Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett

[Misfit]

Alrighty, I'll start this one off and let the debate begin :)

I know I'm in the minority of the rest of the reading public, but this is truly one of the worst books I have ever read. I came so close to throwing the book across the room on several occasions, and ended up skipping through many pages just to get to the final and not too surprising finish.

The characters were flat and lifeless and seemed to have been transplanted from the 20th century into medieval England. The book was rife with unnecessary profanity that in no way enhanced the storyline and obscene gratuitous sex (I mean how many times did William have to rape someone to prove that he was a really really bad guy?). I noticed that at least one other reviewer commented that this book was required reading in his child's school, which if you are a parent I would recommend you take a good look at this book and perhaps take issue with your school district. As an adult I was shocked at the language and violence in this book, and find it totally inappropriate for a child and/or young adult.

I also noticed comments about the historical accuracy and research that must have been involved in writing this book. If that is so, it must only be in regards to the building of the cathedral and the civil war between Stephen and Maud. As for the rest, I must disagree, I have read many well written and researched books of medieval times (thank you Sharon Kay Penman and Elizabeth Chadwick for such awesome reads), and I was infuriated on numerous discrepancies in this book. Examples and anyone may correct me if I'm mistaken as I am not a history major:


Aliena is frequently described as having long, curling loose flowing hair. Women in those days wore their hair braided and covered, it being quite scandalous for any man other than her husband or lover to see it loose.

After the attack on the castle, and the imprisonment of their father Aliena and Richard are allowed to live alone in the castle with only the steward? I doubt that the king would punish the children so for the sins of their fathers, and most likely would have been made wards of the king until they reached their majority. This was most desirable as the king could then skim the proceeds off the estates and funnel them to the crown's use. Sometimes a king would give ward ship to another party as a reward for service, etc.

Young boys of the noble class were typically sent to another noble household to be raised and educated, first as squires and then trained in that household as a knight. What on earth was a teenaged Richard doing living at home?

Much was made of William's warhorse. These were formidable beasts that were not easily handled by strangers. Yet Aliena and Richard were able to not only saddle the warhorse, but to get right on and ride it? I don't think so.

The English nobility of that period were Norman French and did not speak the language of the peasant class. So how did Aliena manage to not only communicate with them, but could set up a successful business in that atmosphere?


I could go on with more examples if I had remembered to take notes, but there were many similar instances to this throughout the book. All I can say is that if you want to read a very well written and researched book on this period, please see Sharon Kay Penman's When Christ and His Saints Slept and Time and Chance or Elizabeth Chadwick's A Place Beyond Courage. Rating: Wall Banger.

[Rowan]

I saw in our local paper he's written a follow up...

[Misfit]

I think that was World Without End, takes place about 200 years later. Not for me though :o

[Rowan]

Yes, that's it!

[tsjmom]

Alrighty, I'll start this one off and let the debate begin :)

I know I'm in the minority of the rest of the reading public, but this is truly one of the worst books I have ever read. I came so close to throwing the book across the room on several occasions, and ended up skipping through many pages just to get to the final and not too surprising finish.

The characters were flat and lifeless and seemed to have been transplanted from the 20th century into medieval England. The book was rife with unnecessary profanity that in no way enhanced the storyline and obscene gratuitous sex (I mean how many times did William have to rape someone to prove that he was a really really bad guy?). I noticed that at least one other reviewer commented that this book was required reading in his child's school, which if you are a parent I would recommend you take a good look at this book and perhaps take issue with your school district. As an adult I was shocked at the language and violence in this book, and find it totally inappropriate for a child and/or young adult.

I also noticed comments about the historical accuracy and research that must have been involved in writing this book. If that is so, it must only be in regards to the building of the cathedral and the civil war between Stephen and Maud. As for the rest, I must disagree, I have read many well written and researched books of medieval times (thank you Sharon Kay Penman and Elizabeth Chadwick for such awesome reads), and I was infuriated on numerous discrepancies in this book. Examples and anyone may correct me if I'm mistaken as I am not a history major:


Aliena is frequently described as having long, curling loose flowing hair. Women in those days wore their hair braided and covered, it being quite scandalous for any man other than her husband or lover to see it loose.

After the attack on the castle, and the imprisonment of their father Aliena and Richard are allowed to live alone in the castle with only the steward? I doubt that the king would punish the children so for the sins of their fathers, and most likely would have been made wards of the king until they reached their majority. This was most desirable as the king could then skim the proceeds off the estates and funnel them to the crown's use. Sometimes a king would give ward ship to another party as a reward for service, etc.

Young boys of the noble class were typically sent to another noble household to be raised and educated, first as squires and then trained in that household as a knight. What on earth was a teenaged Richard doing living at home?

Much was made of William's warhorse. These were formidable beasts that were not easily handled by strangers. Yet Aliena and Richard were able to not only saddle the warhorse, but to get right on and ride it? I don't think so.

The English nobility of that period were Norman French and did not speak the language of the peasant class. So how did Aliena manage to not only communicate with them, but could set up a successful business in that atmosphere?


I could go on with more examples if I had remembered to take notes, but there were many similar instances to this throughout the book. All I can say is that if you want to read a very well written and researched book on this period, please see Sharon Kay Penman's When Christ and His Saints Slept and Time and Chance or Elizabeth Chadwick's A Place Beyond Courage. Rating: Wall Banger.


I agree totally and completely! Ughhhhh :X

[Lady Macbeth]

Blimey!

I was considering reading this before the TV show airs (it has a stellar cast) so did a quick search of the forum and found only this thread with some fairly negative reviews.

Did anyone here actually enjoy the novel?

[Misfit]

OMG, they're going to make this a series? Can they have violence like that on TV?

[Misfit]

OMG, they're going to make this a series? Can they have violence like that on TV?

Actually, if you look at the reviews on Amazon you'll find that 99% of the human population seems to think this is the greatest novel ever written. I'm usually in the minority.:o:)

[EC2]

Not for me this one Lady Macbeth. Most of it could never have happened in the 12thC. I'm sure it will make for exciting TV and most people will love it though.

[Lady Macbeth]

Well, the reviews on Amazon are actually fairly positive so I've put in a request online at the library but I'm right at the bottom of a long queue for only 12 copies so it could be a while.

The TV show cast reads like a Who's Who of British Period Drama Actors!!:D

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1453159/

[Vanessa]

I very much enjoyed it, Lady MacBeth - I didn't know it was being made into a TV series, though. Do you know when it's being shown?

[Lady Macbeth]

I'm really not sure but there is a website.:)



http://www.the-pillars-of-the-earth.tv/

[Vanessa]

Thanks for that - I know of some other fans who will be interested.

[EC2]

Film opening synopsis:

On a bright, cloudless day, a lone ship in the English Channel mysteriously sinks - seemingly without cause. Amongst the ship’s lost souls is the future King of England and his young pregnant bride. The only survivor of this fiery catastrophe is the young French artist, Shareburg, who washes ashore more dead than alive, clutching in his fist the red ruby ring once worn by the drowned Prince.

What?!!!! In history the ship set out at night from Barfleur. Everyone had been drinking heavily before they embarked. King Henry had gone on ahead. The ship didn't clear the harbour but hit a known rock whilst navigating out. The lone survivor of this tragic event was actually a butcher as I recall and he certainly wasn't carrying a ring.

And then 'Ellen bares Shareburg a son' Yikes, you'd think they'd check the spelling. I don't dare read the rest!

[Margaret]

Sounds like the film will make Pillars seem like an impeccably researched novel, by contrast. Film-makers who aim their work at a popular audience generally don't care much about keeping the history authentic. In regard to the novel, my impression was that Follett focused on researching the technology of cathedral-building and some of the other specifics of medieval life with considerable success, but did not steep himself in medieval culture, attitudes and belief-systems, so Pillars often seems "off" to me in terms of how the characters think and behave. Because of his background as a thriller-writer, his scenes are full of tension and plot-movement, which makes his novels exciting for people who are reading primarily for plot and story. A lot of people who don't normally read historical fiction find his novels exciting, and I do think they serve as a worthwhile introduction to the Middle Ages for people who might otherwise think of the Middle Ages in the context of boring history classes at school. While I do find the characters' lapses into modern attitudes annoying, I don't think the novels present the Middle Ages so unrealistically as to be seriously misleading, and I have to applaud any novel that gets people who aren't normally interested in history excited about it and interested in learning more.

[EC2]

Margaret, you are always so balanced in your comments and reviews. I appreciate that. :)

Because of his background as a thriller-writer, his scenes are full of tension and plot-movement, which makes his novels exciting for people who are reading primarily for plot and story.

I agree and I think this is why my mum really enjoyed the book, and my sister in law. My mum loves thrillers and she tends to read fast and for the adrenalin of the story without bothering too much about the history if it's historical, and holes in the plot if it isn't. I do think it's a pacy, punchy novel with that elusive page turning quality.


While I do find the characters' lapses into modern attitudes annoying, I don't think the novels present the Middle Ages so unrealistically as to be seriously misleading,

Once I would have agreed with you, but I was struck on reading it a second time for a reading group (after a 15 year gap) how much was very unrealistic or skewed. I think that it does dovetail with how readers expect the Middle Ages to be, which is part of its popularity, and it has the technical details of building a cathedral which make it seem as if the reader is learning something good and solid while still being hugely entertained. Whingers like me are viewed as detail-nut party poopers who don't get out enough. .:rolleyes::) My mum says so anyway!

and I have to applaud any novel that gets people who aren't normally interested in history excited about it and interested in learning more.

I agree with that, even if I look a little wry.:);)

[Margaret]

I think that it does dovetail with how readers expect the Middle Ages to be, which is part of its popularity

This is where I'm tempted to agree - even though I don't quite - that a novel like Pillars could be pernicious. It does annoy me profoundly when people criticize novels that do present the Middle Ages (or any time period) in an authentic way, accusing them of being "inaccurate" or unbelievable because the novels, even though they are based on solid research, don't conform to what people think the time period was like. What's a poor historical novelist to do? But Hollywood is a far bigger culprit, I think, in promoting misconceptions than any novelist!

[Carine]

Lady Macbeth, I enjoyed reading this too and loved the next one World Without End. :)
I'm curious to see how they interpret it on tv !!

[stu1883]

I have to say that this was one of the books that got me interested in historical fiction as it made me interested in the genre and the period. I'd always enjoyed things about knights and stuff whn I was at school but drifted away from it when others didn't think it "cool".

Follett worked on this novel for ten years, researching all about cathedral construction and masons methods - in retrospect it isnt historically accurate in many ways but I do feel it has a quality that many other books seem to lack. It is enjoyable, it does read easily and will get peopleinterested in history because of its descriptive content.

I have read the second book as well, and enjoyed it. I think this is what makes historical fiction so enjoyable - the variety of styles and the accuracy of research. The TV series looks an exciting project......however I would still prefer to see EC version of the Marshals on the small screen!!!

[siouxzee]

Everyone seems to love this book so much, I'm glad I'm not the only one that hated it! As you said, the characters were incredibly flat and the plot holes were distracting. I'm not usually squeamish about sex/violence/profanity but.... wow. it got pretty annoying after a while. and the rape scenes were so disturbing I had to skip through them (one after another after another after another).... :(
Anyway, glad I'm not alone!

Alrighty, I'll start this one off and let the debate begin :)

I know I'm in the minority of the rest of the reading public, but this is truly one of the worst books I have ever read. I came so close to throwing the book across the room on several occasions, and ended up skipping through many pages just to get to the final and not too surprising finish.

The characters were flat and lifeless and seemed to have been transplanted from the 20th century into medieval England. The book was rife with unnecessary profanity that in no way enhanced the storyline and obscene gratuitous sex (I mean how many times did William have to rape someone to prove that he was a really really bad guy?). I noticed that at least one other reviewer commented that this book was required reading in his child's school, which if you are a parent I would recommend you take a good look at this book and perhaps take issue with your school district. As an adult I was shocked at the language and violence in this book, and find it totally inappropriate for a child and/or young adult.

I also noticed comments about the historical accuracy and research that must have been involved in writing this book. If that is so, it must only be in regards to the building of the cathedral and the civil war between Stephen and Maud. As for the rest, I must disagree, I have read many well written and researched books of medieval times (thank you Sharon Kay Penman and Elizabeth Chadwick for such awesome reads), and I was infuriated on numerous discrepancies in this book. Examples and anyone may correct me if I'm mistaken as I am not a history major:


Aliena is frequently described as having long, curling loose flowing hair. Women in those days wore their hair braided and covered, it being quite scandalous for any man other than her husband or lover to see it loose.

After the attack on the castle, and the imprisonment of their father Aliena and Richard are allowed to live alone in the castle with only the steward? I doubt that the king would punish the children so for the sins of their fathers, and most likely would have been made wards of the king until they reached their majority. This was most desirable as the king could then skim the proceeds off the estates and funnel them to the crown's use. Sometimes a king would give ward ship to another party as a reward for service, etc.

Young boys of the noble class were typically sent to another noble household to be raised and educated, first as squires and then trained in that household as a knight. What on earth was a teenaged Richard doing living at home?

Much was made of William's warhorse. These were formidable beasts that were not easily handled by strangers. Yet Aliena and Richard were able to not only saddle the warhorse, but to get right on and ride it? I don't think so.

The English nobility of that period were Norman French and did not speak the language of the peasant class. So how did Aliena manage to not only communicate with them, but could set up a successful business in that atmosphere?


I could go on with more examples if I had remembered to take notes, but there were many similar instances to this throughout the book. All I can say is that if you want to read a very well written and researched book on this period, please see Sharon Kay Penman's When Christ and His Saints Slept and Time and Chance or Elizabeth Chadwick's A Place Beyond Courage. Rating: Wall Banger.

[ellieaenor]

I found a copy on Amazon.com for $1.00 + shipping. Not sure I want to read it now.

[JoshuaKaitlyn]

Oh! I was thinking of getting both novels...I've seen them going cheap in a second hand book shop....hmm! Might have second thoughts!

[N. Gemini Sasson]

Follett worked on this novel for ten years, researching all about cathedral construction and masons methods - in retrospect it isnt historically accurate in many ways but I do feel it has a quality that many other books seem to lack. It is enjoyable, it does read easily and will get peopleinterested in history because of its descriptive content.

I agree with Stu on this respect. What kept me interested in the book was the detail about the architecture and masonry, not just in the descriptive sense, but in how the story surrounded these factors and shaped the lives of the people in it. Perhaps this is because I've always looked at buildings from centuries past and wondered how they built such beautiful and long-lasting buildings without the use of our modern engines and technology. In a sense, it pays tribute to those men and women who often toiled for decades to see such structures built.

[Daffodil]

I found it enthralling; couldn't read it quickly enough. And yes, the cathedral building and the politics surrounding that, e.g., acquiring supplies of timber and stone, were interesting and new subjects for me in an historical novel. But agree there is too much gratuitous sex and too detailed - in fact, all Follett's books that I have read feature unnecessary and unlikely (such as in Night Over Water) sex scenes [Jack Higgins never needed them!!].

This book is on Australia's Top 100 list of books to read. However, its sequel, World Without End is not. And for obvious reasons as I plod through it right now. It is equally long, but with lacklustre characters, and being halfway through, hardly anyone to latch on to with any feeling except perhaps Merthin - his bridge-building skills are most interesting. Tom Builder and Prior Anthony were such strong characters in the first book, you get the feeling this later one has been written in more of a hurry.

[Misfit]

I found it enthralling; couldn't read it quickly enough. And yes, the cathedral building and the politics surrounding that, e.g., acquiring supplies of timber and stone, were interesting and new subjects for me in an historical novel. But agree there is too much gratuitous sex and too detailed - in fact, all Follett's books that I have read feature unnecessary and unlikely (such as in Night Over Water) sex scenes [Jack Higgins never needed them!!].

This book is on Australia's Top 100 list of books to read. However, its sequel, World Without End is not. And for obvious reasons as I plod through it right now. It is equally long, but with lacklustre characters, and being halfway through, hardly anyone to latch on to with any feeling except perhaps Merthin - his bridge-building skills are most interesting. Tom Builder and Prior Anthony were such strong characters in the first book, you get the feeling this later one has been written in more of a hurry.

Thanks daffodil, and welcome to the forum.

[fairmanthefairway]

Reading the Misfit's drubbing of the book, one wonders how high his expectations can get. To say that there are a few elements of the story that couldn't have happened in real world England circa 1100, well, that's the problem with historical fiction lovers. They get too caught up in the history. Of course there were only four knights who dragged Beckket from his church and murdered him. Of course the main character of this fictional story was not there either. But to pick out such small details and dismiss the novel as inaccurate is to misunderstand historical fiction!

The novel does a wonderful job of showing how tenuous life was without a strong central government, and without any rule of law. The novel also does a great job exploring the relative strength of pragmatism and absolutism as solutions to moral quandries.

Yes, the Misfit is correct- there is a little bit of sex in the novel, some of it quite graphic. At times, it reads a bit like a Harlequin romance. Still, the rape scenes help to reinforce the powerlessness of women in particular and of the down trodden in general. Besides, Follett uses rape as a subtle metaphor throughout if you look for it.

There is one particular moment of actual rape of one of the main characters. In the subsequent chapter, one of the cathedral building scenes begins with a stake being driven into the ground. Unless one avoids all Freudian readings on principle, one can hardly avoid seeing the connection between the rape of women and the creation of cathedrals in England. Yes, it sounds strange, but the connection is there.

Rape, as I have argued here, is simply one imposing one's will (to power) on another. The act of building cathedrals was an act of extraordinary will, requiring an almost manic belief in the cause. It sounds terrible to equate such artistry with rape, but the text really seems to imply this.

To the point at hand though, the Misfit has expected too much from a historical fictive world, failing to abide by Coleridge's caveat regarding suspension of disbelief.

To conclude, yes it's long and the reading of it is quite fulfilling, almost like the cathedral raising, and yes, there are some inaccuracies, but if you are up for 900 plus pages of good plot and strong memorable characters who lead you to a crucial moment in actual history, and if you like architecture, etc. or the debate between church and state, and want a narrative to connect it all, this novel is for you!

[Miss Moppet]

Reading the Misfit's drubbing of the book, one wonders how high his expectations can get.

Welcome to the forum. I can't discuss the book in detail as I haven't read it but wanted to point out that Misfit is usually known as "Misfit" not "the Misfit" and she is female. (I don't object to being called "the Moppet" though. :))

To say that there are a few elements of the story that couldn't have happened in real world England circa 1100, well, that's the problem with historical fiction lovers.

I'm curious as to why, if you feel there is a "problem" with historical fiction lovers, you would want to join a forum intended specifically for them?

To the point at hand though, the Misfit has expected too much from a historical fictive world, failing to abide by Coleridge's caveat regarding suspension of disbelief.

I'm afraid I'm with Misfit, rather than Coleridge, here. I'll suspend my disbelief to a certain extent but too many inaccuracies make me lose interest in the story.

To conclude, yes it's long and the reading of it is quite fulfilling, almost like the cathedral raising, and yes, there are some inaccuracies, but if you are up for 900 plus pages of good plot and strong memorable characters who lead you to a crucial moment in actual history, and if you like architecture, etc. or the debate between church and state, and want a narrative to connect it all, this novel is for you!

That's a strong recommendation and I certainly do intend giving Follett a try some day - although perhaps I may start with his more recent Fall of Giants.

[Chris Little]

I have enjoyed many, but not all of Follett's fiction, some have more karmic force than others. "Pillars" for me is the second best of his HF, after the "Key to Rebecca"

In consideration of Misfit's review, what happens after books impact walls? Is one required to keep wall bangies in hand? Or, do they slide whispering, even whimpering to the floor? With whatever written life remains, are they like puppy poop requiring sanitary disposal? Are their degrees of wall bangness?

[rebecca]

Sounds like the film will make Pillars seem like an impeccably researched novel, by contrast. Film-makers who aim their work at a popular audience generally don't care much about keeping the history authentic. In regard to the novel, my impression was that Follett focused on researching the technology of cathedral-building and some of the other specifics of medieval life with considerable success, but did not steep himself in medieval culture, attitudes and belief-systems, so Pillars often seems "off" to me in terms of how the characters think and behave. Because of his background as a thriller-writer, his scenes are full of tension and plot-movement, which makes his novels exciting for people who are reading primarily for plot and story. A lot of people who don't normally read historical fiction find his novels exciting, and I do think they serve as a worthwhile introduction to the Middle Ages for people who might otherwise think of the Middle Ages in the context of boring history classes at school. While I do find the characters' lapses into modern attitudes annoying, I don't think the novels present the Middle Ages so unrealistically as to be seriously misleading, and I have to applaud any novel that gets people who aren't normally interested in history excited about it and interested in learning more.

I am one who enjoyed 'Pillars of the Earth' and the main reason being what Margaret explained so eloquently above, 'Because of his background as a thriller-writer, his scenes are full of tension and plot-movement, which makes his novels exciting for people who are reading primarily for plot and story..."

I also enjoyed reading 'The Other Boleyn Girl' because the plot lines were so gripping but I never once thought I was reading the 'real' Anne Boleyn. I think when it comes to books it really is a case of different horses for different courses...but I will also add that I don't intend buying the sequel to Pillars, it simply doesn't appeal.

Bec:)

[Matt Phillips]

I didn't read Pillars, but saw the miniseries. I'm now reading World Without End, and it seems a lot of the criticisms of (and plaudits for) Pillars apply to it as well. In World, Follett seems to use the Black Death as a cover for many of the characters' historically implausible behavior, arguing that the rules of society and the Church fell by the wayside amid the chaos and panic of an unseen plague slaughtering huge portions of the population.

I know very little about the 14th century, but it seems the opposite might have been more likely: Wouldn't medieval Europeans have mostly seen the plague as a punishment from God, which would make them want to win back God's favor and behave with more devotion, stricter adherence to Church rules, and less tolerance of deviations from social and religious norms?

I mean, obviously there were any number of examples of indiscretions by priests, monks, nuns, etc., throughout history, including the Middle Ages. So it's not as if what he portrays is impossible, as far as I know. But it does often stretch plausibility.

So between this and the reviews of Pillars, it seems Follett focused a lot of his research efforts on the tangible elements of the medieval world - architecture, commerce, warfare - and little on what really made individuals tick at that time, what really dwelled in their hearts and minds. Also, the characters' dialogue and inner monologue sound too modern - words like "sexy" and terms like "cramp his style" creep in. Perhaps more extensive use of primary sources and social histories in his research might have addressed some of these problems. I'd be curious to see how Fall of Giants measures up.

Putting all that aside, World is a really fun read that's hard to put down. He is a master of building tension and continually adding frequent new tidbits of intrigue that make you want to see what's going to happen next. And in some areas of the historical subject matter, he does seem to paint a picture that largely rings true, although - again - I'm no expert. He does not pull punches in showing the brutality of late medieval warfare (no gallant mythical knights in shining armor here) and illustrates England's growing integration into European trade networks, particularly textiles.

If you can overlook the characters' overly modern mindsets, behavior, and manner of speaking and thinking, World is definitely entertaining: a fast-paced, tension-filled novel with an epic sweep. I'd recommend it ... unless the historical issues would prevent you from suspending disbelief for the full 1,000 pages! A novel that size might really make a dent in your wall.

[Misfit]

If you can overlook the characters' overly modern mindsets, behavior, and manner of speaking and thinking, World is definitely entertaining: a fast-paced, tension-filled novel with an epic sweep. I'd recommend it ... unless the historical issues would prevent you from suspending disbelief for the full 1,000 pages! A novel that size might really make a dent in your wall.

That's the thing, what works for one reader isn't always going to work for another, and why it's good to point out what didn't work in a review. There is a HUGE kerfuffle over at Goodreads right now over a very well written critical review and an author's agent who got a wee bit carried away at Twitter.