YA Addicted Book Club discussion

Series/Buddy Reads Archive > The Court of Miracles

Comments Showing 1-35 of 35 (35 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Kayleigh {K-Books}, YA Fantasy Fan (new)

Kayleigh {K-Books} (kayley_12) | 1895 comments Mod
Myself and Britt are currently buddy reading The Court of Miracles by Kester Grant. Feel free to jump in to discuss.

message 2: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
So I love the narration on this one so far! I'm in chapter 3 (view spoiler) Because I am listening to this I am having a harder time with the character names and writing them is a no go currently. Hoping that part gets a little easier with time

message 3: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments I'm reading this one and I'm kind of struggling to keep track of what's going on. There's a lot of characters to keep track of! Also I guess it doesn't really help that I'm not a massive fan of Les Mis!

message 4: by Kayleigh {K-Books}, YA Fantasy Fan (new)

Kayleigh {K-Books} (kayley_12) | 1895 comments Mod
I'm absolutely loving it so far. I'm so intrigued to see more of the separate guilds. I'm not entirely convinced by this being a fantasy retelling at the moment as I haven't seen much fantasy elements so far. I'm up to part 3 (chapter 15)

message 5: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Yeah I was going to say that as well, I'm almost at the same point, on Chapter 14.

message 6: by Kayleigh {K-Books}, YA Fantasy Fan (new)

Kayleigh {K-Books} (kayley_12) | 1895 comments Mod
I’m up to page 269 / chapter 26
(view spoiler)

Honestly loving this book so much. I still think publicising it as a fantasy is wrong. I’m well over half way and still no fantasy elements but I adore the authors writing style. It’s so beautiful and easy to read. It’s so easy to get lost in the book and not realise how much time has passed. After being in a rut and every chapter a challenge in my past few reads it’s a very welcome feeling.

message 7: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
I'm up to the start of chapter 7
Enjoying it a lot. I agree it isn't really fantasy, more a historical retelling. Like I was saying to Kay the other day I am a little worried since I've heard there are a lot of blatant historical inaccuracies. But it isn't a time I know as much about so it might not bother me as much. Also I love Les Mis but this isn't much like it either other than a couple name choices and the time period.
(view spoiler)

message 8: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments I studied history at uni and I can't say I've noticed anything massively blatant but then French history in the 1830s isn't really my strong suit!

message 9: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
That's good news for me Jo!

message 10: by Kayleigh {K-Books}, YA Fantasy Fan (new)

Kayleigh {K-Books} (kayley_12) | 1895 comments Mod
I've finished it. I gave it 4 stars. I really enjoyed it. (view spoiler)

message 11: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Glad you enjoyed it Kay! I'm still struggling with it, but it's a Netgalley book and I'm trying to get my ratio up to 80% by the end of the year, so every book counts.

message 12: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
I haven't listened any further yet but I'll get there!

message 13: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Okay minor complaint on the historical accuracy part, she keeps referencing La Reine De Gauteux which I assume the author means Marie Antoinette and "Let them eat cake". Very nitpicky, but using this is kind of like using "We are not amused" for Queen Victoria, in that Marie Antoinette is never actually recorded as saying it and historians are pretty unanimous that they think the quote was wrongly attributed to her due to the timing that it first appeared not lining up with her arrival in France and lack of famines during the reign of Louis XIV. It's very likely that the phrase was attributed to her in later historical accounts of the revolution. The phrase was originally found in a book published in 1769 and only attributed to a "great princess" which could have been any number of people!

Also the phrase was actually only attributed to Marie Antoinette in 1843, so that's around 10 years after this book is set, so it seems unlikely that she would have been popularly known at the time as La Reine de Gateaux.

Anyway, minor historical rant over!

message 14: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
Good rant Jo! I appreciate it. I don't believe I have gotten to that part yet but I agree with your thoughts.

message 15: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Ha ha thanks! It's just one of those small things that would be really easy to research and get right.

message 16: by Brittany (last edited Jul 22, 2020 11:31PM) (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
I made it up to chapter 23 still enjoying it.
I passed the part you talked about Jo, I am not sure how much I would have noticed it without you just because I am listening not reading and certain things tend to not be so obvious for me that way.
I do agree Kay, not really a fantasy still at this point. The closest part is (view spoiler)

Not sure how to feel about (view spoiler)

message 17: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Ha ha to be honest, most people probably wouldn't, it's a very well embedded myth that Marie Antoinette actually said that! The prince, Louis-Joseph would also have been long dead by this point, he died of tuberculosis at the age of 7 just before the revolution started. Louis-Charles also died of an illness very young, but it would have made more sense if she'd used him as at least he lived through the Revolution.

message 18: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
True enough! I hadn't even thought to check that, French royals are not people I know a lot about and there are way too many Louis' for me to remember who is who.
Keep the facts stuff coming though, love it

message 19: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments I can't say that it's a massive area of expertise for me either, in terms of revolutions, I'm far more familiar with the Russian Revolution than the French one. I usually look stuff up when I'm reading/watching anything historical because I want to know how close to the actual history the writer has stuck! In reality, only one of Marie Antoinette's children, her daughter Marie Therese lived into adulthood, and she actually would have been alive at the time this novel was set, she died in 1851. All of her other children died due to tuberculosis.

message 20: by Kayleigh {K-Books}, YA Fantasy Fan (new)

Kayleigh {K-Books} (kayley_12) | 1895 comments Mod
I'm not a history buff so I definitely didn't pick up on that.

Britt (view spoiler)

message 21: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments I imagine that she means Louis-Joseph to be the fictional son of Louis XVII, which would make more sense as it's very common for royal names to be used over and over again in the same family but it's not exactly clear since she doesn't refer to the King and Queen by name, only title and then you still fall into the trap that Louis XVII died of natural causes, so even in an alternate history, the revolution failing wouldn't necessarily change that. This is where doing alternate history gets tricky because it's a hard line between how much of what happened would have still happened if the event that you change the outcome of didn't happen the same way? I don't know, I'm a history nerd so I think about that kind of thing a lot!

message 22: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
Okay I thought I had just missed the King and Queen being referred to by name but knowing that we are unsure who they even are with it being alternate history kind of bugs me. I agree Jo that is the tricky part of alternate history but when it is done well I love it.
I noticed one listening today though that I have seen other people complain about. What are Faberge eggs doing in with the French royal jewels? First off they don't exist yet, secondly they were for the Russian royalty... What a silly choice of things to add.

message 23: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Nope, they definitely haven't been which makes it confusing because depending on how you've changed the history, there could be several different options! I do enjoy alternate history when it's done well, but I think the author here might not have done as much research as she probably could have!

Ugh I've seen people complain about that one too, though I haven't got to that part yet. That's such an annoying one, it's pretty well known that Faberge eggs are Russian!

message 24: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
I agree the author definitely needed to do some more research! So while I enjoy the story and the courts the setting needs to be fleshed out better!
I just got to part 4, chapter 26

message 25: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Yes, you don't really get a very good sense of time or place! I'm a little behind you, Chapter 23.

message 26: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
You really don't. If you want to market a book as historical, alternative or not, you need to make me feel like I am in that time period. Instead the only reason it feels like France really is the French thrown in and the people's names. I just want more from it! I do feel like I am in an old city while I listen but not one in particular.

Again, even though I have some complaints I am really enjoying the story.

message 27: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Agreed! I'm glad you're still enjoying it though :)

message 28: by Kayleigh {K-Books}, YA Fantasy Fan (new)

Kayleigh {K-Books} (kayley_12) | 1895 comments Mod
The thing that gets me is they've marketed it as fantasy and I'm like huh?

message 29: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Oh I definitely feel that way too, I don't really understand it? Like it's alternative history, that doesn't make it fantasy? I feel like part of my not really enjoying it as much as I thought is because the marketing led me to expect that it was a very different book to what it actually is!

message 30: by Kayleigh {K-Books}, YA Fantasy Fan (new)

Kayleigh {K-Books} (kayley_12) | 1895 comments Mod
I agree. Like I really enjoyed it but I went into it thinking there would be some high fantasy elements and I was a bit sad to see there wasn't. Like there was some hints at something more fantasy/supernatural but not to the extent that I was expecting.

message 31: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments Maybe it will be expanded on in the next book?

message 32: by Kayleigh {K-Books}, YA Fantasy Fan (new)

Kayleigh {K-Books} (kayley_12) | 1895 comments Mod
Hopefully. Either way I will be reading the next book.

message 33: by Jo (new)

Jo Elliott | 1532 comments I'm not sure I will, usually I do give second books in series the benefit of the doubt, especially with debut authors, but I haven't found enough that I've really liked in this one to continue on.

message 34: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
Completely fair Jo. Sometimes a series just doesn't work for a person.
I'm up to chapter 33, less than 2 hours left of audio. Unless something drastic happens I will absolutely read the second book.
(view spoiler)

message 35: by Brittany (new)

Brittany | 4678 comments Mod
I finished it and will be waiting for the next book!

(view spoiler)

As I am going to write my review I keep realizing how much this book should have bothered me. But I was entertained and loved the narration so somehow it worked.

back to top