_pickle_'s review against another edition
4.0
A nice way of scratching my historical fiction itch. This book did a fine job of not showing its cards. I was impressed!
sarahlou79's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
booksweread's review against another edition
4.0
I really liked this book, loved Womersleys descriptive writing and the historical fiction.
I wished there was more of the magical realism and supernatural elements which was what drew me to the book.
I wished there was more of the magical realism and supernatural elements which was what drew me to the book.
salemshomelibrary's review against another edition
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
2.75
I liked the story and plot enough, the twist ending is dark and predictable but I still liked it. I liked it less because the characters weren't compelling or likeable. Also, the writing style isn't for me, it is more tell than show, I think.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child death
laura_trap's review against another edition
4.0
Impressive and lyrical and dark and surprisingly comedic. Charlotte stole the show in this novel, a strong but fearful character, someone awakening to a new world, and that world is the dirty city of scoundrels, that city of crows, Paris. She seemed some full of grief but determination, and willing to dig into the darkest parts of herself to do what needed to be done and that was finding her only remaining child, Nicolas. Lesage was a joke, honestly, an embodiment of toxic masculinity and avarice for power and striking out when he had none. Well written but I disliked him. I found that when I sat down to read this book, the pages disappeared and I would devour dozens of pages, but then difficult to pick back up. Overall, very good.
richardwells's review against another edition
4.0
This was such an entertaining read. Provincial France and Paris in 1673: plague, impoverished peasants, a corrupt church, and decadent aristocracy. Muck filled streets, the smell of excrement, unwashed bodies, sour wine, grilled meat. Necromancers, sorcerers, poisoners, abortionists, thieves, beggars, and orphans everywhere. Corruption writ so large Dickens would have gasped. Into this a boy is kidnapped, a near murdered mother is initiated into witchcraft and given the grimoire that goes with the trade. She summons a fiend to help her find and rescue her son, and the action and description proceed apace. Everything is clear to the reader, nothing is clear to the characters - what a great bit of trickery by the author whose only fault may be that he revels in descriptions. Philip Pullman's advice came to mind - the woods are not the story, stick to the path. It's not a fatal flaw, and many of the descriptions are breathtaking - especially the scenes of Paris and the haunts of the players. If this were a movie I'd see it in the style of David Lean's Oliver Twist - know what I mean?
There are a few reviews of this book that call it "magical realism." I think that's a misused term. Think of City of Crows as a fable replete with the beliefs of its time - a time when magic was practiced, and ambiguous.
If you're a fan of gothics, and historical fiction (this book is based on real people,) this is a hell of a read.
There are a few reviews of this book that call it "magical realism." I think that's a misused term. Think of City of Crows as a fable replete with the beliefs of its time - a time when magic was practiced, and ambiguous.
If you're a fan of gothics, and historical fiction (this book is based on real people,) this is a hell of a read.
annarella's review against another edition
4.0
A beautifully written, dark, and fascinating piece of historical fiction.
I loved the plot, the characters and found it a real page turner.
Highly recommended!
Many thanks to Europa Editions and Edelweiss for this ARC
I loved the plot, the characters and found it a real page turner.
Highly recommended!
Many thanks to Europa Editions and Edelweiss for this ARC
tricky's review against another edition
3.0
Set in France in 1673, the plague is sweeping across the populace. Charlotte has suffered the loss of her husband and three children. She is determined to protect her Nicolas and they seek sanctuary in Lyon. on their journey they are attacked, with Charlotte left to die and her son taken by slavers. She summons a man to assist recover her son and they travel to Paris. There is witchcraft involved and plain old self-serving individuals who make things difficult.
I have to admit that it is difficult to find the words to convey my thoughts on this book. I enjoyed the rich details, the layers of French society and culture that is revealed. The characters are well crafted and carry their own emotional baggage. I was really immersed in the pages.
Yet the ending left me bereft as it did not work for me. Maybe the build up had me expecting something else. For others it maybe be perfect and I appreciate that.
Womersley really can take you into a world, he has a masterful way with descriptions and creating complex characters.
I have to admit that it is difficult to find the words to convey my thoughts on this book. I enjoyed the rich details, the layers of French society and culture that is revealed. The characters are well crafted and carry their own emotional baggage. I was really immersed in the pages.
Yet the ending left me bereft as it did not work for me. Maybe the build up had me expecting something else. For others it maybe be perfect and I appreciate that.
Womersley really can take you into a world, he has a masterful way with descriptions and creating complex characters.
boyblue's review against another edition
2.0
The premise had promise but it failed to deliver.
The key issue with the book centres around the main character and the concept of magic-realism. Magic-realism normally dictates that elements of magic are woven into the story such that the characters don't question them and they seamlessly merge with the real. The problem with Womersley's book is that he has set it up so that all the magic could more easily be explained as coincidence or in some cases extreme coincidence, thus putting it more in the realism category, with one notable exception, the ending.
When Madame Picot casts spells or charms, or when Lesage predicts things with his tarot deck, the outcomes could just have easily happened by chance. Early on you meet the Forest Queen who seems truly wise and powerful, yet she is in the story so briefly that you never see her true powers before she passes them on to the unsure and bumbling Madame Picot. Lesage who is also supposed to be an extraordinary fortune teller and dark magician is a mumbling, bumbling fool. In many ways you wish Womersley had put more magic into the tale.
The thing that ruins the whole book is the ending. Essentially, after a novel worth of magic that could be explained by chance, the main character just flies away with her child in tow. It seems like an enormous cop out after all the work that has been done to make the story believable. What makes this even more annoying is that by the end of the story the main character has become so boring and mute that you don't even care if she survives or not.
The story felt a bit under cooked, inconsequential and slow. Womersley chose to go with the dark gritty realism but didn't go all the way. The characters weren't sinister enough. The tarot cards that break up the book into its sections feel more like gimmicks than aids to understanding and meaning. Contrast the use of the tarot with Elizabeth Catton's use of astrology in The Luminaries and it comes off looking like a poor amateur attempt at adding meaning. The tarot alone has so much material and potential but it was completely underused. It's also frustrating that there's a section of dark magic in Madame Picot's grimoire that she makes a huge fuss about not using but the story doesn't mention she goes to that section for the sacrifice of the child to bring her son back, in fact she barely uses the book at all. Considering that the author says a history of grimoires was what made him write the story I'm surprised there wasn't more about them in the story. Ultimately, Madame Picot's turn to darkness was poorly written, partly because of her naivety and partly because it felt inconsequential and rushed. You just don't like her or care about her by the end of the story. All of these problems result in a frustrating read where you can easily see where the story could have been improved with a bit of explication, better characterisation or a good editor.
The key issue with the book centres around the main character and the concept of magic-realism. Magic-realism normally dictates that elements of magic are woven into the story such that the characters don't question them and they seamlessly merge with the real. The problem with Womersley's book is that he has set it up so that all the magic could more easily be explained as coincidence or in some cases extreme coincidence, thus putting it more in the realism category, with one notable exception, the ending.
When Madame Picot casts spells or charms, or when Lesage predicts things with his tarot deck, the outcomes could just have easily happened by chance. Early on you meet the Forest Queen who seems truly wise and powerful, yet she is in the story so briefly that you never see her true powers before she passes them on to the unsure and bumbling Madame Picot. Lesage who is also supposed to be an extraordinary fortune teller and dark magician is a mumbling, bumbling fool. In many ways you wish Womersley had put more magic into the tale.
The thing that ruins the whole book is the ending. Essentially, after a novel worth of magic that could be explained by chance, the main character just flies away with her child in tow. It seems like an enormous cop out after all the work that has been done to make the story believable. What makes this even more annoying is that by the end of the story the main character has become so boring and mute that you don't even care if she survives or not.
The story felt a bit under cooked, inconsequential and slow. Womersley chose to go with the dark gritty realism but didn't go all the way. The characters weren't sinister enough. The tarot cards that break up the book into its sections feel more like gimmicks than aids to understanding and meaning. Contrast the use of the tarot with Elizabeth Catton's use of astrology in The Luminaries and it comes off looking like a poor amateur attempt at adding meaning. The tarot alone has so much material and potential but it was completely underused. It's also frustrating that there's a section of dark magic in Madame Picot's grimoire that she makes a huge fuss about not using but the story doesn't mention she goes to that section for the sacrifice of the child to bring her son back, in fact she barely uses the book at all. Considering that the author says a history of grimoires was what made him write the story I'm surprised there wasn't more about them in the story. Ultimately, Madame Picot's turn to darkness was poorly written, partly because of her naivety and partly because it felt inconsequential and rushed. You just don't like her or care about her by the end of the story. All of these problems result in a frustrating read where you can easily see where the story could have been improved with a bit of explication, better characterisation or a good editor.