Scan barcode
A review by seneolas
All the Painted Stars by Emma Denny
i really wanted to like this book better than the first one, which drove me around the bend, but unfortunately that did not happen. i read these bc numerous authors whose opinions i respect had reviewed them positively and i honestly feel BETRAYED by how badly those recommendations let me down on this occasion. this series is not for anyone who cares about historical accuracy and knows anything about the medieval period because you, like me, will end up tearing your hair out with frustration
the worst part is the author clearly did SOME research, eg into the history of brewing. but also just... doesn't know what parchment is? treats it like paper throughout the book? (it's not paper! it doesn't work like that!) i wouldn't have thought this was difficult esoteric knowledge to acquire and I was surprised by the sheer quantity of issues on that front (there's a lot of writing notes and letters in this book and almost every single one of those scenes was historically implausible if not ludicrous). and, like book one, there's zero acknowledgment of religion; nobody goes to church, nobody gets in trouble for it, there are no festivals or saints' days, no church bells ring, nobody prays... there are a couple of mentions of convents which is progress at least but the realistic fourteenth century vibes, they are LACKING
i would have enjoyed both this and the first book much more if the author had admitted they wanted to write either fantasy or regency romance and then just... done that, because they're far more convincing as either of those things stylistically and in terms of vibes than they are as depictions of fourteenth century england. and then i could have enjoyed the characters and the story without constantly yelling THAT'S NOT HOW PARCHMENT WORKS. but here we are. i am peeved. turns out i am in fact a parody of myself and can't ignore bad book/material history for the sake of gays
also a knight riding a palfrey and nobody comments on it? really? okay then.
if however historical accuracy doesn't bother you and/or you also don't know what parchment is (it's animal skin) (it's not paper it doesn't behave like paper) (okay I'm sorry I'm done), you may enjoy this one for useless lesbians who take a fair while to figure out that they are in fact useless lesbians, and tournament shenanigans, and brewing. but if you are looking for convincing historical fiction, not so much. try Alex Myers' "The Story of Silence" for genderweird knights and chivalric romance vibes, perhaps
edited to add (now that it's not 3am and therefore i'm less salty and feel guiltier about my negativity): there were things i DID like about this book e.g. the fact that the butch character is nevertheless the one who likes and is good at embroidery; the acknowledgment that although this is more of a 'crossdressing' story, trans people do exist and did historically exist; johanna's pragmatic attitude to marriage and fulfilling the expectations of a lady that went beyond the basic cliches of medieval fantasy, etc. but on the whole it was hard for me to appreciate those things given the other aspects that bothered me.
the worst part is the author clearly did SOME research, eg into the history of brewing. but also just... doesn't know what parchment is? treats it like paper throughout the book? (it's not paper! it doesn't work like that!) i wouldn't have thought this was difficult esoteric knowledge to acquire and I was surprised by the sheer quantity of issues on that front (there's a lot of writing notes and letters in this book and almost every single one of those scenes was historically implausible if not ludicrous). and, like book one, there's zero acknowledgment of religion; nobody goes to church, nobody gets in trouble for it, there are no festivals or saints' days, no church bells ring, nobody prays... there are a couple of mentions of convents which is progress at least but the realistic fourteenth century vibes, they are LACKING
i would have enjoyed both this and the first book much more if the author had admitted they wanted to write either fantasy or regency romance and then just... done that, because they're far more convincing as either of those things stylistically and in terms of vibes than they are as depictions of fourteenth century england. and then i could have enjoyed the characters and the story without constantly yelling THAT'S NOT HOW PARCHMENT WORKS. but here we are. i am peeved. turns out i am in fact a parody of myself and can't ignore bad book/material history for the sake of gays
also a knight riding a palfrey and nobody comments on it? really? okay then.
if however historical accuracy doesn't bother you and/or you also don't know what parchment is (it's animal skin) (it's not paper it doesn't behave like paper) (okay I'm sorry I'm done), you may enjoy this one for useless lesbians who take a fair while to figure out that they are in fact useless lesbians, and tournament shenanigans, and brewing. but if you are looking for convincing historical fiction, not so much. try Alex Myers' "The Story of Silence" for genderweird knights and chivalric romance vibes, perhaps
edited to add (now that it's not 3am and therefore i'm less salty and feel guiltier about my negativity): there were things i DID like about this book e.g. the fact that the butch character is nevertheless the one who likes and is good at embroidery; the acknowledgment that although this is more of a 'crossdressing' story, trans people do exist and did historically exist; johanna's pragmatic attitude to marriage and fulfilling the expectations of a lady that went beyond the basic cliches of medieval fantasy, etc. but on the whole it was hard for me to appreciate those things given the other aspects that bothered me.