Questions About The Historian

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Historian, please sign up.

Answered Questions (17)

Does anyone else find this book a little dumbed-down for historical fiction? I'm only on Chapter 2 and I'm losing interest fast...

Fiona For heavens sake, this isn't really historical fiction! The title is misleading some of you out there. It's a beautifully and cleverly written work of…moreFor heavens sake, this isn't really historical fiction! The title is misleading some of you out there. It's a beautifully and cleverly written work of fantasy loosely inspired by an old Eastern European vampire folk tale. I don't usually read this sort of fiction because ever since reading Anne Rice's over-rated Interview with the Vampire, and the subsequent over-reaction to what was in essence a pretty mediocre book, I was totally put off by the modern versions of this genre. The Historian has changed all that. A really good piece of intelligent fantasy, vividly written.(less)

flag

Have you lost interest? I have lost interest too. I will not finish it.

Primerofin I finished the book - but it frequently slowed down.

I liked the concept and details of this book.

However, I thought the style/structure made the story…moreI finished the book - but it frequently slowed down.

I liked the concept and details of this book.

However, I thought the style/structure made the story too slow and boring.

The book is nearly entirely told via people reading something - letters, post cards, ridiculously detailed notes that people seem to have time and effort and skill to write even when in danger.

This approach was a creative idea - but ultimately it turned all 'action' into 'history'. I guess that's why its called the historian and I guess that's why many people find history boring. It's not the content that is boring it's the style of story telling.

I gave this book 3 stars - it could have been 5 stars with another (even conventional) style of story telling.(less)

flag

This question contains spoilers... (view spoiler)

Julia

This answer contains spoilers… (view spoiler)

flag

How old do you have to be to read this book?

Primerofin Anyone who is comfortable with the concepts of vampires (and what they do) can read this book without fear of somehow being shocked. Nothing too gory,…moreAnyone who is comfortable with the concepts of vampires (and what they do) can read this book without fear of somehow being shocked. Nothing too gory, no significant sexual content, no profanity. So I'd say anyone over 10-14 years old COULD read this.

However, I think this book is rather slow and exposition heavy so I don't think anyone who is too young to read this would be able to get through it. In other words, I think the style is self-censoring to filter out those who could be not ready. In my opinion - that's a great way for all books to be.(less)

flag

This question contains spoilers... (view spoiler)

Peter Kuypers I think Dracula does not really talk there. I think he directly adresses the daughter's mind. It says: 'I had the sense that they were words I knew wi…moreI think Dracula does not really talk there. I think he directly adresses the daughter's mind. It says: 'I had the sense that they were words I knew with my blood, not my ears.' That's why the father can't her him...(less)

flag

Load 5 more questions