What do you think?
Rate this book
Small Change #1
Farthing
One summer weekend in 1949--but not our 1949--the well-connected "Farthing set", a group of upper-crust English families, enjoy a country retreat. Lucy is a minor daughter in one of those families; her parents were both leading figures in the group that overthrew Churchill and negotiated peace with Herr Hitler eight years before.
Despite her parents' evident disapproval, Lucy is married--happily--to a London Jew. It was therefore quite a surprise to Lucy when she and her husband David found themselves invited to the retreat. It's even more startling when, on the retreat's first night, a major politician of the Farthing set is found gruesomely murdered, with abundant signs that the killing was ritualistic.
It quickly becomes clear to Lucy that she and David were brought to the retreat in order to pin the murder on him. Major political machinations are at stake, including an initiative in Parliament, supported by the Farthing set, to limit the right to vote to university graduates. But whoever's behind the murder, and the frame-up, didn't reckon on the principal investigator from Scotland Yard being a man with very private reasons for sympathizing with outcasts…and looking beyond the obvious.
As the trap slowly shuts on Lucy and David, they begin to see a way out--a way fraught with peril in a darkening world.
Despite her parents' evident disapproval, Lucy is married--happily--to a London Jew. It was therefore quite a surprise to Lucy when she and her husband David found themselves invited to the retreat. It's even more startling when, on the retreat's first night, a major politician of the Farthing set is found gruesomely murdered, with abundant signs that the killing was ritualistic.
It quickly becomes clear to Lucy that she and David were brought to the retreat in order to pin the murder on him. Major political machinations are at stake, including an initiative in Parliament, supported by the Farthing set, to limit the right to vote to university graduates. But whoever's behind the murder, and the frame-up, didn't reckon on the principal investigator from Scotland Yard being a man with very private reasons for sympathizing with outcasts…and looking beyond the obvious.
As the trap slowly shuts on Lucy and David, they begin to see a way out--a way fraught with peril in a darkening world.
319 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published August 8, 2006
172 people are currently reading
10.4k people want to read
About the author
Jo Walton
87books3,029followersJo Walton writes science fiction and fantasy novels and reads a lot and eats great food. It worries her slightly that this is so exactly what she always wanted to do when she grew up. She comes from Wales, but lives in Montreal.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 976 reviews
March 2, 2016
My initial thoughts on reading Farthing by Jo Walton was: why do an alternate history? It’s been done before, and in a lot of ways, what can this quiet, minimalist Welsh author do for this side street sub-genre of the speculative fiction highway?
Phillip K. Dick wrote , published in 1962, where the Axis had won, but here, there has been a stalemate between England and Nazi Germany. Hitler has turned east, and after a peace accord has been signed, he turns on the Russian Bolsheviks and has left Great Britain, and a President Charles Lindbergh led, increasingly isolationist US and Imperialist Japan is in Shanghai.
What is science fiction or fantasy? PKD said of the difference “Fantasy involves that which general opinion regards as impossible; science fiction involves that which general opinion regards as possible under the right circumstances� and so in that regard, and under Dick’s definition, Farthing is most definitely science fiction since military and political historians have opined that Hitler making this decision, to fight on only one front, was very much possible� an alternate history.
Anti-Semitism.
There are no Jews allowed in the US and the people in England have anti Jewish sentiment, just as “on the Continent�. At it’s heart, Farthing is a murder mystery about an odd assassination in an English country estate, a member of the ruling party, the same group that had orchestrated the pact with Hitler and a Jewish man is being implicated in a ridiculously thin charade. Reminiscent of Sinclair Lewis� 1935 novel . Walton has shown that it can happen in Great Britain as Jewish citizens enjoy a perilous position, better than those in Europe, but not wholly free either.
Homosexuality.
Interestingly, this is a central theme of the novel. It seems that most characters have some homosexual tendencies. Walton’s characters make a fun terminological distinction between Roman � straight; Macedonian � both, and Athenian � homosexual (reminiscent of The Kinsey scale, also called the Heterosexual–Homosexual Rating Scale) and laws making illegal homosexual acts as a way to control people.
Courage.
Farthing is a statement on the English character, “keeping a stiff upper lip and all that� and “keeping the sides up� both as a compliment and an indictment. Walton spends time and makes observation and comment upon royalty and class distinctions. The author also demonstrates how the rule of law and the importance of having one system that is the same for rich and poor is imperative in one of her more cautionary aspects of this story.
This also reminds me of the scientific experiment where the test subject thinks he is conducting a question and answer session and an actor plays the part of the testee. When the testee answers incorrectly, the testor is told to press a button that he is told will deliver an electric shock to the actor playing the testee. Even when the test subject is told that the electric shock is approaching lethal levels and when the actor is pretending to writhe in pain, the experiment still revealed that a high percentage of people continued to shock the other person. The reason being simply that they were told to do this.
Walton makes the realistic observation that bad things can happen in good places, that even good people, courageous people in ordinary situations can fall short when in extraordinary hardship.
Finally, Walton owes a literary debt to George Orwell. Subtle, understated allusions to are prevalent and are shown contextually correct to her story.
Phillip K. Dick wrote , published in 1962, where the Axis had won, but here, there has been a stalemate between England and Nazi Germany. Hitler has turned east, and after a peace accord has been signed, he turns on the Russian Bolsheviks and has left Great Britain, and a President Charles Lindbergh led, increasingly isolationist US and Imperialist Japan is in Shanghai.
What is science fiction or fantasy? PKD said of the difference “Fantasy involves that which general opinion regards as impossible; science fiction involves that which general opinion regards as possible under the right circumstances� and so in that regard, and under Dick’s definition, Farthing is most definitely science fiction since military and political historians have opined that Hitler making this decision, to fight on only one front, was very much possible� an alternate history.
Anti-Semitism.
There are no Jews allowed in the US and the people in England have anti Jewish sentiment, just as “on the Continent�. At it’s heart, Farthing is a murder mystery about an odd assassination in an English country estate, a member of the ruling party, the same group that had orchestrated the pact with Hitler and a Jewish man is being implicated in a ridiculously thin charade. Reminiscent of Sinclair Lewis� 1935 novel . Walton has shown that it can happen in Great Britain as Jewish citizens enjoy a perilous position, better than those in Europe, but not wholly free either.
Homosexuality.
Interestingly, this is a central theme of the novel. It seems that most characters have some homosexual tendencies. Walton’s characters make a fun terminological distinction between Roman � straight; Macedonian � both, and Athenian � homosexual (reminiscent of The Kinsey scale, also called the Heterosexual–Homosexual Rating Scale) and laws making illegal homosexual acts as a way to control people.
Courage.
Farthing is a statement on the English character, “keeping a stiff upper lip and all that� and “keeping the sides up� both as a compliment and an indictment. Walton spends time and makes observation and comment upon royalty and class distinctions. The author also demonstrates how the rule of law and the importance of having one system that is the same for rich and poor is imperative in one of her more cautionary aspects of this story.
This also reminds me of the scientific experiment where the test subject thinks he is conducting a question and answer session and an actor plays the part of the testee. When the testee answers incorrectly, the testor is told to press a button that he is told will deliver an electric shock to the actor playing the testee. Even when the test subject is told that the electric shock is approaching lethal levels and when the actor is pretending to writhe in pain, the experiment still revealed that a high percentage of people continued to shock the other person. The reason being simply that they were told to do this.
Walton makes the realistic observation that bad things can happen in good places, that even good people, courageous people in ordinary situations can fall short when in extraordinary hardship.
Finally, Walton owes a literary debt to George Orwell. Subtle, understated allusions to are prevalent and are shown contextually correct to her story.
April 24, 2013
Alas, another case of the right reader, wrong book. I went into Farthing with rather high expectations, I confess. I saw Walton has won a couple of awards for other works--including the World Fantasy Award--and this one was nominated for a Nebula and Locus, among others. When this series got several mentions on The Incomparable (produced by 5by5), a podcast series devoted to all things geek sci-fi, I became tempted to try it. When the book arrived from the library, I was surprised to discover it was more alt-history than either fantasy or sci-fi. Well, I thought, I can manage. I rather love the gentle English mysteries, and I'm a huge fan of Connie Willis' . Within pages, it referenced , another English tale that Willis references. Okay. Might kind of familiar. Little did I realize I was not in for a charming body-in-the-library English romp but more an exploration of the Third Reich and England if history had gone another way.
It begins with the the gentle tones of a Dorothy Sayers mystery, narrated by a daffy Wooster-like aristocratic lead, Lucy. She's perplexedly trying to do up her hair at the same time she comforts her charming Jewish husband that the slight he just endured wasn't personally meant. Of course, she's soothing him; she understands it was meant, as Jewish people aren't considered equal with the upper-crust crowd. The book begins to take on more ominous tones; not only are we dealing with the general foibles of the gentry (dressing for dinner? Fixing hair over feelings?), but underlying class and racial divides as well. Hmm. Still as some potential to explore the situation, only in a multi-culti kind of way. Okay, that's cool.
Then the body is found; not only is a guest at the house party murdered, but his body is desecrated with a Jewish star, used on the Continent to identify Jews. The guests are suspicious of David, especially as the man killed is the one who brokered the peace between the governments of Britain and the Third Reich. But suspecting David seems obvious, and several herrings are deployed our way by his ridiculous widow and her sister--coincidentally, the victim's lover. Our heroine narrates these details in her charmingly silly way, protective of her husband, disgusted at the widow, but being careful that her thought "train didn't leave the station before I have a chance to stop it."
The viewpoint begins to alternate with that of a gay Scotland Yard Inspector. It starts to become clear that being gay is not acceptable, much like being Jewish, so the Inspector is largely closeted. Homosexuality and bisexuality becomes a mirror for the Jewish issue; a disenfranchised identity that is shared by many, however hypocritically. (There's a strange sub-bit here where Lucy shows her charming daffiness by sharing the terms she and her brother used for gay/bi/straight, including 'Athenean'). His own experiences lend him certain sympathies with David. I had hopes that the murderer would be successfully uncovered, as the Inspector showed definite signs of brains. His efforts to solve the case are troubled by the obligatory second-strike, only this time it was Bolsheviks. Inspector Carmichael struggles to reconcile these incongruous leads, but catches a break or two though determined detective work.
Suddenly, the storyline goes someplace darker, dropping the countryside romp for an exploration on politics, society and ethics. The last half of the book weren't about the murder as much as they were about politics. Lucy is no longer charming and daffy; she's impotent and waking to ugly realities. David is as well, as his natural tendency towards showing a positive example fails him. While I felt Walton avoided overt diatribes, politics around Hitler and Stalin are rarely subtle, and were used in overbearing fashion here. Frankly, I felt it also lacked creativity. Germany did a fine stand-in as the ultimate villain, but by the end, Britain wasn't far behind. The issues of sexuality seem a forced metaphor for the ways in which the ruling class spouts a party line but doesn't follow it. However, it seemed generally a crutch to explain relationships, intention and morality.
Overall, it left a bitter taste in my mouth for so many reasons--the disappointing story, anything involving the Third Reich, a tacked-on ending, and an interesting plot gone so wrong. It just isn't a congruous narrative; it wants to be both meat and meringue, and so succeeds at neither.
Cross posted at
This work is licensed under a .
It begins with the the gentle tones of a Dorothy Sayers mystery, narrated by a daffy Wooster-like aristocratic lead, Lucy. She's perplexedly trying to do up her hair at the same time she comforts her charming Jewish husband that the slight he just endured wasn't personally meant. Of course, she's soothing him; she understands it was meant, as Jewish people aren't considered equal with the upper-crust crowd. The book begins to take on more ominous tones; not only are we dealing with the general foibles of the gentry (dressing for dinner? Fixing hair over feelings?), but underlying class and racial divides as well. Hmm. Still as some potential to explore the situation, only in a multi-culti kind of way. Okay, that's cool.
Then the body is found; not only is a guest at the house party murdered, but his body is desecrated with a Jewish star, used on the Continent to identify Jews. The guests are suspicious of David, especially as the man killed is the one who brokered the peace between the governments of Britain and the Third Reich. But suspecting David seems obvious, and several herrings are deployed our way by his ridiculous widow and her sister--coincidentally, the victim's lover. Our heroine narrates these details in her charmingly silly way, protective of her husband, disgusted at the widow, but being careful that her thought "train didn't leave the station before I have a chance to stop it."
The viewpoint begins to alternate with that of a gay Scotland Yard Inspector. It starts to become clear that being gay is not acceptable, much like being Jewish, so the Inspector is largely closeted. Homosexuality and bisexuality becomes a mirror for the Jewish issue; a disenfranchised identity that is shared by many, however hypocritically. (There's a strange sub-bit here where Lucy shows her charming daffiness by sharing the terms she and her brother used for gay/bi/straight, including 'Athenean'). His own experiences lend him certain sympathies with David. I had hopes that the murderer would be successfully uncovered, as the Inspector showed definite signs of brains. His efforts to solve the case are troubled by the obligatory second-strike, only this time it was Bolsheviks. Inspector Carmichael struggles to reconcile these incongruous leads, but catches a break or two though determined detective work.
Suddenly, the storyline goes someplace darker, dropping the countryside romp for an exploration on politics, society and ethics. The last half of the book weren't about the murder as much as they were about politics. Lucy is no longer charming and daffy; she's impotent and waking to ugly realities. David is as well, as his natural tendency towards showing a positive example fails him. While I felt Walton avoided overt diatribes, politics around Hitler and Stalin are rarely subtle, and were used in overbearing fashion here. Frankly, I felt it also lacked creativity. Germany did a fine stand-in as the ultimate villain, but by the end, Britain wasn't far behind. The issues of sexuality seem a forced metaphor for the ways in which the ruling class spouts a party line but doesn't follow it. However, it seemed generally a crutch to explain relationships, intention and morality.
Overall, it left a bitter taste in my mouth for so many reasons--the disappointing story, anything involving the Third Reich, a tacked-on ending, and an interesting plot gone so wrong. It just isn't a congruous narrative; it wants to be both meat and meringue, and so succeeds at neither.
Cross posted at
This work is licensed under a .
June 29, 2008
A good-natured little cozy mystery about power, privilege, fascism, genocide, evil, and tea.
I lie, it's not good-natured in the slightest. It is, however, good. Go read it.
I lie, it's not good-natured in the slightest. It is, however, good. Go read it.
July 5, 2018
Farthing by Jo Walton is a murder mystery, set in an alternate historical England after "the Farthing Set" brokered a truce with fascism/Hitler rather than trying to win the war. The book has alternating chapters between Lucy (an aristocratic daughter married to the Jewish man being set up to take the fall for the crime in a very anti Jewish Britain) and the inspector.
The murder mystery is really the focus here, and Walton doesn't keep her quirky self entirely out of it, which I found made it a pleasure to read. And since I had listened to in audio, I was hearing the words in her voice. There is commentary on societal expectations (for beauty, for brains) that I feel are her own thoughts, some pretty significant thoughts on weak vs. strong tea (this felt multilayered and targeted, not quite sure I got it!) and I was pleased/surprised to see a number of characters who were non heterosexual in this time period.
And yet strange to read it on "Independence Day" in 2018. I feel the author is asking the reader to consider the consequences of allowing fascist behavior to continue whether that's along our border or inside it. Is it enough to push it off? Is it enough if it doesn't effect you specifically because you are rich enough/ the right race or religion/ from the right family? There are policies being considered in this alternate UK where you can only attend an institute of higher education if you attended a certain type of school as a teen, but we know from David Kahn's experience that he was already not allowed to attend private school as a Jewish Brit. He attended school in France. There are all these little pieces that by themselves seem innocuous, especially if you are the person unaffected, but seen as a whole they start to intentionally omit, push out, reject, deny.... it just felt pretty familiar.
The murder mystery is really the focus here, and Walton doesn't keep her quirky self entirely out of it, which I found made it a pleasure to read. And since I had listened to in audio, I was hearing the words in her voice. There is commentary on societal expectations (for beauty, for brains) that I feel are her own thoughts, some pretty significant thoughts on weak vs. strong tea (this felt multilayered and targeted, not quite sure I got it!) and I was pleased/surprised to see a number of characters who were non heterosexual in this time period.
And yet strange to read it on "Independence Day" in 2018. I feel the author is asking the reader to consider the consequences of allowing fascist behavior to continue whether that's along our border or inside it. Is it enough to push it off? Is it enough if it doesn't effect you specifically because you are rich enough/ the right race or religion/ from the right family? There are policies being considered in this alternate UK where you can only attend an institute of higher education if you attended a certain type of school as a teen, but we know from David Kahn's experience that he was already not allowed to attend private school as a Jewish Brit. He attended school in France. There are all these little pieces that by themselves seem innocuous, especially if you are the person unaffected, but seen as a whole they start to intentionally omit, push out, reject, deny.... it just felt pretty familiar.
May 7, 2015
Who killed Cock Robin?Description: One summer weekend in 1949 � but not our 1949 � the well-connected "Farthing set", a group of upper-crust English families, enjoy a country retreat. Lucy is a minor daughter in one of those families; her parents were both leading figures in the group that overthrew Churchill and negotiated peace with Herr Hitler eight years before.
I, said the Sparrow
Despite her parents' evident disapproval, Lucy is married � happily � to a London Jew. It was therefore quite a surprise to Lucy when she and her husband David found themselves invited to the retreat. It's even more startling when, on the retreat's first night, a major politician of the Farthing set is found gruesomely murdered, with abundant signs that the killing was ritualistic.
It quickly becomes clear to Lucy that she and David were brought to the retreat in order to pin the murder on him. Major political machinations are at stake, including an initiative in Parliament, supported by the Farthing set, to limit the right to vote to university graduates.
But whoever's behind the murder, and the frame-up, didn't reckon on the principal investigator from Scotland Yard being a man with very private reasons for sympathizing with outcasts� and looking beyond the obvious.
As the trap slowly shuts on Lucy and David, they begin to see a way out � a way fraught with peril in a darkening world.
Opening: It started when David came in from the lawn absolutely furious.
We are dropped into Farthing Set HQ, which is a microcosm of pre WWII fascist and sleazy Berlin (think Isherwood/Cabaret). The squeeze is on for Jews and gypsies, and the blacks and the reds had better watch out. It is this background shiver that ups the ante on this, which is ostensibly an Up-At-The-Big-House mystery.Love the way that it is through David's lips we hear "It can't happen here."
On the minus side, I never once forgot that I was reading the book, turning the pages, so it didn't pull me in enough to exhort that I lived it. The writing was too pedestrian for that.
Great storyline exposing the need to always fight fascism wherever it is found, even if it is just one cell, it proliferates like the plague. Looking forward to the next, which is wending its way to my postbox as we speak.
(did I just do a good impression of the feedback sandwich! bwhahahaha)
3.5* Farthing
October 31, 2021
Definitely a case of right book, right time for me as I couldn't stop reading this! Walton does a good job of mixing up a Golden Age country house murder mystery with something far darker: it's 1947 (and Orwell has just published Ninety-seventy-four), seven years after the Farthing Set, a power group within the Tory party, negotiated a 'peace with honour' with Hitler. We learn obliquely about what is happening elsewhere in the world: the Third Reich stretches as far as the Channel; Hitler's armies continue to battle with Bolshevik Russia across Europe; Japan is still growing its empire in the East - and labour and death camps proliferate across Europe with widespread and public anti-Semitism accepted and normalised. In the foreground is a localised murder of a Farthing Set politician - and only gradually do we understand the reasons for the killing and the implications for British politics and the future of UK democracy.
There's so much that I loved about this book: the melding of a slightly ditzy narrator in Lucy who turns out to be one of the few characters with integrity in the book; the alternating narrative following Inspector Carmichael of Scotland Yard and his compromised investigation; the way the story probes those constant mysteries of how did ordinary people reconcile themselves to systematic hatred and participation in genocide; even the ways in which the traditional English murder mystery (and I say this as a devoted Agatha Christie fan) is steeped in race, class, sexual and gender prejudices which uphold the values the genre holds dear.
On top of all this is an astute tale of how political power is achieved and upheld in all its cunning, its deceptions, its shameless rhetoric and its expediency: in the story, Britain is on the cusp of change, a deep shift to the Right, and the book explores the individual compromises, neutralities, failures to stand up or speak out, and downright fear that allows this to happen.
Compelling, gripping, never self-righteous, I'm hooked on this trilogy!
There's so much that I loved about this book: the melding of a slightly ditzy narrator in Lucy who turns out to be one of the few characters with integrity in the book; the alternating narrative following Inspector Carmichael of Scotland Yard and his compromised investigation; the way the story probes those constant mysteries of how did ordinary people reconcile themselves to systematic hatred and participation in genocide; even the ways in which the traditional English murder mystery (and I say this as a devoted Agatha Christie fan) is steeped in race, class, sexual and gender prejudices which uphold the values the genre holds dear.
On top of all this is an astute tale of how political power is achieved and upheld in all its cunning, its deceptions, its shameless rhetoric and its expediency: in the story, Britain is on the cusp of change, a deep shift to the Right, and the book explores the individual compromises, neutralities, failures to stand up or speak out, and downright fear that allows this to happen.
Compelling, gripping, never self-righteous, I'm hooked on this trilogy!
Read
January 7, 2016Walton has a knack for taking a specific story (such as the utterly splendid Tooth and Claw that uses Trollope's Framley Parsonage and crosses it with dragons, getting a sum greater than both parts) or a storyline (like Arthuriana) and crossing it orthogonally so that both are transformed into something altogether different. And yet one can see traces of each source. Being a visual being, I can only compare it to the color prism we used as kids, when we laid the yellow glass circle over the edge of the blue to make green—with the edges of the yellow and blue still showing. Better, perhaps, a palimpsest: one sees traces of old underlying the new, so you get a third effect.
Anyway, she takes the form of the English country house murder mystery, with all its emphasis on rank and manners, and crosses it with an Alternate History. So we open with all the implied tensions between the genteel manners of people of privilege—their emphasis on being civilized—with a body lying in a bedroom, one of their own done to death by violence. Meanwhile we discover that this England's WW II never really happened, because in 1941 the government, currently led by political conservatives nicknamed the Farthing Set, made peace with Hitler.
The chapters alternate between two POVs. There is the first person account of Lucy Kahn, daughter of the ultra-conservative Farthing Set (named after their country house) who dared to marry a Jew. So she's a born insider who chose to become an outsider, because one of the issues, of course, in making peace with Hitler is accepting what he's doing over on the continent. The alternate chapters are third person from the POV of Inspector Carmichael of Scotland Yard, sent down to investigate the murder. He's frustrated because he senses that not everyone is telling the truth, but he has to parse the body language and tones of people whose upbringing is so different from his—he's an outsider in various ways forced inside to complete his investigation. Meanwhile, Lucy, who knows the people, how they move and think, is looking at the mystery from another angle—because her husband is the chief suspect. The alternating storyline builds with inexorable (and inescapable) tension as the stakes grow exponentially. Does the mystery get solved? Oh yes, but I can guarantee you are not prepared for the double-echo sonic boom of the ending.
Anyway, she takes the form of the English country house murder mystery, with all its emphasis on rank and manners, and crosses it with an Alternate History. So we open with all the implied tensions between the genteel manners of people of privilege—their emphasis on being civilized—with a body lying in a bedroom, one of their own done to death by violence. Meanwhile we discover that this England's WW II never really happened, because in 1941 the government, currently led by political conservatives nicknamed the Farthing Set, made peace with Hitler.
The chapters alternate between two POVs. There is the first person account of Lucy Kahn, daughter of the ultra-conservative Farthing Set (named after their country house) who dared to marry a Jew. So she's a born insider who chose to become an outsider, because one of the issues, of course, in making peace with Hitler is accepting what he's doing over on the continent. The alternate chapters are third person from the POV of Inspector Carmichael of Scotland Yard, sent down to investigate the murder. He's frustrated because he senses that not everyone is telling the truth, but he has to parse the body language and tones of people whose upbringing is so different from his—he's an outsider in various ways forced inside to complete his investigation. Meanwhile, Lucy, who knows the people, how they move and think, is looking at the mystery from another angle—because her husband is the chief suspect. The alternating storyline builds with inexorable (and inescapable) tension as the stakes grow exponentially. Does the mystery get solved? Oh yes, but I can guarantee you are not prepared for the double-echo sonic boom of the ending.
May 6, 2008
Haiku review:
How can you expect
a happy end in a book
where Hitler still reigns?
Review:
Though a bit slower to start than I expected, Farthing was (overall) an outstanding allegory on fascism disguised as an alternate history novel disguised as a murder mystery. By the time you're about one-quarter to one-third of the way through it, you will have trouble putting it down. The attention to the language is excellent (though I found myself pining for a bit of -style slang and cockney) and author Jo Walton pays peculiar attention to certain banalia like apparel, cooking, and eating.
The narrative structure follows a curious A/B pattern with odd chapters written 1st person (as Lucy Kahn) and even chapters written 3rd person (as Carmichael). It falls into a good rhythm that helps to control the pacing and the various reveals.
Walton's use of the alternate history platform seems to be a device to cast the setting of the murder mystery. The chapters that follow Carmichael have a nod to the classic pulp mysteries (I'm thinking ) and honor those tropes such as re-hashing the events of the crime and narrating through theories about that crime.
One thing I feel disinclined to comment upon is the plausibility of this alternate history. Walton gives an oblique nod to 's novel, that makes me suspect that if Roth's alternate post-WWII world "works" then the story presented in Farthing could be grafted onto that timeline equally well. My knowledge of the WWII-era politics and military history run a bit thin however and I am hesitant to render an enthusiastic "it could have happened". That said, there is a bit of fearful symmetry between Farthing and the post-9/11 United States; this seems especially the case as you race through those last fifty pages telling yourself that it will be all right, that there is still a chance for a happy ending, even as you turn into the last chapter.
How can you expect
a happy end in a book
where Hitler still reigns?
Review:
Though a bit slower to start than I expected, Farthing was (overall) an outstanding allegory on fascism disguised as an alternate history novel disguised as a murder mystery. By the time you're about one-quarter to one-third of the way through it, you will have trouble putting it down. The attention to the language is excellent (though I found myself pining for a bit of -style slang and cockney) and author Jo Walton pays peculiar attention to certain banalia like apparel, cooking, and eating.
The narrative structure follows a curious A/B pattern with odd chapters written 1st person (as Lucy Kahn) and even chapters written 3rd person (as Carmichael). It falls into a good rhythm that helps to control the pacing and the various reveals.
Walton's use of the alternate history platform seems to be a device to cast the setting of the murder mystery. The chapters that follow Carmichael have a nod to the classic pulp mysteries (I'm thinking ) and honor those tropes such as re-hashing the events of the crime and narrating through theories about that crime.
One thing I feel disinclined to comment upon is the plausibility of this alternate history. Walton gives an oblique nod to 's novel, that makes me suspect that if Roth's alternate post-WWII world "works" then the story presented in Farthing could be grafted onto that timeline equally well. My knowledge of the WWII-era politics and military history run a bit thin however and I am hesitant to render an enthusiastic "it could have happened". That said, there is a bit of fearful symmetry between Farthing and the post-9/11 United States; this seems especially the case as you race through those last fifty pages telling yourself that it will be all right, that there is still a chance for a happy ending, even as you turn into the last chapter.
May 4, 2022
3.5 stars - I was very impressed with the high quality of this book. The writing, themes, and plotting were all top notch. I think this just suffered from my own world weariness from the events of the last decade... it just bummed out and I come to a country house mystery for more fun. So very "it's not you it's me" in terms of why this one wasn't a bigger hit for me
June 4, 2023
Farthing: a small historical British coin.
Farthings: A group of villages which are home to a privileged group of politically connected people, called "The Farthing Set".
The main thrust of this novel takes place at a weekend retreat of "The Farthing Set", people who are politically well-connected and all with the "proper pedigrees". The time is designated as 1949, which can be somewhat confusing, because this group was allegedly instrumental in a Peace Treaty with Hitler in 1940, but this is after all, a novel . During this gathering a murder occurs and the intricate tale begins to unwind. Rather than dwell on the plot here, I think it is important to observe the depths of unrelenting anti-semitism and homophobia that is present.
Coincidentally, as I was reading this book, The New Republic(September 23, 2010, published a review of another publication, , by Jonathan Freedland. This illuminating article succintly describes the history of antisemitism in England and the social and political implications. He states that England is the key to antisemitism itself- they were the first nation to cause an enduring , national expulsion of an entire population of Jewish people in history.
"And the subject at hand- English antisemitism- often operates in the nebulous,subtle, implicit register..."
Freedland further comments in a quotation from this book, "'... the mentality of modern English antisemitism,' to the slippery, subcutaneous prejudices and assumptions, the slights and the snubs, that have informed centuries of English social life"
Walton has captured this climate with clarity and painful realism. The Farthing Set, who are intent upon maintaining appearances, propriety and dignity; belie their stances with statements and actions of coldness, disdain and complete antipathy toward both Jews and homosexual individuals.
Initially Farthing appeared to be a light, pleasant mystery, but one can view, as the narration progresses, that there is something far more odious occurring here. This is a compelling, complex novel.
Farthings: A group of villages which are home to a privileged group of politically connected people, called "The Farthing Set".
The main thrust of this novel takes place at a weekend retreat of "The Farthing Set", people who are politically well-connected and all with the "proper pedigrees". The time is designated as 1949, which can be somewhat confusing, because this group was allegedly instrumental in a Peace Treaty with Hitler in 1940, but this is after all, a novel . During this gathering a murder occurs and the intricate tale begins to unwind. Rather than dwell on the plot here, I think it is important to observe the depths of unrelenting anti-semitism and homophobia that is present.
Coincidentally, as I was reading this book, The New Republic(September 23, 2010, published a review of another publication, , by Jonathan Freedland. This illuminating article succintly describes the history of antisemitism in England and the social and political implications. He states that England is the key to antisemitism itself- they were the first nation to cause an enduring , national expulsion of an entire population of Jewish people in history.
"And the subject at hand- English antisemitism- often operates in the nebulous,subtle, implicit register..."
Freedland further comments in a quotation from this book, "'... the mentality of modern English antisemitism,' to the slippery, subcutaneous prejudices and assumptions, the slights and the snubs, that have informed centuries of English social life"
Walton has captured this climate with clarity and painful realism. The Farthing Set, who are intent upon maintaining appearances, propriety and dignity; belie their stances with statements and actions of coldness, disdain and complete antipathy toward both Jews and homosexual individuals.
Initially Farthing appeared to be a light, pleasant mystery, but one can view, as the narration progresses, that there is something far more odious occurring here. This is a compelling, complex novel.
March 3, 2024
Jo Walton is very good at taking something familiar and putting an unfamiliar, intriguing spin on it. Previously, she's done this with King Arthur ( and ), Irish mythology (), and Victorian society as written about by Anthony Trollope (). In Farthing, she takes the traditional English country mystery, adds in alternate history, and comes up with something new and brilliant.
Lucy Kahn has come to her parents' country house, Farthing, for the weekend, bringing her new husband, David. Their marriage caused a scandal, because David is Jewish, while Lucy is of the British upper class, and Lucy is hoping that the stay with her parents will bring about a reconciliation. Instead, it brings violent death, when one of the other houseguests, who was instrumental in bringing about the 1941 peace with Hitler and Germany, is murdered, under circumstances that seem to implicate David. Soon, Inspector Carmichael of Scotland Yard enters the scene, and he and Lucy follow separate but parallel investigative tracks which lead to shocking conclusions.
The point-of-view alternates between Lucy's first person and Carmichael's third person, both splendidly done. I particularly liked Lucy, who's not quite as scatterbrained as she might initially appear, and who has a marvelous style of speaking and system of allusions (I loved her terms for sexual orientation). Both she and Carmichael are outsiders to some extent, Lucy because she's chosen to marry a Jew, Carmichael because he's a policeman (and for other reasons), and thus both are excellent viewpoints characters, looking from the outside in at different angles.
Walton slowly slips in bits and pieces of the alternate history, of which the salient fact, as mentioned above, is England's peace with Hitler, engineered by a group of conservative politicians called "the Farthing Set". Eventually, a clearer picture of this alternate history emerges, of what's already happened, and what might be going to happen. The resonances with today's political scene are chilling, and the book's ending is very unsettling. [ETA 2024: Yikes, all of this still.)
Lucy Kahn has come to her parents' country house, Farthing, for the weekend, bringing her new husband, David. Their marriage caused a scandal, because David is Jewish, while Lucy is of the British upper class, and Lucy is hoping that the stay with her parents will bring about a reconciliation. Instead, it brings violent death, when one of the other houseguests, who was instrumental in bringing about the 1941 peace with Hitler and Germany, is murdered, under circumstances that seem to implicate David. Soon, Inspector Carmichael of Scotland Yard enters the scene, and he and Lucy follow separate but parallel investigative tracks which lead to shocking conclusions.
The point-of-view alternates between Lucy's first person and Carmichael's third person, both splendidly done. I particularly liked Lucy, who's not quite as scatterbrained as she might initially appear, and who has a marvelous style of speaking and system of allusions (I loved her terms for sexual orientation). Both she and Carmichael are outsiders to some extent, Lucy because she's chosen to marry a Jew, Carmichael because he's a policeman (and for other reasons), and thus both are excellent viewpoints characters, looking from the outside in at different angles.
Walton slowly slips in bits and pieces of the alternate history, of which the salient fact, as mentioned above, is England's peace with Hitler, engineered by a group of conservative politicians called "the Farthing Set". Eventually, a clearer picture of this alternate history emerges, of what's already happened, and what might be going to happen. The resonances with today's political scene are chilling, and the book's ending is very unsettling. [ETA 2024: Yikes, all of this still.)
February 12, 2016
Zašto petica? Knjiga je napisana s puno detalja, truda, istraživanja. Imaš osjećaj da si stvarno glavnom liku u glavi i na trenutke zaboraviš da čitaš knjigu. A povijesna podloga mi je puno uvjerljivija nego recimo Deightonov SS-GB (isto odlična knjiga). osim jednog malog blesavog detalja koji me grebao kao biologa/medicinara, ostalo je, moram reći, izvrsno. dakle 4.5 zaokruženo na 5. jedva čekam nastavak.
August 22, 2008
On the back cover is a wonderfully written blurb/review from Publishers Weekly - I wish I could write like this! So succinct!
"World Fantasy Award-winner Jo Walton (Tooth and Claw) crosses genres without missing a beat with this stunningly powerful alternative history set in 1949, eight years after Britain agreed to peace with Nazi Germany, leaving Hitler control of the European continent. A typical gethering at the country estate of Farthing of the power elite who brokered the deal is thrown into turmoil when the main negotiator, Sir James Thirkie, is murdered, with a yellow star pinned to his chest with a dagger. The author deftly alternates perspectives between Lucy Kahn, the host's daughter, who has disgraced herself in her family's eyes by marrying a Jew, and Scotland Yard Inspector Peter Carmichael, who quickly suspects that the killer was not a Bolshevik terrorist. But while the whodunit plot is compelling, it's the convincing portrait of a country's incremental slide into fascism that makes this novel a standout."
That covers things pretty well.
I'm not a fan of generic crime books, but when a crime book/murder mystery is combined with interesting, well-developed characters and a unique premise, there's a lot more for me to get out of it. Having two narrators - Lucy Kahn in the first-person point of view, and Inspector Carmichael in third-person point of view - alternate chapters is quite clever. You never get bored with one because they balance each other so well. It's interesting how Lucy, without her knowledge of the details of the murder, arrives at her conclusions, knowing what she knows about her family and the other guests; and Carmichael, not knowing about the more intimate details of the family, arrives at his. It ensures that the reader knows more than either alone, but the whodunit is far from obvious.
As the blurb/review thingie stated, the book's framework is a murder mystery but it's really more about society and culture, prejudice and superiority and the "slide into fascism". Lucy's sure they were only invited to Farthing so her Jewish husband David would be a scapegoat for the murder. The police, except for Carmichael, are ready and willing to accept obvious clues, like the Star of David that was pinned to the dead man's chest having been bought by Kahn in France - even though you would hardly give your real name, and Kahn hasn't been to France (which could have been verified) and in fact would be stupid to go to France, which was conquered by the Nazi's. They're happier jumping to the obvious conclusions set up for them to jump to, and when Carmichael finds out who really did it - well, suffice it to say this book doesn't have a typical resolution. With my more modern-day, open-minded sensibilities, there were many cringe-inducing moments.
The world is tense and scary - it's not just Jews who are persecuted but homosexuals as well (and there seem to be a lot of them about!) - it's obvious to the reader that England is almost as scary and an uncertain place to be as Nazi Europe, even if you're not a Jew. The language and tone of the 1940s is spot-on, the small details all making you think it was written in the 40s and England really had signed a peace treaty with Hitler. The repurcussions of such a thing are mind-boggling and far-reaching - and followed up in the next book, Ha'penny (more to follow perhaps?).
It's the prejudices that are really frightening. Many are still around today, though at least on the surface people pretend and hide their real opinions. In Farthing, there's nothing wrong at all in saying the most horrible things not just about Jews and other races/cultures, but about the lower classes too. And yet, it's really not all that different from the real 1949. The aristocracy was still hanging onto it's superiority with decaying claws, I'm sure, and the lower classes were still just as maligned. But with Walton's premise, England is slipping into a 1984 world (in Farthing, this book is called 1974 - why the change I wonder?).
The resolution unsettled me quite a bit, I have to admit. It makes sense and fits but it's not what you expect. The story itself takes place over the course of a week, and the pacing is steady and a little slow - not dull slow, but not rushed or hyperactive at all, giving you time to absorb all the little nuances of this well fleshed-out world and the characters who inhabit it. Because it's speculative fiction, you'll find it in the fantasy section, but it's not, strictly speaking, fantasy. If fantasy doesn't interest you but you love 1984 and A Clockwork Orange, I think you'd love this. If you love Sherlock Holmes or Agatha Christie or any other non-contemporary crime writer, you'd probably love this. And if you love reading about the early 20th century, this'd be good for you too, because even though the path England and the world is travelling down is not the "real" one, it's so well written and fascinating, that you can learn a lot about the period and people's sensibilities as well. And it's an interesting social experiment, on top of it all.
"World Fantasy Award-winner Jo Walton (Tooth and Claw) crosses genres without missing a beat with this stunningly powerful alternative history set in 1949, eight years after Britain agreed to peace with Nazi Germany, leaving Hitler control of the European continent. A typical gethering at the country estate of Farthing of the power elite who brokered the deal is thrown into turmoil when the main negotiator, Sir James Thirkie, is murdered, with a yellow star pinned to his chest with a dagger. The author deftly alternates perspectives between Lucy Kahn, the host's daughter, who has disgraced herself in her family's eyes by marrying a Jew, and Scotland Yard Inspector Peter Carmichael, who quickly suspects that the killer was not a Bolshevik terrorist. But while the whodunit plot is compelling, it's the convincing portrait of a country's incremental slide into fascism that makes this novel a standout."
That covers things pretty well.
I'm not a fan of generic crime books, but when a crime book/murder mystery is combined with interesting, well-developed characters and a unique premise, there's a lot more for me to get out of it. Having two narrators - Lucy Kahn in the first-person point of view, and Inspector Carmichael in third-person point of view - alternate chapters is quite clever. You never get bored with one because they balance each other so well. It's interesting how Lucy, without her knowledge of the details of the murder, arrives at her conclusions, knowing what she knows about her family and the other guests; and Carmichael, not knowing about the more intimate details of the family, arrives at his. It ensures that the reader knows more than either alone, but the whodunit is far from obvious.
As the blurb/review thingie stated, the book's framework is a murder mystery but it's really more about society and culture, prejudice and superiority and the "slide into fascism". Lucy's sure they were only invited to Farthing so her Jewish husband David would be a scapegoat for the murder. The police, except for Carmichael, are ready and willing to accept obvious clues, like the Star of David that was pinned to the dead man's chest having been bought by Kahn in France - even though you would hardly give your real name, and Kahn hasn't been to France (which could have been verified) and in fact would be stupid to go to France, which was conquered by the Nazi's. They're happier jumping to the obvious conclusions set up for them to jump to, and when Carmichael finds out who really did it - well, suffice it to say this book doesn't have a typical resolution. With my more modern-day, open-minded sensibilities, there were many cringe-inducing moments.
The world is tense and scary - it's not just Jews who are persecuted but homosexuals as well (and there seem to be a lot of them about!) - it's obvious to the reader that England is almost as scary and an uncertain place to be as Nazi Europe, even if you're not a Jew. The language and tone of the 1940s is spot-on, the small details all making you think it was written in the 40s and England really had signed a peace treaty with Hitler. The repurcussions of such a thing are mind-boggling and far-reaching - and followed up in the next book, Ha'penny (more to follow perhaps?).
It's the prejudices that are really frightening. Many are still around today, though at least on the surface people pretend and hide their real opinions. In Farthing, there's nothing wrong at all in saying the most horrible things not just about Jews and other races/cultures, but about the lower classes too. And yet, it's really not all that different from the real 1949. The aristocracy was still hanging onto it's superiority with decaying claws, I'm sure, and the lower classes were still just as maligned. But with Walton's premise, England is slipping into a 1984 world (in Farthing, this book is called 1974 - why the change I wonder?).
The resolution unsettled me quite a bit, I have to admit. It makes sense and fits but it's not what you expect. The story itself takes place over the course of a week, and the pacing is steady and a little slow - not dull slow, but not rushed or hyperactive at all, giving you time to absorb all the little nuances of this well fleshed-out world and the characters who inhabit it. Because it's speculative fiction, you'll find it in the fantasy section, but it's not, strictly speaking, fantasy. If fantasy doesn't interest you but you love 1984 and A Clockwork Orange, I think you'd love this. If you love Sherlock Holmes or Agatha Christie or any other non-contemporary crime writer, you'd probably love this. And if you love reading about the early 20th century, this'd be good for you too, because even though the path England and the world is travelling down is not the "real" one, it's so well written and fascinating, that you can learn a lot about the period and people's sensibilities as well. And it's an interesting social experiment, on top of it all.
October 10, 2010
The cover blurb "if Le Carré scares you, try Jo Walton" makes more sense after one reads the book. Though instead of "scares you" I would put it "if Le Carré depresses you and you like it, then you will like this". It is the same sort of effect, and while I admire the ambition, the comparison does not flatter Farthing, who does not stand on strong foundations.
The plot is described accurately by the blurb above. The same cover compares this to and - I had read neither, this is my first alternate history fascists-won-ww2 book ( not counting , which I guess does not count, being set centuries and centuries in an alternate future), so I would give Farthing the advantage that the idea is fresh to me.
But I have many problems with everything else. The mystery plot, nominally the focus of the novel, is wrapped up rather fast and ridiculously ( hearsay by old Lady Thirski and servants blurbing like computer game clues) and we must assume that some of the plotters (all, except Daddy) are totally evil and remorseless (only Daddy has a hint of conscience, not that it matters). Worse almost, to my mind, is the betrayal of the mystery genre, in that clues dropped through the narrative come to nothing, mean nothing, have not their correct context explained. We know from the start Mummy was involved, since she was in the corridors at 6 am dressed and imperturbable, but we find no good reason for her to be there at all! What does Angela melodramatically reciting the poem and being embarrassed later mean? Surely Daphne´s grief was real, and oh the wasted potential there, what would she do when she finds out, or not, about the plot. But we get nothing on that, just some extremely fast and contrived explanation of what was supposed to have happened (not that it makes much sense. I mean really a bad shot not trying to hit, manages to hit by accident two people with presumably just two shots?). The mystery plot gets short changed and steam rolled in the way for a depressing alternate history ending and a tragic LeCarré-ish ending. But the writing, universe, plotting is not rigorous, serious enough for me to take it seriously.
A lot of the character interaction seems a bit unlikely or heavy handed. I think it statistically unlikely that almost all the main characters are gay or bissexual, up to it being almost a joke ( seriously the tea thing seems to be the new oysters or snails. Or perhaps more correctly maybe the China tea is a signal of anti-fascist leanings and general "modern" tolerance). Characters seem almost stereotypical, the aristocrats, the faithful old servants, the rabid antisemitic housekeeper coming out of nothing. Even the jewish husband is too perfect, inventing micro-financing all by himself. Our characters get an escape and small revenge (the diamond) in ways which seem rather random and lucky - of course the one character to which we had had several random references before would turn out to be involved in a secret railway scheme and be able to send them to safety. Of course she would. And while I liked Lucy´s chapters and narration, her instant knowledge of conception suspends my belief quite badly.
And then there are the details. Some of them conceivably could have happened in a parallel universe though unlikely : couturiers introducing makeup lines much earlier, or Twinings inventing Lady Grey Tea many decades early. Others seem just sloppy or lazy: for example: titles. I do not undestand how Thirskie could be a baronet with a living legitimate nephew son of an older brother. Surely the nephew would have had the title, perhaps even the estates! Sloppy - and more instances around when things are not quite right.
Lots of ambition but floppy and fuzzy around the corners.
The plot is described accurately by the blurb above. The same cover compares this to and - I had read neither, this is my first alternate history fascists-won-ww2 book ( not counting , which I guess does not count, being set centuries and centuries in an alternate future), so I would give Farthing the advantage that the idea is fresh to me.
But I have many problems with everything else. The mystery plot, nominally the focus of the novel, is wrapped up rather fast and ridiculously ( hearsay by old Lady Thirski and servants blurbing like computer game clues) and we must assume that some of the plotters (all, except Daddy) are totally evil and remorseless (only Daddy has a hint of conscience, not that it matters). Worse almost, to my mind, is the betrayal of the mystery genre, in that clues dropped through the narrative come to nothing, mean nothing, have not their correct context explained. We know from the start Mummy was involved, since she was in the corridors at 6 am dressed and imperturbable, but we find no good reason for her to be there at all! What does Angela melodramatically reciting the poem and being embarrassed later mean? Surely Daphne´s grief was real, and oh the wasted potential there, what would she do when she finds out, or not, about the plot. But we get nothing on that, just some extremely fast and contrived explanation of what was supposed to have happened (not that it makes much sense. I mean really a bad shot not trying to hit, manages to hit by accident two people with presumably just two shots?). The mystery plot gets short changed and steam rolled in the way for a depressing alternate history ending and a tragic LeCarré-ish ending. But the writing, universe, plotting is not rigorous, serious enough for me to take it seriously.
A lot of the character interaction seems a bit unlikely or heavy handed. I think it statistically unlikely that almost all the main characters are gay or bissexual, up to it being almost a joke ( seriously the tea thing seems to be the new oysters or snails. Or perhaps more correctly maybe the China tea is a signal of anti-fascist leanings and general "modern" tolerance). Characters seem almost stereotypical, the aristocrats, the faithful old servants, the rabid antisemitic housekeeper coming out of nothing. Even the jewish husband is too perfect, inventing micro-financing all by himself. Our characters get an escape and small revenge (the diamond) in ways which seem rather random and lucky - of course the one character to which we had had several random references before would turn out to be involved in a secret railway scheme and be able to send them to safety. Of course she would. And while I liked Lucy´s chapters and narration, her instant knowledge of conception suspends my belief quite badly.
And then there are the details. Some of them conceivably could have happened in a parallel universe though unlikely : couturiers introducing makeup lines much earlier, or Twinings inventing Lady Grey Tea many decades early. Others seem just sloppy or lazy: for example: titles. I do not undestand how Thirskie could be a baronet with a living legitimate nephew son of an older brother. Surely the nephew would have had the title, perhaps even the estates! Sloppy - and more instances around when things are not quite right.
Lots of ambition but floppy and fuzzy around the corners.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 4, 2018
I've been reading up on my sci-fi awards list, and this one was one of my priorities. To be honest, it didn't exactly feel a lot like science fiction, and the alternate history setting, while quite allegorical, did not strike me as absolutely needed and/or overly world shattering - what is described to have happened in Britain is pretty much what happened everywhere else up until Hitler's downfall, and I didn't feel any particular compassion for the Polish cook who saw her "loyal" clients throw stones to her restaurant's windows, when being a Jew became a crime in Poland. People are like that everywhere, have always been like that. Will always be like that. Nor was the murder mystery extremely well plotted. But the book was actually very captivating, some of the characters grew on me (many didn't), and the language was exquisite. Compared to Michael Chabon's Yiddish Policemen's Union which was excruciatingly verbose, this is a true gem. I read it in two days, and I utterly enjoyed it. I'm glad I didn't read any of the reviews before I started it. Sometimes having expectations, either good or bad, can ruin a book, and I believe that for me personally this is one of these cases.
May 1, 2015
I got off to a rocky start with Jo Walton. Among Others didn't wow me - I liked it, but the pacing felt off, and keen tension lacking. Since then, however, I've read two of her other books that have simply blown my mind. Tooth and Claw - Victorian society with dragons - made it on to my Top 10 list of last year. And I will not be at all surprised if Farthing joins it there next year.
Note: The rest of this review has been withdrawn due to the changes in ŷ policy and enforcement. You can read why I came to this decision here.
In the meantime, you can read the entire review at
Note: The rest of this review has been withdrawn due to the changes in ŷ policy and enforcement. You can read why I came to this decision here.
In the meantime, you can read the entire review at
September 9, 2010
I feel mostly dissatisfied after reading Farthing, especially after hearing all the hype. As a mystery, it proved unchallenging. As alternate history, it intrigued me, but left me wanting more depth, more worldbuilding. I could have done without the addition of another second class citizen group, besides the already persecuted Jews.
The writing style reminded me of Agatha Christie (but not as well done) and Dorothy Sayers (again, not quite as well done). I would have preferred a narrative told from either first person or third person, but not both alternating.
The writing style reminded me of Agatha Christie (but not as well done) and Dorothy Sayers (again, not quite as well done). I would have preferred a narrative told from either first person or third person, but not both alternating.
October 1, 2015
Deftly blended, this combination of an alternate world history with an English country house mystery opens in 1949, but it’s not exactly the 1949 or England we know. Eight years earlier a group of conservative, anti-semitic politicians known as the “Farthing set� made peace with Nazi Germany, securing Britain’s borders after most of continental Europe had fallen to Hitler. The Germans continue to fight the Soviets, the American president is isolationist Charles Lindbergh, and the Jews left in Europe are living a nightmare.
Against this background, the aristocratic, politically powerful Farthing set comes together for a country weekend. The daughter of one of the couples, Lucy Kahn, is deeply in love and happily married to David, a Jewish man, so she’s surprised that her parents have invited them to join this gathering at her old family home. If it was up to her they’d skip it, she doesn’t like this group and they see her as a race traitor, but David thinks the invitation is a gesture of reconciliation so they go. But when they wake up the first morning they discover that a powerful politician has been murdered in his bed, and it quickly becomes clear that whoever did this is trying to frame David.
The story alternates between two very different voices. Lucy’s chapters chat to readers in the first person, while the point of view of Inspector Carmichael, sent by Scotland Yard to investigate the crime, is told through the third person. Carmichael is a principled, thoughtful man who has secrets of his own--he’s a homosexual. Though he’s working diligently to uncover the truth, he’s being pressured by his superiors to just arrest David and close the case.
Jo Walton’s versatility amazes me. The first books I read by her involved a simulation of Plato’s Republic, set up by the goddess Athena on the ancient island of Atlantis, but this is obviously a very different book, and she’s written it from two highly contrasting points of view. Tightly plotted, the tension builds quickly and continuously in Farthing, so by the time I was 80% in my heart was pounding and the book was impossible for me to put down. It’s the first book in a trilogy that I look forward to continuing once my adrenaline comes back down to normal levels.
Against this background, the aristocratic, politically powerful Farthing set comes together for a country weekend. The daughter of one of the couples, Lucy Kahn, is deeply in love and happily married to David, a Jewish man, so she’s surprised that her parents have invited them to join this gathering at her old family home. If it was up to her they’d skip it, she doesn’t like this group and they see her as a race traitor, but David thinks the invitation is a gesture of reconciliation so they go. But when they wake up the first morning they discover that a powerful politician has been murdered in his bed, and it quickly becomes clear that whoever did this is trying to frame David.
The story alternates between two very different voices. Lucy’s chapters chat to readers in the first person, while the point of view of Inspector Carmichael, sent by Scotland Yard to investigate the crime, is told through the third person. Carmichael is a principled, thoughtful man who has secrets of his own--he’s a homosexual. Though he’s working diligently to uncover the truth, he’s being pressured by his superiors to just arrest David and close the case.
Jo Walton’s versatility amazes me. The first books I read by her involved a simulation of Plato’s Republic, set up by the goddess Athena on the ancient island of Atlantis, but this is obviously a very different book, and she’s written it from two highly contrasting points of view. Tightly plotted, the tension builds quickly and continuously in Farthing, so by the time I was 80% in my heart was pounding and the book was impossible for me to put down. It’s the first book in a trilogy that I look forward to continuing once my adrenaline comes back down to normal levels.
December 22, 2011
Fascinating. Two-thirds English country-house murder mystery, and one-third creeping terror.
June 2, 2010
My local library system has three copies of this book, at three different branches. One branch files it under science fiction, one branch files it under fiction. At my library I tracked it down in the mystery section. What is it, then? Like Jasper Fforde's Tuesday Next books, it is set in an alternate England in which certain wars went another way than in real life. Also like Tuesday Next, the protagonist's brother was killed at war, and she married his best friend. That's where the similarity ends. Where those books are exercises in absurdity, this one feels gut-wrenchingly real.
Jo Walton has created a world in which Hitler's march on Europe went unchecked. A group of politicians known as the Farthing Set brokered an agreement with Germany that allowed England to remain autonomous. The US, under President Lindbergh, is increasingly isolationist, and has closed its doors to Jews. Europe's Jews live with yellow stars and ration books and ghettos and camps. England's Jewish population is free, but faces strong prejudice. This alternate history is the only SF aspect of the book, which otherwise reads as political mystery and social commentary (on the British class system, justice, anti-Semitism, and homophobia).
A few months ago a friend suggested that I try reading Dorothy Sayers, but warned me that her books could be read as somewhat anti-Semitic. I found that in those cases I could dismiss it as a product of the time; not so with this book. I found the treatment of the Jewish characters in this system of casual ingrained bigotry to be absolutely gutting. The author really managed to make me feel that things could have as easily gone this way as the way they did. Walton is an excellent writer: I found it hard to put the book down. Her style feels breezy and effortless in a way that takes an enormous amount of work to achieve. The main characters feel real, and the split narrative (alternated first and third person chapters) works in a way that such things often do not.
The only reason I'm rating this book four stars instead of five is the somewhat "to be continued" ending. Luckily, the second book is at my library (filed under literary fiction).
Jo Walton has created a world in which Hitler's march on Europe went unchecked. A group of politicians known as the Farthing Set brokered an agreement with Germany that allowed England to remain autonomous. The US, under President Lindbergh, is increasingly isolationist, and has closed its doors to Jews. Europe's Jews live with yellow stars and ration books and ghettos and camps. England's Jewish population is free, but faces strong prejudice. This alternate history is the only SF aspect of the book, which otherwise reads as political mystery and social commentary (on the British class system, justice, anti-Semitism, and homophobia).
A few months ago a friend suggested that I try reading Dorothy Sayers, but warned me that her books could be read as somewhat anti-Semitic. I found that in those cases I could dismiss it as a product of the time; not so with this book. I found the treatment of the Jewish characters in this system of casual ingrained bigotry to be absolutely gutting. The author really managed to make me feel that things could have as easily gone this way as the way they did. Walton is an excellent writer: I found it hard to put the book down. Her style feels breezy and effortless in a way that takes an enormous amount of work to achieve. The main characters feel real, and the split narrative (alternated first and third person chapters) works in a way that such things often do not.
The only reason I'm rating this book four stars instead of five is the somewhat "to be continued" ending. Luckily, the second book is at my library (filed under literary fiction).
October 3, 2021
This is the first in a trilogy set in an alternate 1949, when Rudolph Hess found his peace mission successful and 'The Farthing Set,' brought 'Peace with Honour,' to Britain. It is eight years after Dunkirk and Lucy is visiting her family home of Farthing with her Jewish husband, David Kahn. Her brother, Hugh, is dead and she is heir to all except the house and title. Still, her cold mother dislikes her choice of husband and the political intrigue that her relatives are involved in are going to endanger David's life.
This novel is something of a typical Big House murder mystery and partly an alternative history, as one of the guests is found dead with a dagger pinning a yellow star to his chest. Inspector Carmichael is something of an outsider himself and senses that the murder is not straightforward and that David Kahn has been invited to throw blame upon him. However, can he help uncover the truth and clear David's name?
I think the beginning of this book started really well and then it got a little bogged down. The plot worked better than the characters, but I would certainly be interested to read on and discover what happens next to those involved.
This novel is something of a typical Big House murder mystery and partly an alternative history, as one of the guests is found dead with a dagger pinning a yellow star to his chest. Inspector Carmichael is something of an outsider himself and senses that the murder is not straightforward and that David Kahn has been invited to throw blame upon him. However, can he help uncover the truth and clear David's name?
I think the beginning of this book started really well and then it got a little bogged down. The plot worked better than the characters, but I would certainly be interested to read on and discover what happens next to those involved.
October 29, 2016
The book and style are compelling in this alternate world where England made peace with Hitler. Luce and her husband David face a rather horrible sitution when he is implicted in a murder at her family estate.
I found Luce's voice to be real, and I liked the switching viewpoints. If you've seen the BBC mysteries set around the time, it is very much like that (the televised mysteries, not the actual books).
I did have some problems, however. While I believe that Luce and David were in love, I really don't understand why it had to be revealed that David had been Luce's brother's lover as well. (Apparently everyone but Luce and her father are homosexual or bisexual). It just felt, well stupid. It would've been interesting if there had been a discussion about how they were each trying to recapture the relationship they each had with the brother, Hugh, who died in the Battle of Britian. But this isn't done at all. Honestly, the big reveal about Carmicheal doesn't really seem that big of a deal after everything else.
I found Luce's voice to be real, and I liked the switching viewpoints. If you've seen the BBC mysteries set around the time, it is very much like that (the televised mysteries, not the actual books).
I did have some problems, however. While I believe that Luce and David were in love, I really don't understand why it had to be revealed that David had been Luce's brother's lover as well. (Apparently everyone but Luce and her father are homosexual or bisexual). It just felt, well stupid. It would've been interesting if there had been a discussion about how they were each trying to recapture the relationship they each had with the brother, Hugh, who died in the Battle of Britian. But this isn't done at all. Honestly, the big reveal about Carmicheal doesn't really seem that big of a deal after everything else.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 11, 2014
-Costumbrismo al frente acorde con la ucronía al fondo.-
Género. Novela.
Lo que nos cuenta. En 1949, David y Lucy son una adinerada pareja que forma parte de la alta sociedad británica, pero él es un banquero que no puede superar la barrera que provoca su origen judío, algo que sin estar perseguido como en el resto de Europa donde Hitler es el líder absoluto sí que no está bien visto por muchas personas y crea ostracismos y momentos incómodos de diferentes clases. Durante un fin de semana en Farthing, la muerte del político sir James Thirkie, responsable británico ocho años antes de la firma de la paz con Alemania ofrecida por Hitler a través de Rudolf Hess, origina una investigación por parte de Scotland Yard que, debido a las peculiares circunstancias que rodean al cadáver, pondrá rápidamente sus ojos en David.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
Género. Novela.
Lo que nos cuenta. En 1949, David y Lucy son una adinerada pareja que forma parte de la alta sociedad británica, pero él es un banquero que no puede superar la barrera que provoca su origen judío, algo que sin estar perseguido como en el resto de Europa donde Hitler es el líder absoluto sí que no está bien visto por muchas personas y crea ostracismos y momentos incómodos de diferentes clases. Durante un fin de semana en Farthing, la muerte del político sir James Thirkie, responsable británico ocho años antes de la firma de la paz con Alemania ofrecida por Hitler a través de Rudolf Hess, origina una investigación por parte de Scotland Yard que, debido a las peculiares circunstancias que rodean al cadáver, pondrá rápidamente sus ojos en David.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
June 17, 2011
This is a novel I will think about for a long time. I simultaneously dreaded the possible conclusion and couldn't stop reading until I got there. The main protagonists are engaging and the alternating first person and third person narrative allows the point of view to shift in an interesting and natural way. The premise, of course, is shocking: Britain in 1949, having made peace with Nazi Germany, sliding into fascism. It is a salutary reminder of how little it takes for the future of a people and of a nation to be permanently affected - the result of a single election, the emergence of a political leader at particular moment. It is also a reminder of how much vigilence is required to ensure that basic freedoms are not taken away for political ends ...
December 9, 2019
A rec from Wychwood, and a goodie. What seems like an ordinary English country house mystery has dark political motivations and implications, as Walton gradually reveals more and more about this alternate 1949, one in a world where Britain made peace with Hitler in early 1941. Brr.
Walton does a great job of showing how ordinary, and in some cases, perfectly decent people can be affected by prejudice and by the removal of certain freedoms. Lucy, who carries half the POV, is a wonderfully-constructed character, and I really enjoyed watching her develop. The other characters, though none were so clearly-drawn, are also captivating. However, Walton does make one character choice that puzzles me: almost everyone in this book is gay, or at least bisexual, to the point where it began to seem a little ridiculous and bad-fanficcy. Because unlike in real life, in a novel that kind of thing is a choice—on the part of the author, and I'm really not sure what Walton was trying to say with it. Except maybe that when they think nobody's looking, even the crustiest Tories are all indiscriminately schtupping each other, the bloody hypocrites. Okay, but I already got that they were hypocrites, and also racists and very bad people. They don't need to be hypocritical, racist, very bad gay people, do they? Though on second thought, that does sound increasingly like the Republican party in this country. Never mind.
That little tangent aside: this was captivating and scary and much braver and true to itself than, say, 's ; Roth kind of wusses out at the end of that one and makes everything okay again. Not so, here. Though there is a sequel coming—in just over a week, in fact. *wants*
Walton does a great job of showing how ordinary, and in some cases, perfectly decent people can be affected by prejudice and by the removal of certain freedoms. Lucy, who carries half the POV, is a wonderfully-constructed character, and I really enjoyed watching her develop. The other characters, though none were so clearly-drawn, are also captivating. However, Walton does make one character choice that puzzles me: almost everyone in this book is gay, or at least bisexual, to the point where it began to seem a little ridiculous and bad-fanficcy. Because unlike in real life, in a novel that kind of thing is a choice—on the part of the author, and I'm really not sure what Walton was trying to say with it. Except maybe that when they think nobody's looking, even the crustiest Tories are all indiscriminately schtupping each other, the bloody hypocrites. Okay, but I already got that they were hypocrites, and also racists and very bad people. They don't need to be hypocritical, racist, very bad gay people, do they? Though on second thought, that does sound increasingly like the Republican party in this country. Never mind.
That little tangent aside: this was captivating and scary and much braver and true to itself than, say, 's ; Roth kind of wusses out at the end of that one and makes everything okay again. Not so, here. Though there is a sequel coming—in just over a week, in fact. *wants*
September 5, 2010
Farthing is set in an alternate-history world where Britain made peace with Hitler instead of continuing to fight. Jews are still tolerated in Britain, although they're not precisely loved by the aristocracy, and probably not by the regular people either -- though we see less of those. At the start of the book, that doesn't seem very important, perhaps, to the story. It's a country house murder mystery, with a multitude of people with motive and secrets they're keeping. There's some red herrings, etc, but in the end, I found that the alternate history was what was really concerning me and keeping me reading. The slow creep of anti-Semitism, the quiet erosion of freedom...
It's told in two narrative styles. One is in first person, told by Lucy Kahn, a member of the aristocracy who married a Jew. Her voice is quite silly and very stereotypically English, but I rather enjoyed her all the same. The other narration is third person, following a detective, Carmichael. He's much more ordinary, and it's his sections that remind me most of Golden Age crime fiction.
We get to know Lucy Kahn and her husband, David, rather well, but it's Carmichael who interests me, and Carmichael's choices that give me a hurt feeling in the pit of my stomach. I can imagine myself in his place all too well.
The ending reminds me of one of my favourite songs, Dar Williams' Buzzer: "I get it now, I'm the face, I'm the cause of war, we don't have to blame white-coated men anymore..."
It's told in two narrative styles. One is in first person, told by Lucy Kahn, a member of the aristocracy who married a Jew. Her voice is quite silly and very stereotypically English, but I rather enjoyed her all the same. The other narration is third person, following a detective, Carmichael. He's much more ordinary, and it's his sections that remind me most of Golden Age crime fiction.
We get to know Lucy Kahn and her husband, David, rather well, but it's Carmichael who interests me, and Carmichael's choices that give me a hurt feeling in the pit of my stomach. I can imagine myself in his place all too well.
The ending reminds me of one of my favourite songs, Dar Williams' Buzzer: "I get it now, I'm the face, I'm the cause of war, we don't have to blame white-coated men anymore..."
October 2, 2019
Ladies and gentlemen, I don't think I'll have time to finish it, but at least you have to try to write something. If i wasn't superstitious, I'd say this criticism is cursed. I've been with her for days. But between the fact that I have to get more interesting reviews, between being indolent by nature, and being easily distracted. It's made Farthing's review postponed, but I must say something about this interesting book by Jo Walton. . Needless to say, the most interesting thing about the "Farthing Circle" is the premise, or idea, that led him to write it to the Welsh writer. It's not an original proposal, but it's very interesting. As well as Jo Walton's own intention in her prologue that her novel resembled that of novelists Dorothy Sayers /author/show... the problem of the creator of the great detective Peter Wimsey, and third president of the Detection Club. It's just that we look at the least interesting thing about it, and throw away the best. In a sense Dorothy Leigh Sayers reminds me of the Catholic writer Sheila Kaye Smith (a friend of Graham Greene) /author/show...# /author/show... of their differences to the one who reminds me the most is the Norwegian novelist and Nobel Prize winner (when she was worth something. Now they let die the Nobel Prize in Starvation Literature) Sigrid Undset /author/show... who knew how to shake up many of the complexes Dorothy Leigh Sayers suffered. The problem with Dorothy Sayers is that the image we have left is that of the feminist pioneer, not that of the religious woman, which is with which we should stay in part is due to Jill Patton Walsh whose presence is not neutral /author/show... since she had a traumatic experience, and lost her faith. The other writer, who inspires this novel is Josephine Tey who wrote one of the most interesting historical reconstruction novels "The Daughter of Time" /book/show/7... This Was Not My first contact with Jo Walton whom I met thanks to the wonderful reviews of my friend Julie Davis /author/show... /author/show... I recommend its wonderful website A good story is hard to find agoodstoryishardtofind.blogspot.com/ and is also a pioneer in the Audiobook genre, and other alternative reading methods. Apart from that my first encounter with the Welsh writer was due to a wonderful novel "Among others" /book/show/8... what was interesting about this wonderful book was not the story of a girl frightened to flee from an evil mother and is cared for by her aunts also witches. But the author's love for science fiction, and fantasy novels. The wonderful thing, and what I'm indebted to Jo Walton, is that he shared his favorite novels with his readings, making it a top-notch guide. That's why I put a high note on it. . Although I don't agree with your poor narnia Chronicle assessment /book/show/1... we're going to see Lewis didn't deceive anyone. Another thing is that the protagonist will buy him fascinated by his magic stories and his talking animals, but the people who knew him knew that he would write that. This novel I don't think, it's my last Jo Walton novel, because I burn in desire to read his "Tooth and Claw" /book/show/3... although I don't know if I can do it, because the publisher, who edited it in Spain Ideas factory broke. He also burned to read David Farland's book Runelords /book/show/1... But let's not be distracted by what attracted me to this book is that it's a Ucronía. I think a lot of ŷ users will know, but he explained it. A ucronía is a fictional story, or alternate reality. What would have happened if history hadn't happened this way but in a different way? In ancient times it was Titus Livius /author/show... who in his history of Rome already fantasized about the idea that it would have happened if Alexander the Great had faced the Roman legions. According to Titus Livius (Rome pays clear) the legions would have won. I think Javier Negrete has worked on a project similar /book/show/3... /author/show... .Javier_Negrete It is very interesting to speak of Rome, because it was a French writer Charles Renouvier (socialist and Neokantiano) /book/show/9... /author/show... of the 19th century who coined the term. I dislike it, because I believe, that his intention was hostile, as I believe, that as Gibbon /book/show/1... /author/show... and some modern writer accuses Christianity of being the cause of the fall of Rome. Something, which specialists already bequeathe, and consider that Rome fell from exhaustion, and by internal conflicts. In fact, if Rome survives on the common imagination, it is because the hated Christians preserved their heritage, and maintained their traditions. To answer the pagan Zosimo wrote St. Augustine his "City of God" and his disciple Orosio continued the task. In the sack of Rome the Christians welcomed in their temple the heathen, and Leo the Great went out to meet Attila and dissuaded him from taking Rome, and he was about to get it with Genserico. On the subject of the barbarians consult Daniel Gómez Aragones' book "Barbarians in Hispania" /book/show/4... More than the barbarians, which each used at their convenience Rome fell, because it perished from within, gradually as Will Durant explains /author/show... for some as Hilaire Belloc did not fall /book/show/7... /author/show... /author/show... For him the last pagan invasion was with Ragaiso, defeated by Stylic on the vandal. Odoacro the Herulo deposed it on behalf of the eastern emperor Zeno. No one noticed the fall of Flavius' son Orestes (who had been lieutenant of Atila) after Ricimero laid down and laid down emperors at will. Instead, Byzantium does fall, and had a strong impact on the world of its time. When I started to be interested in ucronía, perhaps the third year of career will begin when a teacher with whom I had nothing in common, in fact, we did not agree on anything, since I considered that my vision of history was outdated, and old-fashioned. But he did two things to tell us about history fiction by making us not take a fact for granted, and that we think about what he might have known if things had turned out differently. It also provided me with a lot of bibliography in fact it was the one that provided me the most literature. The idea that Jo Walton carries out in this novel is not new. The first, who came up with the idea was to Cyril M. Kornbluth who will know him for the dystopia "merchants of space" /book/show/3... and wrote it, to justify something, which today seems to us Abominable. For the United States to drop the atomic bomb. Today it seems to us to be a crime against humanity as are the bombings in Dresden and Hamburg, but we must not forget one thing. Revenge is wrong I don't doubt it, and the English got revenge, but I want to remember what the Spanish Conference said, that it had been The Axis causing the war, and that Hitler wanted to cover all of England, and that he was responsible for the Blitz, and let's not talk about the barbarid as well as the Japanese from Busan, Kwai, Nanking (and I say it, i am a pro-Japanese). So yes, the dropping of the atomic bomb is a war crime, but we must not apologise for the crimes of the vanquished. Apart from the no concentration camps, as the frightening Kornbluth in his account intended, but percentity Japan would have had a worse time. The Communists were already entering Japanese territory, causing real massacres in Manchuria. Most likely not to drop the atomic bomb Japan would have fallen under communist dictatorship, or the United States would have reached an armistice with them, to confront Stalin, but they would have left themselves without condemning many war crimes committed by the army Japanese. We have the case of Philip K. Dick "The Man in the Castle" where Germans and Japanese have divided the world /book/show/2... We have the case to justify his thesis acratas of the graphic history of V by Vendetta by Alan Moore /book/show/5... (remember that this author has already written another "Watchmen" ucrony /book/show/4... although I see nothing wrong with the United States winning the Vietnam War, perhaps the Soviet Union had collapsed earlier, and many hell would have been saved). Perhaps the one that I may be most interested in the quality of the writer, because I am a great admirer of his Cicero trilogy (although with Munich he crashed a little) I mean "Fatherland" /book/show/5... La La same tonic that Jo Walton puts up in her novel. In other words, the affair with Bruno Hoffa and the abduction of his son would not have taken place, and that would have allowed Charles Lindbergh to come to the presidency of the States favoring that there was an Axis-friendly government was held by Philip Roth in "The Conjuring Against America" /book/show/7... It was the same theme of a film from the film It happened Here so the subject Jo Walton was not original, but interesting. Perhaps the most interesting thing about Jo Walton's novel is that although our world isn't perfect, it's not the worst of the alternate universes. Humanity's fate could have been much worse. But could Nazi Germany have won the World War? It's the million-dollar question, since it's a subject that my family, my grandfather, my father, and I have debated. How could He have won world war? With America's entry into the war (which in my opinion was the unbalanced factor), as this led Hitler to divide his troops and create two fronts. He has compared Hitler to Napoleon, but the cause of his fall is the opposite to Napoleon he begins to go wrong when he begins to delegate to his brothers, and his generals, and Hitler begins to go wrong when he starts to osonates his generals and it is he who begins to take the Decisions. Robert Harris posed in the sluggish "Munich" /book/show/3... that Neville Chamberlain was a genius, because not starting the war before the Allies had time to stop Hitler. In my opinion this analysis is ridiculous, the longer you would have given Hitler the more territory would have occupied you, and the harder it would have been for you to kick him out. Although Stanley Baldwin underestimated him as a display of the wonderful scene of the "King's Speech" (yes, a wonderful film superior to the overrated Social Network, despite Harvey Weinstein). Yet Stanley Baldwin did two things right. Confront the tycoons of the press, and get the abdication of Edward VIII (who was pro-Nazi). This left the expedited path to Sir Winston Churchill (despite detaining Stanley Baldwin. Churchill is a politician, but he also made many mistakes.) What Hitler did not count (no, it was not Ivor Claire, the character depicting a false appearance of greatness) was for England to resist, or to fight with him. Hence Rudolf Hess's desperate plan is therefore not far-fetched what Jo Walton proposed in this novel by a pro-Nazi government called Farthing. Paradoxically, Adolf Hitler's greatest ally was irenism, namely those who said, that peace had to be maintained at any cost, even if this could lead to an unfair situation. This has happened in my country, and in Colombia, where politicians seeking popularity and easy applause reached peace agreements with terrorist organizations. One wonders if these terrorist organizations had been far-right would have been willing to achieve peace at any cost? I believe that in that case they would have advocated for the annihilation of the enemy. Peace is not only the cessation of armed conflict, as the Spanish writer Juan Manuel de Prada has brilliantly explained /author/show... peace is the restoration of justice, because the Holy Fathers, as well as St. Thomas Aquinas established that war should be the last resort, but they believed in self-defense, if the enemy went against justice, and aggression was unjust. Therefore, if it was legitimate to wage war on Adolf Hitler, who was the aggressor, and the unworthy would have been what Chamberlain did to yield. I had an argument with a Mexican boy, who thinking that because communism was terrible (not bad is even worse) Hitler was not so bad. According to him certain historians we see Hitler as a comic book villain who wants to conquer the world, but unfortunately it is what it was. I've been talking to writer Michael D. Greaney. /author/show... that "El Mein Kapf" (not to this one I don't want to advertise, so I don't link it, nor the communist manifesto either) is the most evil book there is. In the first part, it seems to be logical, and make sense, but the second part is the embodiment of evil. I as a Catholic believe in eschatology, and that there is antichrist (my friend Professor Manuel Alfonseca /author/show... and I differ from approach according to him the antichrist will be an ideology while I believe that ideology will be embodied by a man of flesh and blood. The Devil likes to deform everything that God does), (well according to the Spanish priest José Antonio Fortea (first part)
September 14, 2015
This was a very odd book. I enjoyed most of it, but it was very odd. It took a bit of mental calisthenics to adapt to a 1949 London in which "Old Adolph admired England and had no territorial ambitions across the channel". Because this world's Old Adolph most certainly had all sorts of ambitions across the channel; he was drooling to get into London and execute the entire royal family.
Rather than that straight-forward and outright horror, the horror in this book is � sneakier.
"In May of 1941, the war looked dark for Britain. We and our Empire stood alone, entirely without allies. The Luftwaffe and the RAF were fighting their deadly duel above our heads. Our allies France, Belgium, Holland, Poland, and Denmark had been utterly conquered. Our ventures to defy the Reich in Norway and Greece had come to nothing, The USSR was allied to the Reich, and the increasingly isolationist USA was sending us only grudging aid. We feared and prepared for invasion. In this dark time, the Fuhrer extended a tentative offer to us. Hess flew to Britain with a tentative offer of peace, each side to keep what they had. Churchill refused to consider it, but wiser heads prevailed�"
Wiser heads prevailed, and those damned isolationists in the US held sway, and Britain made a peace with Hitler, and now most if not all of Europe is under a blanket of fascism. Being Jewish is a very, very difficult thing, when it isn't outright life-threatening, wherever you are. And Orwell imagines his dystopia happening ten years earlier than in this world. (That is a lovely subtle touch.) And the United States is led by President Lindbergh � which � Heaven forbid.
And it is in this universe that Lucy and her Jewish husband David return to her family's estate for a house party, during which there is a good old-fashioned country house murder.
There were things I did not like; Lucy uses a verbal shorthand she had developed, but the reader is not clued into exactly what she's talking about until what seemed like a ridiculous ways in. (Page 96 � looked it up. So a third of the way through the book.) It's pretty clear through context what she means by "Athenian" and "Macedonian" and so on � but not totally clear, and a little baffling as to WHY she would be saying "Athenian" and "Macedonian" and so on.
I never warmed up to most of the characters. Heaven knows Lucy's family didn't deserve warming up to…they are snobs of the first water.
"How many servants do you get by with?"
"Just three," David said. "A cook, a housemaid, and a kitchen maid. �"
"You dress yourselves??"
- Goodness me. And here I thought that was something one was taught to do as a toddler.
And Lucy � one of the two point of view characters � began to grate on me. She says, often, that she isn't too bright, though the plan she comes up with is not terrible � but her speech and behavior thoroughly agrees with the "not too bright". Is it all a front? Does she really think she's stupid (perhaps because her mother has taught her so) when she's not so dumb after all? Who knows? She is rather flighty, and certainly fanciful: to avoid spoilers, I'll just say that she develops an unshakeable certainty of something about which she couldn't possibly have a clue, and proceeds from that first moment of certainty as if what she believes is rock solid truth. Is it? Who knows?
Speaking of servants � Things are a bit odd with them in the country house where the good old country house murder takes place. I mean � they're servants, when all's said and done, employees hired and paid to do specific jobs, in a class structure which requires them to show respect to their social "betters". But here the attitudes are extraordinary � and Mrs. Simons, the housekeeper, is outright offensive. Blatantly, intentionally, viciously rude. Lucy: "I didn't like how quickly I'd resorted to threatening to sack her" � WHY? My God, are you mad? Fire that nasty cow and eject her so hard and fast she bounces twice going down the drive.
The book alternates viewpoints between Lucy, on the scene of the murder, and Inspector Carmichael, in charge of investigating said murder. And it's all rather repetitive � not even just because of dual points of view, which is handled fairly well. "He might have committed suicide." "Why would he kill himself?" then a little while later "He might have killed himself." "Why would he commit suicide?" This happens over and over.
I gave this four stars to start with, but � after some time has passed, and having listened to the ensuing two books, and just looking at the notes I made while listening to this one � I bumped it down to three. Because on the whole I really, really hated this series � and, honestly, with the level of exasperation in what I wrote at the time I'm a little shocked that I did rate it higher.
Rather than that straight-forward and outright horror, the horror in this book is � sneakier.
"In May of 1941, the war looked dark for Britain. We and our Empire stood alone, entirely without allies. The Luftwaffe and the RAF were fighting their deadly duel above our heads. Our allies France, Belgium, Holland, Poland, and Denmark had been utterly conquered. Our ventures to defy the Reich in Norway and Greece had come to nothing, The USSR was allied to the Reich, and the increasingly isolationist USA was sending us only grudging aid. We feared and prepared for invasion. In this dark time, the Fuhrer extended a tentative offer to us. Hess flew to Britain with a tentative offer of peace, each side to keep what they had. Churchill refused to consider it, but wiser heads prevailed�"
Wiser heads prevailed, and those damned isolationists in the US held sway, and Britain made a peace with Hitler, and now most if not all of Europe is under a blanket of fascism. Being Jewish is a very, very difficult thing, when it isn't outright life-threatening, wherever you are. And Orwell imagines his dystopia happening ten years earlier than in this world. (That is a lovely subtle touch.) And the United States is led by President Lindbergh � which � Heaven forbid.
And it is in this universe that Lucy and her Jewish husband David return to her family's estate for a house party, during which there is a good old-fashioned country house murder.
There were things I did not like; Lucy uses a verbal shorthand she had developed, but the reader is not clued into exactly what she's talking about until what seemed like a ridiculous ways in. (Page 96 � looked it up. So a third of the way through the book.) It's pretty clear through context what she means by "Athenian" and "Macedonian" and so on � but not totally clear, and a little baffling as to WHY she would be saying "Athenian" and "Macedonian" and so on.
I never warmed up to most of the characters. Heaven knows Lucy's family didn't deserve warming up to…they are snobs of the first water.
"How many servants do you get by with?"
"Just three," David said. "A cook, a housemaid, and a kitchen maid. �"
"You dress yourselves??"
- Goodness me. And here I thought that was something one was taught to do as a toddler.
And Lucy � one of the two point of view characters � began to grate on me. She says, often, that she isn't too bright, though the plan she comes up with is not terrible � but her speech and behavior thoroughly agrees with the "not too bright". Is it all a front? Does she really think she's stupid (perhaps because her mother has taught her so) when she's not so dumb after all? Who knows? She is rather flighty, and certainly fanciful: to avoid spoilers, I'll just say that she develops an unshakeable certainty of something about which she couldn't possibly have a clue, and proceeds from that first moment of certainty as if what she believes is rock solid truth. Is it? Who knows?
Speaking of servants � Things are a bit odd with them in the country house where the good old country house murder takes place. I mean � they're servants, when all's said and done, employees hired and paid to do specific jobs, in a class structure which requires them to show respect to their social "betters". But here the attitudes are extraordinary � and Mrs. Simons, the housekeeper, is outright offensive. Blatantly, intentionally, viciously rude. Lucy: "I didn't like how quickly I'd resorted to threatening to sack her" � WHY? My God, are you mad? Fire that nasty cow and eject her so hard and fast she bounces twice going down the drive.
The book alternates viewpoints between Lucy, on the scene of the murder, and Inspector Carmichael, in charge of investigating said murder. And it's all rather repetitive � not even just because of dual points of view, which is handled fairly well. "He might have committed suicide." "Why would he kill himself?" then a little while later "He might have killed himself." "Why would he commit suicide?" This happens over and over.
I gave this four stars to start with, but � after some time has passed, and having listened to the ensuing two books, and just looking at the notes I made while listening to this one � I bumped it down to three. Because on the whole I really, really hated this series � and, honestly, with the level of exasperation in what I wrote at the time I'm a little shocked that I did rate it higher.
April 28, 2014
Halfway through rereading this, I stalled for a moment, thinking about the ending. See, the book starts out seeming pretty fun, despite the dark threats in the background: there's plainly loving pastiche of Dorothy L. Sayers going on, and Lucy Kahn's narration is lively and silly. All of that disguises, for a while, how serious the themes turn -- and when they do, when the bottom of Carmichael's life drops out, you'll feel it too. I quoted Dar Williams' song Buzzer when I first reviewed this, and it still applies: I get it now/I'm the face, I'm the cause of war/We don't have to blame white-coated men anymore (it's an amazing song, about Stanley Milgram's obedience to authority experiments).
All in all, it's just so well done. The pastiche works, and so does every aspect of the alternate history. The details are tweaked, and it all feels so plausible. I love the image of Churchill's defiance of the events that create the background of and overshadow this book. For something that seems light at times, a pastiche, it turns out to be so horrifying -- and not in the sense of gore and monsters, in the sense of how people can be so completely plausibly awful.
Personally, I love how Walton handles the minorities here, too: their individual voices, their differing hopes and fears, their differing ways of living in a world that's trying to push them and their kind out. I mean, it's obvious I'm already a fan, here, but I just think she gets so much right.
All in all, it's just so well done. The pastiche works, and so does every aspect of the alternate history. The details are tweaked, and it all feels so plausible. I love the image of Churchill's defiance of the events that create the background of and overshadow this book. For something that seems light at times, a pastiche, it turns out to be so horrifying -- and not in the sense of gore and monsters, in the sense of how people can be so completely plausibly awful.
Personally, I love how Walton handles the minorities here, too: their individual voices, their differing hopes and fears, their differing ways of living in a world that's trying to push them and their kind out. I mean, it's obvious I'm already a fan, here, but I just think she gets so much right.
January 11, 2018
Outstanding book. I don't have anything substantial to add to Russ Allbery's fine review (below), which led me to finally read Farthing. So, I recommend you first read his piece, and then read Walton's "spare, lean book." 4.5 stars
"Walton adds overtones and political suspense without compromising the pleasures of the initial mystery plot, and the combination had me unwilling to put the book down. I read Farthing straight through in a single day and stayed up to finish it, despite not being a fan of alternate history and an anti-fan of anything whatsoever related to Nazis or World War II. This is not a typical extended working-out of an alternate timeline, stuffed full of irrelevant research and minutia of divergence. It's a spare, lean book in which each scene and character is effective, the exposition is deft and brief, and the background stays out of the way of the story. Recommended, even if you don't think this is your genre. "
"Walton adds overtones and political suspense without compromising the pleasures of the initial mystery plot, and the combination had me unwilling to put the book down. I read Farthing straight through in a single day and stayed up to finish it, despite not being a fan of alternate history and an anti-fan of anything whatsoever related to Nazis or World War II. This is not a typical extended working-out of an alternate timeline, stuffed full of irrelevant research and minutia of divergence. It's a spare, lean book in which each scene and character is effective, the exposition is deft and brief, and the background stays out of the way of the story. Recommended, even if you don't think this is your genre. "
Displaying 1 - 30 of 976 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.