Review "The Familiars" by Stacey Halls

"Young Fleetwood Shuttleworth, a noblewoman, is with child again. None of her previous pregnancies have borne fruit, and her husband, Richard, is anxious for an heir. Then Fleetwood discovers a hidden doctor’s letter that carries a dire prediction: she will not survive another birth. By chance she meets a midwife named Alice Grey, who promises to help her deliver a healthy baby. But Alice soon stands accused of witchcraft.

Is there more to Alice than meets the eye? Fleetwood must risk everything to prove her innocence. As the two women’s lives become intertwined, the Witch Trials of 1612 loom. Time is running out; both their lives are at stake. Only they know the truth. Only they can save each other.

Rich and compelling, set against the frenzy of the real Pendle Hill Witch Trials, this novel explores the rights of 17th-century women and raises the question: Was witch-hunting really women-hunting? Fleetwood Shuttleworth, Alice Grey and the other characters are actual historical figures. King James I was obsessed with asserting power over the lawless countryside (even woodland creatures, or “familiars,” were suspected of dark magic) by capturing “witches”—in reality mostly poor and illiterate women."

(blurb from goodreads.com)

Rating: 3/5 stars

I started this book thinking I would love it, but it did not quite do it for me in the end. It is a well-written, enjoyable piece of historical fiction. The setting and descriptions are atmospheric. It fits in with a certain trend of depicting female characters as finding themselves/new strength/a sense of completion through friendship with other women (rather than through romance). I liked the fact that all the characters were based on real people. 

However, several things bothered me a little. For some reason, the language used sometimes jarred a little, as if it was not quite right for the historical period. Maybe not so much the language as the thoughts and attitudes... It's difficult to describe but it read very much like something written now. 

Another aspect I found disappointing was the way witchcraft was dealt with. The author makes a vain attempt at creating confusion as to whether the women accused are witches or not, no doubt to reflect the attitude of people at the time. However, the accused "witches" themselves were portrayed as...witches, convinced of their power, making deals with the devil, and being thoroughly nasty characters. I was expecting a more sensible, feminist retelling of witchcraft in the 17th century. I did not get it. And I wonder why this book was called The Familiars, since have barely any role (or make any appearance). Perhaps I have missed something. 

One, minor thing that annoyed me thoroughly was the way horses were portrayed. My guess is that the author knows nothing about horses, and that is fine. But in that case, she should have done a little bit more research before making her character ride everywhere, use riding as a way to assert herself, and show a form of independence by riding. No self-respecting horseperson will call their horse "it." "He" if the horse is a stallion or gelding. "She" if the horse is a mare. No excellent and experienced rider (as the main character is meant to be) will try to grab the reins as a means to save themselves from falling when a horse is rearing. Moreover, bucking and rearing are not the same things. Those are just details but they pulled me out of the story.  

I was also midly bothered by how one-dimensional the male characters were. Like the witches, actually. I had hoped for a nuanced portrayal of those women but, maybe because their point of view was never given, they simply appeared, in most cases, as nasty characters, bent on doing evil, their physical appearance matching the darkness of their deeds.

This is not to say that this book is not enjoyable. Maybe I was disappointed because I expected a more literary work and did not like how manichean it was. Still, if you want a diverting, easy read, do give it a go!

New Year writing resolutions

2020 has been a strange, scary, crazy year. And much as I hope that 2021 will be better, the truth is we cannot be sure it will. The pandemic raging across the world will not be magically resolved because 2020 has come to an end. 2021 begins under the auspices of uncertainty. Still, life must go on... I had a look at the post I made one year ago. Where I was hoping that 2020 would be an even better year than 2019. Ha ha ha. I look back and wonder at my naïve hopefulness. Have I managed to keep the resolutions I had taken then? 

The first was to finish, illustrate and publish Mr. Summerhaye’s Horse. All done, so that’s good. 

The second was to edit The Orchid Collector (done) and find an agent (still searching…). 

The third was to finish editing the sequel of As Winter Came and Went (not done). 

The fourth was to learn about marketing and sell more copies of As Winter Came and Went (not done). 

The fifth was to write short stories (not done). 

The sixth was to unearth one of my unfinished manuscripts and work on it (not done). 

The seventh was to read more fiction and post reviews on the blog (sort of done). 

I have not kept most of those resolutions (which makes me wonder why I’m even bothering making some). The one thing I am pleased with is having published Mr. Summerhaye’s Horse. For some reason, I have a special fondness for that novella. I will even venture to say that, so far, it’s my personal favourite among the books I have written. Maybe because I had wanted to write a story with a horse as the central character ever since I was a child. 

In spite of the likelihood that I won’t be keeping most of them (though I hope that somehow I will), here are my New Year writing resolutions for 2021: 

One: to find (at last) an agent to represent The Orchid Collector. Failing that, I might take the route of self-publication (again…). 

Two: finish edition the sequel of As Winter Came and Went.  

Three: be more active on this blog, with reviews and maybe some short fiction. 

Four: unearth one of my unfinished manuscripts (I know, I know, I’m repeating myself). 

Five: write more regularly. 

Six: sell more books. 

Seven: allow myself to not make plans, to write stories as they come, to find pleasure in writing. 

Will I keep more resolutions than I did last year? None of us knows what this year will bring. All we have is hope. And maybe, given the situation, that’s enough.

Review "A Black Fox Running" by Brian Carter

"A beautiful lost classic of nature writing which sits alongside Tarka the Otter, Watership Down, War Horse and The Story of a Red Deer

This is the story of Wulfgar, the dark-furred fox of Dartmoor, and of his nemesis, Scoble the trapper, in the seasons leading up to the pitiless winter of 1947. As breathtaking in its descriptions of the natural world as it is perceptive its portrayal of damaged humanity, it is both a portrait of place and a gripping story of survival.

Uniquely straddling the worlds of animals and men, Brian Carter's A Black Fox Running is a masterpiece: lyrical, unforgiving and unforgettable." (blurb from Amazon)

Rating: 3/5

What did I think of this book? It's hard to tell. I'm not even sure if I liked it or not. Actually, I'm not sure I really like animal stories as a genre (a bit ironical for someone who's just published one!): horrible, heartbreaking things keep happening to the protagonists (usually because of nasty humans) and that makes me cry... For instance, I was traumatised by Black Beauty when I first read it as a seven year old. Tarka the Otter, mentioned in the blurb, was quite as bad. As for War Horse... Well, you'd better have a handkerchief ready. 

Why do I keep on reading that type of book then? Well I do like how evocative nature-writing is. And when well done, animal stories (though heartbreaking) can be wonderful. The sort of story that stays with you for a long time. 

That, and the fact that A Black Fox Running was set on Dartmoor, which is one of my favourite places in the world, encouraged me to pick it up. I wasn't disappointed about the Dartmoor part. Some of the descriptions were superb and just what I was wanting/expecting to read. If all the book had been like that, I would have loved it.  

I also enjoyed the different characters and temperaments given to the foxes, otters, weasels and so on. The few humans characters were also well-drawn. 

However, I was a bit put off by the way the foxes were anthropomorphised. Anthropomorphism is a necessary element of any animal stories, otherwise it would be hard to write them. Words are put on the animal's feelings and thoughts. Dialog is used. And I totally get that. The way authors managed to make the animal protagonists relatable is essential to the enjoyment of those stories. 

But in this book, anthropomorphism was taken to another level. The fox community in the story follows a number of rules and rituals and has its own religious system. This is the part that annoyed me the most, because I just could not wrap my head around animals praying to a higher entity and having their own legends and epics. Maybe that's just me being narrow-minded but I felt it clashed with the otherwise realistic descriptions. Any novel requires relies on suspension of disbelief. Here, it didn't quite work for me. 

In a way, because of all this religious stuff, I thought it read like a fantasy tale with humanised, talking foxes that have a culture of their own. I might have liked the book more if I had realised before hand that it would be the case.  

It didn't 100% work for me, but that doesn't take away from the beautiful writing or the fact that this book will certainly be enjoyed by readers who like this sort of story. 

Review: "The Sixth Seal" by Mary Wesley

"Everything is out of context: green and pink snow falls in July, there are earthquakes in Africa, pestilences in America, floods in China. Then follows a mysterious catastrophe in which everyone is killed except for those who happen to be underground when it occurs. Among the few survivors in Devon are Muriel, her youngest son Paul, and a schoolfriend of his, Henry. They discover that all that is left of those who are dead is hair and false teeth - ghoulish remains that symbolize the frightening and dramatic story so skilfully developed by Mary Wesley.

A small group of survivors gathers at Muriel's house and tries to make sense of its own long-term chances. Inveitably, the personalities involved prove incomptaible, and gradually they split up - mostly with good will, sometimes with acrimony. Henry, grown suddenly mature and cunning beyond his years, sets off to London to find out what is left there, but also, Muriel suspects uneasily, with some ulterior and sinister reason she cannot explain. She and Paul pursue him, and all three manage to escape from the nightmare capital to the relative sanity of their uncertain life in the West Country.

Mary Wesley's brilliant dialogue and characterization make this horrifyingly topical story one that is unforgettable in its power and originality." (blurb from my edition of the novel - 1984)

Rating: 3/5

Well, that was quite a strange book that left me scratching my head and asking myself many questions - which unfortunately are left unanswered. This novel was written for teenagers and in spite of an intriguing concept and plot, remains a bit short and vague for an older audience. 

The blurb pretty much sums up the whole novel (actually, I'd say it's more of a synopsis than a blurb). I  enjoyed the "survival" parts, especially at the beginning, as the main characters try to organise themselves and more, sometimes quite colourful characters, make their appearance. Some of those characters are well written. Others I found less convincing: that was the case of the two young boys who, with Muriel, are meant to be the heros. Paul wasn't very interesting and Henry nowhere near as cunning and sinister as the blurb makes out: other characters will say he is, but this isn't really confirmed by his actions. 

I was disappointed by the fact that there was no real explanation for the apocalypse. There is, towards the end of the book, a sort of twist that didn't really convince me either. In a way, this novel would have deserved another hundred pages to develop the questions raised at end. But it is on the whole an enjoyable and very readable book that will certainly appeal to the teenage public it was intended for. 

On a more personal note, the main reason why I read it was because it is set in the house you see on the black and white postcard. The author, Mary Wesley, lived for a time in that house and, changing its name and exact location, she made it into the home of the main characters of The Sixth Seal. It is a house I know well, for I spent many, many childhood holidays in the cottage belonging to it... and I also used it as a setting for my own novel! 

So it was nice to read about this house which I've always loved but where I have not been for several years now. 

Review: "The Buried Giant" by Kazuo Ishiguro

"You've long set your heart against it, Axl, I know. But it's time now to think on it anew. There's a journey we must go on, and no more delay..."

The Buried Giant begins as a couple set off across a troubled land of mist and rain in the hope of finding a son they have not seen in years.

Sometimes savage, often intensely moving, Kazuo Ishiguro's first novel in nearly a decade is about lost memories, love, revenge, and war. (blurb from goodreads.com)

Rating: 3.75/5

This is a strange, meandering book, rather like the journey undertaken by the characters. It is set in Britain, in a time after the Roman occupation. Half literary, half fantasy, the novel depicts a land where conflict between Saxons and Britons brew but where all the inhabitants are affected by a "mist" of forgetfulness. 

What can you expect from this book? It is nothing like The Remains of the Days or Never Let Me Go, the only two other books I have read by this author. No country house and aging butler. No clones and futuristic setting. Dragons and knights and many references to Arthurian legends. There are also pixies, monasteries, monsters and magical islands. 

However, all this is mostly part of the setting. On the centre stage are an elderly couple, Axl and Beatrice, on a journey to find their son and their lost memories. Theirs is a moving love story. They are well-written, believable characters the reader can easily sympathise with. The other characters in the story were not quite as fleshed out and their behaviour and speech was sometimes a little stilted, a little clichéed. I guess that this was the author's intention and part of this novel's intertextuality with medieval legends and epics. 

I was a little confused by the sudden, short changes, in the course of the novel, in the narration style (and narrator as well). In a way, I think this could have been developped more, because those changes were bit abrupt and left me wondering why the author had chosen to include them.

The ending, which reviews raved about, was indeed moving but I am not certain I truly understood it completely to be honest. As I've said, it was affecting, but I failed to see why reviewers thought it was so powerful and startling. In my opinion, it was the logical ending to this novel and did not come as a surprise. But again, I believe I may have missed the point and should reread it to make certain!

I did really enjoy reading this book, which, like the other novels I read by Kazuo Ishiguro, is beautifully written. It is however, a little bit perplexing, in terms of plot and structure. But isn't great literature meant to make you ask yourselves questions? 

Review: "The Mermaid and Mrs. Hancock" by Imogen Hermes Gowar

"One September evening in 1785, the merchant Jonah Hancock hears urgent knocking on his front door. One of his captains is waiting eagerly on the step. He has sold Jonah’s ship for what appears to be a mermaid.

As gossip spreads through the docks, coffee shops, parlours and brothels, everyone wants to see Mr Hancock’s marvel. Its arrival spins him out of his ordinary existence and through the doors of high society. At an opulent party, he makes the acquaintance of Angelica Neal, the most desirable woman he has ever laid eyes on… and a courtesan of great accomplishment. This meeting will steer both their lives onto a dangerous new course, on which they will learn that priceless things come at the greatest cost.

Where will their ambitions lead? And will they be able to escape the destructive power mermaids are said to possess?

In this spell-binding story of curiosity and obsession, Imogen Hermes Gowar has created an unforgettable jewel of a novel, filled to the brim with intelligence, heart and wit." (blurb from goodreads.com) 

Rating: 3/5

It's been some time since I read this book, over two years I think, so my memories of it are rather dim. I'd come across many positive reviews of it, which was why I wanted to read it. All the more so since it is in one of my favourite genres: historical fiction with a touch of magical realism. 

Reviewing it is not easy, and not because I read it some time ago. I remember my impressions after I'd finished it well enough. 

After I turned the last page, I was not sure to think of this novel... On one hand, I loved the style, the way the historical context was brought to life with details such as the clothing or the food. It was well-written, and particularly poetic. 

The characters were well-drawn, though, to be honest, I was not particularly drawn to any of them. However, they felt quite realistic, and even real - and their different motivations and actions were believable.

On the other hand, I was a bit disconcerted... Maybe because the story was not quite what the title had led me to imagine. But I will not say more, as to not give any spoilers. Only, do not expect to find in that book the sort of mermaid you do in fairytales... And do not expect the mermaid of the title to be an actual character, or rather a character like the others. 

Another point that bothered me was that the reader gets a glimpse of different stories, pertaining to  secondary characters, which remain unresolve, leaving you to wonder: what was the point of writing them in such detail in the first place? It's very frustrating to have no proper ending to those stories. Were they only there as filler to keep up the reader's interest? 

In spite of all that, this is still a book that I'd recommand for lovers of evocative historical fiction.

Review: "Once Upon a River" by Diane Setterfield

"On a dark midwinter’s night in an ancient inn on the river Thames, an extraordinary event takes place. The regulars are telling stories to while away the dark hours, when the door bursts open on a grievously wounded stranger. In his arms is the lifeless body of a small child. Hours later, the girl stirs, takes a breath and returns to life. Is it a miracle? Is it magic? Or can science provide an explanation? These questions have many answers, some of them quite dark indeed.

Those who dwell on the river bank apply all their ingenuity to solving the puzzle of the girl who died and lived again, yet as the days pass the mystery only deepens. The child herself is mute and unable to answer the essential questions: Who is she? Where did she come from? And to whom does she belong? But answers proliferate nonetheless.

Three families are keen to claim her. A wealthy young mother knows the girl is her kidnapped daughter, missing for two years. A farming family reeling from the discovery of their son’s secret liaison, stand ready to welcome their granddaughter. The parson’s housekeeper, humble and isolated, sees in the child the image of her younger sister. But the return of a lost child is not without complications and no matter how heartbreaking the past losses, no matter how precious the child herself, this girl cannot be everyone’s. Each family has mysteries of its own, and many secrets must be revealed before the girl’s identity can be known." (blurb from goodreads.com) 

Rating: 2/5

I thought I was going to love this book. Gorgeous cover, compelling storyline, rave reviews... The first chapter had me hooked. I reflected that I liked the style. The characters seemed interesting. I was quite engrossed with the plot. I read it quite quickly. But...

There was a huge "but." A "but" so huge that I was rather disgusted with this book and its author by the time I'd finished. Some would say it's just a detail. Maybe it is. Maybe I'm just overreacting. But in my opinion, the detail in question should not have been found in a book published in 2018.

Now, what am I talking about? 

There is in this book a very varied cast of characters. So varied that it screams "politically correct" writing. 

So one of the characters has Down's syndrom. This character I found interesting. I expected him to play a bigger part. I wanted him to play a bigger part. I'd never read a book before when a main character had Down's syndrom. Except that he wasn't a main character in this book either. Just part of the supporting cast. Here, in the background. For the sake of diversity. But that's OK. That's the author's choice.

There is mention, "off-stage," of a gay character. Now that's great. Except that this character plays no role in the story and is killed off before the plot even begins. He's just there to show how open-minded and wonderful another character is. Again, it really seemed to be a way for the author to claim her open-mindedness. And that's lovely, but for a cast to be truly diverse, it should concern the main characters. To just stick references to people who are "different" is more insulting than anything. It's as if the author was saying that they couldn't be more than references. As if they couldn't play a real role. But again, that's just my opinion.

Then there's a Black character. And he's a main character. Hurray! I should be pleased. I was at first. Except... Each time this character was mentionned, each time his point of view was used, his skin was mentionned. Constantly. After ten times of reading that he was black (*gasp*) I did get it. I also did get that everyone was racist and scared of him, except that handful of wonderful, open-minded white main characters. 

That could have been OK. It could have been taken as a way to reflect the racist attitude of many people in the 19th century. And then I came across this sentence, which shocked me. I don't remember it exactly. I don't especially want to remember it. In this sentence, the narrator, after describing people's attitude towards this Black character, concluded by saying that his blackness was only superficial. What?! I guess the author's intentions were not to be racist. But this is so badly phrased... It bothered me, along with all the other little details I mentionned.  

So that's for what bothered me most. Other things about the characters bugged me. The female characters for instance. They could have been interesting but they weren't really. And, again, the author tried a bit too hard to portray some them (one especially) as strong and independent, when their actions show they're not. 

As for the plot, it started off being quite compelling. However, the ending ruined it all, because the author tried too hard to explain it all and tie it all nicely and give the characters who deserved it their happy ending. At the beginning, she tried to dabble with magical realism but it felt as if she did not dare take it too far. A bit like with the "diversity" of the characters. A few touches here and there but nothing really deep. 

All in all, I'd say the main problem in this book was the overbearing presence of the author herself. That might sound a bit odd because, after all, a novel doesn't write itself. But as a reader, I do not want to "hear" the author, I do not want to be analysing why she did this for that reason. I want to be carried away by the story and entranced by the characters. I wasn't really here, at least not for the whole book, in spite of the atmospheric writing style