Rebels and traitors

Rebels and traitors

2009 • 752 pages

Ratings3

Average rating3

15

This is a book of 742 pages in hardback, thick with historical and personal detail; but it's well written and not difficult to get through. I read it in three consecutive days, during which I had other things to do that prevented continuous reading.

The good points are the sense of historical authenticity (though I haven't studied the period and can't judge its accuracy) and the wide variety of well-drawn characters. By the time you've finished it, you've really experienced the English Civil War.

Bad points? I think you need some interest in the historical background, because in a sense the book is about the history; the characters seem to have been chosen as examples of people who lived through it (or, in some cases, failed to do so). The characters are of some interest in themselves, but they are team players rather than big stars. At times the pace of the story slows to allow some history to be explained.

From my personal point of view, this is not the kind of book I'd normally choose to read. I read it because I've read and liked other books by the same author. However, it's the story of how various typical people experienced the English Civil War, and naturally they had a pretty bad time on the whole.

I generally prefer stories in which the hero gets to the end having made some significant achievements, and having had good as well as bad experiences on the way. In particular, I like a happy ending. This story is more realistic than that: it tells of ordinary people suffering and having only minor achievements. So from my point of view it's a long story that's relatively downbeat all the way, and I'll probably never get around to rereading it. As a general rule, I don't normally give more than two stars to books I'm unwilling to reread, so this gets two stars. This is not an ‘objective' assessment of its quality: all ratings are subjective. My ratings indicate how much each book appeals to me personally, and how often I'm likely to reread it.

July 27, 2010Report this review