Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
19 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
An ambitious project badly executed, August 25, 2002
It is noted on the endpapers that it took Pamela Kaufman fifteen years to reasearch and complete "The Book of Eleanor." Judging by the book I read, the manuscript must have spent fourteen and a half of those years in a drawer someplace.Eleanor of Aquitaine has always been an attractive subject for those interested in medieval history--in a time when women counted only as brood mares, she managed to gain enormous power not only as the wife to two kings and mother to two more, but as duchess of Aquitaine and countess of Poitou in her own right. When her story is presented well (and, like other reviewers, I will also cite Sharon Kay Penman's novels as examples), she is trememdously fascinating. In the hands of Pamela Kaufman, however, she is a shrill, imperious self-centered harpy. If that wasn't bad enough, Kaufman throws in a completely--and admittedly--fictional love affair between Eleanor and her Aquitanian captain and asks the reader to believe that this man fathered three of Eleanor's children, including the future Richard Lionheart. Also, Kaufman's Eleanor is dragged kicking and screaming into her second marriage to Henry of England, while history strongly indicates Eleanor wanted the marriage and probably had a hand in arranging it. Add in other enormous historical liberties and just plain bad writing (Kaufman is inordinately fond of exclamation points and crudity for crudity's sake) and you have what could have been a very original novel become an exercise in tedium. There are many excellent books, both fiction and non-fiction, about Eleanor of Aquitaine. "The Book of Eleanor" is not one of them.
|
|
|
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
--Sadly disappointing--, May 18, 2003
THE BOOK OF ELEANOR is fairly entertaining as a story of fiction. It actually reminded me of a rather steamy historical romance with little basis in truth. I think that the author took too many liberties with her subject. History has given us quite a bit of information about Queen Eleanor, but the author ignored some important facts and chose to weave a story where Eleanor had a lover who supposedly fathered several of her children. I also had a problem with the way the character of Thomas a Becket was written. The author made him into a nasty and despicable person. I approached this book with a great deal of enthusiasm because Eleanor of Aquitaine is one of my favorite historical subjects and had a very unique life. As a teenager she was married to King Louis VII of France and later divorced him and married Henry Anjou who became King Henry II of England. She was also the mother of King Richard the Lionhearted and the very unpopular King John who was forced to sign the Magna Carta. Eleanor's life was so full and interesting that it was completely unnecessary to fabricate stories about her. I know this is a novel, but the author did not do justice to Eleanor or her life. One of the few things that I liked about this book was the jacket illustration of Queen Eleanor.
|
|
|
29 of 36 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
A Romantic Fantasy, September 26, 2002
Filled with romantic poetry from the famous "courts of love" of ancient Aquitaine and Poitiers, Pamela Kaufman's Book of Eleanor has incredible shelf appeal.....the reviews are spectacular; Washington Post says it;s "absolutely splendid;" the Sun-Times "superbly written;" and the Kansas City Star goes so far as to have it rivaling Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Wow!.....at least that's what I thought when I got my copy. This one is written for fans of romance, not for historical novel afficionados. Let me explain the strong points of Kaufman's writing, which are probably best said by the review from the Detroit Free Press on the back of the dust jacket, where the publishers have excerpted the phrase "amusing historical novel." That's the most accurate of all the reviews, with the emphasis on amusing and a focus on the romantic speculation that has surrounded the relationship between Eleanor and the troubadour Bernard of Ventadour.Kaufman fans the flames of ancient speculation and creates a romance novel where Ventadour evolves into not only the legendary songsmith that he may well have been, but also a warrior knight every bit the equal of Richard the Lionhearted (who Kaufman makes not only the student of the troubadour, but also his son!) So it's obvious that Kaufman crafts her novel around the legend that there was a romantic relationship between Eleanor and Ventadour. This is the primary nugget of the entire tale that weaves itself into the first 30 of the 31 chapters. The lovers engage in hidden assignations where half of Eleanor's famous "devil's brood" of infant kings-to-be are conceived along with the political revolutions that will in the end foil Henry II's empire building. Throughout their own marriages, constant warfare, and long separations the love persists (in the tradition of the 20th century romance novel) until at long last Henry is dead, Richard is King, and the lovers are reunited in unexpected bliss for their final years together. The fact that too many primary sources appear candid enough to speak to the chivalric love between the two while at the same time stating that it was unlikely that there was any physical relationship, places this novel well outside the realm of historical novels and solidly into the romance category. What I found horrifying was the way Kaufman turns all the primary male characters in Eleanor's life into demons, with the exception of Ventadour (of course). I realize this may be a requirement of the romance novel formula, but it is very clear that Henry II did not brazenly rape Eleanor to make her his wife and future Queen. Alison Weir (who is a meticulous researcher) in her book on Eleanor says only "Eleanor sent envoys to Henry, asking him to come at once and marry her; this was not necessarily a proposal, ....for it is possible that the couple had already agreed to marry." And even in this speculation she cites the well respected Gervase of Canterbury, among other primary sources. And I must admit that I have major problems with St. Thomas a Becket being demonized as well. This historical facts are extremely well documented that he was not martyred at the high altar at Canterbury. Anyone who has been there is well aware of the exact spot just inside the Martyrs Door where the Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury dedicated a new altar within the last decade. And anyone with an elementary knowledge of forensics knows that vermin will leave a body after it cools, exactly as the contemporary accounts describe the lice and other creatures exiting the Saint's hair shirt and braises the evening of the murder. But Kaufman's greatest sin is the way she turns Thomas into a spiritual monster with no one to defend him at his hour of need. It is well documented by eye witnesses that Edward Grim attempted to defend Becket and nearly lost his arm as a result. Eleanor is one of my favorite characters and I consider myself a serious fan of her life. However, there were great men associated with her and they were not all demons all the time. It pains me to see a story constructed at the expense of rejecting a considerable body of historical fact. The legend of Eleanor continues to grow rapidly today. Kaufman's book needs to be considered an interesting aberration, not a part of the legend, for it contains too much that is false.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Pamela Kaufman
by Pamela Kaufman
by Margaret Ball
