The Other Boleyn Girl
Mar. 10th, 2008 08:21 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sanalithI've been looking at this and all of Philippa Gregory's books for some time now, and I just generally kept telling myself I would read them when I get the chance. I've heard good reviews of her writing, and I've always been interested in that part of history, so I figured they'd make good reads. About a week ago, Mike mentioned that he'd seen a preview for the movie adaptation of The Other Boleyn Girl, and that he thought it would be really nice for us to go see it. I immediately refused, because I have this Thing where I do not go to see movies based on books without first reading the books. At least, not if I can help it. Sooo, I ran out to the store and grabbed a copy of the book. Annoyingly, though perhaps not unexpectedly, the cheapest copy was the new paperback with Natalie Portman & Co. on the cover, and not the original. (I have a Thing about this as well, you see.) Still, since it was literally half the price of the original, I swallowed my pride, reminded myself that this would allow me to save money for the *other* books, and bought it.
If nothing else, Gregory created a very believable version of the English court. Her writing is extremely vivid, and I found it quite easy to slip into her world. As most of you know, I have extremely high standards for first person writing, and I felt that she did the character of Mary justice. It was an odd first person novel, however, in that we were given glimpses into the thoughts and feelings of other characters, especially Anne. At times I felt it was strange that I was reading from the point of view of a woman who, historically speaking, was practically a nobody, while we were denied the innermost thoughts of the main players, Anne and Henry. Still, I never really felt jolted out of the novel, so I consider it a success in that light.
As with all historical fiction, I always come out of the novel with one basic question: How much is true? In this case, the major historical facts are easy enough to check, but that actually interests me less than the people themselves. Was Mary truly as innocent as Gregory paints her? Did she really long for nothing more than a loving husband and a small farm on which to raise her children? Was Anne really as cold and calculating as she was portrayed, or was she, too, a pawn in her family's chessboard? How does an author go about creating a personality for a historical figure? THAT is what always interests me, even more than the historical details.
Either way, I have to commend Gregory for truly making me care about these women, to the point where I sometimes had to remind myself that I knew the end of the story. In the beginning, I wanted so much for Mary to be happy, to prove her herself and to her family that she was not worthless...that she was fit to remain with Henry. As the novel progressed, I found myself in complete sympathy for Catherine of Aragon, and praying with her that Henry would come to his senses. And when Anne found herself cast aside for Jane Seymour, along with my satisfaction that she got what she deserved, I shared Mary's desperate belief that Henry would spare her life. As far as I am concerned, that is the mark of a true storyteller. She made me see queens as nothing more than girls who wanted a happy life, yet had no chance of getting it. She made them real. And she very beautifully painted life at a court subject to the whim of a petulant child, which Mary quite accurately described Henry. So many lives ruined, so much unhappiness, and all for a man who simply *could not live* without a son. His fixation poisoned everyone who touched him, and this book made me even more happy at the irony that his daughter Elizabeth was perhaps the greatest queen England ever knew. For that, I can overlook the historical inaccuracies and the liberties taken. I definitely liked it enough to check out the rest of her books on Henry's wives and daughters.
As for the movie...I think Mike still wants to see it, but I've heard nothing but bad reviews so far. I would never expect it to be as good as the book, since it is Mary's narration that makes it flow so well, but I've heard disturbing summaries that make me think the directors made rather bad choices in their edits. I guess we'll see.
If nothing else, Gregory created a very believable version of the English court. Her writing is extremely vivid, and I found it quite easy to slip into her world. As most of you know, I have extremely high standards for first person writing, and I felt that she did the character of Mary justice. It was an odd first person novel, however, in that we were given glimpses into the thoughts and feelings of other characters, especially Anne. At times I felt it was strange that I was reading from the point of view of a woman who, historically speaking, was practically a nobody, while we were denied the innermost thoughts of the main players, Anne and Henry. Still, I never really felt jolted out of the novel, so I consider it a success in that light.
As with all historical fiction, I always come out of the novel with one basic question: How much is true? In this case, the major historical facts are easy enough to check, but that actually interests me less than the people themselves. Was Mary truly as innocent as Gregory paints her? Did she really long for nothing more than a loving husband and a small farm on which to raise her children? Was Anne really as cold and calculating as she was portrayed, or was she, too, a pawn in her family's chessboard? How does an author go about creating a personality for a historical figure? THAT is what always interests me, even more than the historical details.
Either way, I have to commend Gregory for truly making me care about these women, to the point where I sometimes had to remind myself that I knew the end of the story. In the beginning, I wanted so much for Mary to be happy, to prove her herself and to her family that she was not worthless...that she was fit to remain with Henry. As the novel progressed, I found myself in complete sympathy for Catherine of Aragon, and praying with her that Henry would come to his senses. And when Anne found herself cast aside for Jane Seymour, along with my satisfaction that she got what she deserved, I shared Mary's desperate belief that Henry would spare her life. As far as I am concerned, that is the mark of a true storyteller. She made me see queens as nothing more than girls who wanted a happy life, yet had no chance of getting it. She made them real. And she very beautifully painted life at a court subject to the whim of a petulant child, which Mary quite accurately described Henry. So many lives ruined, so much unhappiness, and all for a man who simply *could not live* without a son. His fixation poisoned everyone who touched him, and this book made me even more happy at the irony that his daughter Elizabeth was perhaps the greatest queen England ever knew. For that, I can overlook the historical inaccuracies and the liberties taken. I definitely liked it enough to check out the rest of her books on Henry's wives and daughters.
As for the movie...I think Mike still wants to see it, but I've heard nothing but bad reviews so far. I would never expect it to be as good as the book, since it is Mary's narration that makes it flow so well, but I've heard disturbing summaries that make me think the directors made rather bad choices in their edits. I guess we'll see.