The Heretic's Daughter comes out next month, and I had an advance reading copy that I decided to actually, er, read. In short, Kathleen Kent reimagines the true story of her ancestor Martha Carrier, hanged as a witch in Salem, and her daughter Sarah. When the family moves to Andover in 1690, they bring with them smallpox; it sets them off on the wrong foot with the townspeople and once the witch frenzy begins, sharp-tongued Martha and her children stand accused and are thrown into jail.
I thought the book was okay. It reminded me a lot of Geraldine Brook's Year of Wonders in both topic (a community tries to survive after a tailor brings the plague to town) and tone. Both are written in a style of the past, to make it seem like you are reading something from the 17th century, but I don't think that device totally works in either book, or in, say, The Crucible. These writing styles have simply fallen out of favor -- as tedious, restrained, and boring. The Heretic's Daughter also relies much too heavily on simile and metaphor for description (there must be one per page, at least; now I know why English teachers were always trying to make us stop!), as well as one-dimensional characterizations of people as either good or bad, with little in-between.
Well, after all that, it sounds like the book was terrible, but it's not. It's just simply okay. It's obviously not the best book I've read, but it's certainly not the worst. So, moving on...
No comments:
Post a Comment