Scan barcode
ablotial's review
3.0
I had never even heard of this book or this author before it was nominated in my "Chunksters" reading group here on Goodreads. But the premise intrigued me, so I jumped into the group read, and I was instantly hooked. The beginning of this book is full of mystery, unreliable (child) narration, and history and caught my attention quickly.
Although the book was written in modern times, it is intended to mimic the Victorian style. As we continued to read, we noticed many parallels to Dickens (which I found amusing, since I can't stand that guy but was very much enjoying this novel) as well as other Victorian novels. But then there came to this giant, long, explanatory monologue ... many chapters worth of one person talking, and I just ... blah. Got bored. Couldn't keep myself awake through it. But so much necessary information was given out, I didn't feel I could just skip ahead. So I fell behind with the group.
Eventually, I slogged through it, and the book picked up and got interesting again! But eventually I came to another one of these multi-chapter monologues and just got bored.
Isn't there some other way Johnnie could have learned some of this information? There were three or four of these sections and they really caused my enjoyment level to sink. Not only that but there were sections that I felt just "didn't fit". Most notably, Johnnie's stay at "the school", which (like many characters in this book) was introduced, used as a plot device, and then vanished a few chapters later, never to be mentioned again (or not so as it mattered). I also felt the job he took on with the Digweeds fell into this category.
And then the ending! JUST when I thought Palliser was going to redeem himself, there was the ending. I understand why he wrote it the way he did, and discussing the "modern vs. Victorian" novel perspective in the group helped also, but it was sorely disappointing.
There were parts that I did love though! The author did a great job of pulling the story together. There were so many complicated moving parts and at the end everything came together nicely. Just when I was starting to worry about all the coincidences and that it would turn out to be lazy writing, the author throws in a section making fun of authors who use coincidences as lazy writing to not have to explain why something happened. That made my day. And the historical aspects of the novel were very well done.
Overall, I'm glad I made it through. But I had high hopes based on the first quarter or the novel, and I didn't feel that it lived up to my expectations in the end.
Although the book was written in modern times, it is intended to mimic the Victorian style. As we continued to read, we noticed many parallels to Dickens (which I found amusing, since I can't stand that guy but was very much enjoying this novel) as well as other Victorian novels. But then there came to this giant, long, explanatory monologue ... many chapters worth of one person talking, and I just ... blah. Got bored. Couldn't keep myself awake through it. But so much necessary information was given out, I didn't feel I could just skip ahead. So I fell behind with the group.
Eventually, I slogged through it, and the book picked up and got interesting again! But eventually I came to another one of these multi-chapter monologues and just got bored.
Isn't there some other way Johnnie could have learned some of this information? There were three or four of these sections and they really caused my enjoyment level to sink. Not only that but there were sections that I felt just "didn't fit". Most notably, Johnnie's stay at "the school", which (like many characters in this book) was introduced, used as a plot device, and then vanished a few chapters later, never to be mentioned again (or not so as it mattered). I also felt the job he took on with the Digweeds fell into this category.
And then the ending! JUST when I thought Palliser was going to redeem himself, there was the ending. I understand why he wrote it the way he did, and discussing the "modern vs. Victorian" novel perspective in the group helped also, but it was sorely disappointing.
There were parts that I did love though! The author did a great job of pulling the story together. There were so many complicated moving parts and at the end everything came together nicely. Just when I was starting to worry about all the coincidences and that it would turn out to be lazy writing, the author throws in a section making fun of authors who use coincidences as lazy writing to not have to explain why something happened. That made my day. And the historical aspects of the novel were very well done.
Overall, I'm glad I made it through. But I had high hopes based on the first quarter or the novel, and I didn't feel that it lived up to my expectations in the end.
bunnieslikediamonds's review
3.0
Every misfortune you can imagine befalls our plucky boy hero and his hapless mother in this historical novel (in the afterword the author objects to it being described as a pastiche of the Victorian novel, so I'll keep my mouth shut about that). I absolutely loved the first few hundred pages, but eventually had to resort to skimming. I can only handle so much misfortune at once. If you have all the time in the world and a limitless love for street urchins, go ahead and read it.
ljstrain28's review
1.0
I just couldn't get into it. I usually pick a different genre and this was not my style. Others may love so please try it!
tammiesven's review
1.0
It went from a pretty good story to a repetitive pile of words, sooo many words. This book could have been 350 pgs and should have been.
Spoiler...
The repetitive theme and events gets way tired after the 3rd or 4th or 30th time the mom and son get duped. I found myself really beginning to dislike the protagonists because they're idiots. After being victimized several times by trusting people they shouldn't, you would think they would learn a lesson, be a little weary, less trusting. Nope. They keep going with their blind naivety, 30 times bitten, still not shy at all is their motto. I can't suspend disbelief, I can't like characters that don't learn or grow.
Spoiler...
The repetitive theme and events gets way tired after the 3rd or 4th or 30th time the mom and son get duped. I found myself really beginning to dislike the protagonists because they're idiots. After being victimized several times by trusting people they shouldn't, you would think they would learn a lesson, be a little weary, less trusting. Nope. They keep going with their blind naivety, 30 times bitten, still not shy at all is their motto. I can't suspend disbelief, I can't like characters that don't learn or grow.
roshk99's review
5.0
Amazing book! The plot slowly winds its way to the climax and the language and cultural/historical details make it worth your while. It is a cross between Instance of the Fingerpost (Pears) and Oliver Twist (Dickens).
mbondlamberty's review
3.0
You have to understand what you are getting in this book - an old-timey style of writing - complete with misspellings and the like from older England. So for those of us used to a standardized spelling this it is not and when it is it is in English style (e.g. colour not color).
Some of the characters are rather annoying and seem almost caricature of a villain, maiden in distress, etc. It is also not always pleasant reading about people in abject poverty and the power that money can have over people's lives and the webs that others can spin. So the beginning was a bit of a slog for me. However I persisted and towards the end (not a totally resolved end unfortunately) it becomes much more of a thriller and therefore more enjoyable and you have less of the irregular spelling to deal with too.
I wanted to give it a 4 for the ending but the beginning made me give it a three and that the ending was not as tidy as I would have liked at the end.
Some of the characters are rather annoying and seem almost caricature of a villain, maiden in distress, etc. It is also not always pleasant reading about people in abject poverty and the power that money can have over people's lives and the webs that others can spin. So the beginning was a bit of a slog for me. However I persisted and towards the end (not a totally resolved end unfortunately) it becomes much more of a thriller and therefore more enjoyable and you have less of the irregular spelling to deal with too.
I wanted to give it a 4 for the ending but the beginning made me give it a three and that the ending was not as tidy as I would have liked at the end.
heidekrauthonig's review
Picked it out at library by the first chapter and thought it was going to be a detective with a little philosophy note.
kahale's review
It read a lot like Dickens but withour the really great characters. It really dragged along at times but then there would be a suprise around the corner.
vinjii's review
3.0
I've got many gripes with The Quincunx:
- Published in 1990 but written in the style of Charles Dickens.
- Too long. Too dense.
- If I wanted to learn about inheritance law, I wouldn't have picked up a novel.
- Unnecessarily complex. (I've never had to study a family tree as often as this one.)
- Anything that can go wrong, goes wrong. Repeatedly. And that quickly becomes tedious.
- 800 pages to reach an unsatisfactory ending...
There were moments where it drew me in, and some of the chapters were genuinely gripping. Palliser is a skilled writer, and the complexity of the mystery is impressive, but that's where my praise ends.
- Published in 1990 but written in the style of Charles Dickens.
- Too long. Too dense.
- If I wanted to learn about inheritance law, I wouldn't have picked up a novel.
- Unnecessarily complex. (I've never had to study a family tree as often as this one.)
- Anything that can go wrong, goes wrong. Repeatedly. And that quickly becomes tedious.
- 800 pages to reach an unsatisfactory ending...
There were moments where it drew me in, and some of the chapters were genuinely gripping. Palliser is a skilled writer, and the complexity of the mystery is impressive, but that's where my praise ends.
whatandreawrote's review
5.0
I JUST FINISHED THIS AND NOW I HAVE TO GO BACK AND REREAD IT FROM THE BEGINNING LIKE EVERYONE SAID I'D HAVE TO AND I'M SO PLEASED
Give me neo-Victorian tributes to twisted Dickensian mysteries forever, please. I tore through this as quickly as I devoured all the Sarah Waters novels. I'd often read until bedtime and then spend an hour or two tossing and turning in bed, trying to sort out the dozens of new characters encountered in the last few chapters, or to try and fit John's new revelations into what he (and I) had thought was the truth.
I am such a naive, trusting reader (as trusting as John and his mother are throughout this entire work) and that makes novels with unreliable narrators so much more enjoyable and surprising for me. I am constantly getting backstabbed by people whose words I took at face value and thought could have no other motivation other than helping out our protagonist. That made this novel such a fucking whirlwind for me.
I loved all the meta-nods throughout. Everyone's names with Q's and hints at sets of 5. Pentecost and Silverlight's arguments about novel structure. Mrs. Bellflower's bedtime stories always ending with gunfights and duels.
I loved the deep dives into certain aspects of Victorian life: the sewer systems, the methods of coach travel (I imagine John spending much of his commutes clinging by his fingertips to the roof of a racing carriage), the servants' routine in an aristocratic house. The legal system!!
Most of all, I loved the overarching question of whether inheriting estates and fortunes is worth all the bloodshed and betrayal and misery. And I really enjoyed that there was no firm answer to be found.
I'm off to begin my reread. Cheerio!
Give me neo-Victorian tributes to twisted Dickensian mysteries forever, please. I tore through this as quickly as I devoured all the Sarah Waters novels. I'd often read until bedtime and then spend an hour or two tossing and turning in bed, trying to sort out the dozens of new characters encountered in the last few chapters, or to try and fit John's new revelations into what he (and I) had thought was the truth.
I am such a naive, trusting reader (as trusting as John and his mother are throughout this entire work) and that makes novels with unreliable narrators so much more enjoyable and surprising for me. I am constantly getting backstabbed by people whose words I took at face value and thought could have no other motivation other than helping out our protagonist. That made this novel such a fucking whirlwind for me.
I loved all the meta-nods throughout. Everyone's names with Q's and hints at sets of 5. Pentecost and Silverlight's arguments about novel structure. Mrs. Bellflower's bedtime stories always ending with gunfights and duels.
I loved the deep dives into certain aspects of Victorian life: the sewer systems, the methods of coach travel (I imagine John spending much of his commutes clinging by his fingertips to the roof of a racing carriage), the servants' routine in an aristocratic house. The legal system!!
Most of all, I loved the overarching question of whether inheriting estates and fortunes is worth all the bloodshed and betrayal and misery. And I really enjoyed that there was no firm answer to be found.
I'm off to begin my reread. Cheerio!