Two Book Reviews - The Lecturer's Tale and Outlander

[deralte]

So, while I was on holiday, I read two books I have yet to report on. The first was The Lecturer's Tale. I really didn't like this book much. It wasn't that it was badly written. I'm pretty sure the prose was meant to parody famous literature in places actually, it just wasn't the humour, black or otherwise, that the book was marketed as. The story it portrayed was mostly depressing, and far too accurate. The main 'villian' was disappointing and cliched, while the main character, while decently characterized, was just very bland. I suspect part of my trouble was that it really wasn't for someone with my sense of humour. I'd say the other problem was that the book was boring.

The second book was Diana Gabalon's Outlander which I read rather tentatively, since historical fiction tends to end with me frustratingly slamming the book against a wall at how inaccurate the history is. Oddly, that really wasn't the case with this book. There were some minor problems (most, strangely enough, in attitude), but in general the history seemed to be okay. Of course, I've never made a study of that particular time period (17th century Scotland) and I'm pretty sure if I did, I'd come up with a lot more nitpicks, but since I haven't, we'll leave that be.

The book isn't advertised like a romance novel, though that's obviously what it is, which is something of a pity, since it was quite interesting up until it fell into too many cliches for me to suspend my disbelief. And, that I think, was the problem. The writing was well done, as were the characterizations of any major characters. I was very into the novel for the first 200-300 pages. The 'romance' was low key and it looked like there were a lot of possibilities for the plot - and then there was suddenly a contrived, forced marriage that reminded me of every soul bonding/forced marriage I've ever had the displeasure of reading in fanfic. After that, it wasn't like the writing changed or anything, but it got kinda boring. In fact, I really had to force myself to finish the last couple hundred pages of the book. The only reason I'd pick up the second book is if my serial bookworm guilt over not finishing a story kicks in.

Comments

[doolabug.livejournal.com]

Have you ever read any of Gary Jennings' historical fiction? Impeccably researched, generally for years before he wrote the books. Rich, sweeping sagas full of strife and joy and pain and sex and pageantry. His best known novel is Aztec, which is great but I recommend, in particular, Raptor, set during the fall of the Roman empire. The protagonist is one of the most unusual people I've ever run across in literature.

[deralte.livejournal.com]

They are now on my reading list:) They sound like a lot of fun.

[sansenmage.livejournal.com]

What surprises me is the popularity of Outlander has not resulted in some atrocious anachronistic mini-series on WE.

[cedarlibrarian.livejournal.com]

Oh but WAH I loved Outlander so much! Great, now I have guilt 'cause I made you buy a book you didn't like.

I will go iron my hands now.

[deralte.livejournal.com]

My dear, I payed a dollar for it, and imo, it was worth a dollar. Therefore I am well satisfied.

And you only need iron your hands a few times;)

[casfic.livejournal.com]

I detested the Outlander books because of the historical inaccuracies - I finally threw them away after #3. The first one was REALLY irritating, there was so much wrong with it historically. The character's names were wrong for the period, the geography was all over the place, the descriptions of the culture were total mince, I could go on. But then you've probably guessed this is a period I know quite a lot about. ;) The only reason I kept reading at all was because I quite liked the characters, although Claire was all wrong for an English girl brought up in the 1920s and 30s - far too modern in outlook.

[deralte.livejournal.com]

See, since I didn't know much about the period, all I could pick up on was the modern attitudes (and a few costume problems oddly enough). I completely agree with you about Claire. She was very modern, and it really seemed the author only chose to make her a 1920s nurse because she wanted her to have nursing experience in a real war, and not be from a time period she'd want to stay in.

It's good to know my instincts were right about the history being inaccurate from someone who's studied the time period:)

[casfic.livejournal.com]

It's good to know my instincts were right about the history being inaccurate from someone who's studied the time period:)

Always trust your instincts! What does bug me is that I keep seeing squeeing references from fangirls about Gabaldon's 'marvellous research'. Excuse me? What research, would be more like it.