janetreads's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
fast-paced
Wow I liked this one so much better than the first! I’m glad I gave the series a second chance. Maybe the first in the series was a little too focused on the “set up” of the “world” we’re in. This one was a good story, a good mystery, and the world of early 19th century Istanbul was both integrated into/important for the story and a nice backdrop. Satisfying in the way mysteries ought to be. The explanations of politics, history, and ethnic groups were not over done. I personally enjoyed that the descriptions of food came up more often (with lots of detail) than the last book.
danilanglie's review against another edition
3.0
I'll say straight-up that it's not really the plots that draw me to these books. It's much more so the setting, and the compelling competence of Yashim, our leading man. But unlike in the first book, I found the plot in this book straight-up confusing. When we got the revelation about the identity of the supposedly murdered man, I felt like that was a good twist. But the additional twists that came after it felt like they were tacked on at the last minute. And Yashim's original reasoning for getting looped in - that he worried about his reputation - was pretty much dropped by the end.
That said, I still enjoy the vibrant characters and the incredibly intimate feel of the setting and atmosphere. We spend time with Yashim putting together clues and learning about the history of Istanbul, but we also spend time with him buying vegetables at the market, and cooking in his kitchen.
I also thought the action scenes in this book were just as good as in the last - the short chapters make for a very cinematic feel and pace.
That said, I still enjoy the vibrant characters and the incredibly intimate feel of the setting and atmosphere. We spend time with Yashim putting together clues and learning about the history of Istanbul, but we also spend time with him buying vegetables at the market, and cooking in his kitchen.
I also thought the action scenes in this book were just as good as in the last - the short chapters make for a very cinematic feel and pace.
justfoxie's review
3.0
The second book in the Yashim series, and though not quite as good as the first one (there were moments where it started feeling a bit formulaic), it was still a very enjoyable read.
carolynf's review
4.0
Yashim is an unwilling detective in the Ottoman Empire, as the sultan is on his death bed. This mystery centers on the events of the battle in Greece where Byron died, and lost Byzantine treasures.
kimu's review
4.0
This was the February selection for our neighborhood book club. I didn't read Goodwin's previous novel, The Janissary Tree, before reading this and I don't think you have to read the books in order to enjoy them. The Snake Stone is a good historical detective novel, quite interesting, and well presented.
matthew_p's review
3.0
Enjoyable. The culinary tidbits feel crammed in but are interesting. Still no strong sense of place or time, although time is a little clearer than place, I'm thinking.
besha's review
2.0
The more I think about this book, the less the plot makes sense. Lovely details of everyday life in Istanbul under the Sultan, but I'm still not entirely sure what happened.
kimmerp's review
I actually think this author is really good and weaves a very tight historical tale, but it is too much for me - too much intense historical information in too formal a diction. Maybe I am in a phase where I am just tired and I need easier to read books. I could see coming back to this book in the future as I did really like the first book, but am putting it down for now.
stefhyena's review against another edition
1.0
I wanted to enjoy this book because of the lush settings. I think a lot of people will like them and the convoluted plot. I thought, incidentally that the twists in the plot were just enough to make a good detective story if it weren't for some of the other things. I sort of liked Yashim as a character, I liked the idea of a eunich as the main character and at times he was down to earth- focused on food and caring for others and almost relatable.
But until half-way through the book women did not appear at all, not as people anyway. They were talked about and filled in the background similar to the dogs and the spices and things like that. They were servants and wives who had to obey and I guess in some sense the author uses the setting to get away with the countless micro-aggressions and casual misogynies in this part of the book and would say that was authentic to the context. But to me it is a matter of focus.
And then later in the book women did appear, but Madame Lefevre was somewhat of a sterotype- she was a little too beautiful, a little too devoted, a little too tragic to satisfy. There were also after that some other women who more or less showed some social agency (but generally lived, decided and acted in reference to and in the shadow of some male or another).
Another problematic for me was whiteness in the book. Istanbul is presented as exotic, contested, a melting-pot, but there is a benign sort of racism in the way the detail pan out. Little things like when Madame Lefevre goes to the mosque, a white woman invading that space and then her rescuer is the white doctor. The white people (men and the idealised Madame Lefevre) in the book speak most, act most and determine other people's lives most.
Once again maybe the racism was in some ways the truth, maybe at times this is how it was - a colonialist attitude. Presenting it as unproblematic though continues it. I didn't enjoy the orientalism and male-centrism of the book. I found there were so many characters I had a lot of trouble keeping all the different characters and bits of story in line and at times the writing was so rich in description that the plot moved very slowly- yet it was convoluted and the conversations at times hard to follow.
I personally didn't like this book, although I have many books that were a lot worse. I suspect many people will like it a lot more than I did.
But until half-way through the book women did not appear at all, not as people anyway. They were talked about and filled in the background similar to the dogs and the spices and things like that. They were servants and wives who had to obey and I guess in some sense the author uses the setting to get away with the countless micro-aggressions and casual misogynies in this part of the book and would say that was authentic to the context. But to me it is a matter of focus.
And then later in the book women did appear, but Madame Lefevre was somewhat of a sterotype- she was a little too beautiful, a little too devoted, a little too tragic to satisfy. There were also after that some other women who more or less showed some social agency (but generally lived, decided and acted in reference to and in the shadow of some male or another).
Another problematic for me was whiteness in the book. Istanbul is presented as exotic, contested, a melting-pot, but there is a benign sort of racism in the way the detail pan out. Little things like when Madame Lefevre goes to the mosque, a white woman invading that space and then her rescuer is the white doctor. The white people (men and the idealised Madame Lefevre) in the book speak most, act most and determine other people's lives most.
Once again maybe the racism was in some ways the truth, maybe at times this is how it was - a colonialist attitude. Presenting it as unproblematic though continues it. I didn't enjoy the orientalism and male-centrism of the book. I found there were so many characters I had a lot of trouble keeping all the different characters and bits of story in line and at times the writing was so rich in description that the plot moved very slowly- yet it was convoluted and the conversations at times hard to follow.
I personally didn't like this book, although I have many books that were a lot worse. I suspect many people will like it a lot more than I did.