An Instance Of The Fingerpost

[janeite]

Anybody read it? Just toiled to the end and wondering why I bothered.

I LOVED this book, did read it an age ago mind. The first bit with the doctor and the dried cat's poo in the eye (is this right or my imagination) I thought was all very interesting.

Yes it was interesting and yes, lots of quite compelling stuff in it and obviously very well researched - but it didn't half go round the houses.

It's just my sort of thing as well (or so I thought) but it just kept making me cross and I wanted to shake him and say, 'Just bloomin' get ON with it, why don't you?'

I don't remember getting cross with him, whoever it was who wrote it, who was it that wrote it btw?

Now see you've made me want to re-read it again.

Iain Pears

Didn't you feel enriched with post civil war history though? I rememeber feeling quite full of proper history afterwards. Now all I can rememeber is the cat poo in the eye, and a woman being hanged, oh and the blood transfusion with a quill or something.

I thought the post-hanging thing (with Lower) was excellent, both times it was described. The medical bits really interested me as I'm quite into medical history anyway.

The civil-war stuff didn't do it much for me because there was so little about it: just vague references to uprisings. And the religious stuff just bored me.

Hm I've obviously blnaked out all the boring religious stuff. Isn't Cromwell in it a bit somewhere?

This is a finger post:-

............./´¯/)..
............/....//...
.........../....//....
...../´¯/..../´¯....
.././.../..../..../.|_..
(.(....(....(..../.)..)..
................./.../ ...
................... /...
..................(...

Very clever!

I loved it. It was recommended by the person I have admired most on Mumsnet, and I was really worried that I wouldn't like it and I would discover that my heroine had feet of clay, but I thought it was so rich and full of 'stuff" and very memorable.

See now Seeker, YOU are one of the ones I admire on Mumsnet - so now I feel guilty for not loving it!

Very honoured - and !

Has anybody else read it?

yup. Liked it. It was a bookclub thing. I really enjoy multiple viewpoint books.

Read like someone's labour of love, but I think Iain Pears (?) has written lots more.

I liek it because it is long

and I always forget trhe vital plot twists

I reread it on holiday every 5y or so

Is it quite an old one then? I had never heard of it but liked the cover in the library!

I liked the first and final narratives but was irritated by Prescott and Wallis and found theirs to be v meandering.

I loved it - I read it ages ago and remember being really struck by the richness of the language - but it's my sort of book. I am currently devouring CJ Sansom's trilogy (currently reading Sovereign) and really enjoying the historical context to the stories.....

CJ Sansom is fab - I have loved them all. They seem more tightly structured than Incidence Of.... and the characters are more compelling.

I loved it too. It's set in my favourite historical period (did it for A-level History). Having said that, it's been about 10 years since I read it so I can't recall any detail.

I agree that it is hard going at times but I think it's worth the effort. I also love the multiple viewpoints and the many unreliable narrators.

Yes - unreliable narrators are a 'Good Thing' but I prefer them when I like them or at least sympathise somewhat with them!