ed_moore's Reviews (345)

Miller’s ‘The Song of Achilles’ was a work of poetry every other line. It was such a beautifully written story of the love between Achilles and Patroclus and their legacies in the Trojan war, for the history books cannot claim they were only close friends. It is also interesting how accepted among the greek camp their love is, only Thetis, Achilles’ goddess mother showing any form of rejection to it. 

I will jump to the heart of this review though, in the concluding 50 pages the book was 4.25, then only climbed to 4.5 and 4.75, and then I cried. This happens extremely rarely when I read so for such I can’t refuse it 5 stars. The ending was heart-wrenching but so beautiful. There is a backdrop of so much violence and outrageous acts, the travesties of the fall of Troy so quickly brushed over but not failing to be mentioned, but that’s because Miller’s focus remained true on a love story among the violence. 

I was strictly told going into ‘The Song of Achilles’ to ignore the ‘classical inaccuracies’ which I place in quotation because each translation of the Illiad will tell its own story, and this ‘retelling’ was hardly such as it stayed overwhelmingly true to Homer’s epic, only making alterations for the benefit of the narration in Patroclus’ perspective and therefore implementing him into events for the love story to make sense and also making a lot of character choices so Achilles is a more sympathetic mass murderer. Other supposedly more drastic alterations are just presumptions and don’t fall in the source text of the Illiad. Therefore I did embrace the story and not question it, and honestly whilst this mindset wasn’t crucial as ‘The Song of Achilles’ stands as a marvellous telling of the Trojan War in its own right, such did negate any qualms. 

The point stands that the story was so beautifully written and highly praised and loved for every reason. Pyrrhus is a little dickhead (had to let that one out). It was perfection.

I think the time that it took me to read Spenser’s ‘The Faerie Queene’ is the longest it has ever taken me to read a book. I started this behemoth of an allegorical poem back in August last year and the main reason it took so long was just that it is far too long. It has no right to be 1055 pages long whatsoever. ‘The Faerie Queene’ is a 6 book (7 is you count the unfinished mutability cantos) long arthurian romance following knights which represent different religious virtues, riding around Faerie Land completing quests and slaying monsters in devotion to The Faerie Queene. For a book named after her however the Faerie Queene doesn’t even appear in it. 

With so many different knights and plot lines the poem was all over the place, the confusion only enhanced by the fact that everything was allegorical and many of these allegories I didn’t pick up on whilst reading. Each canto often involved an entirely new side quest and location and after book 2 as soon as more characters were introduced the poem completely lost its consistency as every canto begun to seem completely disconnected from the last. The plot got so all over the place that at times Spenser even forgets what he is writing about, such as an event where a character is mourned whilst being stood right within the group in the previous canto, forgotten in the next, and then returns. Book four especially seemed to lack focus, I couldn’t even identify a main quest or knight in which where the rest of the books at least have some distinctive aim even if it is forgotten about for most of the book and quickly resolved in the final twelfth canto. 

There were many recurring themes across the poem which shoudn’t have had quite so much emphasis too. Spenser throws in characters from Chaucer or the Arthurian legends just to create a pseudo-fan fiction or parallel himself into the medieval canon which felt really unneeded and it has taken me far too long to mention Spenser’s language choices. Just for his poem to appear older and among the great tales of chivalry from medieval times he writes in a made up archaic language and uses frequent classical references. The latter was no problem but in swapping all his J’s for I’s and U’s to V’s the process of reading the poem just had heaps of unnecessary complications, I eventually got the hang of it after around two books but was still a frustration. Spenser uses many magical items without establishing an ingrained magical system or providing context so the reader just has to accept such things exist and get on with it and there were far too many occasions of knights attacking one another unprovoked, often trying to steal the women accompanying them, creating ideas of cult chivalrous ownership. I will also mention that there are many instances of SA that are just completely brushed over and not treated well at all. 

There were some positives of this poem. I can respect Spenser’s dedication to his poetic form as it remained consistent and without alteration across the whole poem, and such form has become known as a Spenserian stanza, which is probably deserved for his unwavering dedication. Britomart was also a fantastic character, she was the strongest of all the knights and often the most successful, complete subverting any gender roles. Separate from her however each knight figure weren’t that unique, other than perhaps Artegall who just rode round committing violence as an act of justice and I can’t not bring up the fact that he for some reason has a mass murdering robotic squire. Honestly by book 5 Spenser was just doing whatever on earth he felt like with the poem. ‘The Faerie Queene’ was certainly a journey, and one I am not that keen to reminisce on. All I can say is thank goodness Spenser didn’t get round to writing his initial 24 planned books for the poem otherwise it would be another 21 months until I would be sitting down to review this. 

Anthony Trollope’s ‘The Warden’ is the first book in the Barsetshire Chronicles, following the church warden of Barchester, Septimus Harding, as he battles a legal case surrounding his entitlement to the money in the will of the owner of Hyram’s hospital, versus 12 beadsmen under the care of the hospital who believe it is entitled to they and the poor. It is a story of legal deceit and religious corruption, presenting the church as an entity that works to benefit solely itself and highlighting that the extent of empathy in religion and politics is largely unchanged, but placing such blame on the institution rather than the individuals benefiting from the clerical system. 

‘The Warden’ was however quite uneventful, it wasn’t that long and I feel it could’ve taken a few more chapters to really explore religious corruption, though did give a sufficient satirisation into the hypocrisy of ‘public newspapers’ which I appreciated and even satirised Dickens and his formula of works. While this was an interesting element, that was the only memorable exploration for I feel the characters were largely flat and uninteresting in their motives, other than possibly the lawyer and suitor John Bold, and the plot really didn’t explore its core themes to the depth that I would expect. The whole book just had an heir of ‘nothingness’, despite such I think I will read ‘Barchester Towers’ one day as I picked up ‘The Warden’ due to a recommendation of its sequel, and if that is equally bland shan’t care for the rest of the chronicle.

For somebody who wasn’t as interested in the lore of Middle Earth and Tolkien as I, David Day’s ‘The Battles of Tolkien’ would not have been a good book. It really wasn’t what I expected, given I assumed a recount of the battles that made up the rich history of Middle Earth, though Day didn’t summarise the events as expected and rather gave analytical insight into Tolkien’s inspiration and sources. Some of this was really interesting, especially the motive behind the Ents march on Isengard being Tolkien being disappointed by the march of Birnam Wood in Macbeth! Day's writing style was noting noteworthy or special either, and flat in occasions, though this was primarily a reference book. I would however have much preferred this if it were mixed with retellings of the battles themself rather than them just being name dropped, though it is assumed these are well known battles as the target reader demographic is those with deep interests in Tolkien’s lore and would be very familiar with such battles.

I will also note that this was far from a 250 page book, more so 75, because it was full of half pages of text and illustrations, and these illustrations were incredible and enhanced the reading experience so much, whereas I would’ve appreciated some more actual content. The reading experience of the book itself in the way it is set out is however wonderful. I appreciated ‘Battles of Tolkien’ but in the same regard it just really wasn’t everything I wanted it to be.

I thought Haywood’s amatory short story ‘Fantomina’ was absolutely awful on a plot basis. It follows a young woman who isn’t even given the care to be named and only known as ‘The Lady’ as she takes up a multitude of disguises and identities to pursue the love of Beauplaisir. The plot was disgraceful however, as in taking on her initial disguise of the prostitute ‘Fantomina’, Beauplaisir rapes her and this only makes her desire him more for some reason. Beauplaisir is a man-slut and discards her when tired of her, so she only proceeds to create another disguise and follow him in order to remain making love to him, and he is willing to use and then discard of her for his own pleasure on multiple occasions, at one point even in two relationships with him at once. The lady is granted no agency and her own trait is an infatuation for Beauplaisir, who is presented as the ideal masculine hero but in reality an awful and extremely stupid man. I was appalled by the presentations of characters and gender in ‘Fantomina’ and how the complete wrong attitudes were elevated and praised - for goodness sake rape was rewarded as oppose to punished. It also just included random capitalisation of words and many an unfinished sentence that just made the reading experience more unpleasant. One of the greatest shocks was that I looked at some other reviews for Haywood’s story and many praise the lady for being “so fun” or a “girlboss”, which confused me a little as I really didn’t read her in such way but it seems to be the general consensus. Maybe I didn’t read it entirely correctly, but I lack any praise for this work and quite frankly hated it. Thankfully it was only a short story as oppose to a novel, because the plot could’ve been expanded upon far more, so many scenes are rushed but given how awful in plot and content they were I for once don’t regard such as a criticism. (this was rated 0.75)

I did however reread 2 days later in prep for my seminar as it its only really short, in the context of being wrapped in a blanket rather than the backstage of a theatre, and allowed myself to not judge only on the SA but appreciate how in some ways 'Fantomina' did come out of the story with agency and deceived Beauplaisir, her chasing of him alternatively being a pseudo act of revenge. Also post lecture her ending fate could be read as a gaining of agency rather than a punishment as I initially viewed it, though I think I still lean toward my initial interpretation. Being written by a woman about a woman making a predatory man seem foolish, it was revolutionary for its time (18th century) of which is commendable, though that being said the themes and plot just simply not being what I enjoy to read remains unchanged.

Ashley Winstead’s thriller ‘In My Dreams I Hold a Knife’ follows Jessica Miller as she becomes intertwined in the investigation of Eric’s, the brother of her murdered friend Heather, personal mission to get his sister justice. The story follows two timelines, the years in university and the scandals and betrayals that led towards the murder on Valentines day, and Jessica’s group off friends reunited and forced to face the truth ten years later at their homecoming event. 

I wasn’t a huge lover of this murder mystery, this mainly spurred by how insufferable a narrative voice Jessica was. She isn’t supposed to be likeable, but she spent most of her dialogues whining and claiming everyone forgets about her and she’s always second best. Some of this and these opinions were important for the plot but it the idea was clear enough and her own self-pity just really took away from many of the books events. There were also many plot conveniences included by Winstead that just felt like they were there not to benefit the story in its technique or believability, but make things easier for Winstead to not have to tidy up tricky plot holes when writing, the main case of this being Jess’ convenient loss of memory on the night that Heather was murdered. It was a really cheap solution to creating a mystery around a person directly involved in a set of events that led to murder. None of the characters were supposed to be particularly likeable, though I didn’t find myself really caring for any of them and also they all had some form of tragic backstory placed upon them, in most cases related to their fathers, which felt like it was included to add ‘relatable depth’ or ’shock value’ to the character development but in that being the case with the large majority of the cast of friends, it really didn’t result in being a significant, impactful or defining part of character building. 

The story was enjoyable enough, and the twist in the murder and climax of the plot was interesting, though I felt the book lacked in so many elements and was just an annoying listen at times, it wasn’t bad but noting amazing whatsoever. 

Susanna Centlivre’s play ‘A Bold Stroke for a Wife’ really surprised me. I was expecting it to be just another 18th century work about gender politics but the premise was so interesting and makes a really unique premise to explore. The play follows Colonel Fainwell who is in pursuit of Anne Lovely, though her deceased father left her fortune in the care off four guardians: a beau,  a merchant, a antiquarian and a quaker, each with opposing valued, and therefore making the agreement on a suitor that meets all their demands impossible, and therefore marriage and the fortune being released also impossible. 

‘Bold Stroke for a Wife’ is a play focused on deceit and disguise in order to gain the consent of all four guardians for Fainwell and Anne’s marriage. I enjoyed it, it was witty and an amazing plot idea, whereas I think the play faltered in execution in some means (though I am aware it could be completely different and flow well when performed on stage), whereas reading it some things for Fainwell’s plan to succeed seemed to occur far too conveniently with no questions asked, and each guardian far too oblivious of the situation than characters rooted in reality likely would be. 

On such note, the guardians aren’t so rooted in reality, they are each extreme stereotypes written in a means to criticise the types of men of the age, and in satirising this I felt an opportunity was lost given the play is a serious drama, where I believe the premise of the plot would have been far more effective as a comedy. Also for a story about Anne gaining freedom from her controlling guardians, this freedom is only into another marriage where Fainwell will control her fortune, and though a product of the 18th century I feel that Anne was given such a minor and submissive role in the story where she could’ve been explored so much more. 

Despite my criticisms and beliefs the play fell short in areas, I was still so surprised by this play as I picked it up expecting it to be completely un-noteworthy and a slog, but Centlivre instead completely inverted my expectations and for such my overall opinions on ‘Bold Stroke for a Wife’ are positive. 

Henry Mackenzie’s ‘A Man of Feeling’ is regarded one of the most important works of sentimentalist literature, and if such is the case I can’t say sentimentalist literature is likely to be a literary movement I fall in love with. It was a movement focused on understanding the feelings of other people, and this book couldn’t match such genre better as its only plot is the protagonist Harley meeting someone, hearing their problems and then crying about them, often giving them money in which there is no explanation to why he is able to give sad people so much money either. 

‘A Man of Feeling’ was really hard to follow as Mackenzie wrote it in a fragmented form with many missing chapters. A prologue explains that a fictional curate put together the story from Harley’s papers scattered across his office, though I think Mackenzie simply couldn’t find a way to link his unrelated vignettes of grief and moments of Harley crying so just decided simply not to bother and publish a completely incoherent plot.

Though the sentimentalist movement portrays a unique type of character that defies patriarchal stereotypes at the time, Harley had no further characterisation other than being an empath to the point that it is unhealthy. My enjoyment of the book also wasn’t helped by my copy being 50 years old and the pages falling out as I turned them causing a very stressful reading experience. I am just thankful the story wasn’t a particularly long one, being just over 100 pages. 

Agatha Christie’s ‘Murder on the Orient Express’ follows Christie’s detective Poriot as he attempts to deduce which of the 12 passengers trapped in the carriages of the Orient Express due to heavy snow murdered the upper class American Mr Ratchett. It was a murder mystery full of seemingly obvious red herrings and planted clues, asking the reader to question the relevance of much of it, and where every passenger seems to have a sound alibi. From the start of the book, the classic murder mystery twist was unexpected (and I was so confident knowing how twists typically worked that I had deduced a suspect and such individual remained unchanged for at least two thirds of the book), whereas come the final third, pre-twist it became quite clear. 

 

Though cleverly crafted, there were many elements in the deduction that I didn’t enjoy so much, such as the focus on nationality and whether someone from such country is ‘that type’ being the go-to evidence in deciding the identity of the murderer. Christie stereotyped many individuals by nationality and even in the solution did not challenge them. This being a successful means of cracking a murder case seemed highly unrealistic. There was also a lot of French dotted throughout the novel, it being the born language of the detective Poriot, whereas my ignorance in not knowing any French left me just trying to guess Poriot’s remarks at some points, and though these had no effect on the plot it was a minor frustration, I can only blame myself for such however. 

 

‘Murder on the Orient Express’ was somehow both a surprising and obvious murder mystery, with glaring issues but all in all deserving of its legacy as one of the most well known crime novels in literature. I can’t claim that I didn’t enjoy it despite its flaws. 

Maya Angelou’s ‘I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings’ is a memoir of her time facing racism, sexism and questions of her sexuality as a child and teenager. It is also difficult to review a memoir as it is almost as if I am reviewing and praising or criticising another’s life and experiences, though am still inclined to come to some conclusion on such. It follows her and her brother Bailey navigating childhood in the Deep South of America before returning to their parents in the North. 

 

This potion of her life was illuminating, turbulent and interesting though I struggled to entirety engage with the book, though narrated by Angelou herself with so much passion, both memoirs aren’t my typical genre and the book felt really fragmented. I am still unsure if this may be because I could’ve listened to an abridged version, though am not even sure wether it was abridged or not as I have found nothing to say otherwise though my audiobook recording felt really short. Abridged or otherwise, Angelou’s decision to split her autobiography across 7 books, ‘I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings’ only being the first, it still lacked any satisfying closure and just seemed to end without warning, not even setting itself up for the second book. 

 

Each fragmented event was interesting and held literary merit in itself, but as a chronology they really didn’t work for me and just felt tacked together with no particular rhyme nor reason. I will also highlight that there are highly detailed scenes of SA that occur in Angelou’s life and therefore autobiography, it is handled well illuminating to see the shifting emotions as Angelou grappled with understanding her victimisation, but still worth being aware of if undertaking this book. It was certainly interesting, whereas I don’t think the first part (and most praised) was enough to persuade me to undertaking the vast number of further parts in Angelou’s collection of memoirs.