 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I've just finished it and, well, meh.
It's garnered so much praise and won so many awards and I'd meant to read it for ages. I got it and Bring Up The Bodies, which has been similarly praosed and awarded, for Christmas and, to be honest, I'm not sure I'm going to bother with BUTB.
I just don't 'get' what the buzz/fuss is about. Am I alone?
The MIL liked it. Have a sample on my Kindle but not started it yet.
You might want to check out the Matthew Shardlake stories starting with:
[img] 
[/img]
Bloody good.
Kate might well be a plastic princess, but Hilary writes boring books
I think the appeal is meant to be the way it brings the era to life in extensively researched glorious detail.
Didn't do it for me, maybe I'm not intellectual enough or somefink.
I did enjoy it though it took me a while and a little self patience to stick with it, especially with the flashbacks and keeping track of all the characters.
Not usually a historical drama sort of person but it spurred me on to read Azincourt which, though not as cerebral, was a damm good read.
Thought both books were brilliant as Llama says 'it brings the era to life in extensively researched glorious detail'
Plus can't stand the Royals 😉
+1 for dissolution as well. Way better and easier to read imho
[i]'it brings the era to life in extensively researched glorious detail'[/i]
That's what I was hoping for, but didn't get, at no point did I particularly feel involved or absorbed. I love how a good book completely draws you into the world and lives of the characters.
This is going to sound terribly pretentious, but with Wolf Hall I just read about what happened to the characters, I didn't experience it with them, if you know what I mean.
Hilary Mantel is an incredible writer. The Cromwell books are brilliant but my favourite of hers is still Place Of Greater Safety, which is about the French revolution and is amazing.
I wouldn't recommend any of her stuff to anyone looking for something undemanding to read though.
Bit of an ugly old trout though, ain't she.
Probably not plastic, though...
This is going to sound terribly pretentious, but with Wolf Hall I just read about what happened to the characters, I didn't experience it with them, if you know what I mean.
I found them both stunning books, I see what you are saying though, I think what you have to do is put yourself constantly in the place with the characters imagining that you are seeing this in front of you. That's how I read it and loved every minute of reading them. I had a very similar experience reading I Cladius, I felt I was there in Rome an invisible witness watching this all happen in front of me.
[i]I think what you have to do is put yourself constantly in the place with the characters imagining that you are seeing this in front of you. [/i]
Surely a good book should do this for you, i.e. draw you in, rather than you having to place yourself there?
It does seem odd for someone who looks like a startled owl to be chucking around catty comments about the appearance of someone else. Perhaps she has been misquoted...?
[img] http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTF6oyxiq9ScAGT_rvbYkGhV7Nbh6lgmMNMfKeQmjoWH0W5dlkl [/img]
Wolf Hall is quite decent though - requires commitment to the cause rather than being a page-turner, IMO.
Surely a good book should do this for you,
I also like books that do that, that don't require any input but the best ones demand a bit of work from the reader. It took me 20 years to get through The Age Of Reason but when I finally got beyond bailing out after 30 or 40 pages I found it a really good read.
Liked both books. Bring up the Bodies def easier to read than Wolf Hall which did take a fair bit of concentration - so recommend OP has a go at the sequel.
Perhaps she has been misquoted...?
Perhaps the media have seized upon a sentence in a much wider piece. Perfectly valid comments in some respects. Kate has been in the news for wearing 'high st' fashion, wearing a nice wedding dress, not wearing a top on holiday, having morning sickness, er, that's about it. So one might suggest that the media in general regard her (Kate) as a clothes horse capable of spawning heirs to the throne.
Perhaps she has been misquoted...?
She has. If you read what she said properly you'll see she's talking about how the media present Kate, not how Kate actually is. Which is why the Mail et al have gone completely mental. She's not attacking the royals, she's attacking the bottom-feeding hacks who leech off the royals for their living.