| Back to Review Index | Go to the Home Page |
June - August 2006 A Christmas gift from my loving, book-addict Mother.
I read this on and off during my summer vacation, which is why it took so long to complete. I got into the book alright, though it took a hundred pages for me to do so; I just couldn't get myself interested in the story. It was about a few people, who wrote letters to each other, and left a lot of things unsaid. Well, I felt it was too much unsaid, and too much mystery, and too many unknowns. In the end, all these unknowns were what made the book interesting, but it took an effort to stay interested at the beginning where it was only unanswered question after questions unanswered.
The setting, (England at the end of the eighteen hundreds,) was an interesting environment to... read. But it wasn't too vividly painted. Not much at all. The only place that it took great effect, was in the social settings, and attitudes of people. It gives a good description of the Mysticism which society was dabbling with, and with the fall of the importance of the church, as more and more people do not truly believe in it. Also there was a great deal to do with the politics of the time, (the whole story revolves around the revolution of ideas of freedom for the peasants, and an end to the strict aristocracy,) as well as the internal family politics between cousins and aunts of an aristocratic family.
All of these things were well depicted. -And I'm just assuming that they were historically accurate. (But I don't know that it's accurate.)
The love story of it wasn't necessary... from a literary point of view, and it wasn't needed for the development of the tale. It was still nicely told though, and somewhat original. (How many love stories are truly original though? I guess Romeo and Juliette was, but it's then been copied thousands of times since.) I guess that the love element did develop the characters more, and we got a better look into who they are, (Through their reactions to love, and their behaviour and thoughts surrounding their partner.) But then, it didn't strictly have to be between these two main characters. So long as each of them found some sort of love somewhere, we could have seen how they dealt with it.
I feel that there ought to be something to say about the way it was written; it was composed Solely of letters. No omniscient view point. Only first person view point when that person is explaining to another what happened. Only dialogue repeated in a letter, (or in journal entries.) I don't know what the authors felt they were gaining by doing it this way. A stronger feeling of authenticity? More a feeling in the reader that they're uncovering a mystery that took place a hundred years ago? (Because the only clues about such a mystery would be letters and journal entries.) That could be it, but I don't know if it worked for me. And there were places in it that were noticeably contrived; When I thought to myself "She wouldn't have really written that down. The authors only made her do it so that we'd understand what's going on."
Still, not a bad book. I'd be notably interested in reading a book by only One of the authors, to see what his/her style would be like without the other.