A twentieth century tale

Although I know I stated previously that I don't read much historical fiction, I am seeing a change of pattern. In fact, I can now confidently say that I do enjoy historical fiction, very much indeed. but Frances Liardet's We Must Be Brave is quite a different breed from my previous post, both in terms of period, topic, approach and style.

A word on the proof cover: I don't know if this will be kept for the hardback when it comes out in February next year, but kudos to the cover designer. Who, by the way, seems to be impossible to identify. Is this the case for most books? Should this change? Surely cover designers should be included in the proofs and finished books?

We Must Be Brave tells the story of Ellen Parr, a young wife who, during the bombing of Southampton in 1940, finds a little girl sleeping at the back of an empty bus. Unable to track down her parents, she takes little Pamela in - if only temporarily, until her real family shows up. Meanwhile, we learn about her past and marry it up with the present; and trace almost the entirety of the 20th century throughout the book, in the first half interchanging between present and past, and in the second half taking bigger jumps forward.

What did I like about it?

Liardet has a writing style that is extremely comfortable to read. I say comfortable because I never lingered; her sentences flow into one another, and there are no pauses or roadblocks. I wouldn't say her style is outstanding, but is very easy and well-structured - and therefore enjoyable.

Oddly enough, I enjoyed the sections about Ellen's past the most, as opposed to the main storyline. Hers is a fascinating story, going from luxury to extreme poverty and describing how a young girl adapts to these changing circumstances, how she gets her first job, the things she appreciates in life. Young Ellen is an interesting character - as well as her best friend, Lucy, who I found to be a complex personality with the most interesting sides to it, both in past and present sections.

In addition, Liardet's attention to detail really helps make this a believable piece of historical fiction (if not the war period itself, more the post-war times). She takes care to include everything from typical habits and hobbies to meals that would be cooked and household objects to be had: Ellen having to borrow black shoes for her first interview (and stockings); bread tins to bake loaves which would 'kiss' in the oven without them; dolls made out of pegs. It's all these little things that help construct a beautiful picture.

What was I not massively fond of?

I have to admit that in the multitude of characters that appear on the scene (often with more than one name to them) I had a bit of trouble remembering who's a friend, who's a foe and who's a dog. I often had to go back to double-check.

The character of Pamela - the little girl found on the bus - just did not work for me, both in terms of character and her relationship with Ellen. It might be that she's a typical eight-year-old, but because she seemed to show no reciprocity for Ellen's immense love, it was hard to believe that she would be the thing that crippled Ellen's soul for the rest of her life.

Which brings me to my third point: the aim of the story. I think Liardet juggles too many ideas at once in this book. All good ideas, mind you, but because she didn't give any of these enough spotlight, I think they overpower each other. There's the Ellen-Pamela relationship; there's the Ellen-Selwyn relationship (her husband) into which we hardly get any true insight; there's Ellen's character by itself, which turns sour in the second half of the book, although this isn't truly explained nor justified in my opinion. Then there's the fairly unnecessary Ellen-Mr Kennett relationship. His character felt like he'd just walked out of a Disney book, if I'm perfectly honest.

A point on the historical element: I think the war feels quite forced onto this book. It is there as a framework, but not much more, and it slowly drifts out of the picture without any true effect on the main characters or their lives. In the beginning, yes, there is bravery, and the effects are felt very strongly. It also affects the lives of some of the supporting characters. But as for the main storyline, I feel this could have been set in any period.

And a final thought: the last section on Ellen in 1974 could have been a tad shorter. Okay, perhaps quite a bit shorter.

Overall...

This is a good story and a good read - it's captivating and draws the reader in quite easily. However, I think the inconsistencies jumble the book up a bit, and what could have been a very touching, honest story instead turns into a platform for ambitious ideas.

None of the characters really resonated with me, and it left me asking too many questions. My main wonder is whether Pamela would really hold a grudge against Ellen, even as an adult, despite now understanding the circumstances under which she was finally taken away from the Parr household. I don't believe so - or if she would, then I should be right in not liking her, not one bit.

6/10

Murder in the Senate

Would you say that Circe by Madeline Miller is historical fiction? It's debatable, because the setting for the book - Greek mythology - isn't exactly history, per say (although accompanied by real events). So perhaps it's more accurate to call it fictional history.

The Year of the Snake by M.J. Trow and Maryanne Coleman, on the other hand, is pure historical fiction. The married couple has written several books, and Mei (M.J.) has written over 100 books in total. It's worth having a look at his website - the sheer number of projects he's taken on is quite fascinating.

This book probably isn't something I would have picked up, I suppose mostly because a, I wasn't aware I enjoyed historical fiction and b, I wasn't aware I enjoyed a murder mystery. And perhaps, as it were, I wouldn't enjoy those things separately - but combined into one, they made a hugely entertaining read.

The Year of the Snake tells the story of Calidus, a recently freed slave. After his master suddenly passes away, Calidus isn't convinced that his death was entirely natural, and begins a city-wide investigation in Rome. The micro level is accompanied by a day-to-day glimpse into the reign of Nero, his follies and obsessions, as well as the sights, sounds and smells of ancient Rome itself.

What did I like about it?

Upon reading the short summary, you may - like me - think this sounds a bit too much like basically every murder mystery ever written, except for the addition of a historical setting. Like me, you'd be wrong though. What the blurb doesn't make clear is that this book doesn't take itself too seriously. It is written in a quite light-hearted, often satirical tone, and adds a pinch of salt to the story through it. Perhaps 'cheeky' is the best word here.

Thanks to this, and also to the research that's clearly gone into this book, I think the writing is excellent. It's very easy reading - perfect for a lazy Sunday or the pool side. You'd be surprised how exciting ancient Rome can be. Details on Roman baths, the Senate, death rituals and the circus all indulge the reader and lead us into the setting of the novel very well. It's quite immersive, which is really what you'd want from any piece of historical fiction.

I also thought that the details about Nero and his reign added another level of interest. He is one of the most interesting characters in Roman history, and the authors give excellent details about his banquets, his habits and his whimsical ways - something of general interest, I believe, surrounded by an air of mystery due to his madness. So it's a clever addition, and in fact ties in with the story eventually too.

What was I not massively fond of?

Is it just me who is bothered about the constant swearing in historical dramatisations? From this book through to the Spartacus TV series, I keep seeing an excessive amount of swearing from Romans. Is this really how they spoke? I have no idea. And fair enough, things like "Jupiter Highest and Best" settle well enough as cursing - but when it comes to "shitting his pants", I'm just not sure it adds so much to the depth. (Then again, if you scroll back through this blog, you'll see me complaining about swearing in basically any book, so maybe I am a prude and it is just me.) But I have to admit, it does add to the comic elements of the novel.

I felt that the characters in the book were somewhat shallow, in the sense that apart from Calidus (our main man) we don't really get a deeper insight into their minds. But then again, for a light-hearted murder mystery, we don't really need to know about daddy issues and childhood trauma.

I'm also not going to pretend that the ending wasn't somewhat predictable - you do get slapped in the face with a few red herrings, but ultimately I'm sure you'll be pretty accurate in your guesses. Towards the end, there are also a few things dropped in that I think weren't absolutely necessary as they don't add to the conclusion (such as the Bacchanalia cult), although they were quite interesting to read about.

Overall...

As I mention above, this is a fun read for a lazy day or the poolside. Hugely entertaining details on an exciting historical period, coupled with a relentless (tenacious?) lead and lots of comic relief characters. Although sometimes the authors can't resist giving us a brief history lesson, for the most part this book is highly visual, entertaining and keeps you turning pages despite yourself.

A word on the ending (more accurately the last sentence): I don't know if it's intentionally satirical or I'm just reading too much into it, but extra points for the subtle humour.

It also opened my eyes to historical fiction in general. Watch out genre, here I come.

6/10