stephh's review against another edition
1.0
The Antiquary starts with a journey that a man named Lovel and an antiquary called Oldbuck take together to Scotland. At the centre of the book is mystery surrounding who Lovel really is, and we start to discover more and more about him through his interactions with the antiquary.
I really struggled with this book - it's something I just couldn't wrap my head around. There is a lot of text in this written in Scottish dialect that made it a very slow read. I found I was focusing more on deciphering what was being said than thinking about the meaning behind the words and then missed a lot of that. It was a fairly hefty read (at over 500 pages), but there just wasn't masses of plot to keep me interested.
I really struggled with this book - it's something I just couldn't wrap my head around. There is a lot of text in this written in Scottish dialect that made it a very slow read. I found I was focusing more on deciphering what was being said than thinking about the meaning behind the words and then missed a lot of that. It was a fairly hefty read (at over 500 pages), but there just wasn't masses of plot to keep me interested.
gailbird's review
funny
informative
lighthearted
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
kailey_luminouslibro's review against another edition
4.0
I adore Sir Walter Scott's writing! He can be a little long-winded at times, but it is absolutely worth it.
I wish that this story had focused more on Mr. Lovel as the hero, instead of telling nearly everything from the Antiquary's point of view. It is funny and touching though, seeing everything through Oldbuck's eyes. I wish there were more depth to Lovel's character; we don't get to see him nearly enough. Same thing with Miss Mc'Intyre. She seems so sweet and nice, but she barely has any dialogue.
The ending is rather abrupt, but good with all the loose ends nicely tied up to everyone's satisfaction.
All in all, a fantastic story, excellent writing, beautiful characters, and a finely laid plot!
I wish that this story had focused more on Mr. Lovel as the hero, instead of telling nearly everything from the Antiquary's point of view. It is funny and touching though, seeing everything through Oldbuck's eyes. I wish there were more depth to Lovel's character; we don't get to see him nearly enough. Same thing with Miss Mc'Intyre. She seems so sweet and nice, but she barely has any dialogue.
The ending is rather abrupt, but good with all the loose ends nicely tied up to everyone's satisfaction.
All in all, a fantastic story, excellent writing, beautiful characters, and a finely laid plot!
romankurys's review against another edition
2.0
Let me begin by saying I respect Sir Walter Scott as an author. There are no “but’s” that follow.
Antiquary was a good book and a good story.
Why 2 Stars then?
Characters: 2
I enjoyed the characters, Scott created. There were interesting and very different from anyone you would encounter these days, I felt. Who is an Antiquary, anyways? Is it a person who collects old stuff or is it a historian? Is it both? What is a blue cloak? If they are honored for their service to he king, why are they beggars? Questions like these ran through my head all story long. Each one of them represented a certain kind of a person who lived in England/Scotland during Scott’s Times. Each character was unique and different in their own way and provided a good backstory of how people behaved and how social classes worked in an everyday setting.
What I had difficulty with is understanding what they were saying in almost every dialogue piece. Having tried to supplement this book with an audio book when I was on a go, I quickly had to stop the audio book or I was going to get lost in the old language. Or maybe it is Scottish dialect?
Plot: 2
That leads me in the Plot of the book. I felt it was good, engaging and interesting somewhere deep underneath all the fluff, all the dictionary look ups and all the wiki historical browsing. I persevered, I figured out what Scott was saying and than somewhere half way through the book, I also figured out what the ending was going to be. I was hoping I was wrong, but I was not.
Setting: 3
Given the Scott’s own point that Waverly novels are meant to show the spirit of his times, I can’t help but think of Balzac who did the same with his “Human Comedy”. One huge difference is that I read Balzac translated to English from old French so I can immerse better in the story. Setting as great, Scott does a great job creative a good and immersive images of the old times, it is just very difficult to comprehend. I suppose it is fair to say that his work did not age well and that is my biggest gripe with this Work. I wonder how many years before the books will become unreadable and maybe someone qualified should consider updating the language while somehow preserving the feel of the times so that young people can also enjoy this work.
As it is right now, I cannot imagine anyone who is not a deep DEEP fan of old literary works actually lasting through this story. I’d recommend you stayed away from this book, unless you have a reason not to. Use this as a gauge:
1. When was the last time you have finished, let’s say , a Charles Dickens novel.
2. Did you flip the back cover and wished it did not have to end?
If 1 is within the last 12 months, proceed to #2. If 2 is a solid yes, give Antiquary a try.
If not...read something else, save your time, you’ll thank me later.
Roman “Ragnar”
Antiquary was a good book and a good story.
Why 2 Stars then?
Characters: 2
I enjoyed the characters, Scott created. There were interesting and very different from anyone you would encounter these days, I felt. Who is an Antiquary, anyways? Is it a person who collects old stuff or is it a historian? Is it both? What is a blue cloak? If they are honored for their service to he king, why are they beggars? Questions like these ran through my head all story long. Each one of them represented a certain kind of a person who lived in England/Scotland during Scott’s Times. Each character was unique and different in their own way and provided a good backstory of how people behaved and how social classes worked in an everyday setting.
What I had difficulty with is understanding what they were saying in almost every dialogue piece. Having tried to supplement this book with an audio book when I was on a go, I quickly had to stop the audio book or I was going to get lost in the old language. Or maybe it is Scottish dialect?
Plot: 2
That leads me in the Plot of the book. I felt it was good, engaging and interesting somewhere deep underneath all the fluff, all the dictionary look ups and all the wiki historical browsing. I persevered, I figured out what Scott was saying and than somewhere half way through the book, I also figured out what the ending was going to be. I was hoping I was wrong, but I was not.
Setting: 3
Given the Scott’s own point that Waverly novels are meant to show the spirit of his times, I can’t help but think of Balzac who did the same with his “Human Comedy”. One huge difference is that I read Balzac translated to English from old French so I can immerse better in the story. Setting as great, Scott does a great job creative a good and immersive images of the old times, it is just very difficult to comprehend. I suppose it is fair to say that his work did not age well and that is my biggest gripe with this Work. I wonder how many years before the books will become unreadable and maybe someone qualified should consider updating the language while somehow preserving the feel of the times so that young people can also enjoy this work.
As it is right now, I cannot imagine anyone who is not a deep DEEP fan of old literary works actually lasting through this story. I’d recommend you stayed away from this book, unless you have a reason not to. Use this as a gauge:
1. When was the last time you have finished, let’s say , a Charles Dickens novel.
2. Did you flip the back cover and wished it did not have to end?
If 1 is within the last 12 months, proceed to #2. If 2 is a solid yes, give Antiquary a try.
If not...read something else, save your time, you’ll thank me later.
Roman “Ragnar”
romankurys's review against another edition
2.0
Let me begin by saying I respect Sir Walter Scott as an author. There are no “but’s” that follow.
Antiquary was a good book and a good story.
Why 2 Stars then?
Characters: 2
I enjoyed the characters, Scott created. There were interesting and very different from anyone you would encounter these days, I felt. Who is an Antiquary, anyways? Is it a person who collects old stuff or is it a historian? Is it both? What is a blue cloak? If they are honored for their service to he king, why are they beggars? Questions like these ran through my head all story long. Each one of them represented a certain kind of a person who lived in England/Scotland during Scott’s Times. Each character was unique and different in their own way and provided a good backstory of how people behaved and how social classes worked in an everyday setting.
What I had difficulty with is understanding what they were saying in almost every dialogue piece. Having tried to supplement this book with an audio book when I was on a go, I quickly had to stop the audio book or I was going to get lost in the old language. Or maybe it is Scottish dialect?
Plot: 2
That leads me in the Plot of the book. I felt it was good, engaging and interesting somewhere deep underneath all the fluff, all the dictionary look ups and all the wiki historical browsing. I persevered, I figured out what Scott was saying and than somewhere half way through the book, I also figured out what the ending was going to be. I was hoping I was wrong, but I was not.
Setting: 3
Given the Scott’s own point that Waverly novels are meant to show the spirit of his times, I can’t help but think of Balzac who did the same with his “Human Comedy”. One huge difference is that I read Balzac translated to English from old French so I can immerse better in the story. Setting as great, Scott does a great job creative a good and immersive images of the old times, it is just very difficult to comprehend. I suppose it is fair to say that his work did not age well and that is my biggest gripe with this Work. I wonder how many years before the books will become unreadable and maybe someone qualified should consider updating the language while somehow preserving the feel of the times so that young people can also enjoy this work.
As it is right now, I cannot imagine anyone who is not a deep DEEP fan of old literary works actually lasting through this story. I’d recommend you stayed away from this book, unless you have a reason not to. Use this as a gauge:
1. When was the last time you have finished, let’s say , a Charles Dickens novel.
2. Did you flip the back cover and wished it did not have to end?
If 1 is within the last 12 months, proceed to #2. If 2 is a solid yes, give Antiquary a try.
If not...read something else, save your time, you’ll thank me later.
Roman “Ragnar”
Antiquary was a good book and a good story.
Why 2 Stars then?
Characters: 2
I enjoyed the characters, Scott created. There were interesting and very different from anyone you would encounter these days, I felt. Who is an Antiquary, anyways? Is it a person who collects old stuff or is it a historian? Is it both? What is a blue cloak? If they are honored for their service to he king, why are they beggars? Questions like these ran through my head all story long. Each one of them represented a certain kind of a person who lived in England/Scotland during Scott’s Times. Each character was unique and different in their own way and provided a good backstory of how people behaved and how social classes worked in an everyday setting.
What I had difficulty with is understanding what they were saying in almost every dialogue piece. Having tried to supplement this book with an audio book when I was on a go, I quickly had to stop the audio book or I was going to get lost in the old language. Or maybe it is Scottish dialect?
Plot: 2
That leads me in the Plot of the book. I felt it was good, engaging and interesting somewhere deep underneath all the fluff, all the dictionary look ups and all the wiki historical browsing. I persevered, I figured out what Scott was saying and than somewhere half way through the book, I also figured out what the ending was going to be. I was hoping I was wrong, but I was not.
Setting: 3
Given the Scott’s own point that Waverly novels are meant to show the spirit of his times, I can’t help but think of Balzac who did the same with his “Human Comedy”. One huge difference is that I read Balzac translated to English from old French so I can immerse better in the story. Setting as great, Scott does a great job creative a good and immersive images of the old times, it is just very difficult to comprehend. I suppose it is fair to say that his work did not age well and that is my biggest gripe with this Work. I wonder how many years before the books will become unreadable and maybe someone qualified should consider updating the language while somehow preserving the feel of the times so that young people can also enjoy this work.
As it is right now, I cannot imagine anyone who is not a deep DEEP fan of old literary works actually lasting through this story. I’d recommend you stayed away from this book, unless you have a reason not to. Use this as a gauge:
1. When was the last time you have finished, let’s say , a Charles Dickens novel.
2. Did you flip the back cover and wished it did not have to end?
If 1 is within the last 12 months, proceed to #2. If 2 is a solid yes, give Antiquary a try.
If not...read something else, save your time, you’ll thank me later.
Roman “Ragnar”
nabilah's review against another edition
2.0
The most difficult book i ever read because of the language. I have to read the summary on Wikipedia to know what was going on and who is who. It took me months to finish too. However, i did not dislike this book at all. It is sort of charming.
lnatal's review
3.0
From BBC Radio 4 - Drama:
Richard Wilson stars as The Antiquary, a man who hordes secrets as well as treasures. Will his knowledge allow Lovel to marry his secret love? With David Tennant as Walter Scott.
The Antiquary (1816) is a novel by Sir Walter Scott about an amateur historian, archaeologist and collector of items of dubious antiquity. Although he is the eponymous character, he is not necessarily the hero, as many of the characters around him undergo far more significant journeys or change. Instead, he provides a central figure for other more exciting characters and events - on which he provides a sardonic commentary.
This is Scott's gothic novel, redolent with family secrets, stories of hidden treasure and hopeless love, with a mysterious, handsome, young man, benighted aristocracy and a night-time funeral procession to a ruined abbey. The romance and mystery is counterpoised by some of Scott's more down-to-earth characters, and grittily unromantic events.
Scott wrote in an advertisement to the novel that his purpose in writing it, similar to that of his novels Waverley and Guy Mannering, was to document Scottish life and manners of a certain period - in this case the last decade of the 18th century.
Music by Ross Hughes and Esben Tjalve
Cello played by George Cooke
Produced and Directed by Clive Brill
A Brill production for BBC Radio 4.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b064xbpk
Richard Wilson stars as The Antiquary, a man who hordes secrets as well as treasures. Will his knowledge allow Lovel to marry his secret love? With David Tennant as Walter Scott.
The Antiquary (1816) is a novel by Sir Walter Scott about an amateur historian, archaeologist and collector of items of dubious antiquity. Although he is the eponymous character, he is not necessarily the hero, as many of the characters around him undergo far more significant journeys or change. Instead, he provides a central figure for other more exciting characters and events - on which he provides a sardonic commentary.
This is Scott's gothic novel, redolent with family secrets, stories of hidden treasure and hopeless love, with a mysterious, handsome, young man, benighted aristocracy and a night-time funeral procession to a ruined abbey. The romance and mystery is counterpoised by some of Scott's more down-to-earth characters, and grittily unromantic events.
Scott wrote in an advertisement to the novel that his purpose in writing it, similar to that of his novels Waverley and Guy Mannering, was to document Scottish life and manners of a certain period - in this case the last decade of the 18th century.
Music by Ross Hughes and Esben Tjalve
Cello played by George Cooke
Produced and Directed by Clive Brill
A Brill production for BBC Radio 4.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b064xbpk
timo74fd3's review
4.0
Wat een wonderbaarlijk boek! Het verhaal krijgt maar erg traag vorm, maar wat voor een personages spelen een rol: een pruikenmaker met nog slechts drie klanten, een Duitse zwendelaar en - natuurlijk - de oudheidkundige uit de titel.
De ontknopping van de al bij al flauwe plot - maar Scott kan bezwaarlijk clichématig worden genoemd! - neemt slechts enkele zinnen in beslag. De ruimte die dat laat, vult de bijzondere Jonathan Oldbuck, Laird of Monkbarns maar al te graag - en dat neem ik hem niet kwalijk.
De ontknopping van de al bij al flauwe plot - maar Scott kan bezwaarlijk clichématig worden genoemd! - neemt slechts enkele zinnen in beslag. De ruimte die dat laat, vult de bijzondere Jonathan Oldbuck, Laird of Monkbarns maar al te graag - en dat neem ik hem niet kwalijk.
More...