The Historian
discussion
There's No Worse Thief than a Bad Book
message 251:
by
Ryan
(new)
-
rated it 2 stars
Apr 03, 2013 04:20PM
I liked it.
reply
|
flag
The one book that I really thought was lame was Sarah's Key. 
I felt like the author just picked a period of time and a subject that would attract a certain number of readers. Early in the book the point of view character complains about how awful it is to be married to such a gorgeous hunk as her husband is. The couple had been married for, I don't know, 15 to 20 years at that point. After that many years of marriage - of picking up socks, cleaning up after him, etc, etc, who says that about their husband?
When I returned it to the library, I told the librarian what I thought of it and she said that a lot of people had told her the same thing. I never did finish the book (and I almost always do finish them); I just couldn't stand the cliches.
I listened to The Historian on audio and thought it was a great book. Truly well-written and so I listened to another book by the same author, The Swan Thieves. Well-written but not as intriguing. I truly enjoy historical fiction books and I can see that if that is not your "cup of tea" that this would not be the book for you.
Not really into people saying its a bad book, no such thing really. Each to their own I think. Loved this book, got it from my sisters unending pile of non keeper books...it now sits proudly on my keeper shelf
I liked The Historian very much but thought it needed serious editing. The book could easily have been cut down by a third which I think could have kept it from getting on so many people's nerves!
TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH ANY NEGATIVE COMMENTS HERE ABOUT THE HISTORIAN. It is probably one of the best books I have ever read.
I rather like The Swan Thieves so I picked up The Historian. Ridiculous book! 900 pages of droning on. A big secret revealed - be scared! Dracula will punish you by forcing you to catalog his library! Hahaha!!!
Tamela wrote: "Always form your own opinion about a book. Then, if you wish, you can throw it across the room.Personally, I found the Historian a very interesting read. I thought it was clever and mysterious. ..."
I totally agree, you have to form your own opinion. I read it, did not liked it (it is not good literature), but.... it was a guilty pleasure to read it. At the moment of the balance I think I have read worse and better. Ni fu ni fa.
I really liked it. Although at times I was thinking am I ever going to finish this monster of a book? But I did, and I thought the story was very interesting. I can understand why some people would hate it and think it was tedious.
Krista wrote: "I really liked it. Although at times I was thinking am I ever going to finish this monster of a book? But I did, and I thought the story was very interesting. I can understand why some people would..."I enjoyed it, but it was probably a guilty pleasure. I haven't read any of them, but it can't be worse than the Twilight books!
I did find The Historian to be quite a chore due to the jumps in time and that the actual vampire confrontations were rather undramatic, but I did actually like the ambition of the book overall and found the whole concept of a still-living Vlad Tepes from the 15th century to be very clever and the fact that he had amassed a terrific library of rare books over 5 centuries to be also fabulous. What Goodreads fan wouldn't admire that? ;)The book that angered me the most in recent memory was The Hypnotist: [http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...]
I really liked it and it prompted me to read The Swan Thieves which I loathed so much I never bothered finishing it.
Linda, why did you dislike Swan Thieves?
Melissa wrote: "I rather like The Swan Thieves so I picked up The Historian. Ridiculous book! 900 pages of droning on. A big secret revealed - be scared! Dracula will punish you by forcing you to catalog his libra..."hahaha!
Rick wrote: "I liked the Historian. It was intriguing, well written and thoughtfully researched. I thought it better than the DaVinci Code, and enjoyed the story. I think Elizabeth Kostova is going to be great..."
I agree with you. I very much enjoyed the book and Ms. Kostova style of writing. I've read the "Da Vince Code" and "Lost Symbols" and found them entertaining. But it wasn't as exciting as the Historian. Being a History major myself, I enjoyed the fairy tale style of story. It was refreshing to see a more novel like story about Historians.
Hi Patty, just found it really boring and hard to get into. I really loved The Historian so was very disappointed, was just so slow going.
Linda wrote: "Hi Patty, just found it really boring and hard to get into. I really loved The Historian so was very disappointed, was just so slow going."I actually just picked up a copy of Swan Thieves for $2 the other day, even though I hated The Historian...it seems that most who liked one disliked the other, so I'm hoping I'll follow that pattern, ha ha!
I enjoyed reading The Historian, although it had too many "refrigerator moments"--Hitchcock's term for the feeling you have after watching a movie, when you go to get a snack, and suddenly realize the movie never tied up certain plot points. I liked the long, slow writing style that built up the suspense. And, in spite of the story-within-a-story-within-a story complications, I liked the characters.The book I have most hated is The Lord of the Flies, which I had to read in High School. Granted, that was--ahem--some time ago. Maybe I should give it another try? On second thought--No. Too many good books out there.
If you are forced to read a book in high school and hated it--Ethan Frome by Edith Wharton, in my case--, and then decades later, having read more of the same author and really liked her, you might read the once-hated book and be surprised you like it, with the benefit of age and experience...I have loved her House of Mirth, in recent years.
The Da Vinci Code would make a great Creative Writing text book of what not to do. Dan Brown uses almost every device that makes an ordinary book into a steaming pile of crap. The ideas were lifted from the research of Bagenti and Leigh, who tried to pass off The Priory Of Scion as non fiction. I found The Historian an okay book if you wanted to get lost in a fat volume., and as I was reading it on a long plane ride, it did the trick. Definitely a 3 star for me, which is the minimum for readability.
Claudia wrote: "I have to stick up for the Historian - I LOVED the way I learned so much about the history of the Ottoman Empire, and (what's now known as) Hungary and Romania. I am a hopeless history nerd, and I ..."Claudia wrote: "I have to stick up for the Historian - I LOVED the way I learned so much about the history of the Ottoman Empire, and (what's now known as) Hungary and Romania. I am a hopeless history nerd, and I ..."
If you want something with incredibly detailed historical background, I suggest the Baroque Cycle by Neal Stephenson. It covers the time of the English restoration (late 17th to early 18th century) and the founding of the Royal Society. It was so detailed about the architecture and geography of London that I was shocked to learn that Stephenson was American. Three volumes of nearly a thousand pages each, it is one to get lost in.
Jane wrote: "If you are forced to read a book in high school and hated it--Ethan Frome by Edith Wharton, in my case--, and then decades later, having read more of the same author and really liked her, you might..."Ethan Frome was my most hated high school book! I can't even really remember anything except how much I hated it.
Clay wrote: "The Da Vinci Code would make a great Creative Writing text book of what not to do. Dan Brown uses almost every device that makes an ordinary book into a steaming pile of crap. The ideas were lifted..."It was Baigent,Leigh and Lincoln who wrote the book that Dan Brown was alleged to have plagiarised, and their book is based on work by a French author (whose name I can't remember at present).Brown acknowledges their part in his book by naming one of his characters "Leigh Teabing",an anagram of Baigent and Leigh.Lincoln now prefers to distance himself from their book "The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail", which is based on documents deposited in the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris by The Priory of Sion (NOT "Scion",which means something completely different!) and conversations & correspondence with one Pierre Plantard,among others.
The "Historian" was a masterpiece next to "The Swan thieves." Man these are better than NyQuil if you can keep from throwing-up!
I quite enjoyed The Historian, haven't read The Swan Thieves yet, although I do own it. I seem to remember reading another novel by the same author around the same time as I read The Historian, but can't remember the name of it....it was a long time ago and I've probably read thousands of books since! I usually have around half a dozen or so books on the go at any time (not counting my e-books). I read pretty much anything, and although there are a lot of books I have only read once and would never read again, there's only one that springs to mind that I have never finished - Vernon God Little....I found it to be a case of hype over substance and thought it was absolute drivel! Others, of course, may disagree.
Agreed. It was bad. It had such promise, but just fell flat.
Claudia wrote: "I have to stick up for the Historian - I LOVED the way I learned so much about the history of the Ottoman Empire, and (what's now known as) Hungary and Romania. I am a hopeless history nerd, and I ..."I loved The Historian. I am a big fan of historical fiction and found the details to be fascinating. I absolutely HATED A Confederacy of Dunces. It was horrible. Someone told me that it was a life changing book and the best book he had ever read. I didn't like anything about it enough to keep reading. I will usually finish a book regardless, but this book was too painful to continue. I gave up and was glad I did.
Lisa wrote: "Claudia wrote: "I have to stick up for the Historian - I LOVED the way I learned so much about the history of the Ottoman Empire, and (what's now known as) Hungary and Romania. I am a hopeless hist..."I've read them both, but The Historian has stayed with me a lot better than Confederacy of Dunces. I enjoyed them both, but the latter is something I can barely recall now.
I loved The Historian. It had a lot of detail, but I am a history buff, so I enjoyed it. On the other hand, A Confederacy of Dunces was so awful, I could not even read past the first few chapters, which is unusual for me. I can usually get through a book, even if I don't necessarily like it. Not this time; I did not care about or particularly like any of the characters. Ignatius came across as a sniveling self-centered slob. Maybe it would have gotten better had I stuck it out, but my to-read pile gets larger by the day and I could not bring myself to devote any more time to it.
I loved this book. I remember when I got it I couldn't put it down. I might pick it up and read it again in a year or so. The first book that comes to mind as one I absolutely hated is Flowers in the Attic. I know, I know. It's a classic, the story was interesting, well written, ect, ect. The truth is that it was just too disturbing for me and my level of disturbing tolerance is pretty high. I didn't even flinch when reading Sybil, and my favorite genres are horror and paranormal but this was just too much. I had to force myself to finish reading it and when I finally finished it I was relieved. I never feel relieved when I finish a book so that was a first.
I loved the Historian. I think it one of the best Vampire books written. I see many of you felt it dragged, but I have an appreciation for the author's cadence and use of language. Her description of place put me there.
Jackie wrote: "I loved the Historian. I think it one of the best Vampire books written. I see many of you felt it dragged, but I have an appreciation for the author's cadence and use of language. Her description ..."I couldn't have said it better myself, and I am not a fan of vampires or the genre. Thanks for putting it so well!
Lori wrote: "Jackie wrote: "I loved the Historian. I think it one of the best Vampire books written. I see many of you felt it dragged, but I have an appreciation for the author's cadence and use of language. H..."Absolutely! I also loved the book and was rather disappointed when recently I had to travel to Czech Republic but the timetable meant I couldn't get a train. I really wanted to see some of eastern Europe in a similar way to the book as I found myself transported there by the writing. A beautiful book in my opinion.
I bought The Historian for 50 cents off the clearance rack at Half Price Books, not knowing anything about the storyline other than the brief description printed on the back cover. I'll tell it to you true - I would have gladly paid $50 for that tattered, paperback copy of what is now one of my favorite books of all time. It was love at first read for me. I found it mysterious and romantic and chilling and beautiful. The unique take on and intertwining of factual Vlad Tepes history and the fictional vampire legend, plus Kostova's exceptional talent for creating atmosphere and her amazing description of foreign lands entranced me. I couldn't put it down. In fact, I read it again about 8 months after my first read and I know I'll revisit it again at some point.
As for books I absolutely loathed, the two that spring instantly to mind are The Pillars of the Earth and World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War. Extremely disappointing experiences, as I had high hopes for both.
I specifically bought Pillars right after reading my first Ken Follett novel, the outstanding Jackdaws (another of my all-time favorites). Where Jackdaws was a thrilling and emotional page-turner with intrigue, action, and excellent character development, Pillars was a nightmare of plodding plotting, irritating characters, and mind-numbing inaction. I finished all but the last 100 or so pages - I couldn't force myself to read one more god-awful word. My disgust with Pillars was so intense that I threw it in the trash where it belonged all along.
As for World War Z, I made it about halfway through and was so incredibly bored, I abandoned my copy in the break room at work. The strict "oral history" format is completely ineffective and wrong for a zombie novel. You can forget about action, tension, mystery, or thrills. I didn't care about any of the characters. And there was a total lack of continuity from one character's history to the next. In other words, World War Z suffers from the complete absence of a plot of any kind.
And yes, I am well aware that both Pillars and World War Z are extremely popular fan favorites and everyone just loves them to pieces. I don't care about any of that - my verdict is they both suck. HARD.
I read The Historian in one night while I was ill and couldn't sleep. Really liked it and got hardcovered one for my birthday. It kinda makes me sad to hear so many people dislikes it.Anyway, a book so bad I couldn't finish reading it...omg I can't remember right now but it usually happens when I start a new book totally different than the last one. It takes time and pages, but most of the time I finish it even when I'm bored. I always hope it will amaze me eventually or at least justify the time spent reading it.
I too just finished The Historian and I loved it. It has me utterly curious to know more about the countries and places mentioned in it and even found myself googling info about Vlad the Impaler!
Well, I loved both Pillars of the Earth and The Historian. Before reading Pillars, I had not read anything by Ken Follett, since he seems to write more in the thriller/mystery genres, which I don't have a huge interest in. Not having any expectations about him may have helped. It isn't great literature, but the story does move along nicely. I don't believe I've ever read anything involving zombies. I suppose if something came out that was really good, I might, but I'm not holding my breath.
Eileen wrote: "Well, I loved both Pillars of the Earth and The Historian. Before reading Pillars, I had not read anything by Ken Follett, since he seems to write more in the thriller/mystery genres, which I don'..."Maybe you should give The Passage and The Twelve ago by Justin Cronin. The creatures are supposedly vampires, but this is mentioned only a few times and they are referred to more as virals and they are very zombie like. They are brilliant books but very complex.
I really enjoyed "The Historian." It made me want to travel eastern Europe.One Second After by William Forstchen was quite a lot of melodrama to choke down. I got it all down but just thinking about it still makes me nauseous.
Chuckell wrote: "Sorry, I messed up on the title the last time I tried to start this discussion. The Historian is a book that truly lived up to that Italian saying--I was angry at myself for every second I spent ..."
I feel the same way about the last Clan of Cave Bear book.
You should all avoid The Chemistry of Tears by Peter Carey as well, made me want to dig my eyes out with a spoon............
Steven wrote: "Karen wrote: "Just about half the books in Oprah's book club have qualified for me. Where the author wallows in the misery of self absorbed people who are annoying. "House of Sand" and Fog and m..."Yep OBCs are always a pass.......
Several books that I love have been on Oprah's list, like East of Eden.
Oprah's list is good when she picks classics but her choices for contemporary literature are questionable IMO.
Well, I also really liked Pillars of the Earth, Middlesex, The Road, A Million Little Pieces, The Poisonwood Bible, and I Know This Much is True. I know that not everyone likes any of those, but I don't understand why some people steer clear of a book simply b/c it has an Oprah sticker on it...ETA: Of course, it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to pick it UP just b/c of the sticker, either.
I enjoyed the Historian for the most part. I thought it was incredibly detailed and I guess relatively factual. It just had some very slow parts through out the book. It needed condensing to keep the action and interest going. I wouldn't even call it waffle but just to detailed, unnecessary detail that could have been left out.When I finished the book ,I did think "that was pretty good" and worth the battling on that some parts needed. I also read it in hardback form, big mistake, it was like doing a work-out!
If your a patient reader and have a taste for history you'll read it and enjoy it, but it's not edge of your seat sort of stuff. That is not to say that it didn't have exciting parts to it by any means.
I have read a number of Steven King books that were far far more boring so don't be put off.
I have to say I liked The Historian. It was a little too detailed at times, but the overall story was good.
Have to say this book "The Historian" was definitely not my cup of tea. I felt the daughter could have been left out of the story altogether, she was like the two grown kids in Bridges of Madison County, a Big Yawn and then back to the real story. I did read this for a vampire novel...and I was disappointed.
She did write another: THE SWAN THIEVES
