What do you think?
Rate this book
A Sundial in a Grave: 1610
"It's about sex, and cruelty, and forgiveness."Thus begins a sweeping historical adventure about two dueling swordsmen and the plot to kill a king in the grand tradition of Dorothy Dunnett and Alexander Dumas.
The year is 1610. Continental Europe is briefly at peace after years of war, but Henri IV of France is planning to invade the German principalities. In England, only five years earlier, conspirators nearly succeeded in blowing up King James I and his Parliament. The seeds of the English Civil War and the Thirty Years War are visibly being sown, and the possibility for both enlightenment and disaster abounds.
But Valentin Rochefort, duelist and spy for France's powerful financial minister, could not care less. Until he is drawn into the glittering palaces, bawdy back streets, and stunning theatrics of Renaissance France and Shakespearean London in a deadly plot both to kill King James I and to save him. For this swordsman without a conscience is about to find himself caught between loyalty, love, and blackmail, between kings, queens, politicians, and Rosicrucians -- and the woman he has, unknowingly, crossed land and sea to meet.
688 pages, Paperback
First published November 20, 2003
28 people are currently reading
563 people want to read
About the author
Mary Gentle
46 books204 followersThis author also writes under the pseudonym of Roxanne Morgan
Excerpted from Wikipedia:
Mary Gentle's first published novel was Hawk in Silver (1977), a young-adult fantasy. She came to prominence with the Orthe duology, which consists of Golden Witchbreed (1983) and Ancient Light (1987).
The novels Rats and Gargoyles (1990), The Architecture of Desire (1991), and Left to His Own Devices (1994), together with several short stories, form a loosely linked series (collected in White Crow in 2003). As with Michael Moorcock's series about his anti-heroic Jerry Cornelius, Gentle's sequence retains some basic facts about her two protagonists Valentine (also known as the White Crow) and Casaubon while changing much else about them, including what world they inhabit. Several take place in an alternate-history version of 17th century and later England, where a form of Renaissance Hermetic magic has taken over the role of science. Another, Left To His Own Devices, takes place in a cyberpunk-tinged version of our own near future. The sequence is informed by historically existing ideas about esotericism and alchemy and is rife with obscure allusions to real history and literature.
Grunts! (1992) is a grand guignol parody of mass-market high fantasy novels, with orcs as heroes, murderous halflings, and racist elves.
Excerpted from Wikipedia:
Mary Gentle's first published novel was Hawk in Silver (1977), a young-adult fantasy. She came to prominence with the Orthe duology, which consists of Golden Witchbreed (1983) and Ancient Light (1987).
The novels Rats and Gargoyles (1990), The Architecture of Desire (1991), and Left to His Own Devices (1994), together with several short stories, form a loosely linked series (collected in White Crow in 2003). As with Michael Moorcock's series about his anti-heroic Jerry Cornelius, Gentle's sequence retains some basic facts about her two protagonists Valentine (also known as the White Crow) and Casaubon while changing much else about them, including what world they inhabit. Several take place in an alternate-history version of 17th century and later England, where a form of Renaissance Hermetic magic has taken over the role of science. Another, Left To His Own Devices, takes place in a cyberpunk-tinged version of our own near future. The sequence is informed by historically existing ideas about esotericism and alchemy and is rife with obscure allusions to real history and literature.
Grunts! (1992) is a grand guignol parody of mass-market high fantasy novels, with orcs as heroes, murderous halflings, and racist elves.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews
June 30, 2011
The prologue was clever (Russell Crowe & Angelina Jolie starred in the movie!), but right there and then I should have realized what was wrong with this book...
It's the story of a swordsman with a hidden past in France/England in the 1600's who gets mixed up with powerful people all intent on using him. Rochefort sounds (from the prologue and blurb) like the greatest hero ever written.
He wasn't. I didn't even like him. The book is a mix of quick, fast action followed by lots and lots and lots of Rochefort thinking about things. So... intense - boring - intense - boring - intense. After 150 pages very little had actually happened.
And what does Rochefort think about? Not much of intelligence, although he's quite sexual by nature.
Before I tossed the book at the wall for the third and final time (I had a case of insomnia and kept tossing it and picking it for lack of anything else to do at 2 AM), Rochefort had done absolutely nothing to impress me. While we are told at how clever he is, etc. He fails at almost everything and his archenemy keeps beating him. (and I'm sorry, but I found the twist about the archenemy silly - Rochefort would know. Trust me, he would know.)
Okay... I've given this book way more words that it deserves. It could have been fabulous (For lovers of Dumas and Dunnett!); it wasn't.
It's the story of a swordsman with a hidden past in France/England in the 1600's who gets mixed up with powerful people all intent on using him. Rochefort sounds (from the prologue and blurb) like the greatest hero ever written.
He wasn't. I didn't even like him. The book is a mix of quick, fast action followed by lots and lots and lots of Rochefort thinking about things. So... intense - boring - intense - boring - intense. After 150 pages very little had actually happened.
And what does Rochefort think about? Not much of intelligence, although he's quite sexual by nature.
Before I tossed the book at the wall for the third and final time (I had a case of insomnia and kept tossing it and picking it for lack of anything else to do at 2 AM), Rochefort had done absolutely nothing to impress me. While we are told at how clever he is, etc. He fails at almost everything and his archenemy keeps beating him. (and I'm sorry, but I found the twist about the archenemy silly - Rochefort would know. Trust me, he would know.)
Okay... I've given this book way more words that it deserves. It could have been fabulous (For lovers of Dumas and Dunnett!); it wasn't.
September 4, 2012
Very rarely do I completely pan any book. Author, Mary Gentle left me no choice, however, in this particular case. I didn't feel it was bad enough to get a 1 star rating, however, I am someone who has also spent a considerable amount of time researching the historical figures behind the famous Dumas characters. One of my favourites, is the underutilized Comte de Rochefort.
"The Mémoires de Monsieur le Comte de Rochefort", which the author in her foreword acknowleged, was written by Gatien Courtilz de Sandras in the seventeenth century and this book, along with a similar "fictionalized" memoirs of M. D'Aartagnan. These served as the major sources of inspiration for Alexandre Dumas' many masterpieces, including "The Three Musketeers". What many fail to realise is that de Sandras penned these books having actually known the real men behind the stories while he had served in the French military. Cortilz knew these men. Dumas was merely borrowing from history, as he often had a tendency to do. The entire plot device regarding Athos' wife, Charlotte and the brand of the Fleur-de-lis was borrowed wholesale from de Sandras' account of Rochefort's stepmother, for example.
I own copies of M. Le Comte de Rochefort's memoirs in the archaic seventeenth century French (1678) and in its early eighteenth century English translation (1704) and so I am working from the very same source materials that Mary Gentle herself has access to and supposedly used when writing this book. I agree with the author in the foreword that Cortilz was not a writer of fiction but biographer of a sort and the seventeenth century norm would have possibly allowed for the format of an alleged "diary". When I picked up this book, naturally I though that someone who was herself a scholar of 17th Century France, and who also had a devotion to the idea that he was a real person would at least try to be true to the historical man's memory. I was sorely disappointed.
Mary Gentle's rendition of Monsieur le Comte de Rochefort, or Valentin, turns a very misunderstood, but no less fascinating character into some sort of fangirl slash fiction masochist and is completely wrong for both fans of Dumas and anyone who cares to do even the bare minimum of historical research. In short, she butchered the man beyond all recognition and it was hard not to just cry how terribly wrong that she got him.
I don't understand what Mary Gentle was thinking about taking the a trusted member of Cardinal Richelieu's circle and having him lust after an adolescent girl disguised as boy and later bumping into a Samaurai warrior where they go on the adventure to save James I. The plot devices are historically unlikely, culturally absurd so the expecting a reader to suspend disbelief is asking just too much. There was so much going on that she could have used but she didn't. I do not recommend this book and am hoping that someone else will see fit to write a better novel about Rochefort that stays in line with who he was. "Sundial in a Grave" does not do that in the slightest.
For any who are interested in the history, I would recommend trying to read the Rochefort memoirs, but the versions available online are very difficult, if not near impossible to read. Another very good book that is probably available through Amazon is "The Four Musketeers: The True Story of D'artagnan, Porthos, Amramis & Athos" by Kari Maund & Phil Nanoson, 1988 Tempus Publishing, Ltd. Not only are the Musketeers discussed, but also Rochefort and the other cast of characters and places as well.
"The Mémoires de Monsieur le Comte de Rochefort", which the author in her foreword acknowleged, was written by Gatien Courtilz de Sandras in the seventeenth century and this book, along with a similar "fictionalized" memoirs of M. D'Aartagnan. These served as the major sources of inspiration for Alexandre Dumas' many masterpieces, including "The Three Musketeers". What many fail to realise is that de Sandras penned these books having actually known the real men behind the stories while he had served in the French military. Cortilz knew these men. Dumas was merely borrowing from history, as he often had a tendency to do. The entire plot device regarding Athos' wife, Charlotte and the brand of the Fleur-de-lis was borrowed wholesale from de Sandras' account of Rochefort's stepmother, for example.
I own copies of M. Le Comte de Rochefort's memoirs in the archaic seventeenth century French (1678) and in its early eighteenth century English translation (1704) and so I am working from the very same source materials that Mary Gentle herself has access to and supposedly used when writing this book. I agree with the author in the foreword that Cortilz was not a writer of fiction but biographer of a sort and the seventeenth century norm would have possibly allowed for the format of an alleged "diary". When I picked up this book, naturally I though that someone who was herself a scholar of 17th Century France, and who also had a devotion to the idea that he was a real person would at least try to be true to the historical man's memory. I was sorely disappointed.
Mary Gentle's rendition of Monsieur le Comte de Rochefort, or Valentin, turns a very misunderstood, but no less fascinating character into some sort of fangirl slash fiction masochist and is completely wrong for both fans of Dumas and anyone who cares to do even the bare minimum of historical research. In short, she butchered the man beyond all recognition and it was hard not to just cry how terribly wrong that she got him.
I don't understand what Mary Gentle was thinking about taking the a trusted member of Cardinal Richelieu's circle and having him lust after an adolescent girl disguised as boy and later bumping into a Samaurai warrior where they go on the adventure to save James I. The plot devices are historically unlikely, culturally absurd so the expecting a reader to suspend disbelief is asking just too much. There was so much going on that she could have used but she didn't. I do not recommend this book and am hoping that someone else will see fit to write a better novel about Rochefort that stays in line with who he was. "Sundial in a Grave" does not do that in the slightest.
For any who are interested in the history, I would recommend trying to read the Rochefort memoirs, but the versions available online are very difficult, if not near impossible to read. Another very good book that is probably available through Amazon is "The Four Musketeers: The True Story of D'artagnan, Porthos, Amramis & Athos" by Kari Maund & Phil Nanoson, 1988 Tempus Publishing, Ltd. Not only are the Musketeers discussed, but also Rochefort and the other cast of characters and places as well.
Read
May 4, 2015Brought to you by Reading Project 2015.
Sex and swashbuckling in about seven hundred pages.
Cross-dressing dominant swordswoman meets submissive duellist spy.
I rest my case.
(This is, however, fantasy so expect one entirely unnecessary rape of the central female character because is that inevitably is what happens to female characters in fantasy novels).
Sex and swashbuckling in about seven hundred pages.
Cross-dressing dominant swordswoman meets submissive duellist spy.
I rest my case.
(This is, however, fantasy so expect one entirely unnecessary rape of the central female character because is that inevitably is what happens to female characters in fantasy novels).
September 4, 2022
1610 is an important year that will change the future - one way or another. Valentin Rochefort, professional duellist, spy and demoted aristocrat, gets caught in a conspiracy to assassinate the King of France. While fleeing to England manages to acquire an arrogant, charming, tag-along teenage duellist, and a shipwrecked "demon". Swashbuckling adventure, more conspiracies and planned assassinations, as well as kinky stuff, ensure. So do cruelty, revenge and forgiveness. I doubt the historical accuracy of the novel, but since I haven't been steeped in English or French history, it didn't affect my enjoyment of the story. In any case, this is an "alternate history" where characters are trying to change the present to affect the distant future. This is an interesting book, and an enjoyable story, with characters you would love to skewer in a duel and others that you would love to skewer people for.
July 19, 2009
The cover of this book promised a historical novel in the vein of "The Three Musketeers" or the two epic sagas of the under appreciated Dorothy Dunnett. However this is not a historical novel -- it is actually a work of "alternative history" mixed with fantasy.
Nothing wrong with that, I guess, if you are the type of reader who can accept preposterous plot devices. To enjoy this book allegedly set in the England of James I, you have to believe that two characters have the ability, through some kind of astrology and mathematics, to foresee the future in minute detail. They can predict where a specific person will be on a specific day at a specific hour -- and also what will happen 20, 50, and 500 years into the future.
Next we have to accept that two French duelists will link up with a Japanese samurai (don't ask how) to save the throne of James I from a plot hatched by his oldest son. The assassination attempt will be carried out during a masque in a cave in Somerset.
These major problems might be overcome were it not for the biggest problem with this overlong book -- the two main characters. (PLOT SPOILER AHEAD). We have to believe a 15-year-old girl can pass as a boy (possible) and then win duels against an experienced 40-year-old man who is the foremost swordsman of his age. We discover that this hero, Valentin Rochefort, is a masochist who gets off on being humiliated in public and beaten in private. His opponent, Mme Dariolet, is a sadist who likes to satisfy those urges. Obviously they are made for each other, although it takes them 672 long, wearying pages to get there.
My copy of "The Three Musketeers" is less than half as long including a scholarly introduction - yet with what economy and taut writing does Dumas tell his story.
The cover of this book includes a blurb saying that Gentle's "command of the sensuous and martial detail of the Renaissance ... completes an immersion in a past epoch ... but it is the novel's erotic element that constitutes its greatest achievement."
I found the "erotic element" yucky and the historical detail fake.
Nothing wrong with that, I guess, if you are the type of reader who can accept preposterous plot devices. To enjoy this book allegedly set in the England of James I, you have to believe that two characters have the ability, through some kind of astrology and mathematics, to foresee the future in minute detail. They can predict where a specific person will be on a specific day at a specific hour -- and also what will happen 20, 50, and 500 years into the future.
Next we have to accept that two French duelists will link up with a Japanese samurai (don't ask how) to save the throne of James I from a plot hatched by his oldest son. The assassination attempt will be carried out during a masque in a cave in Somerset.
These major problems might be overcome were it not for the biggest problem with this overlong book -- the two main characters. (PLOT SPOILER AHEAD). We have to believe a 15-year-old girl can pass as a boy (possible) and then win duels against an experienced 40-year-old man who is the foremost swordsman of his age. We discover that this hero, Valentin Rochefort, is a masochist who gets off on being humiliated in public and beaten in private. His opponent, Mme Dariolet, is a sadist who likes to satisfy those urges. Obviously they are made for each other, although it takes them 672 long, wearying pages to get there.
My copy of "The Three Musketeers" is less than half as long including a scholarly introduction - yet with what economy and taut writing does Dumas tell his story.
The cover of this book includes a blurb saying that Gentle's "command of the sensuous and martial detail of the Renaissance ... completes an immersion in a past epoch ... but it is the novel's erotic element that constitutes its greatest achievement."
I found the "erotic element" yucky and the historical detail fake.
March 13, 2016
December 19, 2014
I can't figure out what's going on with 1610. I thought it was going to pull it all together, but now maybe I don't think that? Regardless, it is already much longer than it needs to be: it is definitely the sort of book you can skim. It's interesting to contrast this with Patricia Finney's Becket and Ames novels (Firedrake's Eye etc), because you do really have to read every sentence in those books if you want to get out all that there is to get out of them (there is lots!), although you could probably pick up the plot if you didn't read very carefully. And Gentle and Finney use some of the same techniques (they're writing about a similar time period, after all). But generally, I think this is a lot broader in its strokes; it should also be funnier given the absurd plot and characters, but so far there are maybe like three funny moments . . . It's odd, because I think the book knows how ridiculous the stuff that happens is, but it's not very humorous.
I'm shelving this under "noirish" because of how much the main characters get beat up.
December 20, 2014
Yeah, so I wrote that while I was about 3/4 through the book, and then I finished it and it's had some time to sit with me (not a lot of time, but still) and I think I'm grouping this under "interesting failure."
There'a a blurb on the cover from Locus that says 1610 is all right as an adventure story in the Dumas tradition, but what's really notable is its erotic aspect. And that seems to be accurate to me. There's actually a pretty interesting and weird love story here, but it's swamped by the plot. They rather fight each other, so even though there are some interesting resonances between the two strands, they never come to be a coherent whole. And that's too bad.
I also kept thinking of that time on Project Runway when Tim Gunn told some contestant, "Just make sure it's exuberant" and I really think that 1610 could have used the same note. But the pacing is inconsistent, there is a trip to Japan . . . Actually, I appreciate the kitchen sink aesthetic here, in theory more than in practice; there are prophecies and mathematical ex-nuns, secret marriages, caves, plays, and sword fights, and more than one character in drag. Robert Cecil has a biggish role; Richelieu has, let's be honest, rather too small a role (a waste! this book needed a suave mastermind). For all this, it just wasn't that fun, and it was too repetitive to be consistently compelling. The first two hundred and fifty pages are particularly slow. I think I would have been crazy about 1610 if it were just . . . slightly . . . different.
I can't figure out what's going on with 1610. I thought it was going to pull it all together, but now maybe I don't think that? Regardless, it is already much longer than it needs to be: it is definitely the sort of book you can skim. It's interesting to contrast this with Patricia Finney's Becket and Ames novels (Firedrake's Eye etc), because you do really have to read every sentence in those books if you want to get out all that there is to get out of them (there is lots!), although you could probably pick up the plot if you didn't read very carefully. And Gentle and Finney use some of the same techniques (they're writing about a similar time period, after all). But generally, I think this is a lot broader in its strokes; it should also be funnier given the absurd plot and characters, but so far there are maybe like three funny moments . . . It's odd, because I think the book knows how ridiculous the stuff that happens is, but it's not very humorous.
I'm shelving this under "noirish" because of how much the main characters get beat up.
December 20, 2014
Yeah, so I wrote that while I was about 3/4 through the book, and then I finished it and it's had some time to sit with me (not a lot of time, but still) and I think I'm grouping this under "interesting failure."
There'a a blurb on the cover from Locus that says 1610 is all right as an adventure story in the Dumas tradition, but what's really notable is its erotic aspect. And that seems to be accurate to me. There's actually a pretty interesting and weird love story here, but it's swamped by the plot. They rather fight each other, so even though there are some interesting resonances between the two strands, they never come to be a coherent whole. And that's too bad.
I also kept thinking of that time on Project Runway when Tim Gunn told some contestant, "Just make sure it's exuberant" and I really think that 1610 could have used the same note. But the pacing is inconsistent, there is a trip to Japan . . . Actually, I appreciate the kitchen sink aesthetic here, in theory more than in practice; there are prophecies and mathematical ex-nuns, secret marriages, caves, plays, and sword fights, and more than one character in drag. Robert Cecil has a biggish role; Richelieu has, let's be honest, rather too small a role (a waste! this book needed a suave mastermind). For all this, it just wasn't that fun, and it was too repetitive to be consistently compelling. The first two hundred and fifty pages are particularly slow. I think I would have been crazy about 1610 if it were just . . . slightly . . . different.
March 5, 2018
This is a difficult book to review. It is an alternative history in which, among other things, a coup is staged against James I/VI by a Doctor Robert Fludd, an astrologer who can predict the future using a complex mathematical theory. The said Doctor has calculated that a comet is due to destroy Earth in the 22nd century, but if he can pull off the assassination of James I/VI, a society will arise capable of producing technology to avert the comet. Hmm.... didn't find that at all believable.
The story is told from the viewpoint of a character who apparently did exist though was undoubtedly nothing like the way he is portrayed here. Valentin de Rochefort as I'll call him for short (his actual name is much longer) is a duellist, spy and sometime assassin working for the Duc de Sully, a chief minister of King Henri of France. Rochefort is blackmailed into helping to assassinate the king, as the party concerned has arranged to kill his master if he doesn't comply. He tries to bungle it, but the attempt succeeds in spite of him, and he has to flee France, forced to accept the company of a young duellist, Dariole, who has a thing about humiliating Rochefort which soon turns sexual. On the coast they rescue a shipwrecked Japanese military man who was part of an ambassador's entourage to James I/VI. He is the sole survivor and feels duty-bound to continue the mission. So all three go to England and try to arrange to see King James. Before long, Fludd forces them into trying to bring about his design and some very unlikely happenings occur involving actors, cross dressing, a masque staged in a cave, a nun who turns out to be a colleague of Fludd's, and other peculiar people and events.
I note the synopsis on Goodreads for this particular edition has two major spoilers: annoyingly, I couldn't help seeing them when adding the book to my shelf. Funnily enough, the second one, concerning Rochefort's sister, isn't true at all. Anyway, the first is a true spoiler but is revealed after about 100 pages so it wasn't a major issue when reading the rest of this long book. What was a major issue, however, was the character of Dariole who I found a right royal pain. I didn't appreciate the whole sado-masochistic nature of her relationship with Rochefort. Although it eventually is supposed to be a 'game' for them, at one point she savagely beats him. In fact, there is a lot of violence in this book, graphically described, but that's partly due to the subject matter - sword fights etc. It is well written but the main premise lacks conviction for me and I didn't like Dariole so I can only rate it 2 stars.
The story is told from the viewpoint of a character who apparently did exist though was undoubtedly nothing like the way he is portrayed here. Valentin de Rochefort as I'll call him for short (his actual name is much longer) is a duellist, spy and sometime assassin working for the Duc de Sully, a chief minister of King Henri of France. Rochefort is blackmailed into helping to assassinate the king, as the party concerned has arranged to kill his master if he doesn't comply. He tries to bungle it, but the attempt succeeds in spite of him, and he has to flee France, forced to accept the company of a young duellist, Dariole, who has a thing about humiliating Rochefort which soon turns sexual. On the coast they rescue a shipwrecked Japanese military man who was part of an ambassador's entourage to James I/VI. He is the sole survivor and feels duty-bound to continue the mission. So all three go to England and try to arrange to see King James. Before long, Fludd forces them into trying to bring about his design and some very unlikely happenings occur involving actors, cross dressing, a masque staged in a cave, a nun who turns out to be a colleague of Fludd's, and other peculiar people and events.
I note the synopsis on Goodreads for this particular edition has two major spoilers: annoyingly, I couldn't help seeing them when adding the book to my shelf. Funnily enough, the second one, concerning Rochefort's sister, isn't true at all. Anyway, the first is a true spoiler but is revealed after about 100 pages so it wasn't a major issue when reading the rest of this long book. What was a major issue, however, was the character of Dariole who I found a right royal pain. I didn't appreciate the whole sado-masochistic nature of her relationship with Rochefort. Although it eventually is supposed to be a 'game' for them, at one point she savagely beats him. In fact, there is a lot of violence in this book, graphically described, but that's partly due to the subject matter - sword fights etc. It is well written but the main premise lacks conviction for me and I didn't like Dariole so I can only rate it 2 stars.
November 21, 2021
It's odd that one of the the blurbs for this, not the one on this actual edition, contains two big plot points which are not present in the text. I am left wondering of there were significant revisions at some point, or no one familiar with the text ever bothered to read the blurb, or there is some kind of time travel/magic/multiverse shenanigans. Along the same vein, I have been wanting to read this for years because I thought it was about Christopher Marlowe, which it is not, at all.
Nor did I realize it was a swashbuckling extravaganza, and fun with that. In retrospect, I wonder if Neal Stephenson considered it an influence on The Baroque Cycle.
I'm glad it's been reissued: it deserves more readers
Nor did I realize it was a swashbuckling extravaganza, and fun with that. In retrospect, I wonder if Neal Stephenson considered it an influence on The Baroque Cycle.
I'm glad it's been reissued: it deserves more readers
August 3, 2011
While it does tend to get "out there", what with the predicting the future and everything-- Oh, and the samurai! How could I forget the samurai. Can't have a book about 17th century France/England without a samurai in it, now can we. What was I saying? Got distracted by the samurai. Anyway, in spite of all that, the story had a steady pace and action, enough to keep me reading, and made me care enough about the two main characters to worry about what would happen to them in the end.
December 31, 2020
A wonderful rip-roaring historical fantasy set in France, England and Japan. I thought this was a marvellous novel and far more light-hearted than Mary Gentle's usual fare. The relationship between Dariole and Rochefort is funny and poignant and particularly wonderfully written at the beginning (I won't give away the early twist!)
Did not finish
May 9, 2012Ah, no. Nope. No more, thanks.
Maybe this will sound prudish, but I prefer my duels with no fondling. And if there MUST be fondling, couldn't it at least be consensual?
Maybe this will sound prudish, but I prefer my duels with no fondling. And if there MUST be fondling, couldn't it at least be consensual?
April 9, 2017
Even though I did not like a lot of things about this book I am glad I persisted and read it all. I found the first 300 pages particularly difficult to keep reading and even once I realised I could get into aspects of the story, some parts were too drawn out. 600 is a lot of pages!!!
The story is a historical (possibly alternative history) look at some assassinations of kings (successful and otherwise) and on the surface level is a swashbuckling adventure. Then it also has a lot of introspective meandering, a love-story that moves very slowly and both sides of it are frustratingly stupid. There are duels, escapes, disguises, voyages- all you would want in a swashbuckling adventure but also for me far too many torture and punishment scenes as well as a rape that may have been crucial to the plot (although I question this in any case) but was shown in far too much detail. Cliche and horrible!
The sexuality in the book could be described as "kink" but even then as I try to like the fact that a rarely seen sexuality is portrayed, I think it is extremely problematical that it starts in non-consent. Both "lovers" try to humiliate each other or enjoy the humiliation of each other, which turns into a harmless sex-game for them eventually and we are meant to forget the real danger and violence it began with. The book is very forgiving of violence, even the killing of friends "these things happen" but very unforgiving of disobedience/disloyalty to a "superior". I tried to integrate that as simply a historical view, but I couldn't help seeing it as a hyper-masculine aspect of the book that somehow passes unexamined in a book that gives us so much good deconstruction of femininity, and also at least opens masculinity up to whatever woman is bold enough to grab some for herself. I guess the "individuality" of the women who managed to overcome their femininity was sort of in a liberal feminist framework, although there was some tacit acknowlegement of patriarchy this was portrayed as men simply being too dumb to realise what women experience (partly true no doubt but portrayed as humorous rather than sinister). Gender bending in the book was wonderful, except in so far as at times it seemed played for laughs (still even then there were some good observations). Why on earth having spent almost 600 pages finding the available female role/s too constrictive does Arcadie raise her daughter only to be a wife and mother??
The queerness and gender-fluidity of the main love story was the best feature of the narrative (the occasional criticisms by the Japanese character of white European culture also a great feature). It was unfortunate though that Arcadie's summing up of the "romance" looking backward finished off what I had felt was a tendency in the text to take all this kink and gender fluidity and turn it monogamous heterosexual after all- very slightly on the boundaries but....I would have preferred the characters to retain some polyamorous tendencies at the very least. The misogyny inherent in some types of male homoerotic behaviour was portrayed effectively. Female characters tended to be somewhat tragic but were portrayed well.
Some historical details were quite nice (such as the description of the colour of Rochefort's shirt as "goose-turd") and yet the characters in the main talked in a very modern (therefore anachronistic) way.
The violence in the book is not only unrelenting and portrayed somewhat positively or casually at times but overly graphic. If I had a dollar every time someone's brains, guts or blood splattered everywhere I would at least be able to buy a nice bottle of wine. I found that excessive if historically accurate. It took me over 300 pages to build any sort of relationship with the two main characters, they were extremely unlikeable to begin with and I think the change in them (Dariole in particular) was not fully believable. It's a romance, I could cope with larger than life happenings and doings if the characters pulled me in a bit earlier and if it wasn't for all the violence and rape scenes.
I am still of the opinion that a book this long is almost always too long.
The story is a historical (possibly alternative history) look at some assassinations of kings (successful and otherwise) and on the surface level is a swashbuckling adventure. Then it also has a lot of introspective meandering, a love-story that moves very slowly and both sides of it are frustratingly stupid. There are duels, escapes, disguises, voyages- all you would want in a swashbuckling adventure but also for me far too many torture and punishment scenes as well as a rape that may have been crucial to the plot (although I question this in any case) but was shown in far too much detail. Cliche and horrible!
The sexuality in the book could be described as "kink" but even then as I try to like the fact that a rarely seen sexuality is portrayed, I think it is extremely problematical that it starts in non-consent. Both "lovers" try to humiliate each other or enjoy the humiliation of each other, which turns into a harmless sex-game for them eventually and we are meant to forget the real danger and violence it began with. The book is very forgiving of violence, even the killing of friends "these things happen" but very unforgiving of disobedience/disloyalty to a "superior". I tried to integrate that as simply a historical view, but I couldn't help seeing it as a hyper-masculine aspect of the book that somehow passes unexamined in a book that gives us so much good deconstruction of femininity, and also at least opens masculinity up to whatever woman is bold enough to grab some for herself. I guess the "individuality" of the women who managed to overcome their femininity was sort of in a liberal feminist framework, although there was some tacit acknowlegement of patriarchy this was portrayed as men simply being too dumb to realise what women experience (partly true no doubt but portrayed as humorous rather than sinister). Gender bending in the book was wonderful, except in so far as at times it seemed played for laughs (still even then there were some good observations). Why on earth having spent almost 600 pages finding the available female role/s too constrictive does Arcadie raise her daughter only to be a wife and mother??
The queerness and gender-fluidity of the main love story was the best feature of the narrative (the occasional criticisms by the Japanese character of white European culture also a great feature). It was unfortunate though that Arcadie's summing up of the "romance" looking backward finished off what I had felt was a tendency in the text to take all this kink and gender fluidity and turn it monogamous heterosexual after all- very slightly on the boundaries but....I would have preferred the characters to retain some polyamorous tendencies at the very least. The misogyny inherent in some types of male homoerotic behaviour was portrayed effectively. Female characters tended to be somewhat tragic but were portrayed well.
Some historical details were quite nice (such as the description of the colour of Rochefort's shirt as "goose-turd") and yet the characters in the main talked in a very modern (therefore anachronistic) way.
The violence in the book is not only unrelenting and portrayed somewhat positively or casually at times but overly graphic. If I had a dollar every time someone's brains, guts or blood splattered everywhere I would at least be able to buy a nice bottle of wine. I found that excessive if historically accurate. It took me over 300 pages to build any sort of relationship with the two main characters, they were extremely unlikeable to begin with and I think the change in them (Dariole in particular) was not fully believable. It's a romance, I could cope with larger than life happenings and doings if the characters pulled me in a bit earlier and if it wasn't for all the violence and rape scenes.
I am still of the opinion that a book this long is almost always too long.
June 19, 2020
Absolutely brilliant book, funny and touching and entertaining.
April 12, 2009
1610: A SUNDIAL IN A GRAVE is a book I knew nothing about when I sat down to read it. To be fair, I didn't enjoy it at first. There are scenes of explicit sex which don't really fit within the historical-adventure template and I almost gave up. But I perservered, and after a few more plot twists, I actually started enjoying it. This was around the 'beach' set piece, where the author hits her stride. Apparently this was the scene around which the rest of the novel was based and it shows.
From then on in, things get REALLY interesting. There are all the usual court machinations, assassination attempts, bonding and swordplay we expect from our historical novels, but there's also a slight sci-fi element as certain characters are able to predict the future thanks to some mathematical equations. I LOVED the way the author handled what it would be like to have your every movement worked out in advance.
The book has a globetrotting feel to it, taking in the highs and lows of Europe as well as the Japans. Gentle is big on description, so much so that you get an overall feel of the places and characters. Characterisation isn't skimped upon, and much of the book's success lies in the surprisingly touching relationship between the two protagonists. My favourite character, though, is Tanaka Saburo, a Japanese samurai far from home. He's riveting.
Gentle is a real-life mistress of the sword so her action scenes ring true. However, I wish there had been more of them, as they're few and far between. It's also true that the plot is sometimes over-elaborate and there's some padding in places; this book could have probably lost a hundred pages or so to no great loss.
It's nevertheless a great read, and one I frequently couldn't put down.
From then on in, things get REALLY interesting. There are all the usual court machinations, assassination attempts, bonding and swordplay we expect from our historical novels, but there's also a slight sci-fi element as certain characters are able to predict the future thanks to some mathematical equations. I LOVED the way the author handled what it would be like to have your every movement worked out in advance.
The book has a globetrotting feel to it, taking in the highs and lows of Europe as well as the Japans. Gentle is big on description, so much so that you get an overall feel of the places and characters. Characterisation isn't skimped upon, and much of the book's success lies in the surprisingly touching relationship between the two protagonists. My favourite character, though, is Tanaka Saburo, a Japanese samurai far from home. He's riveting.
Gentle is a real-life mistress of the sword so her action scenes ring true. However, I wish there had been more of them, as they're few and far between. It's also true that the plot is sometimes over-elaborate and there's some padding in places; this book could have probably lost a hundred pages or so to no great loss.
It's nevertheless a great read, and one I frequently couldn't put down.
February 16, 2011
I'm having a difficult time rating this book. When it's good, it's breathtakingly good, but it has some issues with pacing and I personally disliked one plot point. I would rate the parts of the book dealing with the relationship between Dariole and Rochefort with 5 stars, but overall the book is more like a 3.5.
March 10, 2009
7/10
Similar to the best of Dumas
Quite entertaining story. Reminded me of Dumas. Just a bit more of humour, less of tragedy, and a little bit more of sex!
All in all, a good, solid book.
Interesting characters, good plot, a couple of surprises here and there and...not for kids.
Similar to the best of Dumas
Quite entertaining story. Reminded me of Dumas. Just a bit more of humour, less of tragedy, and a little bit more of sex!
All in all, a good, solid book.
Interesting characters, good plot, a couple of surprises here and there and...not for kids.
Read
June 30, 2024There are shades here of Stephenson’s Baroque Cycle and of Gentle’s own magnum opus, Ash, but 1610 is far less tightly plotted than the former and neither as long or as consistently wrong-footing as the latter. There’s actually nothing wrong with either of those things; it’s a little bit of a relief to know that one need not scrutinise every word of its 750 pages for clues. The book starts with our narrator, French spymaster Rochefort, being blackmailed by Queen Marie de Medici into arranging the assassination of Henri IV of France. He makes arrangements which he’s sure will fail, but by horrible chance they succeed, and soon he’s on the run with infuriatingly insouciant young duellist Dariole, heading to England. There, they encounter Robert Fludd, a (real-life) mathematician and occultist who in this world has mastered the calculation of probabilities. Fludd’s work tells him that, in half a millennium, the world will come to a disastrous end—unless, in 1610, King James I and VI of England and Scotland is assassinated, and his son Prince Henry placed upon the throne. We are therefore in a speculative realm, which I love, and which Gentle blends most effectively with historical truth. Rochefort and Dariole also cross paths with Saburo Tanaka, a shipwrecked samurai on an ambassadorial mission to James; Suor Caterina, an Italian nun hiding out in Cornwall (whence the strong flavour of Stephensonian unlikely-but-possible character interactions); Aemilia Lanier, a poet and playwright who actually lived and is here part of Fludd’s faction; and many others.
I am not sure how well the writing of Saburo holds up; I could find nothing overtly offensive about it, but he is often described as hard for Europeans to interpret and his arc involves some double-crossing. More troubling and fascinating is the way Gentle deals with rape, which walks a fine line between seventeenth-century attitudes (that a woman so violated is unmarriageable, “spoiled goods”, likely to kill herself afterwards, and so on) and early twenty-first-century ones (that healing is possible but will take a long time; that vengeance is often desired but rarely desirable). On the whole, I think, she manages to make clear the full devastation of rape without allowing it to destroy the character’s life, which feels right—but then it is not clear that she takes the rape of men or male-presenting people as seriously as she does the rape of women, given a scene near the beginning where Rochefort attempts to sexually humiliate Dariole in this way only to find that Dariole’s enthusiastic response renders it impossible. Also fascinating, and rather heartening, is her focus on submission kink, which provides a long-running—almost fanfic-esque—tension between Rochefort and Dariole. Near the end, it is suggested that kink might permit a means of rehabilitating the powerlessness of a person who has been raped, which has been borne out in contemporary studies of the kink community and its efficacy around sexual trauma and trust. I always have a soft spot for novels set in the past which show characters discovering their own sexualities in a manner both true to their personalities and congruent with that society’s vocabulary for and understanding of sex.
This is also book 8 of my 20 Books of Summer.
I am not sure how well the writing of Saburo holds up; I could find nothing overtly offensive about it, but he is often described as hard for Europeans to interpret and his arc involves some double-crossing. More troubling and fascinating is the way Gentle deals with rape, which walks a fine line between seventeenth-century attitudes (that a woman so violated is unmarriageable, “spoiled goods”, likely to kill herself afterwards, and so on) and early twenty-first-century ones (that healing is possible but will take a long time; that vengeance is often desired but rarely desirable). On the whole, I think, she manages to make clear the full devastation of rape without allowing it to destroy the character’s life, which feels right—but then it is not clear that she takes the rape of men or male-presenting people as seriously as she does the rape of women, given a scene near the beginning where Rochefort attempts to sexually humiliate Dariole in this way only to find that Dariole’s enthusiastic response renders it impossible. Also fascinating, and rather heartening, is her focus on submission kink, which provides a long-running—almost fanfic-esque—tension between Rochefort and Dariole. Near the end, it is suggested that kink might permit a means of rehabilitating the powerlessness of a person who has been raped, which has been borne out in contemporary studies of the kink community and its efficacy around sexual trauma and trust. I always have a soft spot for novels set in the past which show characters discovering their own sexualities in a manner both true to their personalities and congruent with that society’s vocabulary for and understanding of sex.
This is also book 8 of my 20 Books of Summer.
January 18, 2020
This is a Did Not Finish review. I finally threw in the towel on page 209 of the trade paperback, tired of the repeated sexual humiliation, and of the author's apparent unawareness that male human beings often get erections in combat. The latter was a minor issue, the former was what broke me.
The cover calls it "A novel of intrigue, secret societies, and the race to save history." That is the metafiction, but it isn't what is on most of the 209 pages I got through.
I loved the beginning of the novel, which hinted at a group of time travelers and time influencers, desperate to make sure that Charles I is never enthroned in England, lest he be beheaded. It seems that great danger ensued from that event, which doomed mankind somehow. I loved the idea of alchemical societies being helped from the future, and of practicing swordfights you knew would happen, on the blow-by-blow level. I enjoyed the swashbuckling Dumasesque setting, even the stretching of it to include a samurai. Yes, those first few pages were brilliant, and I looked forward to a solid 6-star ride.
Alas. Most of the first 209 pages follow a person who allegedly is the best swordsman in Paris, and therefore all of France. The folks around him confirm this status, and it is reinforced when the Queen recruits him to kill the King. (Minor spoiler, but who cares?) But on the page he actually loses almost every encounter he is in. He is ambushed and kidnapped repeatedly, including numerous head injuries. (And yes, this is a book where people recover too easily from their wounds.) So this best swordsman of all is like 1 for 15 in actual fact. And he's conscious of possibly facing failure to one particular rising star, but seems oblivious to what's actually going on. This makes him an unreliable narrator (it's a memoir), but not in an interesting way.
And the main theme is sexual humiliation.
Sexual humiliation happens a lot in the real world, and it is certainly reasonable to have it be central to a work of fiction. This book seems inclined to S-M (the other thing that seems to be going on in the scene that finally killed my patience), and it's reasonable to give folks with that interest and motivation some books to read. I, for better or worse, am not the audience for either part of that. When the story kept returning to long, involved descriptions of sexual humiliation, and I realized that there were nearly 500 more pages of that coming my way, I gave up.
Not interested. Not a book for me. Really wish the frame story had been the real story.
The cover calls it "A novel of intrigue, secret societies, and the race to save history." That is the metafiction, but it isn't what is on most of the 209 pages I got through.
I loved the beginning of the novel, which hinted at a group of time travelers and time influencers, desperate to make sure that Charles I is never enthroned in England, lest he be beheaded. It seems that great danger ensued from that event, which doomed mankind somehow. I loved the idea of alchemical societies being helped from the future, and of practicing swordfights you knew would happen, on the blow-by-blow level. I enjoyed the swashbuckling Dumasesque setting, even the stretching of it to include a samurai. Yes, those first few pages were brilliant, and I looked forward to a solid 6-star ride.
Alas. Most of the first 209 pages follow a person who allegedly is the best swordsman in Paris, and therefore all of France. The folks around him confirm this status, and it is reinforced when the Queen recruits him to kill the King. (Minor spoiler, but who cares?) But on the page he actually loses almost every encounter he is in. He is ambushed and kidnapped repeatedly, including numerous head injuries. (And yes, this is a book where people recover too easily from their wounds.) So this best swordsman of all is like 1 for 15 in actual fact. And he's conscious of possibly facing failure to one particular rising star, but seems oblivious to what's actually going on. This makes him an unreliable narrator (it's a memoir), but not in an interesting way.
And the main theme is sexual humiliation.
Sexual humiliation happens a lot in the real world, and it is certainly reasonable to have it be central to a work of fiction. This book seems inclined to S-M (the other thing that seems to be going on in the scene that finally killed my patience), and it's reasonable to give folks with that interest and motivation some books to read. I, for better or worse, am not the audience for either part of that. When the story kept returning to long, involved descriptions of sexual humiliation, and I realized that there were nearly 500 more pages of that coming my way, I gave up.
Not interested. Not a book for me. Really wish the frame story had been the real story.
March 17, 2019
A very Mary Gentle book rooted in real history with added fantastical elemnts that are not out of place. Valentin Rochefort, dissgraced and disinherited eldest son of a Marshal of France, is plying his trade as a duellist and an 'enforcer' for the Duc de Sully. Forced by the newly crowned Queen, Marie de Medici, into arranging the assassination of King Henri IV, Rochefort is appalled when his selected inept assassin succeeds - and flees Paris and then France. Accompanied (plagued?) by young M. Dariolet and a shipwrecked Japanese diplomat he reaches London and becomes embroiled in yet another regicidal plot...
Long, certainly, and quite dense - I feel that the book fleshes out the life of this (I think - there seems some confusion over this, partly begun by Dumas himself) real-life character who was the model for several parts of his Musketeers books. I have to disagree with thse critics/reviewers who rather seem to have missed the point that this is a work of fiction... (Think 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead' with real characters from history being the equivalent of the court in Hamlet interacting with the subject of the book.
I enjoyed it very much - there is some of the White Crow in here (the Valentin gives that away, plus the Hermetic magic influences) but the book is no way connected to those stories. Wonderful, glorious stuff!
Long, certainly, and quite dense - I feel that the book fleshes out the life of this (I think - there seems some confusion over this, partly begun by Dumas himself) real-life character who was the model for several parts of his Musketeers books. I have to disagree with thse critics/reviewers who rather seem to have missed the point that this is a work of fiction... (Think 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead' with real characters from history being the equivalent of the court in Hamlet interacting with the subject of the book.
I enjoyed it very much - there is some of the White Crow in here (the Valentin gives that away, plus the Hermetic magic influences) but the book is no way connected to those stories. Wonderful, glorious stuff!
December 17, 2018
In (of course) 1610 duellist and agent Valentin Rochefort accidently gets the King of France assassinated. Fleeing the country in the company of his rival, who he cannot bear but to be humiliated by, they pick up a shipwrecked samurai and head for London. There they are intercepted by Robert Fludd, a philosopher and student of Giordano Bruno, who has perfected a form of mathematics than enables him to predict the future. In order to save the world Fludd requires Rochefort to kill James I, King of England (and Scotland).
Things get weird and complicated from there. Also a bit kinky.
The story weaves in and out of history, posing various strange questions – how do you find someone who can predict what you will do today? Sadly the answers are not so interesting. Instead the characters stagger from various locations to others, wearing strange clothes, doing odd things, getting in fights, making their relationships needlessly complicated, and then needfully so.
But it's still a cool book.
Read This: For a clever, strange and thought-provoking historical science fiction novel
Don’t Read This: If 17th century occultism is of no interest, or you want clear and straightforward characters or plots.
Things get weird and complicated from there. Also a bit kinky.
The story weaves in and out of history, posing various strange questions – how do you find someone who can predict what you will do today? Sadly the answers are not so interesting. Instead the characters stagger from various locations to others, wearing strange clothes, doing odd things, getting in fights, making their relationships needlessly complicated, and then needfully so.
But it's still a cool book.
Read This: For a clever, strange and thought-provoking historical science fiction novel
Don’t Read This: If 17th century occultism is of no interest, or you want clear and straightforward characters or plots.
December 5, 2023
This is quite a blend of historical fiction with touches of fantasy and eroticism with some scenes that may shock some readers; a love story with duels and plenty of political intrigue and conspiracies. You’ll be forgiven for thinking you’re reading a gay romance to begin with, but then the book takes a turn. That’s not to say it’s an easy read. Often I get through 100 pages a day, even when it’s a complex plot, but found I needed to take my time with this. This mostly gripped me, but there was a sense of wondering whether I’d ever finish, although it’s hard to say why. I’ve read books more involved than this, but some scenes felt needlessly long. I can’t help feeling I’m doing the book a disservice by saying some pages flashed by, others were a slow amble, and the tone of the book changed throughout, which also threw me. The author is meticulous, maybe overly so, but I found sticking with this worthwhile. A story that begins in France with the arrangement of an assassination moves on across the world.
June 12, 2018
3.5 stars
I have a mixed relationship with the author Mary Gentle, having now read two of her books: Ilario, long before I started this blog, and Black Opera some years ago. 1610 has been sitting on my shelf for over a year and, in the course of a warm, sunny weekend, I decided to give it a go. A sexual assault in the first few chapters gave me pause, but I pressed on regardless and soon found myself in the midst of a very enjoyable swashbuckler, populated with spies, rogues, kings, mathematicians and cross-dressing swordsmen – and taking in the France of Marie de’ Medici, the England of James I and, unexpectedly, Japan in the years before the Sukoku Edict closed its borders. I should stress that this isn’t a fantasy, but a rollicking historical adventure with a few hints of the mystical: best described, perhaps, as The Three Musketeers with added esoterica...
For the full review, please see my blog:
https://theidlewoman.net/2018/06/12/1...
I have a mixed relationship with the author Mary Gentle, having now read two of her books: Ilario, long before I started this blog, and Black Opera some years ago. 1610 has been sitting on my shelf for over a year and, in the course of a warm, sunny weekend, I decided to give it a go. A sexual assault in the first few chapters gave me pause, but I pressed on regardless and soon found myself in the midst of a very enjoyable swashbuckler, populated with spies, rogues, kings, mathematicians and cross-dressing swordsmen – and taking in the France of Marie de’ Medici, the England of James I and, unexpectedly, Japan in the years before the Sukoku Edict closed its borders. I should stress that this isn’t a fantasy, but a rollicking historical adventure with a few hints of the mystical: best described, perhaps, as The Three Musketeers with added esoterica...
For the full review, please see my blog:
https://theidlewoman.net/2018/06/12/1...
November 19, 2017
A historical novel with a touch of sf. It's the story of monsieur Rochefort, a duellist and a spy. He must leave France for England when he's forced to participate in the assassination of the king Henri. He meets a young swordsman Dariole, who is not what he appears, Saburo Tanaka, envoy of the emperor of far away Nihon, and the strange doctor Robert Fludd, who can predict the future by "precognitive mathematics". They have the means to direct history - but which way is the best for the future? The thick book was written in old-fashioned English with complex sentences, so it was difficult and slow to read. But it was engrossing; I enjoyed the numerous what-if questions like what if Japan didn't close up in 1636. The male sexuality was also interestingly potrayed.
July 9, 2019
3.5 stars
I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, I found the protagonist a bit tedious, the plot required too much humiliation of the central characters for my taste, Saburo was rather wasted as a character, and I'm just not that into esoteric knowledge and secret societies. On the other hand, there was quite a bit of swashbuckling, this is my favourite period of British history (and it's done well, because of course it is), and the kink was a fun surprise.
It doesn't get near the heights of Ash, but I rocketed through it, even so.
I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand, I found the protagonist a bit tedious, the plot required too much humiliation of the central characters for my taste, Saburo was rather wasted as a character, and I'm just not that into esoteric knowledge and secret societies. On the other hand, there was quite a bit of swashbuckling, this is my favourite period of British history (and it's done well, because of course it is), and the kink was a fun surprise.
It doesn't get near the heights of Ash, but I rocketed through it, even so.
September 29, 2012
Quelle histoire, non mais quelle histoire !
Alors que je commençais à peine ce roman, un camarade twitter m'expliquait que, si Cendres est une tragédie, ce roman est une comédie. Je n'y croyais qu'à moitié. J'aurais dû pourtant ! Parce qu'effectivement, cette histoire est une authentique comedia del'Arte, comme on n'en fait (hélas à mon goût) que trop rarement. Mais reprenons du début.
Ce roman raconte une aventure de Rochefort (oui, LE Rochefort des trois mousquetaires, mais bien avant qu'il ne s'oppose à d'Artagnan et à ses amis) qui va l'emmener voyager à travers l'Europe et même plus, accompagné de deux personnages aussi curieux que marquants. Non pas que Rochefort ne soit pas un personnage marquant : ancien noble renié par sa famille, maître espion et donc assassin du duc de Sully, premier ministre d'Henri IV, et personnage au physique impressionant. Et pourtant, dans ce roman, il apparaît comme dépassé par ... presque tout le monde. Que ce soit Dariole (sur lequel je reviendrai) ou Saburo, qu'on ne découvre qu'après cent pages (donc en fait rien, puisque ce roman fait ... 1100 pages :), chacun d'entre un - dans un style différent et pourtant semblable - éclipse sans le moindre problème ce "brave" Rocherfort qui passe son temps à se faire tirer à hue et à dia par tous les autres personnages.
Commençons toutefois par le commencement. Vous connaissez tous l'histoire de l'assassinat d'Henri IV par Ravaillac ? Bon, eh ben en fait, c'était un complot organisé par Rochefort ! Ca surprend, hein ? Ne vous inquiétez pas, vous saurez tout ça dès la vingtième page, je crois. Une fois ce coup d'éclat passé, Rochefort s'en va donc, accompagné de Darriole qu'il récupère dans une écurie, pour Londres. Et que lui demande-t-on à Londres ? Bien sûr, tuer quelqu'un.
Evidement, les choses ne seront pas aussi simples ...
Ecrit comme ça, on pourrait croire qu'il s'agit d'une sinistre histoire d'assassin. Eh bien sachez qu'il n'en est rien.
D'abord, ce roman explore les relations plus que troubles liant Rocherfort et Dariole. Dariole, le jeune duelliste révélant une nature beaucoup plus complexe que la simplicité de celui qui vit à la pointe d'épée. Qui plus est, les relations entre Dariole et Rochefort sont marquées à la fois par la perception qu'à Rochefort de la nature de Dariole (qui le pousse à être protecteur sans réellement en être conscient) et à la perception qu'à au contraire Dariole des sentiments qu'il peut inspirer à Rochefort (et pas seulement ceux de protection, hein). Il sera donc évidement question d'amour dans ce roman, mais le genre d'amour dont on ne parle jamais, parce que c'est une relation qui est considérée comme "mal" par Rochefort pour tout un tas de raisons qu'il me semble difficile d'expliquer sans dévoiler une bonne partie de l'histoire, et une partie qui mérite, plus encore que l'intrigue principale je trouve, d'être découverte. Bon, rassurez-vous, cette relation réserve quelques scènes comiques, surtout parce que Rochefort n'est qu'une marionette entre les doigts agiles de Dariole (la première scène de sexe est vraiment drôle sur le coup, et plus encore après coup).
Alors évidement, face à cette histoire aussi poignante et comique que le mariage de Figaro, la relation entre Rochefort et Saubro s'éclipse un peu, tout en gardant un intérêt pédagogique fort. En effet, Rochefort qui n'a aucun honneur, (re)découvre grâce à Saburo l'intérêt d'une conduite honorable ... même s'il d'une part il ne l'applique pas toujours, et que d'autre part le giri de Saburo le pousse parfois à agir d'une façon qu'on pourrait considérer comme assez peu charitable (notament quand il part avec Fludd).
Fludd .... Fludd, le noeud de l'intrigue principale. Imaginons donc que Giordano Bruno, l'alchimiste maudit de la renaissance, ait découvert des formules mathématiques lui permettant de prévoir, autant que faire se peut, l'avenir. Bruno forme une dizaine de disciples qui se dispersent à travers l'europe (bien obligés par la condamnation de Bruno par le pape) et portent, quand ils le peuvent, leurs calculs dans d'autres directions. Ainsi, Fludd, découvrant qu'une comète pourrait dévaster le monde à peu près vers le XXème siècle, se met en tête de permettre à l'Europe de survivre à cette comète en faisant de l'Angleterre sa marionette. L'idée est peut-être bonne, malheureusement son application démarre par un régicide ... ouaip, pas terrible, hein ?
Et évidement c'est là-dedans que Rocherfort vient semer le chaos, comme d'autres personnages marquants de la littérature. Bon il sème le bazar, évidement, mais finira quand même par comprendre l'intérêt qu'il peut y avoir à prévoir l'avenir .. ce qui donnera lieu à l'apparition des Rose-Croix.
Bon, vous vous imaginez bien que quand on ajoute à tout ça des descriptions incroyablement détaillées de Paris, de Londres, et de tant d'autres choses qu'on ne pourrait imaginer trouver dans un récit aussi court, ça donne un récit particulièrement foisonant, fascinant ... enfin, un truc inimaginable, quoi ! Je ne peux donc évidement que vous conseiller de le lire, c'est vraiment, mais alors vraiment une très bonne lecture.
Alors que je commençais à peine ce roman, un camarade twitter m'expliquait que, si Cendres est une tragédie, ce roman est une comédie. Je n'y croyais qu'à moitié. J'aurais dû pourtant ! Parce qu'effectivement, cette histoire est une authentique comedia del'Arte, comme on n'en fait (hélas à mon goût) que trop rarement. Mais reprenons du début.
Ce roman raconte une aventure de Rochefort (oui, LE Rochefort des trois mousquetaires, mais bien avant qu'il ne s'oppose à d'Artagnan et à ses amis) qui va l'emmener voyager à travers l'Europe et même plus, accompagné de deux personnages aussi curieux que marquants. Non pas que Rochefort ne soit pas un personnage marquant : ancien noble renié par sa famille, maître espion et donc assassin du duc de Sully, premier ministre d'Henri IV, et personnage au physique impressionant. Et pourtant, dans ce roman, il apparaît comme dépassé par ... presque tout le monde. Que ce soit Dariole (sur lequel je reviendrai) ou Saburo, qu'on ne découvre qu'après cent pages (donc en fait rien, puisque ce roman fait ... 1100 pages :), chacun d'entre un - dans un style différent et pourtant semblable - éclipse sans le moindre problème ce "brave" Rocherfort qui passe son temps à se faire tirer à hue et à dia par tous les autres personnages.
Commençons toutefois par le commencement. Vous connaissez tous l'histoire de l'assassinat d'Henri IV par Ravaillac ? Bon, eh ben en fait, c'était un complot organisé par Rochefort ! Ca surprend, hein ? Ne vous inquiétez pas, vous saurez tout ça dès la vingtième page, je crois. Une fois ce coup d'éclat passé, Rochefort s'en va donc, accompagné de Darriole qu'il récupère dans une écurie, pour Londres. Et que lui demande-t-on à Londres ? Bien sûr, tuer quelqu'un.
Evidement, les choses ne seront pas aussi simples ...
Ecrit comme ça, on pourrait croire qu'il s'agit d'une sinistre histoire d'assassin. Eh bien sachez qu'il n'en est rien.
D'abord, ce roman explore les relations plus que troubles liant Rocherfort et Dariole. Dariole, le jeune duelliste révélant une nature beaucoup plus complexe que la simplicité de celui qui vit à la pointe d'épée. Qui plus est, les relations entre Dariole et Rochefort sont marquées à la fois par la perception qu'à Rochefort de la nature de Dariole (qui le pousse à être protecteur sans réellement en être conscient) et à la perception qu'à au contraire Dariole des sentiments qu'il peut inspirer à Rochefort (et pas seulement ceux de protection, hein). Il sera donc évidement question d'amour dans ce roman, mais le genre d'amour dont on ne parle jamais, parce que c'est une relation qui est considérée comme "mal" par Rochefort pour tout un tas de raisons qu'il me semble difficile d'expliquer sans dévoiler une bonne partie de l'histoire, et une partie qui mérite, plus encore que l'intrigue principale je trouve, d'être découverte. Bon, rassurez-vous, cette relation réserve quelques scènes comiques, surtout parce que Rochefort n'est qu'une marionette entre les doigts agiles de Dariole (la première scène de sexe est vraiment drôle sur le coup, et plus encore après coup).
Alors évidement, face à cette histoire aussi poignante et comique que le mariage de Figaro, la relation entre Rochefort et Saubro s'éclipse un peu, tout en gardant un intérêt pédagogique fort. En effet, Rochefort qui n'a aucun honneur, (re)découvre grâce à Saburo l'intérêt d'une conduite honorable ... même s'il d'une part il ne l'applique pas toujours, et que d'autre part le giri de Saburo le pousse parfois à agir d'une façon qu'on pourrait considérer comme assez peu charitable (notament quand il part avec Fludd).
Fludd .... Fludd, le noeud de l'intrigue principale. Imaginons donc que Giordano Bruno, l'alchimiste maudit de la renaissance, ait découvert des formules mathématiques lui permettant de prévoir, autant que faire se peut, l'avenir. Bruno forme une dizaine de disciples qui se dispersent à travers l'europe (bien obligés par la condamnation de Bruno par le pape) et portent, quand ils le peuvent, leurs calculs dans d'autres directions. Ainsi, Fludd, découvrant qu'une comète pourrait dévaster le monde à peu près vers le XXème siècle, se met en tête de permettre à l'Europe de survivre à cette comète en faisant de l'Angleterre sa marionette. L'idée est peut-être bonne, malheureusement son application démarre par un régicide ... ouaip, pas terrible, hein ?
Et évidement c'est là-dedans que Rocherfort vient semer le chaos, comme d'autres personnages marquants de la littérature. Bon il sème le bazar, évidement, mais finira quand même par comprendre l'intérêt qu'il peut y avoir à prévoir l'avenir .. ce qui donnera lieu à l'apparition des Rose-Croix.
Bon, vous vous imaginez bien que quand on ajoute à tout ça des descriptions incroyablement détaillées de Paris, de Londres, et de tant d'autres choses qu'on ne pourrait imaginer trouver dans un récit aussi court, ça donne un récit particulièrement foisonant, fascinant ... enfin, un truc inimaginable, quoi ! Je ne peux donc évidement que vous conseiller de le lire, c'est vraiment, mais alors vraiment une très bonne lecture.
May 15, 2017
I can't really understand what this novel was trying to do. It's exaggerated pantomime at times, but undercuts the humour and 'fun' kinky-swashbuckling stuff with some realistic violence (including an unnecessary and graphic rape scene) which results in an atonal mess. There's the seed of a good book here, but it's in desperate need of an editor.
August 17, 2022
Fairly accomplished work, though I am not persuaded it really needs to be this long, and there's a rape angle which I feel was pretty gratuitously handled. Full review: https://fakegeekboy.wordpress.com/201...
May 12, 2024
It was interesting and engaging most of the time. Some parts were a bit slow for my taste, so it did take me a while to get through. It's also quite a hefty book which might be why some parts felt slow. The characters were relatable and it was interesting to be written as if it was memoirs.
April 21, 2019
Gave up
January 31, 2025
Bit weird but overall I enjoyed it
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews