Scan barcode
knitswithbeer's review against another edition
5.0
Nancy Mitford; the Jane Austen of her age. Such an observationalist of manners and Society.
Read beautifully by Patricia Hodge
Read beautifully by Patricia Hodge
quincunxes's review against another edition
2.5
Lovely/amusing/nostalgic escapism to the ridiculous, unjust, yet magnificent life of English aristocrats in the early 1930s. Adored the narration: realism, absolutely zero "suspension of disbelief", but a wry & affectionate appraisal that could have been from a real memoir. The Montdores, Boy, Cedric, even Polly ... I never took anyone's side or had hopes for any of them — everyone was so immovably selfish, the battle of willpower over marrying the nonce uncle just unravelled and I watched on sadly... whyyyy,,, hahaha
Apparently this is a companion and the other novel (The Pursuit of Love) has better characters. (Linda!) I definitely *do* want more
Apparently this is a companion and the other novel (The Pursuit of Love) has better characters. (Linda!) I definitely *do* want more
soozereads's review against another edition
3.5
Definitely not as good as The Pursuit of Love, but just enough of the Radletts to keep me going. This novel actually got better as it went along and I could have done with a lot more of Cedric Hampton and much much less of Polly and Boy!
angeliki7's review against another edition
4.0
Loved it, hilarious and witty and sometimes shocking. But WHY does Mitford insist on ending her novels so suddenly?! She always seems to drop a bombshell in the last paragraph and infuriatingly ends it a couple of sentences after, as though she is spent. But her writing is so delightful, the younger Radletts were scene stealers - I wish they had their own novel! Books to own and read again. ☺️
jesssalexander's review against another edition
4.0
Not nearly as good as The Pursuit of Love, because there isn't much Linda. Her youngest sisters flitter in and out of the second book for comedy's sake but it's not the same, of course. Linda is just such a sparklingly tragic character and I think it will take me a while to get over her. In this story, Fanny remains as shadowy a wallflower as ever, narrating other's love stories and barely making mention of her own private life, as if it were too boring to really comment on. The heroine this time is Polly Hampton, who is vapid but beautiful, a puny foil to Linda's complexity and lust for life. Her delightfully abrasive and controlling mother is far more interesting and gets a lot more attention on the page. But my favorite new character HAS to be Cedric Hampton, the Canadian heir to the Hampton estate who doesn't even make an appearance until the last quarter of the novel. I love his shameless self-centeredness and his way of overusing *one* as an impersonal pronoun. He's so cooky and the love-spell he casts on Lady Montdore is just priceless.
This novel takes place in parallel with the first, and enhances the first with new depth and nuance. For instance Fanny constantly reassures the reader that she loves her husband and is happy with her normal domestic life in the first book but in the second her descriptions of him are constantly jabbing and negative in little subtle ways, painting him to be an unfulfilling, condescending and emotionally vacant life-partner. This of course changes how you feel about her commentary during the first book. Was she just trying to convince herself that she was happy? I loved seeing more of Davey and Uncle Matthew and delving further into the disfunctional mother-daughter relationships of the characters. (But I will say, my love of Davey got a little problematic with his "boys will be boys" attitude about the repeat offensives of Boy Dougdale).
But as a whole, this companion novel doesn't really have enough narrative corpulence to stand alone. The ending felt rushed and absurd-- though it feels extremely forward-thinking to A) have an openly gay character and B) allow him a romantic happy ending. And when you strip away the dazzling satire, the basic plot that drives the novel is really depressing. Basically, Polly gets molested by her uncle at a young age, falls in love with him from a distance, and marries him years later when her aunt dies. She's disinherited and quickly disenchanted by her old and pervy husband, delivers his baby who immediately dies, and runs away with a different old man. What is it about the females in these books not caring about their infants!! Lady Montdore's comment about how the stillbirth was for the best because children are an awful expense. I mean. Yikes. Yikes. Triple yikes. That was a truly horrid scene. Overall though, this book is like an encore to the first and it was lovely to spend some extra time with the characters and know them a little deeper.
This novel takes place in parallel with the first, and enhances the first with new depth and nuance. For instance Fanny constantly reassures the reader that she loves her husband and is happy with her normal domestic life in the first book but in the second her descriptions of him are constantly jabbing and negative in little subtle ways, painting him to be an unfulfilling, condescending and emotionally vacant life-partner. This of course changes how you feel about her commentary during the first book. Was she just trying to convince herself that she was happy? I loved seeing more of Davey and Uncle Matthew and delving further into the disfunctional mother-daughter relationships of the characters. (But I will say, my love of Davey got a little problematic with his "boys will be boys" attitude about the repeat offensives of Boy Dougdale).
But as a whole, this companion novel doesn't really have enough narrative corpulence to stand alone. The ending felt rushed and absurd-- though it feels extremely forward-thinking to A) have an openly gay character and B) allow him a romantic happy ending. And when you strip away the dazzling satire, the basic plot that drives the novel is really depressing. Basically, Polly gets molested by her uncle at a young age, falls in love with him from a distance, and marries him years later when her aunt dies. She's disinherited and quickly disenchanted by her old and pervy husband, delivers his baby who immediately dies, and runs away with a different old man. What is it about the females in these books not caring about their infants!! Lady Montdore's comment about how the stillbirth was for the best because children are an awful expense. I mean. Yikes. Yikes. Triple yikes. That was a truly horrid scene. Overall though, this book is like an encore to the first and it was lovely to spend some extra time with the characters and know them a little deeper.
jesssalexander's review against another edition
4.0
Not nearly as good as The Pursuit of Love, because there isn't much Linda. Her youngest sisters flitter in and out of the second book for comedy's sake but it's not the same, of course. Linda is just such a sparklingly tragic character and I think it will take me a while to get over her. In this story, Fanny remains as shadowy a wallflower as ever, narrating other's love stories and barely making mention of her own private life, as if it were too boring to really comment on. The heroine this time is Polly Hampton, who is vapid but beautiful, a puny foil to Linda's complexity and lust for life. Her delightfully abrasive and controlling mother is far more interesting and gets a lot more attention on the page. But my favorite new character HAS to be Cedric Hampton, the Canadian heir to the Hampton estate who doesn't even make an appearance until the last quarter of the novel. I love his shameless self-centeredness and his way of overusing *one* as an impersonal pronoun. He's so cooky and the love-spell he casts on Lady Montdore is just priceless.
This novel takes place in parallel with the first, and enhances the first with new depth and nuance. For instance Fanny constantly reassures the reader that she loves her husband and is happy with her normal domestic life in the first book but in the second her descriptions of him are constantly jabbing and negative in little subtle ways, painting him to be an unfulfilling, condescending and emotionally vacant life-partner. This of course changes how you feel about her commentary during the first book. Was she just trying to convince herself that she was happy? I loved seeing more of Davey and Uncle Matthew and delving further into the disfunctional mother-daughter relationships of the characters. (But I will say, my love of Davey got a little problematic with his "boys will be boys" attitude about the repeat offensives of Boy Dougdale).
But as a whole, this companion novel doesn't really have enough narrative corpulence to stand alone. The ending felt rushed and absurd-- though it feels extremely forward-thinking to A) have an openly gay character and B) allow him a romantic happy ending. And when you strip away the dazzling satire, the basic plot that drives the novel is really depressing. Basically, Polly gets molested by her uncle at a young age, falls in love with him from a distance, and marries him years later when her aunt dies. She's disinherited and quickly disenchanted by her old and pervy husband, delivers his baby who immediately dies, and runs away with a different old man. What is it about the females in these books not caring about their infants!! Lady Montdore's comment about how the stillbirth was for the best because children are an awful expense. I mean. Yikes. Yikes. Triple yikes. That was a truly horrid scene. Overall though, this book is like an encore to the first and it was lovely to spend some extra time with the characters and know them a little deeper.
This novel takes place in parallel with the first, and enhances the first with new depth and nuance. For instance Fanny constantly reassures the reader that she loves her husband and is happy with her normal domestic life in the first book but in the second her descriptions of him are constantly jabbing and negative in little subtle ways, painting him to be an unfulfilling, condescending and emotionally vacant life-partner. This of course changes how you feel about her commentary during the first book. Was she just trying to convince herself that she was happy? I loved seeing more of Davey and Uncle Matthew and delving further into the disfunctional mother-daughter relationships of the characters. (But I will say, my love of Davey got a little problematic with his "boys will be boys" attitude about the repeat offensives of Boy Dougdale).
But as a whole, this companion novel doesn't really have enough narrative corpulence to stand alone. The ending felt rushed and absurd-- though it feels extremely forward-thinking to A) have an openly gay character and B) allow him a romantic happy ending. And when you strip away the dazzling satire, the basic plot that drives the novel is really depressing. Basically, Polly gets molested by her uncle at a young age, falls in love with him from a distance, and marries him years later when her aunt dies. She's disinherited and quickly disenchanted by her old and pervy husband, delivers his baby who immediately dies, and runs away with a different old man. What is it about the females in these books not caring about their infants!! Lady Montdore's comment about how the stillbirth was for the best because children are an awful expense. I mean. Yikes. Yikes. Triple yikes. That was a truly horrid scene. Overall though, this book is like an encore to the first and it was lovely to spend some extra time with the characters and know them a little deeper.
mrswythe89's review against another edition
3.0
This is actually three books in one: The Pursuit of Love, Love in a Cold Climate and The Blessing. Sort of trashily enjoyable, like reading a 1930 issue of the Tatler.
kittymamers's review against another edition
4.0
ma muidugi olen Nancy Mitfordi populaarsemad raamatud kõik läbi lugenud ja jumaldan nende juures kõike. tema tegelased, tema dialoogid, need seltskonnad ja ühiskonnad (briti aadel), see ajastu (30ndad ja sealt edasi). perekond Radlettid, kellest ma võiks lugeda lõputult. keelekasutus ja mitfordianismid. do admit!
niisiis hankisin ja võtsin oma esimese eestikeelse Mitfordi ette kõrgete ootustega - lootsin, et sellest saab see raamat, mida ma kõigile inglise keelt mitte nii hästi lugevatele sugulastele ja sõpradele hakkan pihku suruma kui parimat, mis sel kultuuril maailmale anda on.
kahjuks pean nentima, et Varraku kirjastus, keda muidu kvaliteedi osas olen usaldanud, on siinkohal lati alt läbi jooksnud :( tiitellehe järgi otsustades pole raamatul olnud ei toimetajat ega keeletoimetajat, ainult korrektuuri lugeja ja... see paistab välja. tekstis leidub nii trükivigu, hooletusvigu, võibolla-autocorrect-vigu (Maison Pearsoni juuksehari?!) kui konkreetseid tõlkeapse. jah, ühtegi kategooriat eraldi pole väga palju, aga kõik kokku jätavad ikka mulje kiirustamisest, hooletusest ja... lugupidamatusest nii autori kui lugeja vastu :( (ahjaa, ja ma ei tea, kas saab öelda "küljendusviga", aga asjaolu, et tekst lõpeb täpselt viimase lehekülje lõpus enne tagakaant, lisab ka nagu... räpakust? ALATI suudetakse sinna ju ikka vähemalt üks tühi lehekülg jätta? jällegi, üksi poleks see seganud, aga kõigele muule lisaks...)
võib täitsa olla, et esmakordset lugejat või lihtsalt väikemat tähenärijat kui mina ei sega need kümmekond pisiprobleemi läbi raamatu üldse ja ongi ikka tore. lõppeks, keda üldse peale ilublogijate huvitab, mis brändi juuksehari mingil 80 aasta tagusel väljamõeldud tädikesel täpselt oli?:)
ahjaa, tohutu huviga ootasin, kuidas ikkagi on Krista Kaer tõlkinud Mitfordi (ja Radletti) perekonna lemmikhüüatuse "do admit!" - absoluutselt tunnistan, et ise ei osanuks head eestikeelset vastet leida. esimesel katsel oli sellest saanud "tunnista üles" ja pettusin kibedalt, sest see ei sobinud konteksti kohe kuidagi. hiljem samas raamatus öeldi "tunnista ometi" ja see on ju suurepärane. miks ta's ei võinuks algusest peale nii olla...? äkki ikka oleks natuke toimetamist kasuks tulnud.
aga kes ei ole enne Mitfordi lugenud, see peaks ikkagi lugema nüüd, kasvõi eesti keeles - see siiski jääb üheks parimaks asjaks, mis sel kultuuril maailmale anda on :)
niisiis hankisin ja võtsin oma esimese eestikeelse Mitfordi ette kõrgete ootustega - lootsin, et sellest saab see raamat, mida ma kõigile inglise keelt mitte nii hästi lugevatele sugulastele ja sõpradele hakkan pihku suruma kui parimat, mis sel kultuuril maailmale anda on.
kahjuks pean nentima, et Varraku kirjastus, keda muidu kvaliteedi osas olen usaldanud, on siinkohal lati alt läbi jooksnud :( tiitellehe järgi otsustades pole raamatul olnud ei toimetajat ega keeletoimetajat, ainult korrektuuri lugeja ja... see paistab välja. tekstis leidub nii trükivigu, hooletusvigu, võibolla-autocorrect-vigu (Maison Pearsoni juuksehari?!) kui konkreetseid tõlkeapse. jah, ühtegi kategooriat eraldi pole väga palju, aga kõik kokku jätavad ikka mulje kiirustamisest, hooletusest ja... lugupidamatusest nii autori kui lugeja vastu :( (ahjaa, ja ma ei tea, kas saab öelda "küljendusviga", aga asjaolu, et tekst lõpeb täpselt viimase lehekülje lõpus enne tagakaant, lisab ka nagu... räpakust? ALATI suudetakse sinna ju ikka vähemalt üks tühi lehekülg jätta? jällegi, üksi poleks see seganud, aga kõigele muule lisaks...)
võib täitsa olla, et esmakordset lugejat või lihtsalt väikemat tähenärijat kui mina ei sega need kümmekond pisiprobleemi läbi raamatu üldse ja ongi ikka tore. lõppeks, keda üldse peale ilublogijate huvitab, mis brändi juuksehari mingil 80 aasta tagusel väljamõeldud tädikesel täpselt oli?:)
ahjaa, tohutu huviga ootasin, kuidas ikkagi on Krista Kaer tõlkinud Mitfordi (ja Radletti) perekonna lemmikhüüatuse "do admit!" - absoluutselt tunnistan, et ise ei osanuks head eestikeelset vastet leida. esimesel katsel oli sellest saanud "tunnista üles" ja pettusin kibedalt, sest see ei sobinud konteksti kohe kuidagi. hiljem samas raamatus öeldi "tunnista ometi" ja see on ju suurepärane. miks ta's ei võinuks algusest peale nii olla...? äkki ikka oleks natuke toimetamist kasuks tulnud.
aga kes ei ole enne Mitfordi lugenud, see peaks ikkagi lugema nüüd, kasvõi eesti keeles - see siiski jääb üheks parimaks asjaks, mis sel kultuuril maailmale anda on :)
benedettal's review against another edition
4.0
Absolutely delightful. Love reading about high society, and Nancy Mitford is the prefect witty and knowledgeable narrator to tell such a story.
I always love reading about the aristocracy from the pov of critical insiders. It really shows the ridiculousness of the entire system, while still having an air of glamour that makes it fun for me. I also really enjoy reading period pieces that showcase characters who divert from accepted norms, like the flamboyant Cedric here. It’s so interesting to read about gay people that were somewhat more accepted in society back in the early 1900s than we realise today.
Also just all the scandals to do with marriage are so entertaining to read when love is completely out of the equation. There is something in the extravagance of these rich people that just makes for a good, light read, just the thing I like every so often.
I always love reading about the aristocracy from the pov of critical insiders. It really shows the ridiculousness of the entire system, while still having an air of glamour that makes it fun for me. I also really enjoy reading period pieces that showcase characters who divert from accepted norms, like the flamboyant Cedric here. It’s so interesting to read about gay people that were somewhat more accepted in society back in the early 1900s than we realise today.
Also just all the scandals to do with marriage are so entertaining to read when love is completely out of the equation. There is something in the extravagance of these rich people that just makes for a good, light read, just the thing I like every so often.
ellenlouisefreeman's review against another edition
funny
lighthearted
relaxing
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.5