vivdunstan (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
vivdunstan) wrote2024-06-17 05:02 am
vivdunstan) wrote2024-06-17 05:02 am
Entry tags:
Book 24 of 2024: Scarlet by Genevieve Cogman
I finished this the other night, the first in a trilogy I think of stories set in the Scarlet Pimpernel world of the French Revolution, with added vampires. I'd previously read one Invisible Library series book by the same author.
There was a lot to like in Scarlet. You don't need to be familiar with the original Scarlet Pimpernel stories by Baroness Orczy, though it's nice to recognise familiar characters. It is set after the first Pimpernel book, and tells you what you need to know. The Scarlet Pimpernel is an English aristocrat, with a French wife, who with his gang of fellow conspirators goes undercover in France to rescue French aristocrats from the guillotine.
The book is told through the experiences of an English maid, who gets embroiled in the Pimpernel's efforts in France. I did wonder how well this was going to work. Was she always going to be listening at doors, one step removed? But no, she is enmeshed effectively, in what to me was a surprising and good way.
I did expect the plot to go slightly differently in one section of the book, but overall it was full of surprises. And not necessarily following the history as we know it.
I wasn't so keen on another fantasy element (not the vampires) that was introduced later on in the story. But maybe this will be developed more in the subsequent books.
The big downside of the book for me was that there was far too much info dumping about the history. Not least in the introduction to the book, which had a phenomenally in-depth - far, far too much depth to be honest - essay giving a historical overview of the French Revolution at this point. Which I found phenomenally off-putting, and did not endear me to the author. Show us what we need to know through the story, through what the character encounters, and their experiences. Do not have a long-winded and frankly boring history lesson. I would skip this sort of thing when I was my doing my taught postgraduate Masters degree in history including this exact historical period. I don't want to read it in a fiction book, even historical fiction.
Also I don’t recommend following a Dramatis Personae listing with an opening chapter about a whole bunch of folk not in the list. It was a good chapter, but having the list immediately before it was jarring.
There were also extended sections - often multiple pages - of psychological reflections by the characters. I think the editor(s) could have tightened this aspect considerably.
For these reasons I'm rating it 3/5 stars. But I did enjoy it. And would read the sequels. But it should have been better.
There was a lot to like in Scarlet. You don't need to be familiar with the original Scarlet Pimpernel stories by Baroness Orczy, though it's nice to recognise familiar characters. It is set after the first Pimpernel book, and tells you what you need to know. The Scarlet Pimpernel is an English aristocrat, with a French wife, who with his gang of fellow conspirators goes undercover in France to rescue French aristocrats from the guillotine.
The book is told through the experiences of an English maid, who gets embroiled in the Pimpernel's efforts in France. I did wonder how well this was going to work. Was she always going to be listening at doors, one step removed? But no, she is enmeshed effectively, in what to me was a surprising and good way.
I did expect the plot to go slightly differently in one section of the book, but overall it was full of surprises. And not necessarily following the history as we know it.
I wasn't so keen on another fantasy element (not the vampires) that was introduced later on in the story. But maybe this will be developed more in the subsequent books.
The big downside of the book for me was that there was far too much info dumping about the history. Not least in the introduction to the book, which had a phenomenally in-depth - far, far too much depth to be honest - essay giving a historical overview of the French Revolution at this point. Which I found phenomenally off-putting, and did not endear me to the author. Show us what we need to know through the story, through what the character encounters, and their experiences. Do not have a long-winded and frankly boring history lesson. I would skip this sort of thing when I was my doing my taught postgraduate Masters degree in history including this exact historical period. I don't want to read it in a fiction book, even historical fiction.
Also I don’t recommend following a Dramatis Personae listing with an opening chapter about a whole bunch of folk not in the list. It was a good chapter, but having the list immediately before it was jarring.
There were also extended sections - often multiple pages - of psychological reflections by the characters. I think the editor(s) could have tightened this aspect considerably.
For these reasons I'm rating it 3/5 stars. But I did enjoy it. And would read the sequels. But it should have been better.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Not all authors have this problem. Benedict Jacka's Verus series had excellent world-building from the start, and that started with his first published novel. His new series (only book one so far) also sets up the new world very convincingly and intriguingly. Jim Butcher, on the other hand, did a reasonable but not perfect job with his Dresden Files and had to do some retconning by about book 4 to ensure things were stable for his long -running series.
Maybe that's good advice for new authors. Start off with a limited series and then if you want to write something longer start something new where you've got the capability to set it up from the start.