I read this title for a book group, and I didn't expect to like it since I know quite a bit already about Tudor history and thought I would not enjoy a fictionalized account, especially one with elements of the supernatural.
However, I was very pleasantly surprised. I found the story interesting. As some reviewer of The White Queen said, Gregory makes The War of the Roses/Tudor history interesting despite the fact that we know how it ends.
I was a little disconcerted by the point of view of Elizabeth of York: her view of Richard III as a tragically lost lover and her view of Perkin Warbeck, which really surprised me (she views Perkin Warbeck as being, possibly, her brother Richard, the Duke of York (presumed lost/murdered in the Tower of London). For one thing, I had not thought that there was any uncertainty about whether Richard, Duke of York had perished in the Tower. I do remember reading somewhere, with some incredulity, that there is some thought that Richard III had an illegitimate son who succeeded in escaping notice.
Gregory's characterization of Margaret of Beaufort as an old battle ax may not be far off the mark although it does not quite answer the question I've always had, which is, how did Margaret Beaufort think that she could put her son on the throne given that the Beauforts were expressly excluded from the succession by an act of parliament. Perhaps the answer is simply "that was then, this is now."
Her portrait of Henry VII as a man obsessed with keeping his crown perhaps explains the "bloody" nature of the Tudors.
I was a little disappointed by the ending, which seemed to me to trail off without conclusion. However, it occurred to me that no ending is perhaps needed when you know that another chapter in the saga will appear in a year's time.
Given that this story is the basis for Games of Thrones and many other books, I perhaps should not be so surprised that Gregory has been able to mine it for much more drama.
However, I was very pleasantly surprised. I found the story interesting. As some reviewer of The White Queen said, Gregory makes The War of the Roses/Tudor history interesting despite the fact that we know how it ends.
I was a little disconcerted by the point of view of Elizabeth of York: her view of Richard III as a tragically lost lover and her view of Perkin Warbeck, which really surprised me (she views Perkin Warbeck as being, possibly, her brother Richard, the Duke of York (presumed lost/murdered in the Tower of London). For one thing, I had not thought that there was any uncertainty about whether Richard, Duke of York had perished in the Tower. I do remember reading somewhere, with some incredulity, that there is some thought that Richard III had an illegitimate son who succeeded in escaping notice.
Gregory's characterization of Margaret of Beaufort as an old battle ax may not be far off the mark although it does not quite answer the question I've always had, which is, how did Margaret Beaufort think that she could put her son on the throne given that the Beauforts were expressly excluded from the succession by an act of parliament. Perhaps the answer is simply "that was then, this is now."
Her portrait of Henry VII as a man obsessed with keeping his crown perhaps explains the "bloody" nature of the Tudors.
I was a little disappointed by the ending, which seemed to me to trail off without conclusion. However, it occurred to me that no ending is perhaps needed when you know that another chapter in the saga will appear in a year's time.
Given that this story is the basis for Games of Thrones and many other books, I perhaps should not be so surprised that Gregory has been able to mine it for much more drama.
No comments:
Post a Comment