Crocodile on the Sandbank by Elizabeth Peters

My Rating: 3.0 / 5.0

Amazon Rating: 4.40 / 5.00

Goodreads Rating: 4.01 / 5.00

Amelia Peabody can be summarized by a few words: sensible, self-confident and self-sufficient. A Victorian lady with the good fortune to have had a wealthy father, she is now pursuing her interest in all things ancient and Egyptian by travelling that country armed with her extensive fortune, an endless sense of determination and a stout umbrella. She was accompanied by a suitably boring companion until their stay in Rome, where the thoughtless woman developed a horrible disease and had to be sent home to England. However, she came across another, more suitable travelling companion in the form of the destitute, but beautiful, Evelyn Forbes. Miss Forbes is a fallen woman, whose Italian lover has abandoned her now that her grandfather has written her out of his will because of her scandalous behavior.

Undeterred by Evelyn’s previous poor judgment, Amelia rebuilds the poor girl’s wardrobe and self-esteem and then they depart for Egypt. There they encounter the Emerson brothers and Evelyn is smitten by the young of the pair, Walter, while Amelia detests the elder brother, Radcliffe, on sight. They also meet Evelyn’s cousin, Lucas, who brings news of their grandfather’s death and his position as the new heir. He proposes marriage so that she will be allowed to inherit after all.

During their cruise down the Nile the ladies re-encounter the brothers at their dig site and decide to stay to help Radcliffe recover from a terrible infection. However, things at the dig site are much more complicated that they would seem. A strange mummy begins to haunt the dig, terrifying the local diggers and Lucas arrives to continue his pursuit of Evelyn, much to Walter’s distress.

This series was one that I had seen mentioned in some of the reviews for Gail Carriger’s Soulless, with comments about the similarities in their settings and the heroine. While it is true that both Amelia and Alexia have similarities in their general appearance and temperament, and that both books are set within the Victorian era, I found several differences between the two. While Ms Carriger maintains a cutting and sarcastic tone, especially in the way that Alexia views the world, Ms Peters gives Amelia a much more bombastic voice, with much less wit and bite. I also found that the plotting and world building were handled very differently, with Ms Carriger’s story ripping along at a good pace, whilst Ms Peters’ struggled from far too much description and unimportant detail. The final difference that was most obvious was the way in which the two authors handled the love-hate relationship between the heroine and her leading man. In Alexia, we have a woman who is constantly aware that she is lacking a soul and, therefore, is not quite normal in her lack of emotionality. This gives her a unique perspective on her growing feelings for Maccon, which she does not understand or trust, and adds to the humor in the situation. In contrast, Amelia’s bloody-minded refusal to recognize the obvious attraction between herself and Radcliffe becomes simply irritating.

Even if we put aside the comparisons with The Parasol Protectorate, we are left with a novel that is not entirely satisfying. The plotting was dreadfully slow, with so much detail about the preparations necessary for a trip down the Nile and then about the trip itself, that I was tempted to skip over some sections. This is very, very unusual for me, and shows how difficult it was for me to stay engaged with the characters. I plodded along, convinced that there must be some significance in the description of the pyramids, the decoration for their ship, what they were wearing, what Amelia had in her first aid kit . . . but, alas, these proved to be merely set dressing that a good editor would have hacked out with numerous slashes of a red pencil. I can understand the desire to wax lyrical about a subject dear to your heart, and I would probably do the same if I ever attempted to write a novel set in Rome, either ancient or modern, but there is a point at which one must stop describing the scenery and actually get on with the action.

Unfortunately, the plot itself was rather predictable, which made the unnecessary description even more annoying. When I have read most of a book, where very little has happened, only to have the ‘big reveal’ illicit nothing more than a disappointed eye roll I am not a happy bunny. I expect some mystery in my mystery novels and a surprise at the end when the cunning plan is revealed. This book had neither and left me feeling like I had wasted my time plowing through all the pages up to that point. Perhaps if the ‘eccentric’ British characters had been more witty and amusing I would have been swept along, but they were actually pretty tame. There was also very little use of the Egyptian and Italian characters, which left the story focused on the four main characters and made it even more imperative that they be entertaining.

On the whole, this was a disappointing read for me and I am not sure that I can ascribe that entirely to the book’s publication date of 1975.

(First published at Not Your Ordinary Book Banter)

Outlander by Diana Gabaldon

  

My Rating: 1.0 / 5.0

Amazon Rating: 4.30 / 5.00

Goodreads Rating: 4.03 / 5.00

It is 1945 and Claire Randall has been released from her duties as an army nurse and returned to Britain. She has reunited with her husband of eight years, Frank, who has been working as an intelligence officer for the duration of the war. Having been apart for most of the last six years they have decided to take a second honeymoon in the north of Scotland. There they visit an ancient stone circle and secretly observe a druidic ritual. When Claire returns to the circle next day, she falls through one of the stones and travels back in time two hundred years.

In 1743, Claire finds herself in the middle of a skirmish between a group of English soldiers and some Highlanders. She is attacked by the English commander, who happens to be Frank’s famous ancestor, Jonathon Randall, but rescued by the Scots. She is taken to meet the leader of the Mackenzie clan and begins to find a role for herself as the clan healer. However, she also meets the young and attractive Jamie Fraser, and life becomes more complicated.

 

I was reading this book quite recently as part of a read along, but I gave up about half way through. Why?

Let us start with the research into Britain in 1945. I am British so the glaring errors in the author’s portrayal of the post-war Highlands were very annoying. I will only mention the two most glaring errors. Firstly, Claire and Frank are staying in a Bed and Breakfast with a little old lady, in a tiny village near Inverness, who has a car. At this time in the UK the only people likely to own a car would have been the local doctor, vet, lawyer and perhaps the vicar: in other words, a person of wealth. Secondly, there is the fact that Claire and her husband are both serving in the military, but by the autumn of 1945 they have both been de-mobbed: this is possible, but not likely as Victory in Japan was not declared until August 15th.

Then there are the Scottish accents. I lived in Aberdeenshire for 20 years, so I have heard a lot of Scots speaking, and Ms Gabaldon’s dialogue is very hit and miss to my ear. She does include some nice Scottish words like ‘slaters’ and ‘oxters’ (woodlice and armpits for the non-Scots-speaking), but the accent that she depicts seems to owe far more to Mr Scott from Star Trek than to real Scots speakers. Also, all the Scots have exactly the same accent, which is not at all believable knowing how they are so different from one another even now with modern communication. I cannot really comment on the accuracy on Ms Gabaldon’s other research of the Highlands during the 1740s, because it is not a period that I have studied. I hope it is better than her study of the more modern era.

However, my biggest issue with the book was Claire’s infidelity. She married Frank in 1937/8 and they had been apart for six out of the eight years because of the war. While she is still in 1945, Frank makes a comment to her about how he could forgive her for any indiscretions during their time apart. Many in the Read Along saw this as Frank hinting that he had been unfaithful to Claire, but I am not so sure about that. Later, Claire remembers that she had infatuations with other men during the war, going so far as to kiss some of them. It seems to me that Frank is very perceptive about her ability to be faithful because when Claire is rescued / captured by a group of Highlanders she is immediately drawn to Jamie. For totally contrived and unbelievable reasons she HAS to marry Jamie and it HAS to be consummated, but, although she is still planning to return to Frank, instead of bouncing on the bed and making sex noises she actually does the deed with Jamie. Repeatedly. In fact, so frequently that I was amazed that she could get back on her horse. However, she is only marginally conflicted about this and has few moments of regret and a couple of twinges of guilt.

Most of the Read Along group were more than happy for Claire to forget about Frank and team up with Jamie, but I found it very difficult to stomach. If she had grieved for Frank and decided that she was stuck in the past and then ‘moved on’ emotionally, I could have accepted her decision much more easily, but she didn’t and I couldn’t. She even makes an unwise attempt to run away from the Highlanders and return to the stone circle with the idea of going back to 1945 and Frank. The whole issue of her infidelity was glossed over so that she could enjoy her time with Jamie, which made me wonder why on Earth Ms Gabaldon decided to make her married in the first place.

A second big issue was the portrayal of the bad guys, which eventually led to me putting the book aside. I am going to gloss over the fact that they are both English, and I was not even overly offended by the fact that Captain Randall, the main baddy and Frank’s great- great- ancestor, tries to rape Claire at every opportunity. His casual attitude to rape was shared by the Highlanders and I found it totally offensive at all times, as it made it an acceptable activity for all men, who cannot control themselves, and placed the blame for being raped squarely on ‘careless’ women. No, it was the fact that his interest in rape was extended to include, shock, horror, MEN as well, that finally made me put this book to one side. Both Captain Randall and his patron, the Duke of Sandringham, are homosexuals, renowned for their pursuit of young boys and men. We are told of the Duke’s attempted rape of Jamie and that Randall offered to cancel a beating if Jamie would have sex with him.

You see, the Scots are depicted as ‘good’ rapists: they only rape women who do not have the sense to stay out of their way. But the bad guys are gay, so they will rape anything, and, they are pedophiles as well, because that is all part and parcel of being gay. What? Homosexuals are not pedophiles, nor do they necessarily go around raping other men. I know that rape is often used as a way to assert power and is often seen after military conquests, but this was not what was shown here. The Captain makes his offer to Jamie in private and the Duke is described as soft and having a high-pitched voice, attempting to grope lads at any opportunity. I know that the book was written twenty years ago, but this homophobic attitude is still offensive in the extreme.

It is not often that a book manages to offend me quite so much as this book did. Those of you who have read some of my other reviews will know that I have a real problem reading about infidelity and rape, both of which were dismissed as just part of life in this book. The issue of Claire’s adultery seemed totally unnecessary, as the main story of travelling back in time and adapting to that society could have provided more than enough interest without a previous marriage. If I was supposed to think badly of Frank, and so feel happy that Claire abandoned him at the first opportunity for Jamie, then he needed to be a really awful husband, rather than a nice and considerate man.

I know that this is a wildly popular book, but I obviously bring a very different mind set to it than a lot of the other readers. I tend to be a little wary about Romance novels, especially those that are based in historical British settings but are not written by British authors, because they usually provide such an irritatingly warped view of my home country. Coupled with an apologist attitude towards infidelity and rampant homophobia, this made Outlander a highly unpalatable cocktail to me.  

Other Reviews I Recommend

Calico Reaction

Gossamer Obsessions

Sarah Says Read

That’s What She Read

Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman

My Rating: 4.0 / 5.0

Amazon Rating: 4.40 / 5.00

Goodreads Rating: 4.12 / 5.00

Richard Mayhew is an ordinary guy living a dull life. He has a boring job and an overbearing girlfriend, but he is not unhappy. During one of their many arguments he stumbles over a girl bleeding in the street and decides to help her. This decision changes his life forever as he is drawn into her world: the dark and magical world of London Underground. There, he will travel through sewers, tunnels and disused underground stations, encountering Old Bailey, The Angel Islington, Serpentine and the Blackfriars.

The Lady Door has the ability to open any door, but has just returned home to find her entire family murdered. She is running from the probable murderers: Mr Croup and Mr Vandemar, a pair of very sinister thugs. She seeks help from the Marquis de Carabas and recruits the mysterious Hunter as her bodyguard, but it seems that Richard will be vital for the completion of her quest: to find out who killed her family and why.

I read this book as part of a Read Along, even though I had never read any of Neil Gaiman’s other titles. The book is the novelized version of a TV show, written for the BBC and shown in 1996, which I had actually seen and been impressed by. In many ways, the book’s origins are pretty obvious, because it has a very visual quality and is very ‘busy’ with lots of movement and a large cast. Ultimately, this leads to a few too many ideas, locations and characters, which left me with questions unanswered at the end of the book. However, it is wildly imaginative and will keep you guessing for every step of the way.

Perhaps the most striking thing about this book is the world building. At first, London Below seems to be simply an underground society of the dispossessed and forgotten. But, as we travel further in and further down, we come across increasingly magical and fantastical elements until we almost feel as if we are in Alice’s Wonderland or Dorothy’s Oz. Many of the inhabitants of this world appear to be normal humans, but they may have amazing talents or be the relics of a previous time period. One very disturbing feature of London Below is that entering into it causes your life in London Above to unravel. Once Richard has been drawn into the world he finds that the people above have forgotten his existence and cannot really ‘see’ him anymore. This makes it a cruel and hopeless world in many ways, so that it seems more nightmare than dream.

Many of the major characters are very gray in terms of their motivation. Although we are sure that Richard and Door are the ‘good guys’, many of the other characters are much more doubtful. For example, the Marquis is a very difficult character to trust. Door trusts him totally, but throughout the first part of the book we are constantly given reason to doubt his loyalty and to suspect him of playing a double agent. We see something similar with Messers Croup and Vandemar. Yes, they are exceedingly dangerous murderers and Mr Vandemar eats raw animals, is immune to pain and has spit like superglue, but they are simply mercenaries. They do what they are paid to do, although they do enjoy it rather too much. This uncertainty about some of the characters was very refreshing and made them feel so much more real than if they had been written as the usual two-dimensional offerings.

Indeed, even the central figures of Richard and Door are not typical either. Door is not a helpless maiden in distress in need of rescuing. This is fortunate, because Richard is most certainly not a knight in shining armor. He is full of self-doubt and desperately wants to return to his old life. However, we see him grow and come to realize that he has more strength than he had ever realized. During the journey we share his sense of disbelief and of being off-balance. He questions what he sees and so do we as we see the world through his eyes.

The plot was basically a quest journey, so it followed a predictable path in its broadest outline. However, there were enough twists and turns to keep me guessing at what was coming next. There were also moments of high tension and deep despair, so that I wanted to know how they escaped from the latest trap or problem. But, in many ways, the plot took a bit of a back seat to the world building and the introduction of new and interesting characters.

Overall, this was a fun read, although I felt like it was a little lacking in depth. I would have preferred fewer characters and settings so that we could have learnt more about each of them. I do wonder if the original idea was for more than one series. I am left with far too many questions and ideas that I want to explore, which is vaguely dissatisfying.

Other Reviews I Recommend:

Books Without Any Pictures

Fantasy Cafe

The French Gardener by Santa Montefiore

My Rating: 2.5 / 5.0

Amazon Rating: 4.20 / 5.00

Goodreads Rating: 3.62 / 5.00

Miranda Claybourne moves to Hartington House in Dorset to get away from the rat race in London and because her son, Gus, is a problem child. He is aggressive with other children and it is hoped that the countryside will help him and his younger sister, Storm, to make friends. Miranda is a writer, so she can work anywhere, but her husband, David, stays in London during the week because he works in the City.

When we first meet Miranda she is struggling to cope with the children and misses the glamor of her London lifestyle, while David has largely checked out of their marriage and spends the weekends relaxing in front of the television. However, when she decides to hire a cook and gardener she meets some of the local community and gradually begins to integrate. Then Jean-Paul arrives and everything changes. He is very French and very handsome and he offers to recreate the once famous gardens if she will allow him to stay in the small cottage at the bottom of the garden. As Miranda is clearing out the cottage she finds a scrapbook full of notes and pictures. When she begins to read it she learns that the previous owner, Ava, created the famous garden in conjunction with a wonderful young French man.

We follow as Miranda and her children are reconnected with nature as they rebuild the garden under the tuition of Jean-Paul. Meanwhile, we follow Ava as she builds the original garden and falls hopelessly in love with the French gardener. We see how their affair develops and how it affects her and her family.

I have to admit that I was somewhat uneasy about reading this book because I knew that infidelity played a large role in the story. In fact we are presented with two separate affairs: one in each timeline. Ava’s affair is presented as an irresistible urge that she fights against for a long time, even sending her lover away to remove the temptation. However, her husband’s actions place the two together again and she gives in to the sensuality of the illicit romance. In doing this she places her needs above those of her husband and children, so I had very little sympathy for the grief she feels when the affair finally collapses. She spends the rest of her life punishing herself and dedicated to caring for her aging husband.

David’s affair is more sordid, largely conducted out of boredom with his marriage and a feeling of entitlement. He does not have romantic feelings for his mistress who is engaged in the affair as a way to get back at Miranda and her ‘perfect’ life. I was highly dissatisfied with the conclusion to this affair and the consequences. He suddenly has an epiphany that he really loves his wife and children and, with very little fuss or effort, he returns to the bosom of his family. Unless we are supposed to guess that there was extensive counseling and work on the marriage, this seemed to be far too easy on him and struck me as unbelievable.

Putting the infidelity to one side was not easy for me, but the portrayal of the magic of nature, and the garden in particular, was strong enough to keep me reading. The author obviously has a deep connection with the earth and countryside that shone through in her writing and resonated with my own love of the natural world. I liked how she understood the healing qualities of nature, especially with regards to Miranda’s children who blossom when they are allowed the freedom to explore the world around them.

In fact, the vivid descriptions of nature were about the only thing that I enjoyed in the book. Many of the characters are highly annoying and unsympathetic. Miranda is a mother who ignores and resents her children, although she does at least pay some attention to them, unlike David. She is shallow, spoilt, judgmental and snobbish. I was getting very tired of reading about her (insert famous designer name here) shoes / jacket / dress and how she misses going out to (insert famous name here) restaurant / shop. David was simply a selfish, thoughtless adulterer, with no redeeming qualities as far as I could see. Everything Ava does is all about her: she is incredibly selfish. Even before the affair she spends all her time in the garden, ignoring her children and doting husband, though she is consistently portrayed as a perfect wife and mother. Then there is Gus who enjoys beating a donkey with a stick and pulling the legs off spiders: delightful!

The other thing that really made me struggle was the wealth of the main two families. I grew up in a working class family in England and so I find it very difficult to feel much sympathy for a woman who owns a huge manor house with huge grounds, employs a cook / housekeeper and a gardener and drives a Range Rover. Both families come from money and have no understanding of the lives lived by their neighbors and employees. I know that money cannot buy happiness, but it certainly can help to remove nasty things like hunger and homelessness. Knowing a little about the author I know that she also comes from this background, so she is writing from her own experience, but I still wanted to give Miranda, in particular, a shake for being so self-pitying. I kept wondering why she had bothered to have the children because she obviously did not want to deal with them and was counting the days until she could send them off to boarding school.

The writing was a little melodramatic at times and some of the names were very odd: Storm and Peach being the two worst. I disliked the way we jumped about from one point of view to another all the time: we ended up in the head of a donkey at one point, which was just strange. I was also unimpressed by the attempt at a third romance story between the shop owner and the farmer, which seemed forced and totally pointless. Indeed, the secondary characters were mostly set decoration and very clichéd: gay hairdresser, fat lady vicar, etc.

In short, I am not sure what the author was trying to say about infidelity but she certainly loves gardens.