data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e79da/e79daa5973db09ce4499d439a1b9b9eb9cbfa271" alt=""
I started out thinking that I was not going to love this book. I am not that fond of epistolary novels, and the last one I read (check out my not-so glowing review of Between Friends) was so bad that I almost put this book back down once I'd picked it up. But after resisting the pull of the story for 50 pages or so, I was drawn completely into the lives of the characters. Juliet reminded me of a character from a period mystery I read recently (this time a glowing review of A Duty to the Dead)-a spunky, scrappy, snarky, but ultimately kind and loving young woman. And I think that the reason that this worked where Between Friends did not is because each of the letter writers had such a distinctive voice. Despite everything being told second hand, the novel felt very intimate and personal, and I felt like the character development was pretty good. But what really made the novel work for me was the historical events it was based on.
I knew that the Channel Islands were occupied during WWII, and I already had some vague idea about their relation to France and England politically (which is to say, they "belong" to England but have their own government, a bit like Puerto Rico, I suppose). But this novel filled in some details in my admittedly sketchy picture of that period in British history. And like any good historical novel, it led me to do some more reading and research on the topic. Rather than using lots of long exposition to provide background, the stories of the islanders comes out in dribs and drabs over the course of Juliet's relationship with them, and the novel feels light and easy to read, while at the same time having some substance-not an easy balance to maintain, but one that Burrows and Shaffer pull off rather well.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Penny for your thoughts...