A tough one to rate. This is nothing like "The Room" by the same author EXCEPT that she manages to match her style of writing to the story-teller and period remarkably well. So much so that had one might even think the two books were written by completely different people. This story is set in the 1800s and is based on true events. The chapters are short so it's nice to read and the way it is written is more of the old style which means there are some lovely old phrases and words that one rarely comes across in more modern novels. The book didn't wow me, but I still enjoyed the read.

I was very disappointed about this book, I read Room by Emma Donoghue and really wanted to read another book by her because it was very good, very beautiful!
I found this book in a London bookstore and bought it without knowing what it was about,
I found it really dull and haven't even finished it (that's very rare for me to not finish a book!)
and I doubt if I'll ever will.

This book was intense. In my opinion, this is an excellent work of Historical Fiction and OMG, that ending! o_O!

I quite enjoyed this but did struggle with the use of wording at times! Overall a good story and one I would recommend

IF ENGLAND HAD LISTENED TO MARTIN BUCER IN 1550, NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED.

In other words, blerg, Victorians. However, Donoghue made me care about them, so good job!

one of those odd books that i end up liking only after the fact, after long contemplation. i was expecting a writing style as bold and imaginative as that of room or slammerkin, but found instead something much more flat and even toned. makes for slow reading but in hindsight i can see why it might work better that way.

historical fiction can be hit or miss with me. often it is the (self-trumpeted) meticulously researched work that feels the most like a fraud; facts and figures are made to stand in, like fetishized army regimentalia, in place of any sustained consideration of the flesh and bone underneath. this is not one of those books, but i'm having a difficult time trying to explain why. if the flesh and bone of a story is its language, then i think this book succeeds in showing that the past is all perception, structure, discourse, context...how a thing is said, how it is recorded.

and yet i didn't like this as much as i liked her other books. maybe because this one feels too glib at times, the morals too easy? i'm not sure. going to mull over it a little more.

---

oh hey! turns out emma donoghue has got a phd in english lit!

Nooooot enoooooough lesbiaaaaaans, said Lauren about every book ever.
Why is it that all of the really really good writers only hint at LGBT themes, rather than outright devoting books to it? All of the ones ive managed to find are either badly written or the sexuality is so subtle it's almost pointless.
I'm working my way through E D's books though, because I love her sheer historical research and writing style, and a few look more promising on this front, so we shall see.

A piece of fiction based on a real and for it's time, sensational divorce case of the Victorian times. No wringing her hands, innocent and deeply wronged heroine here but you end up feeling for her simply because how the law, the society, the whole deck was stacked against her.
And for all those young and not-so-young women who claim not to be feminists, here is an example of how if some women did not take up the cudgels for them, their comfortable life would not have even existed!

This book was just fine. It is exactly the kind of thing I would never even pick up ("Victorian scandal!") except that I so enjoyed Room that I thought I would take a chance on a proven author. The book was pleasant enough, but it felt like it took forever to get to the end - and end that somehow wasn't satisfying. I liked the "based on an actual story" aspect, and the fact that the research only turned up so much, so there was room for fictional embellishment, but I wish I felt like the time reading this book had felt more well spent.