Life of a mainly unhappy man

So boring that I found myself mentally writing shopping lists and daydreaming and not reading pages for a long time.

This is a dense book but really interesting. It is historical fiction and tells the tale of a man and his redemption or restoration. It takes place in England during the reign of King Charles. I got a kick out of the references to the royal dogs (like my own Chloe). The lead character endured great tragedy and goes from being an orphaned philanderer who failed medical studies to a favorite of the king who is placed in a palace in the country and married to the king's lover (for appearances sake). He tries his hand at painting and fails.....but continues to make dear and loyal friends along his jaded path. The path meanders and takes him through the kings court, pubs, royal gardens, the beds of laundresses and eventually a mental institution in the country. I felt very transported by this book and it's beautifully written.

This is a wonderful book and one that I often finds comes to mind even thought I read it years ago. The book takes its name from the restoration of a king to the throne of England. Robert Merivel is the protagonist in the story, a man awakening to himself and the effect he has on the world.
The era is caught well with some brilliant evocations of London and also the life of the early Quakers. It builds to a climax that is perhaps unexpected but (for me at least) deeply satisfying.

I cant believe this was seen as worthy of making in to a movie.
Seriously.
I only pushed through it in hopes it would redeem itself and get better. It didn't. What is with the ending in particular? Is that his dying imaginations, or a fever dream, or what?
Probably my least favourite book I have read in quite a long time.

I expected this to be good, but I also expected a romp. Was very pleasantly surprised at how thoughtful and moving this was.

I came across this book under serendipitous circumstances. I was at the recent Book Box Sale (an entire box of books for $50) when I saw this book near the cashier. It had a pretty cover and, totally judging the book by its cover, I picked it up and, turned out, it had an interesting premise and an above-average rating on Goodreads. So I purchased the book and decided to dig into it this week.

Now, this is a book I hadn't heard before, by an author whom I also hadn't heard before. To start things off on the positive side, I want to say that I love the way Tremain writes. A little longwinded, sure, but she has an old fashioned way of writing that makes her passages very textured. It feels good to read in my mind's mouth (if there's such a thing), and it is beautiful writing without being convoluted. This is exactly the kind of writing I like in historical fictions, and it does make me want to explore Tremain's other books.

I also want to say that it is incredibly difficult for a writer to write a loveable losers — and our protagonist is certainly one, at least at the beginning of the book. He is vain, self-centred and is completely devoid of integrity, as long as a thing he does (or doesn't do) pleases the King. This is also the reason why he entered into an agreement with the King to become a so-called 'paper groom'. That is, he agrees to marry one of the King's mistresses, just as long as he gets to live lavishly in the countryside as payment. Everybody in town knows that he is a fool for doing so, and he gets no respect for what he does. However, to our protagonist, as long as the King is happy because of him, then he, too, is pleased.

What I love about Tremain's characterisation here is that she has a way of really bringing us to the side of the protagonist in the course of the book, which is difficult considering the starting point. The book is called 'Restoration' and, aside from the fact that the book is set in the Restoration Period, it's also pointing to the character's redemption and restoration. Spoiler alert, but by the end of the book, after much trials and tribulation, our unlikeable protagonist does become a better person, and he is restored to his former life — only this time, he deserves it.

However, I do have two main issues with this book.

The first criticism is this: male authors are often criticised for the way female characters are portrayed in their books. Female characters are often 'dispensable', and they are there to serve or to be saved by the protagonist (often male), thus allowing him (usually him) to become the hero of the story. In such stories, the female characters are often prostitutes, or poor street urchins, or handicapped, or she dies — you get the idea. If I were a woman, I wouldn't be too happy either. In fact, I think noticing such issues in books I read has made me a better reader overall.

However, this book, written by a woman, commits the exact same problems that many feminists today decry. For example, our protagonist develops several love (or lust) interests throughout this book, and the women either become successful prostitutes, become exiled or die from childbirth. These events are also there only to serve the progression of our male protagonist. It isn't very big of an issue for me, because women in that day and age (17th century to be exact) were probably not treated very well anyway, but Tremain — a woman — wrote this in the 1980s. I just feel like, to level such criticisms against male writers and ONLY male writers is just patiently unfair. It seems to be a trope that even female writers commit as well.

Another issues that I have with this book is actually the ending. Now, the protagonist's journey to redemption is a believable one. After being exiled, he goes to work in an insane asylum of sorts, and there he learns to be more caring towards others and be less attached to worldly desires. However, the one that he had trouble leaving behind was his attachment to the King, and how he still wanted, more than anything, to please him. Now, the King is 100% the reason why he was in the state that he was in. In fact, the King was the only who exiled him in the first place. So to have the King being such an integral part of his redemption and restoration at the end of the book just doesn't feel right with me. I feel like, in order for our protagonist to fully redeem himself and be restored, one of the main things is to detach his feelings and attachments to the King. However, the 'reward' in the end is not complete segregation, but the acceptance of the King's gift. He's back in his old house, with his old servants, and even though he is now less self-centred and more kindly to the people around him, he is still very much surrounded by his former life — thanks to the King. As such, I just cannot help but feel that his so-called 'restoration' is complete or true, unless that is what Tremain is gunning for?

Either way, an enjoyable though slightly long historical novel, with a questionable ending that is sure to spark debates.