I did not know a huge amount about Marie Antoinette and felt this was a good introduction. Sometimes, I could get the gist of it from what was going on but I still would have liked to know what was actually said.įrom what I've read, Plaidy's work is considered very historically accurate and while it's not something I require from my historical fiction, it is certainly something I can appreciate (though I do struggle to understand how one woman could research and write as many books as she did in her life time - I worked out she would have to have written at least 2 books per year). But in the US, most students choose to learn Spanish, not French and unfortunately I did not always have Google with me while reading. So it's understandable the author might assume her readers know enough French to know these basic words and terms. Granted, the author was born and raised in England and I understand most English schools teach basic French. I just found it rather lazy coming from such a highly acclaimed author.Ī minor complaint but I also didn't like the fact that Plaidy frequently used french words and terms without always explaining what they meant. The same thing occured with other characters too. Words like "dainty" and "frivolous" were used far too often to describe Antoinette when there are plenty of suitable synonyms. The same adjectives seemed to be used over and over again. I suppose the lack of depth in the beginning was merely because Antoinette herself lacked much depth until her world began to change.
The gradual evolution of Antoinette's character was well portrayed and the ending was very moving. But by the end of the book, I felt it was well worth the read. At first, I wasn't fond of the writing style - not because it wasn't modern but because it just didn't seem to lend itself to much depth.
0 kommentar(er)
