Hi everyone. Welcome back to Bibliophilia Book Reviews. Today, I’m doing my April Wrap Up and this month I finished 8 books and DNF’d 2. Here are my thoughts on all of them. Please bear with me, it’s a bit of a long one.
1. CLASSIC AND MAGIC REALISM: The Master and Margarita by Mikhail Bulgakov
I picked this book up for one of my book clubs, and I admit I had never heard of it before. It is also not a book that I would typically associate with Russian literature because it is so unlike Crime and Punishment or War and Peace. But I kinda get it now. Yes, this book deserves its current place in the canon. The Master and Margarita is a satire of life in Russia and Russian politics during the years in which Stalin ruled the country. But what is more, it is an attempt to answer one of the fundamental and unanswerable questions of human existence: Why do bad things happen to good people? Do bad things happen at the behest of God, whose orders are followed by Satan and his cohort? Is Satan an agent of God? This is a dense and complicated book. It is also not a book for everyone, and Bulgakov himself knew that it could get him in a lot of trouble. That is why he burned it several times. I think it is worth the read, and I am glad I picked it up.
2. CONTEMPORARY AND ROMANCE: Blame it on the Brontes by Annie Sereno (DNF)
After reading such a dense and philosophical novel, I wanted to read something light. So I picked Blame It On The Brontës by Annie Sereno. This author is a librarian, and I am all for supporting librarians and people who love books like I do. Unfortunately, I could not finish this book. I really wanted to like it, and when I read the synopsis I wasn’t entirely sure I would. But I went ahead and bought it because, let’s be honest, I would pick up anything with the formula Brontë + romance. But I was right. This book did not work for me. It had absolutely nothing to do with the Brontë sisters.
The female protagonist is an academic specialist on Emily, Charlotte, and Anne, but she has not published anything in a while and is about to lose her job. So, in a mad dash, she decides to search for the reclusive and mysterious author C.L. Garland and write her biography. The best part is that C.L. Garland, who writes spicy retellings of classic literature, lives in Athena’s hometown of Laurel, Illinois. The male protagonist is an ex-lawyer turned baker who moved back to Laurel three years ago and is now the owner of As You Like It Café. And while I appreciated all the literary references, like the café named after one of Shakespeare’s plays, I didn’t like either one of the protagonists well enough to root for them into becoming a couple, for the third time apparently. Guess, third time’s the charm. But if you ask me, there’s a reason why they broke up the previous two times. Anyway.
Thorne Kent, the ex-boyfriend, is rather flat and forgettable. Not at all what you would expect of the epitome of male contemporary romance leads and after whom the entire genre was created: Mr. Darcy. And that’s what I’ve found out about me and romance. I have to love the male protagonist in order to finish the book, and that didn’t happen here. I also found Athena’s situation unrealistic. Yes, I can accept that she hasn’t published in a while and that she has problems at work with other members of the staff in her department (of the university she works at) as we all do in our personal work scenarios at times, but what felt so out of left field for me was her decision to chase after an author who doesn’t want to be found, and which is obviously her ex-boyfriend’s pen name, instead of focusing on something that actually had to do with the Brontës. I mean, their name is on the title of the book. And maybe it does, and I just didn’t get that far, but I didn’t it think worthwhile to stick around and find out. Sorry. Unfortunately, I was bored by this point and I didn’t want to push myself into reading something I was already not liking. So I dropped it. The book just didn’t go in the direction I expected it to.
3. NON-FICTION AND WORLD WAR II: KL: A History of the Nazi Concentration Camps by Nikolaus Wachsmann
The title of this book says it all, and I picked it up because I was interested in reading more about the Nazi concentration camps and it didn’t disappoint. It is a thorough historical account about all the concentration camps before and during WWII, from inception to end. And while I knew the names of some of them, like Dachau, Auschwitz-Birkenau, Bergen Belsen, Ravensbrück, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, I had no idea that there had been so many of them.
I have been reading a lot of books about WWII lately, as you could probably tell from all my wrap-ups but this one is different. Mostly, I’ve read several biographies of Hitler and the politics of WWII. This one doesn’t mention Hitler. It focuses solely on the concentration camps, and the man behind the atrocities committed therein, Heinrich Himmler. Theodor Eicke, Richard Glücks, Oswald Pohl, Hans Frank and Adolf Eichmann are also prominent names in this book, and I recommend it to anyone interested in reading about concentration camps. I think it is worth the read.
4. CLASSIC AND DRAMA: Tartuffe by Molière
I first read Molière in college. But I think I was too young to understand it properly. I read Tartuffe for one of my classes, and I don’t remember liking it very much. In fact, it was one of those books that you pick up, read, and then forget about very quickly. It’s been a very long time, but I do remember buying it for school. And now that I have read it again, almost 30 years later, I realize how fortunate I was to be able to visit Molière’s tomb in 2015. I’m just one of those people who think it’s fun to visit graveyards as tourist venues (I visited all of Paris’s graveyards without realizing then that visiting them by myself was probably not a very good idea) and I just happened to stumble upon Molière’s tomb. I mean, he’s famous enough to be included in the tour of VIP graves of the Cimetière du Père-Lachaise, but I just didn’t think I would find it. There’s so many of them, the graveyard is full, and I wanted to get out of there before dark. But there he was. And I took a picture. Despite not remembering by then what his plays were about.
Now, I am so glad I picked up his books again. Molière is so funny; I was having a blast reading Tartuffe. This play is a critique of religious hypocrisy, and Molière was very brave to write and later perform it in a time when the Church was all-powerful. I think though that part of the reason why it didn’t stand out for me the first time I read it was because I read it in Spanish, and I don’t think I pick up the right translation. Had there been a translation in Spanish similar to Richard Wilbur’s translation in English, I probably would’ve had a completely different experience. Today, Tartuffe remains Molière’s most famous play.
5. NON-FICTION AND HISTORY: Reinas de Leyenda by Cristina Morató
This book is a biographical account of five queens: Katherine of Aragon, Elizabeth I, Charlotte of Mexico, Catherine The Great, and Empress Cixi, the last empress of China. I like to read about the lives of kings and queens, and I picked this book up mostly because of Charlotte of Mexico. But what all of these women have in common, though, is that they led somewhat tragic lives. Katherine of Aragon went down in history as Henry VIII’s first discarded wife and whom he divorced to marry Anne Boleyn. But Katherine of Aragon had her parents’, his Catholic Majesties of Spain, strength and willpower and did not back down from the fight of asserting her position as the Queen of England, despite her husband’s repudiation.
Elizabeth I was Henry VIII’s and Anne Boleyn’s daughter and is England’s most famous queen regnant. But throughout her entire life, she fought to assert her position as queen and was very much aware that she was not the only claimant to the throne. Mary Stuart, the granddaughter of Margaret, Henry VIII’s older sister, sought to claim the throne of England and was Elizabeth’s greatest rival. However, Elizabeth, shrewd and careful, where Mary was not, was able to imprison her cousin and keep her in captivity for 19 years.
Charlotte of Mexico was princess of Belgium in her youth. There’s much that I didn’t know about Charlotte of Mexico, but her life was very sad. After marrying Maximilian, archduke of Austria and brother to Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria, she accompanied her husband to Mexico to accept the Mexican crown offered to them by Napoleon III of France. And while Charlotte (or Carlota, her name in Spanish) welcomed her role and authority in Mexico, learned Spanish, and became genuinely interested in Mexican history, art, and culture, Maximilian lost Napoleon’s support and the French emperor withdrew his troops in 1866 in the face of Mexican resistance and US opposition. So Carlota traveled to Paris, Vienna, and Rome seeking assistance for her husband’s regime in Mexico but found none. And upon her failure, she exhibited paranoia and other signs of mental illness. She would never return to Mexico, and when her husband was executed a year later, her symptoms worsened. She would live the rest of her life in seclusion and outlive her husband by 60 years. She died when she was 87 years old in 1927.
Catherine The Great died at age 67 in November 1796 and she is the Empress that I know the least about. I know she was born a German, fell in love with Russia when she arrived to Saint Petersburg to marry Peter III and took the name Catherine, detested her husband and overthrew him in 1762, had a lot of lovers (or favorites), and had at least four children. And this is something that she differs in with Katherine of Aragon, who got pregnant several times but had only one surviving daughter, and with Elizabeth I, who refused to get married and have children, as well as Charlotte of Mexico, who had no children either and who, apparently, never consummated her marriage to Maximilian of Habsburg. Catherine The Great is remembered today as the ruler who led a renaissance of culture and science in Russia, founded many cities and universities, and who led Russia into becoming one of the great powers of Europe.
Finally, Empress Cixi of China. Known simply as Orchid in her youth, she became one of Emperor Xianfeng’s concubines at 16 in 1835. In 1856, she gave birth to the heir and her standing in court improved. She became Noble Consort Yi, second to Empress Zhen, Emperor Xianfeng’s wife. Yi, however, began to offer the Emperor unwanted advice and he was afraid that she would interfere in state affairs after his death. So, to keep her under control, he set up an eight-man regency to run China on his deathbed. But Yi and Empress Zhen succeeded in mounting a coup against the regents before Emperor Xianfeng was even buried, and each became Empress Dowager. Empress Zhen was known as “East Empress Dowager” because she lived in the eastern Zhongcui Palace and Noble Consort Yi was elevated to Empress Dowager Cixi; she was known as “Western Empress Dowager” because she lived in the western Chuxiu Palace. These two women reigned “behind the curtain” as Empress regents for years.
Empress Cixi never sat on the throne of China. Her power depended on the emperor being a child. When her son was old enough, Cixi retired. But then he died, and another child took the throne, Guangxu. Guangxu was still very young then and Cixi took the reins again. This time, however, by herself, as Empress Zhen had also died. She nonetheless held on to power for as long as she could because Guangxu was clearly incompetent. He was very immature. But she “retired” again in 1889. She came out her retirement when China lost a war against Japan in 1894 and she declared Guangxu incapable of ruling. She deposed and imprisoned him. She died in 1908 after poisoning Guangxu with arsenic the day before, and the Dragon Throne was now vacant. It was filled by yet another child, Pu Yi, the last emperor of China. The empire fell in 1911 and Pu Yi abdicated a year later. Since then, China has been a republican state. However, Cixi is remembered today as the Empress who brought a medieval empire into the modern age. Vilified by many, she is still however the most important woman in Chinese history.
6. CLASSIC AND DRAMA: King Lear by William Shakespeare
Ufff. This play is complicated. King Lear is about aging, family relations, madness and foolishness, a disruption of order, and about not being able to see things clearly. King Lear, for example, can’t see Goneril and Reagan’s true nature, that Cordelia is the only one of his daughters that loves him, and that Kent and Gloucester are his most loyal servants. Gloucester, for example, can see better after his eyes are gouged out than before and his loyalty to the king is seen to the end. The tension between an aging monarch and a younger generation who think he took too long to retire and who have their own desires for power is also palpable. Arrogance, excessive pride and a lack of self-knowledge can cause chaos and tragedy.
I didn’t like this play as much as I liked Othello, despite it being one of Shakespeare’s most prominent tragedies and a masterpiece. It’s not bad, and I don’t want to lessen this play’s importance in literature. I just didn’t love it as I thought I would. The beauty of it is how it weaves all of these themes together and everything devolves into chaos at the end, but still I thought it was too depressing. Everyone dies. And yes, the characters in Othello die too, but this one is ten times more miserable. Also, I get the importance of the fool, and how he is the epitome of fools and wisdom, but I just didn’t like this character. I don’t know why. Sorry.
7. CLASSIC AND DRAMA: The Misanthrope by Molière
The Misanthrope by Molière is similar to Tartuffe in that it criticizes hypocrisy too, but while Tartuffe chastises religious hypocrisy, The Misanthrope slams hypocrisy as a whole. This theme is encountered in Act 1, Scene 1, when Alceste berates Philinte for insincerity. Alceste, the misanthrope alluded to in the title of the play, cannot abide flattery, deception, and artificial manners so typical of court behavior, and believes that all human relationships require total genuine expressions of opinion and emotion. And the implications of his convictions are explored throughout the entire play.
I loved this play. It was both humorous and poignant, and I was reading it with a smile on my face the whole time. The play also juxtaposes extremism (Alceste) with rationality (Philinte). Alceste finds insincerity and social pretension detestable while Philinte is aware that you can’t always be so blunt. Sometimes it’s best to soften the blow, as happens in Act 1, Scene 2, when Oronte requests Alceste’s judgement of a sonnet he has written. Philinte is polite but Alceste refuses to be anything but honest and states that the sonnet is childish and clumsy.
What makes this play so good is the writing. I enjoyed it very much. This, however, is not true of my next couple of reads. Sadly.
8. NON-FICTION AND SCIENCE: The Hidden Life of Trees by Paul Wohlleben
I am very disappointed that I didn’t like this book because I thought I would love it. I don’t know a whole lot about plants and trees but there was a time in my life when I thought I could be a botanist if I could. I enjoy nature and I respect trees, so I added this book to my TBR when I found out that it existed. What I didn’t like about it though is that each chapter is a whole universe by itself. The author wanted to talk about everything he’s experienced in the forest he takes care of, and that’s great, I’m all for reading his life experiences, but he only touches upon the phenomenon he addresses and then moves on to something else. And this gives absolutely no depth to the knowledge he’s imparting. It’s a lot, and it’s all very interesting. But it is only cursory, and I was expecting more science. More explanation of what’s going on inside the tree. Yes, a lot is still unknown (like what actually happens underneath the soil, in places we cannot see, because scientists have only touched upon what they can see), but I was very disillusioned by this and I didn’t get over it. Sorry. Maybe I was expecting too much (I know the author isn’t a scientist), but still.
9. CONTEMPORARY AND ROMANCE: Home Front by Kristin Hannah (DNF)
Okay. Kristin Hannah. I read her most popular novel, The Nightingale, a couple years ago, and I liked it. Unfortunately, none of her other books have piqued my interest. Except maybe this one and I was very disappointed by it. A broken marriage, deployment, and falling in love again with your spouse? Sure, I’m up for that plot. But I’ve come to realize that I don’t like how Kristin Hannah portrays romantic relationships. Even in The Nightingale, I wasn’t a fan of the couples. And that’s the case here. Jolene and Michael Zarkades barely speak to each other at the beginning of the novel (and that’s part of the plot, I get it, so I accepted it) but the more I read, the more I realized that they barely know each other and they barely knew each other when they got married. Michael is an attorney who spends most of his time at work and Jolene a part-time helicopter pilot in the army. They have two children, Betsy and Lulu, and Jolene is the primary caretaker. Jolene, however, has to hide a part of herself (her army/pilot self) at home. There are no pictures of her in uniform around the house, Michael never attends her work functions, and all her gear is stashed in the closet out of sight. So there is a negative perception of the military throughout the novel, and to a point I understand that this negativity is important for the plot but we get reminded about this at every opportunity and I wasn’t a fan.
Also, the beginning of the book is very slow and it focuses too much on Betsy and Lulu. I know that parenting is hard, and more so during the preteen and teenager years, but I didn’t appreciate how many times Betsy yelled at her mother to go away, and how many times she said that having a mom in the military was embarrassing. I’m not military and I don’t have family in the military but I didn’t like this either. And I had had enough of Betsy pretty fast. Granted, children are hard to write. But I didn’t like how this one was written at all.
By the time the plot did get going, I was already bored. So, no. Not going to continue this book.
10. CLASSIC AND POETRY: The Iliad by Homer, translated by Samuel Butler
The Iliad is my favorite book, and I want to find the translation I like the most. In January, I read the Stephen Mitchell translation and liked it more than I thought I would. This time I picked up the Samuel Butler translation and it is perhaps the oldest translation of The Iliad on my list. I thought I would love this translation, but unfortunately I didn’t. I knew that the English in it would be archaic, and I have read books with archaic English before, but this time I was not of fan. This translation is now my least favorite one.
That is everything I read this month. Thank you for stopping by and I’ll see you next time.
