We are in England in the 1660s, Charles II has been restored to the throne following years of civil war and Oliver Cromwell's short-lived republic. Oxford is the intellectual seat of the country, a place of great scientific, religious, and political ferment. A fellow of New College is found dead in suspicious circumstances. A young woman is accused of his murder. We hear the story of the death from four witnesses: an Italian physician intent on claiming credit for the invention of blood transfusion; the son of an alleged ...
Read More
We are in England in the 1660s, Charles II has been restored to the throne following years of civil war and Oliver Cromwell's short-lived republic. Oxford is the intellectual seat of the country, a place of great scientific, religious, and political ferment. A fellow of New College is found dead in suspicious circumstances. A young woman is accused of his murder. We hear the story of the death from four witnesses: an Italian physician intent on claiming credit for the invention of blood transfusion; the son of an alleged Royalist traitor; a master cryptographer who has worked for both Cromwell and the king; and a renowned Oxford antiquarian. Each tells his own version of what happened. Only one reveals the extraordinary truth.
Read Less
Writing a novel which really contains four novels in one - each from a different person's point of view is, well, novel.
I found the book hard going in places. The author has tight, well-written sections, but his links sometimes are a bit pedestrian to my tastes.
But, dear reader, persevere to the end and I think, like me, you'll not begrudge the time it took to go from cover to cover.
absafruitly
Jan 12, 2010
While I admit I enjoyed the first section 'A Question of Precedence' and even part of the second section, I soon found that the change in perspectives and narration was incredibly confusing and overly complicated. It reminded me of 'The Shark Net' by Robert Drewe in that the plot depended heavily on the reader's ability to recall details of events described earlier in the book and recognize when the same event is being retold from someone else's perspective.
In short, I was unable to finish this book despite the fact that the literary difficulty was quite average, it simply became too confusing to the point I wasn't able to enjoy it.
Three stars for the first section which was very interesting and Pear's attempt at a complicated writing style.
