Book review: "Dunstan", by Conn Iggulden

Synopsis: Recalling the life story of St. Dunstan (909-988 A.D.), Conn Iggulden brings the reader into the world of 10th Century Wessex, and a kingdom that will one day be called "England". With the Romans having departed centuries before, the British isles is a place ravaged by internal disputes, conflicts and foreign threats. As a young man, Dunstan becomes apprenticed in a monastery, and reaches adulthood just at the point in which King Athelstan is about to subdue a rebellion in the north, and bring the whole of the island under his control...

An ambitious and driven man, Dunstan is destined to rise to the top of society at a rate that will surprise even him at times... but at what costs? After all, the life of a powerful man in an unstable and turbulent time is always exposed to treachery, deceit and the desires of those who would see him brought down. As war rages near and far, as conspiracy threatens to undermine both him and the Church, and as he outlives king after king in quick succession, Dunstan learns that the plans of God, kings and men are not always one and the same...

  Dunstan reacts to an unwelcome visitor...

Review: Conn Iggulden, a man who clearly has a lot of fun writing historical fiction, has once again delivered what feels like an authentic classic. 10th Century England is a period that often gets overshadowed by the Norman invasion of 1066, partly because that was the last time that the British Isles were fully invaded, but also because William the Conqueror (1028-1087 A.D.) is often considered to be the first "true" king of England. To add to the difficulty of studying the period, as Iggulden admits in the incredibly useful historical notes at the back, so much from that period has either been lost, was never written down, or has roots in dubious sources. But, Iggulden is able to turn lemons into lemonade by using these gaps in history as a way to test out his creative licence... and at no point does the storyline seem inconceivable or far-fetched.

One of the advantages of writing an entire book from the perspective of one person is that you can explore their psyche and personality in great detail, past present and future, and even watch it develop as the book progresses. We hear all about Dunstan's internal emotions, which he often confesses as sinful, either privately to the reader or, as in the case below, in full public view:

"Brother Casper, would you fetch me a whip?" I said. 
He looked suspiciously at me and I saw he thought I would use it on him. 
"It is for my penance, Brother Casper. St Benedict's rule forbids us to strike one another in anger. I have sinned, Brother Casper. I must suffer."

Dunstan, this Saint from over a millennium ago whose life you can read about on Wikipedia, is made into a tangible character that a modern reader can relate to. No easy task when you consider the historical context. These were, after all, times when Viking raids happened every other day, when kings were elected to rule with pretty much supreme power by a council called the Witan, and both the monarchy and Church held extensive political power, the likes of which our modern democracy would struggle to deal with. They were, to put it bluntly and to state the obvious, just very different times.

But some things never really change- human nature, for example. And Dunstan has a human nature; he often despairs at the burden caused to his life by his brother Wulfric, particularly in his younger, less forgiving years. He falls into temptation, and when he doesn't receive punishment for it, automatically labels it as "God's will". He's at times guilty of being self-righteous and judgemental, but also exercises righteous indignation, like calling out a newly crowned king for having a mother-and-daughter threesome at his own coronation (just as raunchy as it sounds). He's broken, prone to iniquity and making mistakes... as well are. It truly is a story of a man's nature in conflict with his conscience, and his often opposing morals trying to survive in a wretched and depraved world- and that is always a story worth telling!

And this is the book's strong-point; that Dunstan WAS a real man, who was declared a Saint and achieved many great works... but was human none-the-less. He comes across as comprehensible, flawed and imperfect. While the title of "Saint" can often be isolating, as it marks an immediate distance between the person and their fellow man, "Dunstan" helps take away the curtain of the title, and connect with the trials of the character himself. And Dunstan, a self-confessed imperfect man striving to lead a life dedicated to Christ in often ferocious and merciless circumstances, has PLENTY of stories to share...

This is a stand-alone book, and at times that must have been a challenge for Iggulden, who I felt really thrives in writing series books (see "Wars of the Roses" ). With this in mind, I would suggest that the author struggled a little with what ALL producers of historical fiction have to face to an extent, whether it be in books or film, which is trying to cram in an entire life without making it feel rushed or skipping huge parts. Maybe it's just me, but I could have read and enjoyed a book that was twice the length, as long as it had kept the same pace and style throughout. But it is a minor point- I was lucky enough to get a signed copy from the author himself (thanks to the patience and research of my mum! Many thanks again) and, as I've said about Iggulden's books before, it was just such fun to hold and engage with a man's incredible life reborn on the pages in front of me. But all things must pass, including the experience of hearing great stories. As Conn himself says:

"All such empires fall away, leaving stories behind: from Plato's men staring at shadows in a cave or Horatius on the Bridge, to Sir Francis Drake playing bowls and a thousand more. It has been my privilege to tell just one".

Score: 8/10

Book review: "Catch-22", by Joseph Heller

Catch-22

by Joseph Heller

Synopsis: Set on the fictional island of Pianosa during the American campaign to liberate Nazi-occupied Italy during the Second World War, Yossarian, a 28 year-old bombardier grows increasingly paranoid that he'll NEVER be sent back home, as Colonel Cathcart keeps raising the number of missions his men have to fly before they can take leave. His methods to stand his ground and save his life grow ever more inventive, but there's no doubting that the longer he stays on duty, the more creative and imaginative his would-be assassins become... As dangers reveal themselves from above, below and even from his own circle of acquaintances, Yossarian will slowly discover that "death-by-Nazi" will be the very least of his concerns...

Review: Some con artist tailors came to town, and offered to make the Emperor a set of new clothes. He agreed, and they got to work... doing nothing. After weeks of them sitting around idly, the Emperor came to collect his new threads. When he asked the tailors why he couldn't see or feel the clothes, they told him "They're made of the finest silk- so fine and unique, that only the wise and sophisticated can see and feel them..."... Suddenly, the Emperor decided that actually, he COULD both see and feel them... He had messengers sent throughout the kingdom, telling his subjects that only the wise would be able to see his clothes. Convinced that he must be wearing his new suit simply because he'd been tricked into thinking that it was real, the Emperor walked out naked in front of the entire kingdom. The crowd cheered and applauded his minimalist fashion show, boasting to each other about how beautiful the Emperor's new wardrobe appeared to them...

This is the same with Catch-22. When it first came out, apparently it was slated by critics for being simply awful. However, soon, certain people started saying "It's not awful- it's cult. It's subtle and dry- a wonderful satirical delight that I guess is something that only us sophisticated readers can truly appreciate..."... Suddenly, people started responding, "Oh...! Wait a second... Now that I take a CLOSER look, I can see that, actually, it is a really good cult classic... how wrong I was before. Yes- very sophisticated humour, which I DEFINITELY understand"... a forced and uneasy smile on their faces...

Don't get me wrong; undoubtedly there will be some genuine fans of Catch-22 out there... but I suspect that a lot of people who say they like this book say so simply because they feel they should. It honestly wouldn't surprise me if Joseph Heller sat down one day and thought to himself, "As a social experiment, I'm going to write a mediocre book, and then see how many people will be convinced by peer pressure that it's actually really good..."...

Well, the original critics had it right. This book is not great literature. The characters are unlikeable, under-developed, and uninteresting... to the point where, on the rare occasions when things actually DO happen to them, you're so far from any emotional investment in them, that you just think, "Who even cares?".

If you want a rough outline of what to expect: imagine a book which takes the social awkwardness and hilarity in misunderstandings of "The Importance Of Being Ernest", mix it in with the complete madness and ludicrousy of "Alice in Wonderland", and then place it on a similar 1940's Mediterranean island to that of "Captain Corelli's Mandolin", and you'll start to get an outline of "Catch-22". And, to its credit, there are times when reading it where it does make you chuckle, it does make you think about the absurdity of it all, and you do dream of the clear blue ocean stretching under a glistening sun, the peace aggressively torn apart by American bomber squadrons. But, for such a LONG book, these occasions are strikingly rare. Take, for example, its main message- that war is complete madness. That the people who start it and run it are all mental, and that the sane, innocent people who get dragged into it start to lose their minds, eventually. An important message, yes, but hardly ground-breaking, even for the time. And you could appreciate that fact in a fraction of the time, and with much more impact simply by watching an episode of "Blackadder Goes Forth".

All is NOT lost, though: the failed efforts of the young Nately to tame both his prostitute girlfriend and the other members of his squadron into "settling down" are predictably and comically shot down, and the running joke at the end of that same prostitute appearing cunningly and in disguise to try to assassinate Yossarian doesn't grow old (in fact, it lifts the tempo towards the end of the book, in a morbid, black-humour kind of way)... But even these fun parts aren't enough to justify the book's reputation. 

I really don't like writing negative reviews. But this kind of trickery has to be called out. There is probably some young person out there who wants to get into reading great books. In which case, I have a responsibility to save them a few quid, along with a number of reading hours they could be spending engaged in genuinely fantastic literature. It doesn't take a scholar to see that the reputation that Catch-22 has gained is a scam; a trick played on society to expose its conceited mindset. All it takes is that one uninhibited little boy to suddenly shout; 

"The Emperor's got no clothes on!"

Score: 4/10

Book review: "The Life: A Portrait of Jesus", by J.John and Chris Walley

Review: I first came across J. John when I was given his "Making the Christmas connection" book at a Christmas Eve church service a couple of years ago. As soon as I opened the first page, I knew I was holding a special little book- I was taken aback by how many concisely made points and insights into the true realities of following and serving Christ in the 21st century filled each page! I kept the book, and have read it half a dozen times a year ever since, each time finding new wisdom to practise.

"The Life: A portrait of Jesus", I'm happy to say, contains just as much knowledge and well-versed modern-day parables, except the focus is obviously shifted slightly (and explained in more detail) towards the incredible 3 year ministry that Christ performed on Earth- His actions, His miracles, and the power behind His messages. Before this, though, J. John quite rightly sets the tone of 1st Century Palestine, educating the reader on the socio-political and religious climate in which Christ lived His extraordinary life. In doing so, many parts of Christ's story that we find in the Bible, which may be difficult to fully understand or to feel the full effect of due to the separation of time and culture, are clarified by the author's explanation of what it signified at the time. It's easy to forget how much of a radical of his age Christ was, and He was considered dangerous by his enemies. Of course, He was also declared by many at the time as being the Messiah- God manifest as a man on Earth. While clearly being a worship book of tremendous Christian morals and values, both sides are studied, and explained.

J. John's time and dedicated research into the setting of Christ's earthly mission (The history of the Jews up until Christ, their attitude towards the Romans and neighbours, and their relationship towards God) will give even the most studious and avid Bible reader new insights into the true impact that Jesus had on the world at the time, and subsequently the effect that we feel 2000 years later. It's truly worthy of its full score, and I would recommend anyone to read this book- from absolute nay-sayers, to sceptics, to the curious, to Christians like me, who are looking to learn more about the Good Shepherd who changed their lives forever :)

Score: 10/10

Book review: "Shantaram", by Gregory David Roberts

Synopsis: Australian Gregory David Roberts- convicted armed robber, formerly incarcerated, recently escaped, and, where Shantaram picks up, currently on the run, lands in Bombay to begin his new life in exile.

Hiding his past, and making friends quickly and with apparent ease as he learns to survive in this new world, Gregory (under the alias of "Lin") gets immersed in what seems to be almost every section of forgotten Indian society- the drug dealers, the slum-dwellers, the lepers... As these people become part of his new reality, Lin is forced to move with the tide. But how far into the ocean of the Bombay underworld can Gregory safely go? And will there be anything other than an empty prison cell waiting for him on shore when he gets back?

Review: Right from the very first sentence, "It took me a long time and most of the world to learn what I know about love and fate and the choices we make, but the heart of it came to me in an instant, while I was chained to a wall and being tortured", you get the feeling that this is a very sincere book. Evocative descriptions throughout the first chapter will convince strangers to the Indian subcontinent that they are walking through the chaotic streets of a steaming hot afternoon in India's largest city.

For the romantically squeamish, you should be warned that, at times, "Shantaram" does look like it's getting a bit... you know... "Eat. Pray. Love."-esque, especially when describing Karla who, to a standing ovation from every Hollywood director in history, encounters Gregory by pulling him out of the way of the path of a bus. Cue the eyes meeting... two smiles- hers joyful, and his love-struck; her a successful, ambitious soul who's fallen in love with India and been accepted by the locals, him a lost and bewildered foreigner who despite escaping from prison can't master the art of basic road safety... Sadly, the flowery metaphors about his unrequited love for her don't subside- get ready for them to pop up and visit anytime!

Still, the periods between his inability to truly win her heart are filled with some amusing stories, such as bear hugging (of the literal kind), bear incarceration (of the literal kind), bear smuggling... and I think there's something about a blood-thirsty search for revenge for his unfair imprisonment, which was most inconvenient as it means that we hear (in graphic detail) about a hellish 4 months in an Indian Prison system without even a single anecdote about a bear to lighten the mood!

It's always a joy when Prabaker, Lindsay's first friend in India and trusted Bombay tour-guide, comes back on the scene. Roberts captures his broken English without making him sound to much like Apu from The Simpsons. As you can probably already tell, there is quite a lot of "soul-searching", going on throughout this novel. From the time he visits like Prabaker's village, and makes undeniable tangents between the insightful way that the villagers measure the height of the river and how they make the same delineations in him as a man, to the pathetic fallacy of the Palestinian Khaled walking into the snowy Afghan night having committed murder. And as for his chats with Khader, his mafia boss/amateur Yoda, about the complexity of the universe- let's just say, there's a reason that it's over 900 pages long! However, his vivid and thoughtful description of the "leper slum" is truly heartbreaking, and any resentment you feel towards Gregory David Roberts for laying on the sentiment and spirituality a little too thick is instantly washed away as soon as you finish chapter 10.

It's certainly a great achievement, considering it took him 13 years to write (the first two copies having been trashed by Indian prison guards)... Sadly (and not to the books detriment), the tale is nothing new or surprising- to anyone who's visited the developing world, it's a story of daily hardship and inequality that's far too common to be denied, and way too familiar to many travellers to be surprising.

Like so many descriptions of India, it's in danger of falling into stereotype at times- the romantic idea of India, the place where "the soul is king"... basically the same kind of sentiment you could get from watching Slumdog Millionaire. However, to be fair to a very well written book, it takes the time and opportunity to show the true tragedy behind the romance- aside from the obvious extensive poverty, there's the gang violence, cholera epidemics, drug addiction (which Roberts describes vividly and openly). All this wound into a pretty thrilling (if not always convincing) apparently true narrative means the summary can be as short as: "A pretty good read".


Score: 7/10

Book review: "Pompeii", by Robert Harris

Synopsis: Based around the eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in 79A.D.,  the story follows Marcus, a fictional hydraulic engineer who is sent to the Bay of Naples to sort out the recent problems of the local aqueduct system after his predecessor goes missing. The signs of the imminent eruption are all there, if only they can be interpreted correctly. The threat that Marcus faces of a jealous and murderous employee and a corrupt and arrogant business man pain in significance compared to the fate that they all face from the increasingly active volcano, which is preparing to demonstrate that an act of nature can be the deadliest enemy of all...

Review: An excellent read, especially for anyone who's new to historical fiction. Gripping from the start, and with the the countdown to the inevitable (yet unknown) fate slowly ticking, you won't be able to put it down until you've finished! Harris has an enviable way of taking a historical character and bringing them to life for a 21st century reader, while still keeping them historically convincing. The characters feel tangible, yet also ancient... but most importantly, they feel real. The book is greatly assisted by the fact that there are well documented historical reports of the eruption (principally by Pliny the Elder, who features as a character in the book), and this does a great service of convincing the reader that this fictional story COULD have happened.

Furthermore, he plays the reader between the two giant chasms, the first being Marcus's mission, along with it's trials and frustrations (fixing the aqueduct, exposing corruption and avoiding assassination being his principal concerns!), and the second being the inevitable fate that we all know so well from the history books. Just as you feel comfortable being dangled of the one gorge, he'll send you hurtling towards the other, just to remind you that it's still there, looming below you with grave solemnity. The question that you find yourself asking throughout is "WHERE is Harris going to place these various characters when the fateful moment arrives???". It is a cunning tactic that he uses magnificently, and which turns a piece of history into one of the great works of historical fiction.

Score: 9/10

Book review: "The Pilgrim's Progress", by John Bunyan

"He that lives in sin, and looks for happiness hereafter, is like him that soweth weeds, and thinks to fill his barn with wheat or barley."

Synopsis: Christian discovers that he, along with everyone else in the City of Destruction, is going to die. In his despair, he's shown a scroll and a wicket gate by which to enter the path towards the Celestial City, and eternal life. Discouraged by his family (who he's forced to leave behind), ridiculed by the townspeople, and abandoned by his friends, Christian believes he must make the uphill struggle towards salvation on his own. However, he's soon to discover that he is not alone on the path towards God, but for every tree bearing good fruits that he finds, there is a wolf in sheep's clothing not far away. Can Christian stay on Christ's path no matter what... to the very end?

Review: John Bunyan (1628-1688) briefly joined Oliver Cromwell and his bunch of merry round-heads in systematically ousting King Charles I during the English Civil War. Life was pretty good after that- Bunyan converted and joined the church. And if there was one thing that puritans liked it was preachers- the purer and more militaristic the better! Then, rather predictably, the British people decided they were lost without SOME kind of monarch, hence the reinstating of "King Charles II: This time, it's personal", later shortened to just Charles II. All this talk about God and the turning away from sins from someone who WASN'T officially Church of England registered apparently didn't sit well with the King, and in 1660, Bunyan found himself on the wrong side of a prison cell (namely, in it).

And as it turns out, being in prison can actually do wonders for anyone suffering from writer's block (just ask Jeffrey Archer. And before you ask- no, I never have nor ever will read any of his 'books'. Thank you). With a 12 year stretch to serve, Bunyan had plenty of time to strengthen his faith and organise his beliefs into a well-structured narrative.

Hence, "The Pilgrim's Progress", which is on-par with Nelson Mandela as the best thing to come out of an undeserved prison sentence, was born. A giant parable, it describes the spiritual journey necessary within the soul in order for a person to turn away from the world and it's wickedness, and return to the arms of God. It probably won't shock you to learn that this is a mostly up-hill battle. To quote;

"The way to heaven is as up a ladder, and the way to hell is as down a hill". 

At the time, America was still a British colony, and before Charlotte Bronte had even coined the term "Wild West", the not-far-off-being-United-States were beginning to look as if the brave pioneers had wandered greatly from the righteous path... and as for Bunyan's OWN countrymen, well, a Civil War is a pretty clear message that attitudes have to change. What better moment, therefore, for a recap of Christian morality on both sides of the Atlantic? Bunyan wrote "The Pilgrim's Progress" as an equally practical document as the Bible both for the good stay-at-homers in Blighty as well as those out there chasing the American dream. It was an opportunity for the reader to reflect on their own life, to see the value in resisting temptation, and generally provoke them into assessing their position as a practising Christian.

Anyone who's even vaguely familiar with Bible teachings will recognise most of the points that Bunyan was trying to warn about. Take the following:

Bible:
 "Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber."- Jesus Christ, John 10:1

The Pilgrim's Progress:
And, as he was troubled thereabout, Christian espied two men come tumbling over the wall on the left hand of the narrow way; and they made up apace to him. The name of one was Formalist, and the name of the other was Hypocrisy...

Christian: "Why came you not in at the gate which standeth at the beginning of the way? Know ye not that it is written, "He that cometh not in by the door, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber?"

Formalist and Hypocrisy: "They said that to go to the gate for entrance was, by all their countrymen, counted too far about; and that therefore their usual way was to make a short cut of it, and to climb over the wall as they have done". 

Christian: "But will it not be counted a trespass against the Lord of the city whither we are bound, thus to disobey His will?"

Formalist and Hypocrisy: "If we get into the way, what matter is it which way we may get in? If we are in, we are in: thou art but in the way, who, as we perceive, came in at the gate; and we are also in the way, that came tumbling over the wall: wherein, now, is thy condition better than ours?"

Anyway, they all continue somewhat together (actually, it's more like Formalist and Hypocrisy following Christian, who's trying to get rid of them)... Until, THIS happens:

I beheld then that they all went on till they came to the foot of the Hill of Difficulty, at the bottom of which was a spring. There were also in the same place two other ways, besides that which came straight from the gate; one turned to the left hand, and the other to the right, at the bottom of the hill; but the narrow way lay right up the hill, and the name of that going up the side of the hill is called Difficulty. Christian now went to the spring, and drank thereof to refresh himself, and then began to go up the hill, saying:

"The hill, though high, I covet to ascend;
The difficulty will not me offend, 
For I perceive the way to life lies here.
Come, pluck up, heart, let's neither faint nor fear. 
Better, though difficult, the right way to go, 
Than wrong, though easy, where the end is woe."

The other two also came to the foot of the hill. But when they saw that the hill was steep and high, and that there were two other ways to go; and supposing also that these two ways might meet again with that up which Christian went, on the other side of the hill; therefore they were resolved to go in those ways. Now, the name of one of those ways was Danger, and the name of the other Destruction. So the one took the way which is called Danger, which led him into a great wood; and the other took directly up the way to destruction, which led him into a wide field, full of dark mountains, where he stumbled and fell, and rose no more". 

 "... just as Christian came up with the cross, 
his burden loosed from 
his shoulders, and fell from off his back, 
and began to tumble..."

You can expect this kind of clear metaphor throughout, with as little room for misinterpretation as possible. As was well pointed out to me recently, "Bunyan was writing to impart understanding, so clarity was everything". It is also believed to be the second most published book ever (after the Bible), and has apparently never been out of print. And both of these facts are utterly believable- it's so resonant to daily Christian life that Bunyan reflects in his work that he must have been a spectacular preacher. As for the ye olde language (which takes a few pages of getting used to!), there are modern translation versions, and even a children's version... which a number of adults might also appreciate. For those who are inclined to develop the soul, "The Pilgrim's Progress" is a step onto solid ground both for those at the beginning of their spiritual journey towards Christ, as well as the veteran pilgrim.

Score: 10/10

Book review: "A Farewell To Arms", by Ernest Hemingway

Synopsis: Semi-autobiographical and stunningly realistic, "A Farewell To Arms" is based on one of the most intense periods of Hemingway's life. A young American (in the book, Frederic Henry) is helping the Italian war effort as an ambulance driver in the latter part of the First World War. Life becomes slightly more complicated when he meets, falls in love with, and impregnates an English nurse, Catherine Barkley. What's more, almost as soon as Freddy makes it back to the front, the Italians start a hasty retreat away from the speedy advance of the German and Austrian enemy. As he sees himself quickly falling behind enemy lines, he resorts to drastic measures to escape certain death and to find Catherine again, only to discover that his greatest trial is fast approaching... a true test of his human endurance from which there will be nowhere to run.

Review: As soon as you learn even a little about "Papa" Hemingway , you know he's going to write well. His life story oozes with adventure- every corner of it seems to be crammed with entertaining anecdotes that make you think that if you'd ever met him in a bar, there's a strong possibility that you'd never ever leave that bar (as long as you could keep up with his drinking pace, that is!). An 18 year-old volunteer injured during WW1 in Italy, cutting his teeth in inter-war Paris with only Pablo Picasso, Scott Fitzgerald and Gertrude Stein for drinking buddies, countless (mainly bullfighting, but also Civil war reporting) adventures is Spain and hunting in Africa, being a war-correspondent actually AT the D-day landings in 1944 (where he was labelled "precious cargo"), and retiring to write in post-revolution Cuba- just the tip of an incredibly well-travelled, war-wounded, bull-fighting, lion-shooting, bi-plane-flying (probably- it fits), yacht-sailing book-selling iceberg. His life itself is almost the stuff of fiction. And it's with little amazement that he's considered one of the most important American writers ever.

 Ernest Hemingway, from "Midnight in Paris"

So, "A Farewell To Arms" is off to a good start... much like Frederic Henry and the Italian army! All's going well on the campaign to defend the newly recognized Kingdom of Italy against the remnants of the Austro-Hungarian empire. Austria, a country which to many in the 19th century appeared to have been invented with the sole purpose of giving Napoleon a place to swing his sabre and fire off any spare cannon balls he had lying around, was at somewhat of a loose end. Hemingway himself says:

"The Austrian army was created to give Napoleon victories; any Napoleon".

And with that epic burn, they decided that the 20th century was going to be different. And what better way to celebrate the new century than with a bit of imperialistic expansion? It turns out that this empire building lark isn't like moving your fence a foot into your neighbour's garden when he's on holiday, though, as the Italians decide that being forced to wear pointy hats and grow outrageously overgrown mustaches isn't for them. Hence, the Austrians call on their younger, harder, German brother.

"It's the Germans that are attacking," one of the medical officers said. The word Germans was something to be frightened of. We did not want to have anything to do with the Germans".

Hemingway describes the chaos that ensued as a result of the Italian defeat at Caporetto so well, that many real-life survivors of the retreat swore that the only way he could have written such accurate details correctly is by actually having been there (he wasn't). It's no wonder he made himself a successful career as a war reporter- he lavishes the reader with a real sense of the disorder, disarray and general lawlessness of an army on the back-foot... Now, if only Frederic's countrymen would jump in and get involved in some politically motivated mass-murder for a change, then maybe we could enjoy the world as one, peaceful humanity. However, as he realises that he's more likely to die by being executed by a handful of rebellious Italian subordinates than by Kaisers Bill and Charles (of Germany and Austria respectively), he jumps headfirst into a river to avoid execution, and the wishful idea of some good ol' American intervention must seem like a very long way away for him...  Still, after his well-timed and supremely executed "Sod this!", Frederic gets back to Catherine, leaving the Italian army to scratch their heads over a missing ambulance driver while simultaneously face the fact that they're at the pointy end of a German bayonet... 

"We've been sitting here since Christmas 1914,
during which time millions of men have died,
and we've moved no further than
an asthmatic ant with heavy shopping"-
Captain Blackadder critiques the war

  

Obviously, any war ever fought anywhere would be utterly pointless if there wasn't a love-story to accompany it, a fact which has escaped neither Hemingway nor any Hollywood directors (except Spielberg). But Catherine Barkley is more than just an interesting and uplifting side-line to a tragic war-torn reality (although, she is that too). Being "married" to a fugitive in a foreign continent that seems intent on smashing itself to bits as quickly and efficiently as possible can't be easy, but she remains positive throughout, even when pregnant and having to do some midnight rowing across a lake towards Switzerland. Then again, it's not her who's going to have to face a firing squad if caught... so maybe there's a reason to be cheerful, after all... And as for the rowing- well, the promise of a life surrounded by Toblerone, cuckoo clocks and yodelling shepherds is enough to spur even the most amateur pregnant rower on!

If you haven't read Hemingway before, then the first lesson you will learn from the master is that by eliminating almost all punctuation, you can turn something as mundane as hooking up and getting pissed in a hotel room into mini-novella, such as the following:  

"Maybe she would pretend that I was her boy that was killed and we would go in the front door and the porter would take of his cap and I would stop at the concierge's desk and ask for the key and she would stand by the elevator and then we would get in the elevator and it would go up very slowly clicking at all the floors and then our floor and the boy would open the door and stand there and she would step out and I would step out and we would walk down the hall and I would put the key in the door and open it and go in and then take down the telephone and ask them to send a bottle of capri bianca in a silver bucket full of ice and you would hear the ice against the pail coming down the corridor and the boy would knock and I would say leave it outside the door please."

Try it out. On the downside, you'll give your English Writing teacher a seizure, but... well, actually maybe there are only plus points to it! XD

It's a fantastic book... but it's not a 10/10... and here's why. Read this passage, and tell me what's missing:


"I order you to come back to the car and cut brush," I said. The one sergeant turned. "We have to go on. In a little while you will be cut off. You can't order us. You're not our officer."

"I order you to cut brush," I said. They turned and started down the road. 

"Halt", I said. They kept on down the muddy road, the hedge on either side. "I order you to halt," I called. They went a little faster. I opened up my holster, took the pistol, aimed at the one who had talked the most, and fired. I missed and they both started to run. I shot three times and dropped one"...

All without a flicker of emotion, apparently! It's difficult to believe that even a war-weary veteran such as Frederic/Ernest could kill a man (let alone a man on his own side) without feeling something. A little low on the human-feeling front, I must admit (and just wait till you read the last page!!!)...

This week, retired war criminal and got-away-with-it mass murderer Tony Blair has said his next project will be to support the Bremain camp, to channel deep into the psyche of the British public and remind them that a little red-tape in Brussels is a small price to pay for booze runs to Calais and £15 mini-breaks to Barcelona. However, having Tony Blair in your camp for ANY kind of contentious issue is a bit like Charles Manson supporting your demonstration to raise the minimum wage. The way you react to the news of both of them backing your cause is the same, namely:

 "Oh... well, thanks... but no... no no no....no...

THANKS, though!

But, most importantly, no... a hundred thousand times, no...

no, no no..."

I mention this because, as we head towards an almost inevitable Brexit, and possibly afterwards a "Byegium", a "Departugal", a "Czechout", an "Italeave", a "Nethermind", a "Latervia", a "Fruckoff", a "Splitzerland", an "Austria La Vista", and a "Germany thanks it's been a blast", what is really only left are the following pertinent questions: have we really learned anything since 1918? Are we the more enlightened and tolerant generation that we simply assume we must be? And, if so, then can we reasonably claim a warm hearted sympathy for Frederic Henry and Catherine Barkley, two fictional refugees from a war which ended 100 years ago, whilst concurrently showing the cold shoulder to refugees who are taking strikingly similar journeys across Europe today?

Food for thought.

Score: 8/10

Book review: "Wars of the Roses: Ravenspur, Rise of the Tudors", by Conn Iggulden (part 4 of a 4 part series)

Synopsis: Earl Warwick is back! This time, it's from exile, and accompanied by a largely French-funded army, with the intent of removing Henry VI from the Tower of London, and sticking him on the throne at Westminster palace, therefore making Edward IV's dubious rule null and void. He's off to a good start, as Edward and Richard of Gloucester (who will one day lament over a lost horse in his role as Richard III) are caught unawares, and forced to flee the country, seeking refuge in the home of the Duke of Burgundy...

But it's not long before they're back, and thanks to Edward's charismatic influence, they're able to rally enough support to stage a counter-attack. A couple of bloody battles later, and power is theirs again, with all ghosts laid to rest...

Right...?

Of course not.

As a shining hope for the Lancaster cause emerges, the last of the Plantagenet line struggles to keep hold of its heirs, and it's "all in" from all players in this bloody 30 year game of cat-and-mouse, as both sides make their way to Bosworth field...

Review: "Who is this man, this over-looked and under-appreciated almost super-human "king", otherwise called "Edward IV"?", is a question that you may well find yourself repeating throughout this final chapter in an outstanding piece of semi-fiction. Yes, it seems that history doesn't like strong leaders nearly as much as it likes devious, cowardly villains (more on that later...)... or perhaps because he was a "usurping king", from a weak and tenuous royal line who's main claim was that some M.P.s (unreliable at the best of times) voted his father, the late Richard of York, to be their stand-in-monarch. Edward had inherited this honour the moment Richard of York STOPPED fighting battle in vain, and his head started having spectacular views of York from it's vantage point of the city's gate. Or maybe it's because his tenacious ambition to be king had dragged out a chaotic, bloody and frankly complicated civil war that seemed to have no end, and which few hoped to survive.

Whatever the reason, Edward is not a favourite for the history classes, and it's a shame because as "Ravenspur" shows he was, for want of a better word, a bit of a bloody legend. Proving himself countless times on the battlefield, often vastly outnumbered, under-prepared, under-funded or (in the case of Towton), knee deep in snow, Edward apparently terrified his opponents... and with good reason. They say "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog that counts". But just in case the fight inside this dog wasn't enough, life decided to make him over 6 feet tall (a giant in the comparatively short-statured world of 15th Century England)... and also, a ruthless and efficient killing machine.

However, being a giant womanising alpha-male with a steel liver and an appetite for destruction apparently has a downside- namely, you might suddenly die at 40. Cue stage... and... RICHARD ON! After a well-timed accusation that Edward's sons are illegit, Richard makes the noble sacrifice of taking the crown from their barely pubescent heads, and sticking it on his own... and act which, somewhat unsurprisingly, would result in a pretty stressful and risk-filled life! (who'd have thought???).

Lost and found: Richard III

As I was reading Ravenspur, I tried to constantly be aware of how Iggulden was portraying Richard III. Ask anyone (*anyone who is not from Leicester) what they thought of him, and they'll tell you he was a cold-blooded, hunchback fiend, who murdered his nephews and more than likely a few more poor sods on the way. However, it appears that we largely have Shakespeare to blame for this. For all his great works about Italian nobles roaming around the countryside slicing each other up like pastrami, his portrayal of Richard III is hardly flattering... and more importantly, possibly completely inaccurate! As I mentioned before- everyone loves a character, especially if he's been dead for 500 years and has a sinister rumour revolving around him. Undoubtedly, Richard committed ruthless acts on the way to becoming king and beyond... but MORE than his predecessors, or those around him? Unlikely. Iggulden does a great job of leaving us guessing about the princes in the tower, never quite letting on the "truth", and only hinting subtly at possible leads towards potential assassins... However, as he plainly admits at the end, it's his personal opinion that it WAS Richard who quietly disposed of his two nephews.

As for his classic hunchback- again, might be slander, or the misrepresentation of a normal growth of muscle from the result of a lifetime playing around with 2-ton swords. Although, he did have a crooked spine, so unless Shakespeare somehow tampered with THAT, I think the photographic evidence speaks for itself...

Of course, this whole series of books is made infinitely more interesting by the (fairly) recent discovery of Richard's skeleton. In 2012, after a huge amount of research and, as it would turn out, a minimal amount of digging, he was discovered in the FIRST TRENCH dug in the archaeological search for his remains in Leicester. Furthermore, it's said they he was found under a parking space that had the letter "R" (for "Reserved") on it... but, as we've seen so many times in this book, hearsay and rumour are convincing little things. Maybe this will be the final legend that is added to Richard III's name... :)

Richard III skeleton discovered- Youtube

"I told zem we already got one!"- The French knights
outwit an English King yet again...

From the character development throughout the final three books (of which there's FAR TOO LITTLE BLOGSPACE to go into now!), it's evident that Richard WAS a deeply complex person, and far more than a caricature of himself. Which makes what I'm about to comment on even more of a shame. You see, I felt like this whole series was building up to the battle of Bosworth. It's certainly the most famous battle in the War of the Roses, and a natural finale- the murdering, usurping king falling to make way for the younger, more exotic Henry Tudor, recently landed in Wales at the head of a largely French army...

And yet, the battle didn't seem to receive nearly as much attention as the battle of Towton did in Bloodline. It was disappointing to miss out on Iggulden's masterclass of battlefield description, which have proven to be vivid and piercing. It all felt quite rushed at the end- and that's a shame, considering that (as Iggulden himself described), there was a real risk, especially for Richard, who had lost both his wife and son shortly before. Now heir-less, he knew that even if he survived the battle and his bloodline didn't get trampled into the dirt by a horde of angry Welsh and French hired-hands (who were by that time so used to assisting vague claimants to the English throne that they probably saw it as a gap-year), then he'd still have to get a move on to make the Plantagenet name last another decade...

Unfortunately for him, of course, history had other plans.

"Tudor". Now THERE'S a name you
can trust not to cause a scandal... ;)

So, Bosworth fell flat, for me... but that's not to put a damper on a supreme set of books. It's been great fun reading this series- I've learnt more information about the Wars of the Roses than I will probably ever use (and I'm all the happier for it!), and I hope that Conn Iggulden and such writers continue to write books that take the worlds of our fascinating ancestors, and put them in the grasp of the ordinary hobby-reader.

Score: 8/10

Book review: "Wars of the Roses: Bloodline", by Conn Iggulden (part 3 of a 4 part series)

Synopsis: With the defeat of Richard of York at the battle of Wakefield, Queen Margaret of Anjou and her Lancastrian forces head victoriously towards London. There's a nasty surprise, though, as their riotous surge south has scared the inhabitants of the capital stiff, locking her out and forcing her back north. In another unfortunate twist of fate for the red-rosed royals, Edward of March enters London unobstructed, crowns himself king, and leaves London as Edward IV, hot on the Queen's tail to face her at the bloodiest battle ever fought on British soil- the battle of Towton.

Having thoroughly dealt with his family's enemy of the best part of 30 years, Edward is free to rule... but old habits die hard, and it's not long before he's seeing conspiracy and treason amongst the very men who put him where he is. As he embarks on a mission to "trim the vine" of the powerful house that made him king, patience begins to wear thin, tempers start to fray, and King Edward will find that tables that turn quickly, will quickly turn back...

Review: Apparently, it's actually quite easy to become king- you just rock up, cobble together some half-baked story about a distant ancestor and a Parliamentary Act you inherited from your dad, throw a few thousand pounds around, and make sure you've got enough pissed-off locals to do the dirty work for you. It also helps if the current king, the one you're trying to overthrow, is as fabulously unpopular as Henry VI- in fact, that's a key part. And if you can capture him and keep him prisoner for years without most people apparently noticing or caring, then you know you're onto a winner...

The hard part- as Eddie and countless others before and since have discovered- is holding on to your well-earned title. There's several approaches one could take; 1) be a bloody good king, SO good that common-folk will wonder how they ever survived without you, 2) be brutally oppressive, slaughtering anyone who whiffs of rebellion, 3) marry a manipulative control-freak and let her work her way through your list of enemies... or, there's secret option number 4) a corrupted cocktail of all of them!

And the part of Lady Macbeth for tonight's performance will be played by Elizabeth Woodville. Yes, as soon as she's Edward's queen, this recent graduate from the "A woman's guide of how to piss of the Nevilles and lead your country into a state of perpetual war" course (presumably taught by Margaret of Anjou) sets about applying her new techniques with fury, fully convinced (and not without reason) that the Neville family has spent too much time reproducing and marrying off (and repeating) and not enough time doing whatever else rich and powerful people are supposed to spend their leisure time doing...

So, who's first on the list? Well, let's start off with an easy one. Cruella Woodville believes that Archbishop and tubby Nevillite George Neville has had far more than his share of bishopping around the country, and it's time to let someone else have a go at it for a change. In a move of Biblical irony, the bishop is drained of his power once his seal is taken from him, like Samson having his hair cut...

One down, two to go...

Then there's never-quite-sure-if-he-really-is-a-psychopath John Neville, who you felt sorry for in "Trinity" after he had his fairytale alfresco wedding interrupted by a half-arsed attempt on his life by Henry Percy and his bunch of merry wedding-crashers, but who now never seems to be around unless there's someone who requires their head to be immediately and permanently removed from their shoulders. Ever since its former owner Thomas Percy died at Towton, he's been lounging it up in Percy's lands and residence, presumably laughing maniacally and throwing darts into his portrait late at night. Well, the fun stops here, John, as your spoils are going back to their rightful owner- a spotty Percy youth captured and kept in the tower of London, forgiven and released by King Edward.

What happens when the king you created...

... goes rouge?

And finally, Elizabeth turns her attention to Richard Neville, recently promoted to Earl of Salisbury (although affectionately and, to avoid confusion, known simply as Warwick). Despite being rich to an extent that you expect him to put on a top hat and pull out a pocket watch every 30 seconds, Warwick has come up with a way to get even richer... this time, REALLY rich, and REALLY forever. What could it be?  I smell a wedding! Yes- you've guessed it- the one-trick-pony strikes again, and Warwick decides not to break with tradition. Instead of retiring gracefully and concentrating on his hobbies, Warwick plays a dangerous game of "poke the 6ft 4" usurping English king into provocation" by engaging his daughter, Isabel Neville to the King's own brother, George of Clarence. Unsurprisingly, under the influence of his wife, Edward says no... but Warwick, God bless him, is a "kingmaker"...

... and where there's a will, there's a way! :D

On a more serious note about the importance of this book- people often ask me, "Why do you study history? What's the point? It's all in the past, it's not relevant now". They'll even add, when it comes to ancient history, "It was TOO LONG AGO to affect today, so what does it matter?" At this point, I could easily go on a tirade about how hugely wrong these cynics are- how everything had a birth, a lifespan, and a death. How every reality that we often take for granted today started out as an idea, and one to be feared and shut away, but eventually gaining ground, and turning into a struggle that many people viewed as more valuable and long-lasting than their own temporary time on Earth. How England didn't always have a middle-class, universal healthcare, or even educate the vast majority of it's population, most of whom would be considered an ancient old biddy if they made it past 40. And I could also confidently say that without a study of history, we are in danger of going backwards, not forwards. No- today, I'm going to play devil's advocate, and I'm going to give them their way... a little bit.

Let's say that all that they've said is true, and that learning about history is pointless. Let's cast our minds into a state where it's possible to believe that we don't need to study the actions of our ancestors, or for even a mere moment contemplate gaining any lessons from their misfortune or triumphs. Let's imagine that as a human race, we all agree that any attempt to consider where we are today as a direct consequence of what happened prior is a futile and fruitless venture. Even in this meaningless and depressing dystopia, I would still recommend this book, this entire SERIES, in fact, based solely on the fact that it's INTERESTING.

It's true that most books, with a handful of exceptions including holy scriptures, aren't likely to transform your life. Even the handiest self-help books can't guarantee they'll help you live better, find love, or even write great blogs... :) And Bloodline, like most books, falls into the over-populated category of books that are PRACTICALLY almost useless, in terms of the impact it can have towards making you a "better person". True- it's not likely to to get you a job, or help you score at a bar... at best, it might win you a couple of quid on pub-quiz night. And yet, like so many great books, despite its lack of "practical application", it doesn't feel worthless. Quite the opposite. Holding it while you read feels like holding something immensely important and of great value- like an ancient and finely crafted chess set, with each of its pieces beautiful and impressive in it's own right. The books absorb you based on the sole fact that you are curious, and you want to be entertained. They deliver- and what's more, you spend the rest of the day struggling to ever really shake these vividly painted ghostly faces of our ancestors from your mind.

Finally, as cliche as it might sound, Bloodline does what all great historical fiction does, which is put a name to a face, and then breathe life into it. It's one thing to read about the exploits of Edward IV- "He was the son of Richard of York, he won the battle of Towton, he became King and married Elizabeth Woodville..." etc etc. It's quite another to meet him as a boisterous 14 year old, play-fighting with the guards with a wooden sword, watching him grow into a giant 17 year old, able to wrestle with fully grown and experienced knights, feeling the pain of a tragedy-stricken son as he hears and reacts to the news of his father at the battle of Wakefield, becoming drunk on bravado and trust in the belief that his friend and mentor has in him to become king, and the pain, anger and resolution that he feels as he realises that he has to burn the very bridges he crossed to get to the throne. Conn Iggulden, a man who was surely born to put the "story" into "history", will make you fully and intensely interact with these real historical figures, whose world is now yours to explore, and who had their personal stories told by a true master of the craft.

Score: 9/10

Book review: "Wars of the Roses: Trinity", by Conn Iggulden (part 2 of a 4 part series)

Synopsis: As Henry VI is no longer seen as healthy enough to run jolly old England, Richard of York is official protector of the realm while he recovers... much to the disgust of many. It seems that, although Richard is doing a pretty good job at 1) not being invaded by France, and 2) not letting the country burn to the ground on the whole, still only the sight of Henry VI sitting on his throne will satisfy York's harshest critics, the fiercest of those being Queen Margaret. And what better Christmas present for her than for her husband to come to on Christmas day, march to London, and reclaim the throne?

Cast out with his tail between his legs, York faces accusations of treason, a bud he is very keen to see nipped. He (rather unwillingly) gets the chance at the dramatic battle of St. Albans, which sees York clear his name, keep his fame and fortune... and then some! But is he safe from the Queen's clutches? You might think so... but no. As she calls in innumerable favours from abroad, she takes a gamble on a manoeuvre that is designed to see York and his family tree ousted from the power struggle in England. But will it be enough? And if so, what roots of the York family remain waiting under the surface...?

Review: I can see why Conn Iggulden wrote this as a series- the character development would have been impossible if it were any shorter. Take Yorky-boy (Richard). In my last review, I compared him to Lord Farquaad from Shrek, a similarity which although I still hold to be largely true (ESPECIALLY the rubbing-his-hands-with-glee malevolence), I also feel a pang of guilt because it doesn't tell the whole story of the man. Much more so in "Trilogy" than in "Stormbird", you feel a real sympathy for York. At times, you just think "He's not a bad bloke. He's just trying to make a quick buck, obtain another 50 manor houses, and be irrefutable divine-appointed leader of a nation. Who DOESN'T want that???".

He's a man with ambition, a quality in most circumstances, but apparently a vice if your ambition is to become "God's man-on-the-ground". And here's where Richard's character is truly exposed to his credit. He doesn't appear to WANT to be king, even though his various promotions seem to be leading straight towards that path. In fact, he throws somewhat of a hissy-fit when the chant "Richard of York is a stinky traitor" does the rounds. To which his response is- and his logic is questionable, here- to "accidentally" go to battle with the king's troops at St. Albans. What better way to show you love your king than by getting all your forces together, slaughtering half his army, and basically standing over his broken body saying "NOW: SAY I'M NOT A TRAITOR!".

In the wacky world of Pre-Tudor politics, apparently that's a great way to get yourself promoted, as Richard is then named heir (for some reason that, I must admit, I wasn't able to pick up on... I think it was something to do with the condition that he'd stop killing everyone first). What's more, he's never short of chances to "do a Macbeth" and get rid of Henry. Barely a page goes by when him or one of his offspring isn't alone with the semi-conscious king, the perfect chance for an unhappy
accident. York and Henry seem to spend more time alone than Henry and his wife! (And DEFINITELY more than York and his). Still, Richard's attitude towards being regent is only slightly above a simple "meh...".

Seriously, though, I think Conn puts it best in his epilogue, as follows:

"He was a complex man, and no clear villain. I could not escape the strong sense that neither York nor the house of Lancaster particularly wanted the struggle. Each house was forced into war, out of fear of the other". 

... and Lady Macbeth.

Fair's fair! Margaret of Anjou...

And while you start to feel that, aside from his over-reaction to a little name-bashing, Richard of York has a genuine cause, you also can't help picturing Margaret of Anjou more and more as Lady Macbeth. She certainly works hard to gain the reputation, pushing Henry to trump every card that York plays, when he's even aware of where he is, of course...

                                                        
Poor Henry- a mere pawn in between Margaret and Richard's deadly game... with the obvious difference that a pawn can at least take any enemy that is directly diagonally in front of them, whereas Henry is usually too ill to even leave his tent (a move which almost proves fatal for him on TWO occasions!).

While we're on the chess metaphor, the queen certainly manages to move far more squares than the king! Tenacious and imaginative in her ways to make sure that York is destroyed, Margaret is a whirlwind to be reckoned with as she does a grand tour of the British Isles, trying to find people that her adopted countrymen the English haven't slaughtered, invaded or pillaged from recently, in order to support her husband's right to the throne... no easy task! In the end, she actually has to settle for a bunch of rowdy Scots who, until their king was killed when his cannon decided to explode more outwards than forwards, actually supported Richard's claim to the English throne. Still, there's nothing that an arranged marriage can't fix (or destroy) apparently, and with Maggie at the helm, off they bloody well trot, happy as Larry, to go kill some English. Which English? To which they reply, "Who knows? And who the hell even cares?".

Margaret has engaged in the age-old English tradition of importing monarchs, and although her late father-in-law Henry V made seeing how many French knights he could fit on a pike somewhat of a hobby, you'd have thought that watching his son let his inheritance fall into anarchy would be fun for her. Again, not so. She's married to him, after all... and that rainy little Euro-sceptic island on the edge of Europe is her son's inheritance. CAN love conquer all? As we head into the third book "Bloodline",  with the House of York scorned and vengeful, and with no more children to marry off, Margaret must be wondering how long it'll be until her luck finally runs out...

Score: 8/10

Book review: "Wars of the Roses: Stormbird", by Conn Iggulden (part 1 of a 4 part series)

Synopsis: Detailing an often over-looked part of English History, "Stormbird" essentially lays out the foundations and build-up to the War of the Roses (1455-1487). Henry VI, a physically weak king who many see as unfit to rule, still clings on to power. With such a lack of faith in the king's abilities to lead, a well meaning (but ill-conceived) attempt to secure peace with France for the next 20 years is arranged- a marriage between Henry VI and France's Margaret of Anjou. Happy to be out of her oppressive father's house and become something in life, Margaret is ready to take on her new responsibility as joint-sovereign of England. But, it comes with a catch- the English owned regions of Maine and Anjou are handed back over to France as soon as the matrimony is complete. Feeling they've been betrayed by their king, grieved landowners gather around the violent and tumultuous Jack Cade, who marches on London with the intent of bloody revenge against the royals for their injustices. Meanwhile, there's conspiracy within the ranks of the ruling class, as Richard of York plots and schemes in an effort to become King of England. With no heir to speak of, London at a knife's edge, and powerful men out for her husband's crown, Margaret realises that far from the hard life being over for her- it has only just begun.

Review: As previously mentioned, the period that this book describes is not one of the most memorable from your history lessons. Shortly put, you say the word "Henry", you think "the 8th" (or "Hoover"). The exploits of Henry (NOT the 8th) VI and Richard of York (NOT Richard III), for many, have gone largely unnoticed, apart from at least 2 Shakespeare plays dedicated to them.

Still, perhaps this is part of this book's appeal- the fact that it gives you a chance to plug-up gaps in your knowledge. It'll be a delve into the unknown for many- an opportunity to read the story of an ACTUAL event as if it were the first time... which it undoubtedly will be for many! Famous historical events sometimes become SO famous, that they actually become LESS true. Newton was never hit on the head by an apple, Vikings didn't wear horned helmets, and Einstein wasn't bad at maths as a child. See?

Richard III

Richard Duke of York

So, imagine hearing the details of Napoleon- before you were blind sighted by the false rumour that he was short. Or the story of D-day before Hollywood had us all believing that the troops flew in on bald eagles, with Schwarzenegger muscles and cigars between their teeth. This is what this book is- a fresh pasture. And right off the bat, Conn Iggulden says to the reader "I know you're nervous about how little you know about these dark times, but I'm going to walk you through it!", which he does spectacularly.

The pace is best described as "romping"- leaving little time for your mind to wonder or be dragged down with over-descriptions. Very aware that the real history was a lot more drawn-out (for example, as mentioned at the end of the book- the re-taking of Maine and Anjou by the French took 5 years, as opposed to mere weeks in the story...), Igguldon doesn't let it drag or become cumbersome to read. It's a superb compromise between "Couldn't have happened like that!" and "Wwwaaayyy too much detail!".

One criticism might be that some of the characters become almost caricatures. Take Tricky Dicky Richard of York, for example. He's described as being so full of malice and wicked intent that it's hard to picture him as anyone other than Lord Farquaad from Shrek (which is ironic, because actually his son Richard III is the spitting image).
                                                                                       
Still, it is compellingly entertaining, with something of a Game of Thrones theme running throughout (admittedly with a few less dragons and sex scenes). And Iggulden certainly knows how to describe a knife-fight, with such precision and detail that you'd swear you were seeing them in slow-motion. Conn should be careful, though: He doesn't over-use slow-mo blood-spurting and battle cries as much as, say, the movie "300" does... But it's a close one...

Lord Farquaad of Shrek

Interestingly, his main character, Derihew "Derry" Brewer, the king's spymaster, is one of the few fictional pieces in this work. Iggulden explains at the end that, from his research, a person (or, let's face it, a few people) like Derry MUST have existed in order to broker the truce with France. In fact, in the book, the ceremonial screwing-over of English tenants in northern France is Derry's brainchild, an act that he defends to the last. Outside of negotiating difficult international treaties, Derry is a sleek, cool medieval Bond character. From going undercover as a peasant in France in order to infiltrate the king's wedding without Tricky Dicky noticing him, to reporting directly (but often tensely) to Queen Margaret ("M"), there's an instant familiarity with his personage, which is amusing even if it's not strictly accurate. Furthermore, making him an expert in espionage was an ingenious move, as you can't help but wonder if he is fictional, or if he merely slipped himself out of the history books, erasing himself from memory...

Despite having the disadvantage of never actually existing, though, Derry manages to interact with the real-life characters seamlessly- from getting up Richard's nose, who takes time out of his busy schedule of high-treason and moustache-twisting to belittle Derry (never taking the initiative to mention that, according to history, he is mere fantasy), to Lord Suffolk, Derry's close friend and confident, who stands in for the king at his own wedding in France, who takes the flack for losing Maine and Anjou, and who ultimately faces exile for not being a "team-player".

And, what Henry VI-based story would be complete without the appearance of Jack Cade? (Who?).  Exactly. Very little is known about the rebellious Kentish leader, but what we do know is that if ever there was a man to bring a sh*t-storm to London, it's our boy Cady. Terrifyingly aggressive and manic after his son's unjust execution, we're led to believe that "enough was enough", and that Cade was the physical embodiment of the anger over the loss of English territories in France, who led a chanting and murderous mob of a few thousand towards London, for a night out in the city that nobody would forget. But Igguldon won't let that lie- he's planted a subtle seed to make us wonder if (somehow) Lord Farquaad Richard had a hand in the uprising in some sneaky, could-only-be-part-of-a-Disney-plot kind of way... Founded fears? Or more vicious historically inaccurate rumours? Perhaps "Trinity" will solve the case...

Score: 8/10

Book review: "Nomad", by Alan Partirdge

Synopsis: Alan Partridge is back... and this time, he's on the road! After discovering that his late father once failed to show up for an interview at Dungeness Nuclear Power station, Alan (in true Partridge style) feels it his duty to complete the on-foot journey from Norwich to the South Coast that his father never could. After several failed attempts to secure a television deal to record the walk, Alan decides that it must be a spiritual endeavour that will not only honour his late dad, but also teach him more about... him (his father). However, with a strict 2-week limit given to him by North Norfolk Digital's overlord ("boss") Greg, and with only the likes of hapless booze-jockey Dave Clifton and the bebearded Sidekick Simon to cover his ever popular mid-morning slot, will Alan make it back before Monday morning and, if so, will he be a changed man?

Review: For those of you who aren't familiar with Alan Partridge (probably because you didn't have a T.V. during the 90's)- he is a symbol of quite a specific British mindset that, once dominant and making up the status-quo, is now struggling to cope with the modern world of today- one of paying homage to a picture of the Queen, driving to country pubs in a Land rover (or a Volvo, at a push), and going to sleep to the soothing sounds of Jeremy Clarkson.

So, there's something essentially 'British' about Alan Partridge (specifically, his 'little England' mindset, which has shown to be more widespread than ever since the BREXIT referendum), and therefore assists in the more global question(s); "Who is Alan Partridge? And also, what does it actually mean to be 'British'?" One of those (the latter) is a very relevant question that millions of people had to ask themselves in 2016, and this instantly gives a real weight and significance to this topical book.

The book itself centralises around Alan's great journey, but as you can imagine (and would EXPECT, considering it's 274 pages long!), Alan uses the opportunity to engage us in some ruddy good personal insights into the world, life,1 and soul of Alan Partridge. Sadly, though, he largely uses it as a chance to bitch (mostly about Noel Edmonds), to set the record straight (again, Edmonds)... but most importantly, and I cannot stress this enough... to shamelessly name-drop and to show off who he's amiably connected to in the show-biz world (with the exception of Edmonds, with whom he shares a mutual disdain. Alan only refers to Noel by his last name, quoting "I won't dignify him with his full name. Besides, he signs his emails and legal letters "Edmonds", so he started it").

But, his tangents are a more than welcome respite from a frankly arduous march across East Anglia (including a 280 km detour round the back of London- read the book to find out why!). My personal favourite insight into the mind of this unique man, which I've quoted here, gives us a clear picture of Alan's philosophy about revenge:

"When I was young- i.e. up to the age of fifty - almost all of my actions were motivated by revenge. If you had wronged me, then sooner or later you'd have it coming to you. It might not be that week, it might not be that year, but if your name was on the list I kept in a Harrogate Toffee box buried in my garden, then trust me, the die had been cast. And while I have to admit that some of the happiest times of my life have been as a result of getting someone back, the quest for retribution was an exhausting one.

Let's say a colleague has caused offence by failing to compliment you on your new haircut. It's not like they haven't noticed. It's shorter than before, it's got gel in and the way the fringe flops over to the right makes you look, what, four years younger? Yet they don't say a word. Where's the best place to pay them back? Think about it for a moment. You know for a fact they'll be at work every day, you even know where their desk is. But that would be too easy, too obvious, even. Better by far to do it where they feel safest: their home. Order sixty Littlewoods catalogues to be delivered to the place where they live, where their parents live, where their children live, and you can seriously shake them up".

And with those, the ramblings of a border-line sociopath, you very much have a measure of the man.

So, is it funny (Me asking myself)? Yes! (Me answering myself). It's also worth mentioning that, a-typical of a man who both loves the sound of his own voice and loves the sound of his own voice saying his own name, "Nomad" is also available on audio book (or youtube, for you petty-criminals out there). And for all die-hard Partridge fans (all 4 of you), rest assured that you'll get the full Partridge deal. From his affectionate pleas to Angela, his as-of-late ex-girlfriend, to a touching pictorial tribute to Michael, his missing-presumed-dead Geordie friend... to Bill Oddy, who tears himself away from spotting bluechests in order to wish him luck, "Nomad" picks up the life of Alan Partridge from right where you last left it.

Finally, what A. Partridge book review would be complete without an anecdote... about Edmonds?
 Taken from Nomad's chapter 14, simply entitled "Edmonds"

Score: 9/10

1 This is an Oxford Comma, without which no review of anything within the Partridge brand would be complete.