Customer Reviews: Read 29 more reviews...
 Good but not great...Displaying talent though August 27, 2008
This book has stayed with me and I personally found that the second half worked after the first part (for those who haven't read the book, there is change of location and mood). However, it left me with a sense of disappointment. The book rushes along and I was left feeling that more attention and character development for fewer characters would have made for a more rounder novel. However, it is definitely worth reading and indeed was haunting at times.
 The Resurrectionist August 23, 2008
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
I honestly read this book twice. I thought perhaps I had missed something the first time but no I hadn't. I just didn't get it at all. I felt that none of the characters had any depth whatsoever and was baffled by the lack of real story or motive. I think the author was more interested in shock value. Suppose it will make the next best horror flick!
Weakly plotted and poorly characterised August 19, 2008
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
Englishmum.com's July book was The Resurrectionist by James Bradley. Admittedly I got this late and had to force myself to read it over one weekend but `force' is definitely the right word. I found that the old fashioned language, although no doubt authentic, quite awkward:
`It is three months since I came here, apprenticed to my master's side so I might learn his trade.'
I really, really enjoyed the descriptions of London in the early 1800s - he went into great detail about how they lived, what they ate, the people, the places - this was by far the most enjoyable part of the book for me. However I didn't really think there was much of a plot: orphaned chap comes to London, works for anatomist, gets in a fight (why did he just not tell his boss what happened for God's sake? He'd already had the fight with the bloke so knew he could handle him), gets with an actress/prostitute, is devastated when her friend dies (why?), loses his job, descends into opium addiction (I hated this - aren't you supposed to like your hero? I didn't like him at all - I have no sympathy for drug addicts, either in the early 19th century or today), gets in with a bad crowd, robs graves, murders people, then whoosh, he's off to Australia (bit confusing, that, as he's not convicted for the murders but for being a `vagabond'), falls in love with this girl, doesn't get together with her and that's it.
Other members of the book club commented:
"the problem was the "hero". He was not a hero. You wanted to like him, but you couldn't. You couldn't even feel sorry for him - I tried, but after the incident where he watched someone brutally torture and murder a kitten and actually enjoyed it, well, that was the end of any support, sympathy, empathy etc. And if you can't connect with a book's leading character in any way, the book just becoimes a chore"
I liked the detail too, but the plot stank. Forgive me if I'm wrong but... he dies in England then... Australia! Is is the same guy? What's the point?
At this stage in the plot I got fed up and bored and went to see David Starkey for a proper book...
"Top marks for place descriptions but nada for characters. The was he wrote them didn't make me feel for any of them. Maybe I just didn't get it but surely the authors' intent is to make you `identify' with his characters? Empathy for the main character, distrust for the antihero, that sort of thing? The `flow' of the story was stilted and the characters very wishy-washy. At Best."
In summary - we were all greatly disappointed and didn't think the book warranted its 'brooding Gothic horror' label.
Pointless August 18, 2008
Characters very poorly drawn - almost impossible to distinguish between Dickensian stereotypes. Nothing new - a story told often and more effectively by others. The two parts of the novel were completely disjointed. No surprises. Loved The Book Thief - hated this waste of time!
Such a shame August 18, 2008
I approached this book with high hopes - it was a R&J recommendation plus I liked the synopsis. Initially I thought the book would fulfill its promise; the writing was stylish and evocative, and there was a sense of danger and malignity pervading the narrative. I soon realised, however, that I wasn't interested in the characters as they hadn't been fleshed out properly, and whilst I don't expect things to be spelt out for me, there was too much left unexplained and the narrative more and more disjointed and obscure. I didn't bother to finish it in the end, which is sad as I believe the author shows promise. I think an earlier review has hit the nail on the head - it should have been twice the length and has probably been butchered by the editor.
|
