Phillipa Gregory does a wonderful job of recreating a historical period, and I did enjoy her other Tudor work, The Other Boleyn Girl. I expected to enjoy this one as much, but couldn't.
I found the indiscriminately sympathetic portrayal of Mary (known to history as Bloody Mary) troubling. The author seemed to think that because Mary was a wronged wife, her excesses were excusable. Even more disturbing, and harder to swallow, is that the main character, Hannah, a secret Jew who lives in fear of being burned as heretic, remains loyal and uncritical of Mary until the end.
Either Hannah is an insensitive hypocrite, indifferent to the suffering of others because of her own safety as a royal favorite, or she is a poorly drawn character. It is hard to believe someone whose own mother was burned at the stake could remain loyal to a woman who sent so many to be burned alive.
Gregory blames Mary's ministers, pretending Mary was largely unaware of what was being done. A ruler with Mary's absolute power "unaware"? That makes her either a disconnected, incompetent ruler (not Gregory's view), or one so weak she was completely dominated by her ministers, which there is no reason to believe.
Gregory did succeed in showing how sad Mary's life was in many ways: Early separation from her mother due to her father's selfish whims, loss of her position, a youth spent in a kind of exile, an unfaithful husband.
However, I also saw her parents' flaws in her: obsessive attachment to a indifferent man, fanaticism and sense of absolute truth which both parents possessed, and worse, a ruthlessness and cruelty in enforcing her will inherited from her father.
"Bloody Mary" traumatized her country and was, ironically, probably one of the reasons England turned staunchly Protestant. If you happened to catch the recent cable movie "Charles II, The Last King" you can see how strongly the hatred/fear of Catholics persisted over a century later.
The other strange thing about "The Queen's Fool" is the unsympathetic portrayal of Elizabeth, the ruler who would prove the most tolerant of religous practices. What is worse is that Gregory's and Hannah's condemnation of Elizabeth is largely based on qualities, actions or feelings that Hannah also exhibits.
For example, Hannah's (and our) first view of Elizabeth is of a 14 year old girl flirting and kissing a married man (Thomas Seymour, a notorious womanizer). Yet, for much of the novel, Hannah is in love with a married man. She even spies on and betrays a trusting mistress (Mary) for love of him. Still, Elizabeth is considered a "whore" by Hannah (a word greatly overused by Gregory, used for any sexually active woman, though there were kinder words in use at the time).
Hannah also condemns Elizabeth for her secret Protestantism, stange considering she herself is a secret Jew. Why does she feel such loyalty to Catholicism anyway? It is the Catholics of Spain who have particularly persecuted her people, and Mary's husband is the Spanish King. English Protestants were benign by contrast.
The historical information about 16th century European Jews was interesting, and the most worthwhile part of "The Queen's Fool." Otherwise, not recommended.
