The design and UX isn't done, Rob and Abbie, okkurrrr! 😌
ergative's review
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
 This felt vaguely disappointing, given how well it started. It did a superb job evoking life in the Tudor era (well, Stuart, but I just finished reading Black Tudors, and the similarities were very resonant) era, and the snakepit of court politics (and the fact that pretty much all King James IV/I ever cares about on page is silkworms was very funny), and I was all in for a scandalous tale of poison and murder. But it really dragged. We spent ages and ages following these characters' desperate attempts to build the lives they wanted in the face of a cruelly restrictive social context (because misogyny, always, but also class and the importance of connections who can raise you up or bring you down despite your best efforts), and some of it really bogs down the plot. There was a whole chapter in which a particularly disappointing event, which we saw ages ago was going to happen, finally happens, and I didn't need to read about it and didn't want to watch it take place. I wanted to get on with the murder!
Unfortunately, since this was based on a historical event, it was constrained by (say it with me now) historical accuracy, which meant that I kept on hoping that once murder and poison had been deployed once, they would be deployed more than once. There were many people in the book who could have done with a spot of strychnine in their soup. But I did enjoy the fact that, in the eventual murder trial that ensues, every single accusation leveled against the defendant is, as it turns out, entirely true. She is not falsely accused of anything. Even the accusations of sorcery and witchcraft are accusations of actions that, as defined by the prosecution, she absolutely did undertake. And given that the book must turn out in the way that history records it having turned out, the fact that she is not innocently accused is satisfying.
In a way, after re-reading the chapter in Eleanor Herman's outstanding The Royal Art of Poison about the death of Sir Thomas Overbury, I rather think that this book would have given me what I wanted if the characters adhered more to their portrayals in the historical records. The idea of evil, calculating Anne Turner colluding with Franklin about exactly which poisons are strong enough to kill but weak enough not to kill too quickly, testing various decoctions on domestic pets, cackling and rubbing their hands wickedly, is so much more fun than the anxious, fretful, loving, well-meaning Anne Turner we get in this book. Jago says in her author's note that she wanted to humanize the people away from their villainous portrayals, but the villainous portrayals are so much more lively and engaging than what we got. Ah, well. I guess I can't criticize the book too much for being what the author intended it to be, rather than what I was hoping for.Â
Unfortunately, since this was based on a historical event, it was constrained by (say it with me now) historical accuracy, which meant that I kept on hoping that once murder and poison had been deployed once, they would be deployed more than once. There were many people in the book who could have done with a spot of strychnine in their soup. But I did enjoy the fact that, in the eventual murder trial that ensues, every single accusation leveled against the defendant is, as it turns out, entirely true. She is not falsely accused of anything. Even the accusations of sorcery and witchcraft are accusations of actions that, as defined by the prosecution, she absolutely did undertake. And given that the book must turn out in the way that history records it having turned out, the fact that she is not innocently accused is satisfying.
In a way, after re-reading the chapter in Eleanor Herman's outstanding The Royal Art of Poison about the death of Sir Thomas Overbury, I rather think that this book would have given me what I wanted if the characters adhered more to their portrayals in the historical records. The idea of evil, calculating Anne Turner colluding with Franklin about exactly which poisons are strong enough to kill but weak enough not to kill too quickly, testing various decoctions on domestic pets, cackling and rubbing their hands wickedly, is so much more fun than the anxious, fretful, loving, well-meaning Anne Turner we get in this book. Jago says in her author's note that she wanted to humanize the people away from their villainous portrayals, but the villainous portrayals are so much more lively and engaging than what we got. Ah, well. I guess I can't criticize the book too much for being what the author intended it to be, rather than what I was hoping for.Â
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal death, Misogyny, and Rape
darcyjanea's review
adventurous
dark
emotional
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death of parent, Death, Domestic abuse, Grief, Infidelity, Murder, Misogyny, Pregnancy, and Rape
Minor: Suicide attempt and Miscarriage
More...