What do you think?
Rate this book
The Skull and the Nightingale
Michael Irwin’s The Skull and the Nightingale is a chilling and deliciously dark, literary novel of manipulation and sex, intrigue and seduction, set in 18th-century England.
When Richard Fenwick returns to London, his wealthy godfather, James Gilbert, has an unexpected proposition. Gilbert has led a sedate life in Worcestershire, but feels the urge to experience, even vicariously, the extremes of human feeling: love, passion, and something much more sinister.
It becomes apparent that Gilbert desires news filled with tales of carousing, flirtation, excess, and London’s more salacious side. But Gilbert’s elaborate and manipulative “experiments” into the workings of human behavior soon drag Richard into a Faustian vortex of betrayal and danger where lives are ruined and tragedy is only a step away.
With echoes of Dangerous Liaisons, Michael Irwin’s The Skull and the Nightingale is an urgent period drama that seduces the senses.
When Richard Fenwick returns to London, his wealthy godfather, James Gilbert, has an unexpected proposition. Gilbert has led a sedate life in Worcestershire, but feels the urge to experience, even vicariously, the extremes of human feeling: love, passion, and something much more sinister.
It becomes apparent that Gilbert desires news filled with tales of carousing, flirtation, excess, and London’s more salacious side. But Gilbert’s elaborate and manipulative “experiments” into the workings of human behavior soon drag Richard into a Faustian vortex of betrayal and danger where lives are ruined and tragedy is only a step away.
With echoes of Dangerous Liaisons, Michael Irwin’s The Skull and the Nightingale is an urgent period drama that seduces the senses.
416 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 2013
25 people are currently reading
1337 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 93 reviews
November 6, 2019
this book is a little cyrano, a little frankenstein, and a little les liaisons dangereuses.
it's a dirrrrty book about the seedy underbelly of 18th century england we all love so much, complete with costumed fumblings, indecorous passions, gentility masking bestial impulses, and letters. lots of letters.
richard has just returned from his grand tour, which i'm sure you know is like rumspringa for the english leisure class, and he returns to london unsure of his future but full of ambition. he had been orphaned at a young age, and came under the financial protection of his godfather, james gilbert, but has rarely been in his company. now, ready to make his way in the world, he visits his godfather, isolated out in the country, hoping to be named his heir and to enjoy a life of leisure and the arts, free from those gauche concerns about money or stability.
he finds his godfather to be a well-preserved older gentleman, reserved, rigid, formal, and disinclined to share his thoughts with him, especially those concerning richard's future. and he's a little bit creepy. obviously, i'm thinking this the whole time:
richard is introduced to gilbert's neighbors, all of whom are in his debt in one way or another. it is a gloomy collection of the fearful, the uncouth, and the diffident.
and soon richard will be included in their numbers. his godfather has a proposition for richard - he is an old man who has never allowed himself the pleasures of the animal urges. he has refrained from courtship in favor of philosophical experimentation, and is the kind of man who manipulates people into situations and sits back and observes what happens without having to dirty his hands with any participation. so his new experiment is richard. richard is to return to the hustle and bustle of london and live, properly funded, as a participant in all that london has to offer in the way of excess and diversion, and to report back to gilbert with accounts of his exploits. which is a sweet deal, from richard's point of view - he gets cash to go out and live the life he wanted to live anyway with the drinking and parties and women, all within his grasp, and for the cost of a few letters.
but it's a delicate situation. does he refrain from mentioning certain things in order to avoid coming across as an irresponsible reprobate and jeopardize his hopes of becoming gilbert's heir? and yet if he withholds too much, will his godfather believe that his money is being wasted and cut him off completely? tricky indeed. fortunately, it turns out that gilbert is quite the closet perv, and welcomes richard's less classy dealings, going so far as to arrange a seduction under his very roof.
and so it goes, on and on.
richard's moral erosion under the tutelage of his godfather is interesting, but since he is a little rapey to begin with, the descent is less dramatic than it could have been. there are some wonderful secondary characters in this book, but the best ones either disappear or become domesticated, disappointing both richard and the reader.
it's not a bad book by any means, but some of the potential is not realized, for me. there is a lot of psychological build-up and hints of diabolical machinations that end in rather pedestrian realities, and ultimately it leaves the reader with more of a sad and pathetic tone than the heroic emotional and social apocalypse that ends les liaisons dangereuses.
a personal note/entreaty. i requested this book because i thought it was going to be a gay novel. this is not a gay novel - not that there's anything wrong with that. i thought i would read it for dana , and i could pass it along to her and she would be thrilled. you can understand my reasoning: the lack of gender-specific pronouns in the synopsis-copy in sentences like this: when Richard does the unthinkable and falls in love with one of Gilbert's pawns, the hintings at excess and hedonism, the unexplored, passion, salaciousness… usually, in a victorian novel, these are code for "gay novel." plus, he also wrote books called bears in my bed and educating boys, and we all understand what that means, right? okay, there i jest. but here's the thing - the other gay-signal i got was when this book was compared to crimson petal and the white, a book i have never read, but i have always seen on gay reading lists. so i read some reviews of that book on here, and i couldn't find any reference to gay themes at all. just a lot of dirrrrty het-sex. have i been mislead? this is my real question, and the point of this irrelevant babbling - explain to me please why that book is always on gay lists if it is about a lady-prostitute and her gentlemen clients. because that is too huge of a book to be on those lists if there is only a gay uncle or something, who comes in to wave and deliver life-lessons or whatever. thank you.
come to my blog!
it's a dirrrrty book about the seedy underbelly of 18th century england we all love so much, complete with costumed fumblings, indecorous passions, gentility masking bestial impulses, and letters. lots of letters.
richard has just returned from his grand tour, which i'm sure you know is like rumspringa for the english leisure class, and he returns to london unsure of his future but full of ambition. he had been orphaned at a young age, and came under the financial protection of his godfather, james gilbert, but has rarely been in his company. now, ready to make his way in the world, he visits his godfather, isolated out in the country, hoping to be named his heir and to enjoy a life of leisure and the arts, free from those gauche concerns about money or stability.
he finds his godfather to be a well-preserved older gentleman, reserved, rigid, formal, and disinclined to share his thoughts with him, especially those concerning richard's future. and he's a little bit creepy. obviously, i'm thinking this the whole time:
richard is introduced to gilbert's neighbors, all of whom are in his debt in one way or another. it is a gloomy collection of the fearful, the uncouth, and the diffident.
and soon richard will be included in their numbers. his godfather has a proposition for richard - he is an old man who has never allowed himself the pleasures of the animal urges. he has refrained from courtship in favor of philosophical experimentation, and is the kind of man who manipulates people into situations and sits back and observes what happens without having to dirty his hands with any participation. so his new experiment is richard. richard is to return to the hustle and bustle of london and live, properly funded, as a participant in all that london has to offer in the way of excess and diversion, and to report back to gilbert with accounts of his exploits. which is a sweet deal, from richard's point of view - he gets cash to go out and live the life he wanted to live anyway with the drinking and parties and women, all within his grasp, and for the cost of a few letters.
but it's a delicate situation. does he refrain from mentioning certain things in order to avoid coming across as an irresponsible reprobate and jeopardize his hopes of becoming gilbert's heir? and yet if he withholds too much, will his godfather believe that his money is being wasted and cut him off completely? tricky indeed. fortunately, it turns out that gilbert is quite the closet perv, and welcomes richard's less classy dealings, going so far as to arrange a seduction under his very roof.
and so it goes, on and on.
richard's moral erosion under the tutelage of his godfather is interesting, but since he is a little rapey to begin with, the descent is less dramatic than it could have been. there are some wonderful secondary characters in this book, but the best ones either disappear or become domesticated, disappointing both richard and the reader.
it's not a bad book by any means, but some of the potential is not realized, for me. there is a lot of psychological build-up and hints of diabolical machinations that end in rather pedestrian realities, and ultimately it leaves the reader with more of a sad and pathetic tone than the heroic emotional and social apocalypse that ends les liaisons dangereuses.
a personal note/entreaty. i requested this book because i thought it was going to be a gay novel. this is not a gay novel - not that there's anything wrong with that. i thought i would read it for dana , and i could pass it along to her and she would be thrilled. you can understand my reasoning: the lack of gender-specific pronouns in the synopsis-copy in sentences like this: when Richard does the unthinkable and falls in love with one of Gilbert's pawns, the hintings at excess and hedonism, the unexplored, passion, salaciousness… usually, in a victorian novel, these are code for "gay novel." plus, he also wrote books called bears in my bed and educating boys, and we all understand what that means, right? okay, there i jest. but here's the thing - the other gay-signal i got was when this book was compared to crimson petal and the white, a book i have never read, but i have always seen on gay reading lists. so i read some reviews of that book on here, and i couldn't find any reference to gay themes at all. just a lot of dirrrrty het-sex. have i been mislead? this is my real question, and the point of this irrelevant babbling - explain to me please why that book is always on gay lists if it is about a lady-prostitute and her gentlemen clients. because that is too huge of a book to be on those lists if there is only a gay uncle or something, who comes in to wave and deliver life-lessons or whatever. thank you.
come to my blog!
May 3, 2017
"I propose an experiment. Life has slipped past me half unnoticed. I am tormented by a restlessness that I cannot subdue. I would wish my final years to be more vivid, more diversified, more - pungent. In short" - he rapped the table - "my project is in some sense to live again. I would hope to live differently and dangerously - through you and through your exploits. I am not so old that reports of mischief and gallantry will fail to warm my blood."
It is 1761.
Richard Fenwick's godfather, a distant figure who has financially supported him through university and its cap, a grand tour of Europe, is now calling the debt due. He wishes to fund young Dick in a rake's existence - a London bacchanal of drink, debauchery and idle pleasure that will be reported through correspondence and the occasional visit to the elderly gentleman's country manor. The two men know next to nothing about one another, but the inheritance of that rich estate looms large as a motivation. (Well, that and Richard's aversion to the practice of an actual profession.)
The experiment is taken up, and with it the opportunity to experience the seamier side of life in this mid-eighteenth century city - its discreet alleyways and taverns, its crumbling quarters and quays; its teeming streets; its filth, its stink, its dark criminal class. Fenwick gets to work immediately, establishing himself a carousement of fellow libertines whose hijinks and carnal frolic will make juicy reading for the old goat. His patron, though, proves to be a good deal more discriminating and latches on to the vague reference his godson lets slip about a certain woman who had married in his absence, and for whom he bears a deeper emotional regard. This is the adventure he is instructed to pursue; the cuckolding his godfather insists upon.
Readers in search of an erotic component will not find it here. This is astonishingly dispassionate writing that, while it relays its share of bodily functions, does so in a fashion which debases the choice. It's morality that's at play in these scenes, not the charm of some physical mischief. The pages don't so much turn as harden; growing bleak and bitter as the evil nature of the compact rises to take sway.
While Irwin occasionally flies off into stuffy, over-written passages filled with literary allusion (Shakespeare, Swift, Richardson's Clarissa) and era-contemporary song, he does manage to hold the story together, and it does manage to work as a cautionary tale.
Experiment at your peril.
But then, of course, we knew this.
It is 1761.
Richard Fenwick's godfather, a distant figure who has financially supported him through university and its cap, a grand tour of Europe, is now calling the debt due. He wishes to fund young Dick in a rake's existence - a London bacchanal of drink, debauchery and idle pleasure that will be reported through correspondence and the occasional visit to the elderly gentleman's country manor. The two men know next to nothing about one another, but the inheritance of that rich estate looms large as a motivation. (Well, that and Richard's aversion to the practice of an actual profession.)
The experiment is taken up, and with it the opportunity to experience the seamier side of life in this mid-eighteenth century city - its discreet alleyways and taverns, its crumbling quarters and quays; its teeming streets; its filth, its stink, its dark criminal class. Fenwick gets to work immediately, establishing himself a carousement of fellow libertines whose hijinks and carnal frolic will make juicy reading for the old goat. His patron, though, proves to be a good deal more discriminating and latches on to the vague reference his godson lets slip about a certain woman who had married in his absence, and for whom he bears a deeper emotional regard. This is the adventure he is instructed to pursue; the cuckolding his godfather insists upon.
Readers in search of an erotic component will not find it here. This is astonishingly dispassionate writing that, while it relays its share of bodily functions, does so in a fashion which debases the choice. It's morality that's at play in these scenes, not the charm of some physical mischief. The pages don't so much turn as harden; growing bleak and bitter as the evil nature of the compact rises to take sway.
While Irwin occasionally flies off into stuffy, over-written passages filled with literary allusion (Shakespeare, Swift, Richardson's Clarissa) and era-contemporary song, he does manage to hold the story together, and it does manage to work as a cautionary tale.
Experiment at your peril.
But then, of course, we knew this.
June 16, 2013
The Skull and the Nightingale captured my attention when it claimed that it fell in tradition with Liaisons Dangereuses and echoed The Crimson Petal and the White, which just happens to be one of my favorite novels of all time. I must say, with such grand references, I opened the book with high expectations. If I had a red pen, I would go back and cross out all literary comparisons along with the words, 'chilling,' 'deliciously dark,' and 'exciting.' Thus, leaving the not so captivating blurb of, 'A literary novel of manipulation, sex and seduction set in eighteenth-century England.' That accurately depicts what you can truly expect from the book.
Much of the story is communicated through letters sent between characters. A few italicized letters would have added a creative element, but by using this continued mode of delivery throughout the novel...well, it becomes tedious, limits POV and kills any active tension. Several times a recap of events (out of necessity) is repeated in letter form. Sure, some detailing is left out to show the withholding of intimate details, but I certainly did not want to read any scene twice.
There is potential for the plot. I believe it has all the bones needed in the basic structure for it to live up to the adjectives given, but unfortunately, the more exciting, urgent period drama twists were not taken. Half way through the book I was convinced the godfather was a sociopath, which would have been fabulous, but the old man abandons his strangeness toward the end. It turns out he's just another eccentric pervert. In fact, all the quirky characters are domesticated rather easily or written off completely. The author took the least imaginative path for the 'twist' and to my disappointment, made the plot a touch predictable. The sexual scenes consist of aggressive grunting and border on descriptions of rationalized rape.
If you've read the novels mentioned above, you might find this one to be as satisfying as a tepid cup of tea.
Much of the story is communicated through letters sent between characters. A few italicized letters would have added a creative element, but by using this continued mode of delivery throughout the novel...well, it becomes tedious, limits POV and kills any active tension. Several times a recap of events (out of necessity) is repeated in letter form. Sure, some detailing is left out to show the withholding of intimate details, but I certainly did not want to read any scene twice.
There is potential for the plot. I believe it has all the bones needed in the basic structure for it to live up to the adjectives given, but unfortunately, the more exciting, urgent period drama twists were not taken. Half way through the book I was convinced the godfather was a sociopath, which would have been fabulous, but the old man abandons his strangeness toward the end. It turns out he's just another eccentric pervert. In fact, all the quirky characters are domesticated rather easily or written off completely. The author took the least imaginative path for the 'twist' and to my disappointment, made the plot a touch predictable. The sexual scenes consist of aggressive grunting and border on descriptions of rationalized rape.
If you've read the novels mentioned above, you might find this one to be as satisfying as a tepid cup of tea.
August 25, 2013
While on the whole, this novel was provocative and enticing, I felt somewhat disappointed by the end result. I admired the level of writing and the depth of some characters, but it was altogether a slow read and I was not emotionally attached to anyone or anything contained therein. I felt no sympathy whatsoever for the main character, and ultimately felt that he got what he deserved in the end. Having said that, however, I do feel that the novel touches upon interesting topics of conversation about our own morality, and how we act and react as humans to those around us, and the roads we must go down in order to live a life deserved to us. It's also interesting because I myself live a solitary, quiet life: will I end up like Gilbert? Resigned to a life at home and reading letters from one so more spirited in order to fulfill a need for action and adventure whilst sitting in the comfort of my own home? Topics such as these are discussed in the novel and garners a read from most everyone. Whilst I felt it was somewhat enjoyable, I don't find myself needing to return back to it in the future. Maybe when my own character develops over time will I find the need to come back and explore the characters in further detail.
September 3, 2013
If I could give less stars I would, this is one of the stupidest books I have ever read. The premise is preposterous. In 1760, London, Richard, a young man returns from a European tour. He is an orphan, and has been raised by a remote godfather. His godfather now contacts him, and give him lots of money to "experience" all that London has to offer and to write him (the godfather) all about them so he can live them vicariously. Soon it becomes clear that the godfather wants Richard to engage in adultery and fornication, blah blah blah. The only reason I continued to read it is because I am way behind on my Goodreads book challenge. Don't waste your time.
June 16, 2013
Titillating, Saucy and Warped
Richard Fenwick, under the patronage of his wealthy godfather, James Gilbert, has returned to England after taking a Grand Tour of Europe. Without his own funds or any other family means he hopes to become his godfather's heir. And so, he accepts Mr. Gilbert's proposal to participate in an unusual undertaking wherein Richard will enjoy a variety of experiences, that Gilbert has never been brave enough to participate in, then describe them in detail to his godfather.
At first it seems that Richard has landed the perfect situation. He explores the drawing rooms and parties of high society, the theater at Drury Lane, resorts and pubs and the docks of Whapping. He's perfectly poised to observe and partake of a broad range of experiences offered by a growing city and tell the reader and his uncle all about them. "Everywhere I found fresh cause for curiosity. New houses, new shops, whole new streets were coming into being. I would linger to watch the builders at work and see houses rise from the earth with the slow persistence of plants."
It soon becomes apparent that his godfather is looking for some livelier observations, specifically related to the Passions that possess a man. And so it seems that Dick's situation is improved, for what could be more enjoyable for a young man than to sew his wild oats at the expense of someone else's purse. What Richard fails to realize is the effect his uncle's voyeurism, as well as his own behavior, will have on his relationships with the people in his life.
This was an interesting novel, I liked the characters and thought the story was well done. The setting was vividly described and I enjoyed the variety of supporting characters. There was one very ribald conversation that I did not find at all believable but I can overlook one conversation in the course of a whole book. I thought Michael Irwin could have taken the story a little further by revealing more about the people living in close proximity to Fork Hill and their relationships with Mr. Gilbert. This novel was sometimes slow, the story line could have been tightened up to increase the pacing but I found the story interesting and worth reading. I would have been more satisfied if there had been a greater emotional depth to the two protagonists.
This novel is not a thriller or even particularly chilling, I think the spin doctors of the publishing world sometimes do more of a disservice when they characterize books in a way that isn't quite accurate. This was not a fast-paced thriller or a frightening tale and readers who expect it to be may very well be disappointed because they didn't find what they were looking for.
Richard Fenwick, under the patronage of his wealthy godfather, James Gilbert, has returned to England after taking a Grand Tour of Europe. Without his own funds or any other family means he hopes to become his godfather's heir. And so, he accepts Mr. Gilbert's proposal to participate in an unusual undertaking wherein Richard will enjoy a variety of experiences, that Gilbert has never been brave enough to participate in, then describe them in detail to his godfather.
At first it seems that Richard has landed the perfect situation. He explores the drawing rooms and parties of high society, the theater at Drury Lane, resorts and pubs and the docks of Whapping. He's perfectly poised to observe and partake of a broad range of experiences offered by a growing city and tell the reader and his uncle all about them. "Everywhere I found fresh cause for curiosity. New houses, new shops, whole new streets were coming into being. I would linger to watch the builders at work and see houses rise from the earth with the slow persistence of plants."
It soon becomes apparent that his godfather is looking for some livelier observations, specifically related to the Passions that possess a man. And so it seems that Dick's situation is improved, for what could be more enjoyable for a young man than to sew his wild oats at the expense of someone else's purse. What Richard fails to realize is the effect his uncle's voyeurism, as well as his own behavior, will have on his relationships with the people in his life.
This was an interesting novel, I liked the characters and thought the story was well done. The setting was vividly described and I enjoyed the variety of supporting characters. There was one very ribald conversation that I did not find at all believable but I can overlook one conversation in the course of a whole book. I thought Michael Irwin could have taken the story a little further by revealing more about the people living in close proximity to Fork Hill and their relationships with Mr. Gilbert. This novel was sometimes slow, the story line could have been tightened up to increase the pacing but I found the story interesting and worth reading. I would have been more satisfied if there had been a greater emotional depth to the two protagonists.
This novel is not a thriller or even particularly chilling, I think the spin doctors of the publishing world sometimes do more of a disservice when they characterize books in a way that isn't quite accurate. This was not a fast-paced thriller or a frightening tale and readers who expect it to be may very well be disappointed because they didn't find what they were looking for.
March 6, 2014
Actual Rating = 3.5 stars
For those looking for action, this is not the book for you. This is neither a Thriller or Erotica. That being said, I really enjoyed this book. I'm sure my infatuation with England in the 18th century has something to do with it. I felt transported back to London in the 1760's. Much of the book is correspondence between Richard Fenwick and his godfather. My only complaint is that sometimes these discussions would be a bit tedious.
For those looking for action, this is not the book for you. This is neither a Thriller or Erotica. That being said, I really enjoyed this book. I'm sure my infatuation with England in the 18th century has something to do with it. I felt transported back to London in the 1760's. Much of the book is correspondence between Richard Fenwick and his godfather. My only complaint is that sometimes these discussions would be a bit tedious.
December 25, 2016
I just noticed that this book has an aggregate rating of less than three stars, and I can understand why some readers might not like it, the two biggest issues being that the plot feels terribly contrived and rather sordid (I'll be curious to read over some reviews and see if I guessed right). The story takes place in late eighteenth-century England, when a young man with no money or prospects of his own, Richard Fenwick, is given an odd proposition by his godfather: to experience a life of debauchery and write it all down so the old guy can experience it vicariously. My first reaction to this plot was a snort of incredulity, but then it occurred to me that many people like to experience depravity second hand through books, books such as this one which I was currently reading, so why not? As to the sordidness, after a while it just made me start to dislike Fenwick and wish that something nasty would happen to him, such as a bad case of venereal disease. My main criticism of this book is that it takes itself way too seriously, with long discussions about the conflict between flesh and spirit, including a long crucial scene at a masquerade with that exact theme/heavy-handed metaphor, instead of just allowing itself to be the fun, trashy read it could have been. Instead it presents sordidness with pretensions, which is just sort of cringe-worthy, such as the completely unrealistic "seduction" of the country matron. But overall, actually, I did enjoy this book; it was a well-written, quick read with lots of good period details and a couple of really good characters such as the massively obese but imminently decent Crocker and a twelve-year old girl chess whiz.
October 22, 2013
It is the early 1760's and a young man, Richard Fenwick, is returning from two years abroad on the Grand Tour. An orphan, he is reliant on his wealthy godfather, Mr James Gilbert, to finance his future. When called to that formidable old gentleman's estate, he wonders whether he will propse a career or possibly, hopefully, make him his heir and begin to teach him about being a landowner. Instead, surprisingly, Mr Gilbert proposes something quite different. Admitting that he has regrets about missing out on what life has to offer, he suggests that Fenwick sample what London has to offer and then writes to him about what he sees, hears and feels. Initially elated, Fenwick sets off to enjoy life and his excursions begin with theatres, coffee houses, fashionable drawing rooms and even executions. However, soon things take a darker turn, as Gilbert suggests that Fenwick can go further. As Fenwick's social life becomes his occupation, he fears he is being manipulated. How far can he trust his uncle and, indeed, how far does his uncle trust him?
This is a book about manipulation, corruption and moral dilemmas; as Fenwick begins affairs with the wife of one of Mr Gilbert's neighbours, a young actress and the beautiful Sarah Ogden, who he admired before leaving for his European tour and is distressed to learn has since married. However, he finds it impossible not to be become personally involved; even as he reports on his own life to entertain and titillate his godfather. People get hurt and eventually Fenwick faces real disaster.
Although this novel is well written and creates a real sense of the time and place the author has set it in, with lots of nods to historical and literary characters of the period, it somehow failed to engage me. I appreciated Fenwick's financial dilemma and his reliance on his godfather's goodwill, yet both men lacked sympathy and I did not feel enough for the characters. Although the middle dragged, both the beginning and the ending of the novel were good and there would be plenty for a book club to discuss. There was much about it I enjoyed, but I have to admit I finished it with some relief.
This is a book about manipulation, corruption and moral dilemmas; as Fenwick begins affairs with the wife of one of Mr Gilbert's neighbours, a young actress and the beautiful Sarah Ogden, who he admired before leaving for his European tour and is distressed to learn has since married. However, he finds it impossible not to be become personally involved; even as he reports on his own life to entertain and titillate his godfather. People get hurt and eventually Fenwick faces real disaster.
Although this novel is well written and creates a real sense of the time and place the author has set it in, with lots of nods to historical and literary characters of the period, it somehow failed to engage me. I appreciated Fenwick's financial dilemma and his reliance on his godfather's goodwill, yet both men lacked sympathy and I did not feel enough for the characters. Although the middle dragged, both the beginning and the ending of the novel were good and there would be plenty for a book club to discuss. There was much about it I enjoyed, but I have to admit I finished it with some relief.
July 31, 2013
I'm not quite sure what to think. I was fairly sure I knew how the novel would end...but then it did something different. Quite a bit different. And I haven't decided if I like it or not - and it came down to the very last page.
The Skull and the Nightingale was pitched to me because I liked Perfume: The Story of a Murderer and Les Liaisons Dangereuses and it was similar to The Crimson Petal and the White. And there are a lot of similarities in time period and tone. At one point in the novel almost every major character from Les Liaisons Dangereuses is represented. Richardson's Clarissa, or, The History of a Young Lady - complete with the dick-tacular Lovelace becomes a running thread. The writing and multi-layered characters made for great reading. Don't get me wrong. This was a good book, a good read.
But I wanted more grit, more dirt, more moral ambiguity. One of the things I loved about Perfume was how grimy and messy and gross and beautifully described it is - Fenwick, the protagonist of The Skull and the Nightingale, is a handsome young man in mid-eighteenth century London, but he seems to pale next to more vivid characters of the time period. I was hoping for some floundering about in drrrty, drrrty morally squalid London but it didn't dig quite deep enough, IMO.
The Skull and the Nightingale was pitched to me because I liked Perfume: The Story of a Murderer and Les Liaisons Dangereuses and it was similar to The Crimson Petal and the White. And there are a lot of similarities in time period and tone. At one point in the novel almost every major character from Les Liaisons Dangereuses is represented. Richardson's Clarissa, or, The History of a Young Lady - complete with the dick-tacular Lovelace becomes a running thread. The writing and multi-layered characters made for great reading. Don't get me wrong. This was a good book, a good read.
But I wanted more grit, more dirt, more moral ambiguity. One of the things I loved about Perfume was how grimy and messy and gross and beautifully described it is - Fenwick, the protagonist of The Skull and the Nightingale, is a handsome young man in mid-eighteenth century London, but he seems to pale next to more vivid characters of the time period. I was hoping for some floundering about in drrrty, drrrty morally squalid London but it didn't dig quite deep enough, IMO.
dnf
August 5, 2016Blar. I'm tired of protagonists being all rapey in the guise of being "edgy." If I'm going to read about an amoral, detached investigator of human nature, I don't care to waste my time with this self-important, did he mention he's pretty? because he knows he's soooo pretty, insufferable blowhard. When your exploration of the dark sides of humanity are pretty much all about this dude sees women as chattel whose value is determinable by their level of fuckability, even if that level is unexpectedly higher than this paragon of human observation first thought, well. You're not particularly cutting-edge or interesting.
April 2, 2013
Big meh.
Probably stuck with it for the historical aspect, and a slight "where is this going to go" curiosity. And because I have a thing for books with godfathers. I didn't feel there was sufficient character resolution though.
Probably stuck with it for the historical aspect, and a slight "where is this going to go" curiosity. And because I have a thing for books with godfathers. I didn't feel there was sufficient character resolution though.
September 9, 2013
This book just felt very pointless. I read it diligently for 3/4 of the way through but skimmed the last hundred and something pages. It wasn't terrible but I felt like it was a complete waste of time.
October 29, 2017
I didn't like this in the least.
The main character is a truly terrible person using science as an excuse for his actions. He's basically a piece of cardboard with no personality and a penchant for sex. My least favourite scene happened in the first couple of pages where he got randy in the forest and then asked himself if he abused nature or took part in it. Bitch, if you're jizzing on a bunch of flowers in the middle of a forest you're abusing it. The flowers didn't deserve that, and none of the woodland creatures needed to see that.
There is no happy ending, except maybe that he gains his freedom, but he gets away with horrid things and that poor girl he was leading about gets nothing but dissatisfaction. The other characters were one dimensional, like props or background actors who are just there to make the plot move. And I don't know how a skull came into play here? I get the nightingale part as it refers to a woman, but a skull? Ugh. I unno, this book frustrated me.
The main character is a truly terrible person using science as an excuse for his actions. He's basically a piece of cardboard with no personality and a penchant for sex. My least favourite scene happened in the first couple of pages where he got randy in the forest and then asked himself if he abused nature or took part in it. Bitch, if you're jizzing on a bunch of flowers in the middle of a forest you're abusing it. The flowers didn't deserve that, and none of the woodland creatures needed to see that.
There is no happy ending, except maybe that he gains his freedom, but he gets away with horrid things and that poor girl he was leading about gets nothing but dissatisfaction. The other characters were one dimensional, like props or background actors who are just there to make the plot move. And I don't know how a skull came into play here? I get the nightingale part as it refers to a woman, but a skull? Ugh. I unno, this book frustrated me.
May 16, 2020
The Skull and the Nightingale is a very effective pastiche of an eighteenth century epistolary novel, with echoes of Swift, Fielding, Defoe and Samuel Richardson's Clarissa, not to mention Hogarth. It's much more than a mock-Georgian romp, though, as it explores some pretty serious themes - identity, the idea of self, and the reaction of individual actions on the wider community. At its heart is a rake's progress of sorts; Richard Fenwick, fresh from his Grand Tour is summoned to his godfather's house in Worcestershire and presented with a surprising and morally dubious proposition - that he will be set up in London to live a life of action and incident, reported back to his benefactor by regular letters, thereby enabling him vicariously to live the life that he was incapable of living in his youth. The portrayal of Georgian London is highly effective as a backdrop to the moral debates exercised in the plot.
January 26, 2017
I wasn't sure about this book at first. It felt like the plot was going to just facilitate a lascivious romp through C18th London. However as I read on I became increasingly intrigued by its questioning of human/animal nature, our conscience, morals and honesty and how we can be corrupted into compromising ourselves.
So I ended up being fascinated by the story.
And I really enjoyed the way the author captured the feel of the era through his use of words, idioms and linguistic style. A very good read.
So I ended up being fascinated by the story.
And I really enjoyed the way the author captured the feel of the era through his use of words, idioms and linguistic style. A very good read.
October 10, 2020
I quite liked this book; it was disconcerting, somewhat foreboding, intriguing, and atmospheric. I enjoyed that much of it is set out in correspondence, and the first-person storytelling is unusual and helped draw me in, making me feel somewhat of a confidante, almost a participant, although from a distance, in the unpleasant and uncomfortable events described by the narrator. The protagonist telling the story is not likable, but is interestingly self-aware, and the other inhabitants of this creepy, sordid tale are well-described and fascinating.
June 30, 2017
A slow read that meanders through large questions of morality, the passions of the life, and the practical need for money in the modern world. I liked the development of the main character throughout the novel: as a reader I was on his side up until the final pages.
May 4, 2017
DNF- dear blurb writers, casual misogyny is not 'morally fascinating' nor does it inherently make a pieces historically accurate.
December 17, 2017
I was pleasantly surprised by an ending that didn’t turn into a moral lesson.
December 28, 2017
Enjoyed it. Unusual english prose. Was good nevertheless.
December 15, 2018
A promising premise, lost in antiquated style. Anticlimactic, irredeemable protagonist, and unsatisfactory ending.
January 6, 2023
An anticlimactic romp with so much unmet potential. Enjoyable, but nothing to write home about.
September 10, 2023
Pretty good. Definite creep voyeuristic feels, but not too much or too terribly explicit. Had a Dorian Grey/ de Sade/Frankenstein vibe.
November 24, 2025
DNF
If you're looking for a scandalous tale, with detailed descriptions of what a 'gentleman' does with his 'privy member', this books for you. Not for me.
If you're looking for a scandalous tale, with detailed descriptions of what a 'gentleman' does with his 'privy member', this books for you. Not for me.
November 27, 2013
Richard Fenwick, an Englishman of but few years, lately returned from a Grand Tour of the Continent, is an orphan whose powerful but aloof patron, Mr. Gilbert, has sent him to London, that sprawling metropolis of a full half-million people in this Year of Our Lord 1761, with but a single project—to conquer the City by pen and pizzle (or pintle, as this novel repeatedly has it). Gilbert has provided Fenwick with lodgings and an income sufficient to dress, feed and entertain himself as a young gentleman should when at large in London. Richard is given leave—nay, encouraged—to do as he wishes, to sample all of the pleasures that the great City has to offer a young man with neither strong attachments nor many scruples. And those pleasures are numerous—strong drink, willing wenches, and the hustle and bustle of the City itself are just a few of the endless stream of diversions from which Richard eagerly partakes.
He has but one duty, and that seemingly not an onerous one at first: Richard must report on his deeds in detail, sending frequent letters back to Mr. Gilbert's country home, so that Gilbert can enjoy by proxy the wild youth he did not allow himself to have. It is a mutually satisfactory arrangement...
For all Fenwick's swiving, rogering and plowing, though (and Richard does get up to some fairly antic bedroom antics), it seems that he is really interested in romance after all. When he meets up with his childhood companion Sarah, now grown into a beautiful and poised young woman—and, regrettably, married to the odious but wealthy Ogden—Richard is unable to treat her as just another commissioned conquest. He begins to dissemble in his reports to Gilbert, to omit and elide parts of his campaign to win Sarah's heart, even though her hand is taken.
The contradictions between Richard's various narratives begin to mount until he is unsure where—if anywhere—his loyalties and his duty truly lie. And I must say that I was entirely surprised by the ending—while it's not inconsistent with Fenwick's character, I still didn't see it coming.
I encountered Michael Irwin's novel quite by chance—it had been misshelved in the sf section, though in truth it contains no hint of the fantastic, other than what comes from the mere distance of time and place. Fenwick's 18th-Century London is not the City I saw during my own (brief and so far single) visit... his London's streets are crowded with horses and filled with sewage, clamorous and malodorous, with great new "Georgian" buildings surrounded by neighborhoods full of ramshackle tenements with a tendency to collapse on their own, a place where even the richest and most powerful would have to walk through the mud from time to time.
The Skull and the Nightingale is a gaudy, bawdy reconstruction of a people and an era that seem very real, though very alien to me. I was occasionally jolted by curiously modern diction and idioms; Richard Fenwick does not always seem to tell his story as a contemporary would tell it. But Michael Irwin revels in the past while not shrinking from its stench—he recreates the squalor and the splendor of Georgian London with a fidelity that leaps from the page to the nose. You may want to carry a perfume-soaked kerchief along with you while reading this book... but I don't think you'll want to miss it altogether, either.
He has but one duty, and that seemingly not an onerous one at first: Richard must report on his deeds in detail, sending frequent letters back to Mr. Gilbert's country home, so that Gilbert can enjoy by proxy the wild youth he did not allow himself to have. It is a mutually satisfactory arrangement...
For all Fenwick's swiving, rogering and plowing, though (and Richard does get up to some fairly antic bedroom antics), it seems that he is really interested in romance after all. When he meets up with his childhood companion Sarah, now grown into a beautiful and poised young woman—and, regrettably, married to the odious but wealthy Ogden—Richard is unable to treat her as just another commissioned conquest. He begins to dissemble in his reports to Gilbert, to omit and elide parts of his campaign to win Sarah's heart, even though her hand is taken.
The contradictions between Richard's various narratives begin to mount until he is unsure where—if anywhere—his loyalties and his duty truly lie. And I must say that I was entirely surprised by the ending—while it's not inconsistent with Fenwick's character, I still didn't see it coming.
I encountered Michael Irwin's novel quite by chance—it had been misshelved in the sf section, though in truth it contains no hint of the fantastic, other than what comes from the mere distance of time and place. Fenwick's 18th-Century London is not the City I saw during my own (brief and so far single) visit... his London's streets are crowded with horses and filled with sewage, clamorous and malodorous, with great new "Georgian" buildings surrounded by neighborhoods full of ramshackle tenements with a tendency to collapse on their own, a place where even the richest and most powerful would have to walk through the mud from time to time.
The Skull and the Nightingale is a gaudy, bawdy reconstruction of a people and an era that seem very real, though very alien to me. I was occasionally jolted by curiously modern diction and idioms; Richard Fenwick does not always seem to tell his story as a contemporary would tell it. But Michael Irwin revels in the past while not shrinking from its stench—he recreates the squalor and the splendor of Georgian London with a fidelity that leaps from the page to the nose. You may want to carry a perfume-soaked kerchief along with you while reading this book... but I don't think you'll want to miss it altogether, either.
October 2, 2014
Richard Fenwick returns to London in the 1760s after touring Europe. He is an orphan and lives on the goodwill of his godfather, the wealthy James Gilbert, and now faces a surprising proposition from the old man, who he so far only has a courteous but rather superficial relationship with. It turns out that Gilbert wants Richard to explore all the dirt of London and especially the opposite sex that he never dared do himself and report back to him in quite detailed letters. As a man of the Age of Enlightenment he has a keen interest of studying the Passions, and especially the animal desires. Richard is eager enough, wanting to secure the goodwill of the rich benefactor, but is not blind to the moral issues, the difficulties of keeping on top of such a task or to the delicacy of giving up any privacy in order to report every aspect of his doings, dreams and desires to his godfather.
So Richard becomes a man of the town, his whole occupation to partake and report in whatever might tickle the surprisingly dark fancies of his godfather. He soon decides that certain parts of his life will stay out of his letters and that he need not be completely truthful in all matters, especially when it comes to his infatuation with his old friend Sarah, now Mrs. Ogden. This turns out to be harder than intended and he gradually gets himself entangled in a web of lies, desires and deeds and along the way he gets to know sides of his godfather he didn't expect existed.
For me this ended up being quite the page turner as I gradually started to wonder how everything would turn out. What would happen to Richard? What would he decide to do? I've read other reviews where the reviewers said they had difficulties to relate to the characters. I did experience that somewhat as well, there is something in the writing or the character description that keeps you somewhat at a distance. Possible because a lot of the book consists of letters written between Richard and his godfather, and occasionally correspondence between Richard and a few others.
This gets a little tiresome at length. Richard recounts his endevours and amourous encounters, sweats over leaving things out or making things up so that he can keep things to himself, and they engage in long theoretical discussions about the animal desires and the complexity of the relationship between man and women. It demonstrates very well the day and age of the 1760s and the paradox between theory and practice, but it's not that engaging and might be a factor in regard to the distance the reader now and then feels toward the characters. Too much talk, when we want the theories expressed through more deeds. Richard was by far the most convincing and complex character in the book, but also a good observer and narrator in regard to the other characters.
The writing is an example of an author that accomplishes to catch a tone that is both time authentic and the authors own authentic voice as well. Part of the fun and the attraction of the book was without question the 1700s style of Richards narration. It only took me a few pages to settle into the tone and the effortless fluidity of the writing. And it's not entirely without humour.
The ending was unexpected and turns things upside down. Or was it? Does it? Richard writes one last important letter, but throughout the book he has shown that he not always writes the truth. It makes me wonder... All in all an entertaining read, not flawless, and the description on the back of the book promises something more sinister than is actually the case, but I liked it and it pulls off a lot by the writing and the page turner quality towards the end.
So Richard becomes a man of the town, his whole occupation to partake and report in whatever might tickle the surprisingly dark fancies of his godfather. He soon decides that certain parts of his life will stay out of his letters and that he need not be completely truthful in all matters, especially when it comes to his infatuation with his old friend Sarah, now Mrs. Ogden. This turns out to be harder than intended and he gradually gets himself entangled in a web of lies, desires and deeds and along the way he gets to know sides of his godfather he didn't expect existed.
For me this ended up being quite the page turner as I gradually started to wonder how everything would turn out. What would happen to Richard? What would he decide to do? I've read other reviews where the reviewers said they had difficulties to relate to the characters. I did experience that somewhat as well, there is something in the writing or the character description that keeps you somewhat at a distance. Possible because a lot of the book consists of letters written between Richard and his godfather, and occasionally correspondence between Richard and a few others.
This gets a little tiresome at length. Richard recounts his endevours and amourous encounters, sweats over leaving things out or making things up so that he can keep things to himself, and they engage in long theoretical discussions about the animal desires and the complexity of the relationship between man and women. It demonstrates very well the day and age of the 1760s and the paradox between theory and practice, but it's not that engaging and might be a factor in regard to the distance the reader now and then feels toward the characters. Too much talk, when we want the theories expressed through more deeds. Richard was by far the most convincing and complex character in the book, but also a good observer and narrator in regard to the other characters.
The writing is an example of an author that accomplishes to catch a tone that is both time authentic and the authors own authentic voice as well. Part of the fun and the attraction of the book was without question the 1700s style of Richards narration. It only took me a few pages to settle into the tone and the effortless fluidity of the writing. And it's not entirely without humour.
The ending was unexpected and turns things upside down. Or was it? Does it? Richard writes one last important letter, but throughout the book he has shown that he not always writes the truth. It makes me wonder... All in all an entertaining read, not flawless, and the description on the back of the book promises something more sinister than is actually the case, but I liked it and it pulls off a lot by the writing and the page turner quality towards the end.
October 30, 2013
It's England in the early 1760s and Richard Fenwick has just returned from the Grand Tour of Europe. Despite being an orphan, he's been fortunate enough to have been helped through life to date by his godfather, James Gilbert, who lives a quiet life on his estate in Worcestershire with only a few neighbours dependant on his support for company. Richard's return to London leaves him at a crossroads in his life: is he now to be named as his godfather's heir or merely left to secure a future for himself? What happens instead is a proposition he wasn't expecting which is to live London life to the full and report back in detail to his godfather. This presents Richard with a dilemma. What exactly does his godfather want to hear about, and in exactly how much detail, and if he reports every gory, salacious detail, will this help or hinder his chances of an inheritance?
Irrespective of these qualms, Richard decides to take up the challenge and starts making his new life in London - and sending his reports of it to James. These are made in the form of his letters in the book interspersed with Richard's own thoughts and actions, so you can see what he's reporting and how it sometimes differs to what actually occurs. As Richard is drawn further into fulfilling his side of the bargain, he enters questionable and dangerous territory and his decisions and actions have a considerable impact on others, and he finds himself in situations which threaten not only his own standing in society but also his liberty.
Both Richard and his godfather, James, are guilty of manipulation, both of one another and other characters in the novel, and it's interesting to follow their schemes, especially as more is revealed about their present circumstances and their histories and you begin to understand them, as a result. Sadly, this still wasn't quite enough to make either character engaging enough to make me care about the outcome of their lives or the novel though and while the period detail and atmosphere is well done and well written, I could never quite get over a feeling of detachment from these two main characters and therefore a distance from their stories that left me not having enjoyed this novel as much as I'd originally hoped. However, I am glad that I read it, it was an interesting attempt at an eighteenth century epistolary tale and I was happy with the outcome for Richard and James and felt that it was the right one under the circumstances.
Irrespective of these qualms, Richard decides to take up the challenge and starts making his new life in London - and sending his reports of it to James. These are made in the form of his letters in the book interspersed with Richard's own thoughts and actions, so you can see what he's reporting and how it sometimes differs to what actually occurs. As Richard is drawn further into fulfilling his side of the bargain, he enters questionable and dangerous territory and his decisions and actions have a considerable impact on others, and he finds himself in situations which threaten not only his own standing in society but also his liberty.
Both Richard and his godfather, James, are guilty of manipulation, both of one another and other characters in the novel, and it's interesting to follow their schemes, especially as more is revealed about their present circumstances and their histories and you begin to understand them, as a result. Sadly, this still wasn't quite enough to make either character engaging enough to make me care about the outcome of their lives or the novel though and while the period detail and atmosphere is well done and well written, I could never quite get over a feeling of detachment from these two main characters and therefore a distance from their stories that left me not having enjoyed this novel as much as I'd originally hoped. However, I am glad that I read it, it was an interesting attempt at an eighteenth century epistolary tale and I was happy with the outcome for Richard and James and felt that it was the right one under the circumstances.
May 19, 2014
This book was not what I expected, and not what I wanted. At all. I picked it up because of the title (it's pretty poetic, right?) then read the cover copy, then looked it up on Goodreads and saw the 2.84 rating and put it back on the shelf. Reading through the reviews, I thought, "Wow, all these things people don't like, I do like, so I'll try this."
So if you're picking this novel up because you believe you'll be reading about a morally flexible young man experiencing all sorts of tawdry, erotic adventures while he takes other seriously questionable actions, but then he falls "in love" and this helps him realise his lifestyle is unsustainable: put this novel back down. Seriously. You're cruising for disappointment.
Here's what you can expect: a well-written piece of work set in vivid, engaging settings that is about a young asshole misogynist and his old asshole pervert of a godfather, with occasional perfunctory sex scenes so full of (presumably era-appropriate?) euphemisms your head will hurt.
The beginning of this book promises philosophical and moral intrigue. The middle of this book feigns philosophy as an explanation for what amounts to selfish, manipulative behaviour and thoughts. I would have set it down without finishing, but I saw a review saying the protagonist "gets what he deserves" so I continued reading.
Guess what?
He doesn't get what he deserves.
He gets away with more bullshit that shouldn't benefit him, but does. And then he makes another really selfish decision. The last page of this novel made me realise how much time I'd wasted, basically, hoping for some shade of moral goodness or character development from this douchebag. Nope. The guy from the first page of the novel is the exact same guy from the last page of the novel, who just spent 400+ pages being a shithead and getting away with it.
So if you're picking this novel up because you believe you'll be reading about a morally flexible young man experiencing all sorts of tawdry, erotic adventures while he takes other seriously questionable actions, but then he falls "in love" and this helps him realise his lifestyle is unsustainable: put this novel back down. Seriously. You're cruising for disappointment.
Here's what you can expect: a well-written piece of work set in vivid, engaging settings that is about a young asshole misogynist and his old asshole pervert of a godfather, with occasional perfunctory sex scenes so full of (presumably era-appropriate?) euphemisms your head will hurt.
The beginning of this book promises philosophical and moral intrigue. The middle of this book feigns philosophy as an explanation for what amounts to selfish, manipulative behaviour and thoughts. I would have set it down without finishing, but I saw a review saying the protagonist "gets what he deserves" so I continued reading.
Guess what?
He doesn't get what he deserves.
He gets away with more bullshit that shouldn't benefit him, but does. And then he makes another really selfish decision. The last page of this novel made me realise how much time I'd wasted, basically, hoping for some shade of moral goodness or character development from this douchebag. Nope. The guy from the first page of the novel is the exact same guy from the last page of the novel, who just spent 400+ pages being a shithead and getting away with it.
July 11, 2013
I received this book as part of the Goodreads First Reads giveaway and I must say, it was not what I expected at all. The Skull and the Nightingale tells the story of Richard Fenwick, a young man who has recently returned to England after spending some time traveling abroad, the bill for which was being paid by Fenwick's godfather. Fenwick's godfather, Mr. Gilbert, is the closest he has to family and he hopes to stay in his good graces in hopes of being named heir to his large estate. What he does not expect is his godfathers next request. Mr. Gilbert asks Fenwick to go back to living in London but to write to him about all his adventures, specifically those involving strong emotions. Ultimately Fenwick realizes that his godfather is basically living vicariously through him.
I must admit, this is not a book I would normally read but something in the summary caught my attention so I thought I would give it a try. While it is not a book that I will probably ever read again, it was still a good read. The story is told mostly through Fenwick's letters to his godfather as well as through his memories. There are a few scenes where Fenwick describes his sexual encounters but they are not at all graphic. He simply explains what he thinks and feels. The only part of this book that I did not enjoy was the ending. I felt like the story was left unresolved, which is why I only gave it three stars. I felt like there was really no point to the story because even though you are experiencing this man's life, it does not really go anywhere. Other than that, the book was pretty good and very well written.
I must admit, this is not a book I would normally read but something in the summary caught my attention so I thought I would give it a try. While it is not a book that I will probably ever read again, it was still a good read. The story is told mostly through Fenwick's letters to his godfather as well as through his memories. There are a few scenes where Fenwick describes his sexual encounters but they are not at all graphic. He simply explains what he thinks and feels. The only part of this book that I did not enjoy was the ending. I felt like the story was left unresolved, which is why I only gave it three stars. I felt like there was really no point to the story because even though you are experiencing this man's life, it does not really go anywhere. Other than that, the book was pretty good and very well written.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 93 reviews