the time period. And actually value what they valued.
I just felt like 21st century morality was superimposed on a 16th century time.