Hannah Morgan-Lewis

I have only just started, and despite really enjoying Hartley's lyrical prose I'm finding that the heavy-handed editing (in the 2003 Penguin edition)is getting on my nerves. I'm one of those people foolish enough to read the introduction before I start and to at least try to read the notes, but Brooks-Davies has committed the cardinal sin of thoroughly spoiler-ing the book in the introduction then adding insult to injury by over end noting (at least five notes per page)with further spoilers and over-analysis. Save it for the study edition, Douglas, I just want to read and analyse the book myself and discover its mysteries in peace.

Update: the notes weren't too bad. At least it explained all the French conversation, although it was like having an over-eager guide alongside. Having read the NYRB Classics introduction by Colm Toibin (the introduction and some reading notes are available here: NYRB Classics site) I'd probably recommend that edition.

Review: Beautiful book, Hartley really captured the young narrator in his innocence and misunderstanding the world the ‘grown-ups' inhabited, also the period before the Great War. Love the way that Ted and Marian's actions are left to our interpretation and all the little things that the narrator brings in such as the references to the zodiac, the use of Belladonna as a symbolic device and how Leo believes as a young boy that he can perform magic. Wish I hadn't read the introduction through, as I think it would've been one of those books that the less you know about it in advance, the better. Shocking ending though, even though I knew what was going to happen, I didn't expect it to end that abruptly.

It's taken a couple of attempts and some years but I finally appreciate Wuthering Heights. Yes, many of the characters are loathsome & this is no love to emulate, but I don't think any other book I can think of is quite like it in it's depiction of a savage, all consuming completely destructive love.

Undoubtedly this sprawling novel is a great achievement in terms of plot, length and historical research, however I'm giving it 3 stars. It's readable but I found myself frustrated by Ralph and Philemon the panto villains who are Irredeemably nasty and always seem to scupper the plans of the heroic characters, the what seemed like an over-reliance on rape as a plot device, particularly in the first half. Not even well-written rape, just problematic rape. Finally, the mysterious letter. I'm not going to spoil it, but I would've liked some sort of explanation as to why Ken came up with that theory, as most novelists do tend to explain what's going on when they use real historic figures. As it was, it seemed like a bit of an irrelevant after thought. Think I preferred the first book, this one seemed to take me ages.

A surprising, quite uplifting book. I was expecting a dissolute man novel about a degenerate individual on a spree of gambling and drinking, but this book is way more than that. The author avoids predictability or making the book too cosy with black humour and a great cast of characters including a German leather maid, a crazy self-obsessed doctor who spends operations imagining himself saving Hendrix and an anarchist slider chef.

Admittedly, I haven't read that much Russian literature before. I think I enjoyed the first part of the story more, and Anna's parts more than the Levin parts. Some of the Levin parts were a bit too slow going to the point that I got frustrated.
Okay, so the characters didn't appear that sympathetic at times, particularly Anna, but the book does give an insight into the Russian society of the time and in particular the hypocritical way Anna is treated - forced not only to live in as kind of semi-married stasis but also to be treated like a social pariah for loving Vronsky (who it seems is unaffected socially by the match).
Not an easy read and it's taken me months to finish it, but I'm glad I read it.

The most difficult of the Barchester chronicles I've read, this time I found the plot and the characters quite difficult to get into and it's taken me nearly a year to finish it (admittedly this has been an eventful year). Probably not the time to appreciate it. I appreciate the ending, however. I agree that Lily Dale is maddening for her decision, but so many novels of this period seem to take the easy route (Dickens I'm looking at you). So far, I haven't found that Trollope's women can compare to say Henry James or Hardy (although it's been a while since I read Trollope's later novels), I don't think Lily has that kind of depth, but it's a good beginning and Eames seems better written (apart from the harping on about his ‘hobbledeyhoyhood' which just seems rather overused).

I think calling this book a “Downton Abbey-style saga” does it a bit of a disservice. Whilst I like Downton this is a far more subtle novel. Whilst I didn't find it a page turner, I did feel a sense of satisfaction having read it and it reminded me a little of “Atonement”. Good characters, I liked the writing style and it seemed well researched, as you would expect from a historian.

Enjoyable, but at the same time I found this quite a frustrating read. Juliet can at times be a bit annoying, this is not helped by the first person narrative. Just when the plot gets interesting, you get more nonsense about how sexy she finds the three men she can't decide between and how she can't decide whether to be a chef or not. The mushroom sub plot goes nowhere, it looks like it was inserted to provide a bit of spice but never really resolved in a satisfying way, it was if the author changed her mind about where she wanted it to go. It also doesn't feel that evocative for a book about food, stately homes and Christmas. The author obviously knows a great deal about cooking, but I found her descriptions fell short. I enjoyed the parts about the family and the below stairs staff though.

What can I say about such a mind-blowing book? I could barely decide how many stars I would give it since it divided my opinion so. No wonder it's so controversial. There were a few chapters I absolutely hated (Scylla and Charbidis anyone?) and I thought I would end up disliking Joyce too for inflicting some of it and being such an arrogant know everything at times. Yet I find myself admiring him a great deal and wanting to re-read the book at some point if only to try and make some more sense of it. The technique astonishes, but I can't give it a glowing review because frankly I didn't like it that much. It grated in parts. Maybe that's why it's so revered though, and why I wanted to read it again, because it challenges in a way that very few other books manage.

I'd like to read it with some proper guides handy so that I don't have to keep flipping to the end notes. Nevertheless, I've found some good guides online.

Anyway, it got three stars in the end. I won't be going around boasting I've read it or attending the next Bloom's day, but I am glad to have read it and to have finished it, as I think if I'd given up half-way through I wouldn't have ever read it or finished it in the future. Glad to have read it in the version I did as well, the free ebook was apparently broken! Also, it had been edited. I know the text I read was full of a lot of mistakes (it was the 1922 version), but I'd rather that than something that has been edited in too heavy-handed a way.

The kind of epic novel that leaves you exhausted by the time you finish it. I thought the characters were well written, particularly Prior Phillip. Follett has obviously avoided using language of the period and this makes it an easy read (other than the length!). I found the descriptions of the cathedral building interesting and well researched. I did notice my reading slowing towards the last third, but it did pick up again and I rushed to finish it.

I feel very lukewarm and quite frustrated towards this book. It's a straightforward, not very original update of Austen's novel. What I love about the original is that Austen conveys the emotions of the characters in such a subtle way. Unfortunately I feel like Trollope fails at this and the characters end up annoying and insipid. Add to this the feeling that the social media references were written by someone who has little concept of the modern world and a Margaret Dashwood talking slang that dates the book immediately and what I got was a big pile of disappointment. If I hadn't read the original I might have found it an instantly forgettable romance, as it was I don't think that it really deserves to have Jane Austen's name on it.

Beautifully written and intricately plotted dual narrative novel which is told partly from the perspective of Juliet, an unhappy mother of three and from the previous generations of her family. When Juliet, an art historian inherits a house unexpectedly from her grandmother, she decides to separate from her husband and move into the dilapidated house with her disgruntled children. Domestic life is very well portrayed, almost painful to read. Juliet is related to the famous artist Ned Horner, creator of The Garden of Lost and Found, a painting of his children that has subsequently disappeared. The historical parts tell the story of Lydia, his wife, her sister Mary and their children. This begins with Lydia's dreadfully unhappy young adulthood after the death of her mother and its effect on her life. I thought the plot was gripping with both stories as the secrets of Lydia and Mary's lives unfold alongside Juliet coping with domestic tribulations and her new job with an old university adversary. Her grandmother is is a rather complicated character with secrets and the Juliet parts of the narrative are added to with her diary entries giving advice about the house and garden. Juliet finds herself renewed by working on the garden and there are lovely descriptions. Overall, a really enjoyable book that got me hooked.

Not too bad, glad I read it but it's not really one I would re-read. It's a highly interesting premis for a novel, but I did find it confusing in parts and somehow didn't find Osgood that three dimensional. Not sure if that was because he was a real person, but I didn't find him that realistic. The background to Drood was good though.

I should have loved this, the kind of book that is right up my street. It does have its good points. The atmosphere is captured well and I can't say I hated it. But I didn't love it either. For a start, I think It was a ghost all along! has to be very skillfully plotted. In this case I found it a bit cringy. It was a little too nudge nudge wink wink with the references to a Christmas Carol and his other work, I get what you're trying to do, you can be a little more subtle about it. The ending was quite rushed and seemed to emphasise Dickens raking in magic money (suddenly writing a Christmas Carol is like wining the lottery) then spending it to solve everything. That's missed the point of the original. I feel like I'm being harsh, and I think I would have loved it when I was younger but it didn't touch me that much and I think that was what it was supposed to do.

At last, I've finished this damn book! Loved the first part, but goodness me, the military history of part two went on and on. Well researched, but the writing got a bit fanciful at times, making it seem a bit like a fictitious account of historical events. A bit disappointing, particularly as I really enjoyed her first book.

A little bit slow starting (especially with all the mentions of chilblains), but I found this book enjoyably different. Baker doesn't just write in the point of view of the servants, she also gives P&P an extra back story. Whilst this may potentially offend purists, I thought it was handled well. I really enjoyed the way that the love story developed slowly and it was obvious that the author had done a great deal of research.

It gets two stars because I didn't hate it all the way through, I just didn't “get” it. I didn't find the humour that funny, it wasn't absurd enough to be absurd or sharp enough to be that satirical. I found the plot a bit of a muddle and the pacing a bit patchy. It dragged at times. And I hated the ending. I don't know if he was aiming for emotional resonance, but it felt like he ran out of steam and it was a bit of a cop-out. The protagonist didn't really redeem himself enough for it to work.
Otherwise, it's a gentle read and can be mildly amusing in places, it just didn't suit me.