What do you think?
Rate this book
The Meaning of Night #1
Mörkrets väg
En kall oktobernatt 1854 i en mörk gränd i London dödas en oskyldig rödhårig man. Edward Glywer håller i kniven och han gör det för att han måste öva sig på att mörda. Mörkrets väg är hans bekännelse.
Edward har alltid haft höga tankar om sig själv och trott att han var menad att bli något stort. Men med en romanskrivande moder som ensamförsörjare ser släkttavlan inte särskilt lovande ut. Möjligen kan det finnas oklarheter i familjens förflutna som skulle kunna förändra allt och det blir Edwards livsuppgift att sprida ljus över omständigheterna och göra allt för att utkräva sitt rättmätiga arv och sin position i samhället.
Vår oberäknelige berättare tar med oss på en gastkramande resa djupt ner i skumma viktorianska gränder, opiumhålor och snuskiga bordeller fulla av förtappade unga kvinnor, men också till det förtjusande godset Evenwood där Edward möter kärleken och med den kanske även sin överman.
En stark roman om förräderi, lögner, död och passion men framför allt besatthet - och i berättelsens varje förveckling möter Edward sin stora rival, den kriminella poeten Phoebus Rainsford Daunt.
Edward har alltid haft höga tankar om sig själv och trott att han var menad att bli något stort. Men med en romanskrivande moder som ensamförsörjare ser släkttavlan inte särskilt lovande ut. Möjligen kan det finnas oklarheter i familjens förflutna som skulle kunna förändra allt och det blir Edwards livsuppgift att sprida ljus över omständigheterna och göra allt för att utkräva sitt rättmätiga arv och sin position i samhället.
Vår oberäknelige berättare tar med oss på en gastkramande resa djupt ner i skumma viktorianska gränder, opiumhålor och snuskiga bordeller fulla av förtappade unga kvinnor, men också till det förtjusande godset Evenwood där Edward möter kärleken och med den kanske även sin överman.
En stark roman om förräderi, lögner, död och passion men framför allt besatthet - och i berättelsens varje förveckling möter Edward sin stora rival, den kriminella poeten Phoebus Rainsford Daunt.
581 pages, Paperback
First published September 17, 2006
599 people are currently reading
17062 people want to read
About the author
Michael Cox
217 books230 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name.
This is Michael^Cox, where ^=space. (default profile)
About the Author:
Michael Andrew Cox was an English biographer, novelist and musician.
He also held the position of Senior Commissioning Editor of reference books for Oxford University Press.
This is Michael^Cox, where ^=space. (default profile)
About the Author:
Michael Andrew Cox was an English biographer, novelist and musician.
He also held the position of Senior Commissioning Editor of reference books for Oxford University Press.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,171 reviews
October 28, 2007
This pseudo-Victorian study in thwarted ambition is a literary tour de force. It's the tale of the rightful heir to one of the most powerful houses in England, brought up in anonymity, who learns of his true identity by chance and embarks on an all-consuming struggle to reclaim his inheritance. The atmosphere of the period is faithfully recreated but the real strength of the book lies in the voice of the central character through which the author manages to convey so much complexity that we find ourselves sympathising with the narrator even though we learn in the very opening paragraph that he has murdered a totally innocent stranger. It's an immensely long novel but I never found my attention flagging. This is a book for those who love to lose themselves in a novel, only surfacing from the depths of the narrative at intervals to look about with disappointment at their humdrum modern day surroundings, before plunging once more with relief and pleasure into the meticulously crafted world of the story.
May 4, 2009
Fellow not-so-gentle readers ripped this book a new one. Why? Mainly because it was "long". This seems to be a very common complaint in our contemporary culture. Everyone cries out for an editor. We seem to prefer our prose tight and terse and conveying "just enough".
This is another reason why my tastes are so helplessly out of my time. I enjoy wallowing in description. I actually don't mind if the author runs on a bit (or even more than a bit) if the story grabs me. In the case of this title I also suspect the author chose to be more florid with the phrasing to convey the feel of a Victorian novel. The Victorians were not exactly minimalists...in anything.
Back before Youtube and IM and 4 minute microwave dinners people could stick with a longer story. The Victorians would certainly prefer a tale that was of robust length...there were not as many competitors for the reader's spare time. A book that would last awhile was probably considered an asset.
So, if you dislike the plot, (which is actually rather intriguing) or hate the characters (some are truly despicable people) or feel the style (faux Victorian wordiness) is not to your taste...go ahead and slam this book six ways to Sunday. But, if the main complaint is that it was "too long"...then choose a shorter book next time.
For anyone who is not automatically turned off by length and by the Victorian setting, I would recommend this as a good read. It would appeal to someone who enjoys rooting for the "bad guy" sometimes...and who is flexible in mind enough to accept gray areas in character development. Yes, good people can do inexcusable things...and people who the world sees as heroic can be shams and con men. If this sort of thing is not palatable to you, this is not the story you are seeking.
This is another reason why my tastes are so helplessly out of my time. I enjoy wallowing in description. I actually don't mind if the author runs on a bit (or even more than a bit) if the story grabs me. In the case of this title I also suspect the author chose to be more florid with the phrasing to convey the feel of a Victorian novel. The Victorians were not exactly minimalists...in anything.
Back before Youtube and IM and 4 minute microwave dinners people could stick with a longer story. The Victorians would certainly prefer a tale that was of robust length...there were not as many competitors for the reader's spare time. A book that would last awhile was probably considered an asset.
So, if you dislike the plot, (which is actually rather intriguing) or hate the characters (some are truly despicable people) or feel the style (faux Victorian wordiness) is not to your taste...go ahead and slam this book six ways to Sunday. But, if the main complaint is that it was "too long"...then choose a shorter book next time.
For anyone who is not automatically turned off by length and by the Victorian setting, I would recommend this as a good read. It would appeal to someone who enjoys rooting for the "bad guy" sometimes...and who is flexible in mind enough to accept gray areas in character development. Yes, good people can do inexcusable things...and people who the world sees as heroic can be shams and con men. If this sort of thing is not palatable to you, this is not the story you are seeking.
September 23, 2011
This book started out great. The first line, "After killing the red-haired man, I took myself off to Quinn's for an oyster supper." really hooked me. As the book continued it proved interesting, a tale narrated in the first person by a man of obvious derangement convinced of his own rationality and the fact that he is justified in any action taken towards furthering his own ends.
Cox does an excellent job of capturing the feel of a Victorian novel, and I think that may ultimately have been the problem. As the story continued for page after page I simply got too bogged down in the sheer Victorian-ness of it. Tiny details of little or no interest and constant digressions from the main plot as the narrator sees conspiracies against him in every corner and hidden meaning in every turn of phrase. Sheer number of pages or word count is not usually a huge impediment to me, but there just wasn't enough of a pay-off here for me to have any desire to continue.
Maybe someday I'll come back to this book and see if I'll find it any less of a slog, but this one was just too much for me when I first tried to tackle it.
Cox does an excellent job of capturing the feel of a Victorian novel, and I think that may ultimately have been the problem. As the story continued for page after page I simply got too bogged down in the sheer Victorian-ness of it. Tiny details of little or no interest and constant digressions from the main plot as the narrator sees conspiracies against him in every corner and hidden meaning in every turn of phrase. Sheer number of pages or word count is not usually a huge impediment to me, but there just wasn't enough of a pay-off here for me to have any desire to continue.
Maybe someday I'll come back to this book and see if I'll find it any less of a slog, but this one was just too much for me when I first tried to tackle it.
January 24, 2021
Ova knjiga je izazvala veliku pažnju u svetu dok je bila još u rukopisu, potom je imala dobru medijsku pažnju kad je objavljenja... U Srbiji pe prošla potpuno nezapaženo (za Hrvatsku se ne sećam kako je prošla, tj. da li je objavljena)... Prevod je dobar... Ali knjiga nije za svačiju dušu...
January 21, 2012
Allow me to stop and doff my stove pipe hat to you Mr Cox, for truly you are a man who has done his research. Having recently perused the weighty tome that is The Meaning of Night, I am reacquainted with what it means to be a man obsessed. Both the protaganist and the author have their fixations but over 700 pages it is apparent that Michael Cox's obsession for mid-Victorian history and literature is as all consuming as Edward Glyvers determination for revenge.
Whether you regard the footnotes as a helpful point of reference (presuming you too are the kind of person who checks the validity of historic references in fictional novels), or as Cox cheerfully showing off just how much he really knows about the period in question, you surely cannot fail but to admire him for a magnificent work of fiction with some faction thrown in. I realise that through goodreads/goodreading I've become a fan of this kind of book and this has taken me by surprise but some of this stuff is a pretty good substitute for Victorian Era literature if you ever get to the point that you've read all that period has to offer. I've got the Crimson Petal and the White to read and also Cox's other work of fiction The Glass of Time lined up for next month. Take note though reader, if you are looking for a fairy tale ending then you may wish to refer back to the much cited Les Milles et Une Nuits because you're not going to find one here.
Whether you regard the footnotes as a helpful point of reference (presuming you too are the kind of person who checks the validity of historic references in fictional novels), or as Cox cheerfully showing off just how much he really knows about the period in question, you surely cannot fail but to admire him for a magnificent work of fiction with some faction thrown in. I realise that through goodreads/goodreading I've become a fan of this kind of book and this has taken me by surprise but some of this stuff is a pretty good substitute for Victorian Era literature if you ever get to the point that you've read all that period has to offer. I've got the Crimson Petal and the White to read and also Cox's other work of fiction The Glass of Time lined up for next month. Take note though reader, if you are looking for a fairy tale ending then you may wish to refer back to the much cited Les Milles et Une Nuits because you're not going to find one here.
February 21, 2008
This book is perhaps the worst book I've read in several years. The "plot twists" were inane. I kept thinking that the "twists" were so obvious that surely they were just decoys designed to obscure the real twists, but no. Those WERE the real twists, twists that were super obvious and could only be surprising to someone who was either dumb or reading a totally different book. And the whole thing went on and on for something like 690 pages. And I hated the protagonist. There was no point to anything he did. OK, so he was the real Lord Tansor--after I figured that out on, like, page 3, I then had to sit for 687 more pages while the idiot went on and on and on with a plan that was never going to work and that I as a reader was *hoping* wouldn't work. The only character I liked was the one who couldn't talk. Seriously.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 19, 2007
I'm reasonably certain that this is the first book I've given 2 stars since joining GoodReads. Partly because I'm easily amused; partly because I tend to read stuff I already know I'm going to like (recommended by a friend, work of an author I've enjoyed in the past, good reviews, etc). I borrowed The Meaning of Night from my mother-in-law because I needed something to read on the commute and I wasn't buying myself new books so close to Christmas. I asked her if it was any good; her response was "eh". Bad sign.
So this is, as the subtitle indicates, a confessional novel, and the central conceit is that it's "real", recently discovered by a professor who specializes in Victoriana. So it's written in a Victorian style ... kind of. I had a nagging feeling while reading the entire thing that there were anachronisms, not in terms of facts and places but in terms of the narrator's attitudes and other intangibles. I wasn't able to suspend my disbelief at all - the entire book felt like an adult in the 21st century pretending to write as someone in 1855. To my ear it lacked authenticity.
The book suffers from other problems as well. SPOILERS AHEAD (trust me, you don't want to read the book, so let me spare you the trouble). The main character confesses to murdering a stranger on page 1. He also quickly indicates that he only killed the stranger as practice so that he would feel confident enough to murder his enemy. So right off we have an extremely unsympathetic protagonist. Then for 600 pages we get the back story of why the protagonist thinks his enemy deserves to be murdered. It's extremely straightforward stuff - I kept waiting for a twist but nothing happened that I didn't see coming. Then, in the end, the protagonist kills his enemy in the most boring way imaginable. There's zero character development and zero conflict. Protagonist hates his enemy, justifies his hate, and kills his enemy. There's never the slightest doubt that the protagonist will survive because he has to in order to write the ex post facto confession. Nor is there any way for him to have a change of heart, nor is there any chance of him getting caught, ibid.
And speaking of "ibid", a word about footnotes. The book technically has two narrators - the protagonist writing the confession, and the professor who "discovered the manuscript". The second narrator only intrudes in two ways - an introduction at the very beginning, and footnotes throughout the text. Now, I appreciate a good footnote. Other books I've recently read have made great use of footnotes. The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, for instance - hilarious, vibrant asides and explanations made in the footnotes which really enhance the overall experience in a meta-fiction kind of way. Or the edition of A Tale of Two Cities I read - those footnotes were useful because they addressed certain things that made the text clearer, explaining things which Dickens (correctly) felt would be understood by his contemporary audience. The footnotes in The Meaning of Night, however, were just awful. Bear in mind that the novel only has one author, pretending simultaneously to be a Victorian murderer and a modern professor. So every obscure reference in the book was chosen deliberately by the author, and then footnoted by the author, but often in spectacularly unhelpful ways. A running theme is that the protagonist loves rare books, so he will occasional make passing reference to "so-and-so's folio". Then the footnote gives the folio's complete author, complete title, and date of publication, and other utterly useless esoterica which add nothing to the bottom line understanding. Again, I kept waiting for the professor to become a true character through the footnotes, to see some kind of relevance down there, but it never happened. Alas.
Like a true English major, I've now written my longest review for the book I've liked the least. It just bugs me when books are bad!!!
So this is, as the subtitle indicates, a confessional novel, and the central conceit is that it's "real", recently discovered by a professor who specializes in Victoriana. So it's written in a Victorian style ... kind of. I had a nagging feeling while reading the entire thing that there were anachronisms, not in terms of facts and places but in terms of the narrator's attitudes and other intangibles. I wasn't able to suspend my disbelief at all - the entire book felt like an adult in the 21st century pretending to write as someone in 1855. To my ear it lacked authenticity.
The book suffers from other problems as well. SPOILERS AHEAD (trust me, you don't want to read the book, so let me spare you the trouble). The main character confesses to murdering a stranger on page 1. He also quickly indicates that he only killed the stranger as practice so that he would feel confident enough to murder his enemy. So right off we have an extremely unsympathetic protagonist. Then for 600 pages we get the back story of why the protagonist thinks his enemy deserves to be murdered. It's extremely straightforward stuff - I kept waiting for a twist but nothing happened that I didn't see coming. Then, in the end, the protagonist kills his enemy in the most boring way imaginable. There's zero character development and zero conflict. Protagonist hates his enemy, justifies his hate, and kills his enemy. There's never the slightest doubt that the protagonist will survive because he has to in order to write the ex post facto confession. Nor is there any way for him to have a change of heart, nor is there any chance of him getting caught, ibid.
And speaking of "ibid", a word about footnotes. The book technically has two narrators - the protagonist writing the confession, and the professor who "discovered the manuscript". The second narrator only intrudes in two ways - an introduction at the very beginning, and footnotes throughout the text. Now, I appreciate a good footnote. Other books I've recently read have made great use of footnotes. The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, for instance - hilarious, vibrant asides and explanations made in the footnotes which really enhance the overall experience in a meta-fiction kind of way. Or the edition of A Tale of Two Cities I read - those footnotes were useful because they addressed certain things that made the text clearer, explaining things which Dickens (correctly) felt would be understood by his contemporary audience. The footnotes in The Meaning of Night, however, were just awful. Bear in mind that the novel only has one author, pretending simultaneously to be a Victorian murderer and a modern professor. So every obscure reference in the book was chosen deliberately by the author, and then footnoted by the author, but often in spectacularly unhelpful ways. A running theme is that the protagonist loves rare books, so he will occasional make passing reference to "so-and-so's folio". Then the footnote gives the folio's complete author, complete title, and date of publication, and other utterly useless esoterica which add nothing to the bottom line understanding. Again, I kept waiting for the professor to become a true character through the footnotes, to see some kind of relevance down there, but it never happened. Alas.
Like a true English major, I've now written my longest review for the book I've liked the least. It just bugs me when books are bad!!!
November 12, 2020
“To set things in their proper light, I must first say something about myself and my situation.”
If I were writing this review in the manner of the novel itself, I'd tell you a bit about my birth, my gently wonderful parents, my siblings. I'd describe my education, and perhaps tell you the life story of my most influential teacher. I'd certainly mention my physical struggles and temperament in detail, so you'd understand my state as I read. I'd tell you all about my reading life, my bibliophilic loves and hates – and about the histories of my most bookish comrades. I'd tell you about the nemesis that made reading this detailed confession story so frustrating, and about my plans to revenge myself against said nemesis. (Who was probably mostly my own self, though I'll never fully see it.)
It would be a good review. But gawddammit it would take two hours to read and use absolutely every character in the allowed word count. Every single one of those words would be relevant, but you'd have to work to find out if they are essential. And it would all boil down to this:
This book was probably better than I thought it was. Certainly, it was full of amazing detail. It was easier to put down than pick up, though. It is almost certainly more my fault, than Cox's. There's a sequel, and I'd like to read it. If I can't get to it before Night gets blurry in my rearview, though, then I'm reminding myself right here that, my own fault or no, this felt tedious and there are scads of unread books out there.
“And so I began to reel him in, just as I had done with Mr Tredgold. It was the bibliophilic temperament, you see; its possessors constitute a kind of freemasonry, ever disposed to treat those blessed with a similar passion for books as if they were blood brothers.”
November 20, 2012
This is one of the most unique books I've ever read. Is it because it's a murder mystery? No. Because it's told in the first person? No. What makes it unlike any other book I've read is that from the very beginning, from the very preface itself, this book is set up as if it were a true manuscript found by someone and put to publication. This goes right down to editor's notes fleshing out names, events, times and places for the reader, not all of which are made up.
It is a work of fiction though. A VERY good work of fiction.
'A spellbinding story of murder, deceit, love, and revenge in Victorian England.' That's what it says in the book's jacket and a pretty accurate representation of what's to be found inbetween the covers.
The Meaning Of Night is a tale of a man seeking revenge. Revenge against a childhood nemesis. Revenge that takes place over nearly a lifetime.
This is a very deep and tightly plotted book. There are alot of names and events and alot of twists and turns, but it was never a labor to read. Even the most mundane of exposition is told in such a way that Cox makes it interesting, and what's more , FUN to read.
I say this book is tightly plotted because just about everything is significant in some way or another. Every character, look, line of dialogue. Not one word is wasted.
Page by page, we get more and more information on the narrator's past and his motivations, all as he discovers it himself so it's almost like you're there with him every step of the way and there are several huge twists that are fantastic.
This is a great and long story that just satisfies on about every point I can think of. It's never dumbed down but it's never laborious to read. 'Page Turner' is a cliche, but it's totally appropriate here.
It is a work of fiction though. A VERY good work of fiction.
'A spellbinding story of murder, deceit, love, and revenge in Victorian England.' That's what it says in the book's jacket and a pretty accurate representation of what's to be found inbetween the covers.
The Meaning Of Night is a tale of a man seeking revenge. Revenge against a childhood nemesis. Revenge that takes place over nearly a lifetime.
This is a very deep and tightly plotted book. There are alot of names and events and alot of twists and turns, but it was never a labor to read. Even the most mundane of exposition is told in such a way that Cox makes it interesting, and what's more , FUN to read.
I say this book is tightly plotted because just about everything is significant in some way or another. Every character, look, line of dialogue. Not one word is wasted.
Page by page, we get more and more information on the narrator's past and his motivations, all as he discovers it himself so it's almost like you're there with him every step of the way and there are several huge twists that are fantastic.
This is a great and long story that just satisfies on about every point I can think of. It's never dumbed down but it's never laborious to read. 'Page Turner' is a cliche, but it's totally appropriate here.
May 27, 2008
I could only get up to page 166 in this book before I gave up, thats out of about 600 pages.
This book was like the love child of Dickens and Austen, which is then orphanned and left to be raised by a commune of varrious victorian era British melodramatists. It took at least 100 pages before the author finally got to the point of telling us precisely WHY his main character needs revenge on someone. Even then, 60 pages into the story of this guys past, I'm falling asleep.
I found the characters two dimensional, the setting not used nearly enough, and the premise cliche to say the least. I just couldn't stomach anymore of this as it was distracting me from other reading. If you are a fan of British melodrama, then you should read this. I personally was hopping for something less flowery and more street level gritty. Stop lamenting about getting revenge, and get your revenge already!!
This book was like the love child of Dickens and Austen, which is then orphanned and left to be raised by a commune of varrious victorian era British melodramatists. It took at least 100 pages before the author finally got to the point of telling us precisely WHY his main character needs revenge on someone. Even then, 60 pages into the story of this guys past, I'm falling asleep.
I found the characters two dimensional, the setting not used nearly enough, and the premise cliche to say the least. I just couldn't stomach anymore of this as it was distracting me from other reading. If you are a fan of British melodrama, then you should read this. I personally was hopping for something less flowery and more street level gritty. Stop lamenting about getting revenge, and get your revenge already!!
April 12, 2008
I was warned to persevere through the slow beginning, and after a few chapters it really does become the gripping page-turner promised in the back cover reviews. In the first sentence, the main character murders an unknown man. He shortly reveals himself to be a grossly immoral opium-eater bent on revenge — hardly an auspicious beginning even for an anti-hero, but at least an intriguing one. Soon the intrigue becomes almost palpable and the hero becomes quite sympathetic as layer after layer of his story is revealed through various characters’ letters, journals, and recollections. Intensely atmospheric, very layered, and surprisingly easy to follow — what’s not to like? I did anticipate the major plot twists rather far in advance, possibly because I’m naturally suspicious and read a lot of mysteries. However, my anticipation of them did nothing to diminish my enjoyment of the drama. Michael Cox has masterfully captured the flavor of Victorian London and literature and created a mystery that really will keep you up at night. Intriguing!
June 26, 2009
3 1/2
This is another book which is, in a way, hard for me to review. The book was not without its flaws. In many ways I can think of more negative things to say about the book than positive ones - but, despite that, I still liked it. I didn't love it, and I wouldn't rave about it or say that it's a must read... but it is interesting, and I wouldn't suggest you not read it, either.
The book started with promise, and I was enthralled. It was texture and sumptuous, as we journied with Edward through his first murder and his reaction to it. We get into his head - his madness and paranoia - as we see things unravel, even as he seems to think himself calm and rational. The first couple hundred pages were excellent.
But then we get to the backstory, and here things slow down a pace. Some parts were interesting, some less so, but it seemed to drag. I think the biggest problem was that we learned some of the same things multiple times from different sources. It's supposed to be pieces here and pieces there, putting them together to get the whole picture, but the whole picture was frustratingly obvious and it took far too long for the narrator to put them together! I always hate it when the "detectives" (and here I use the term loosely) are so much stupider than their audience.
It's a failing, to be sure - but whether it's a failing in that the author made the protagonist too slow on the uptake or whether he gave the audience too much information at the outset is left up to the reader. I think fixing either would've made it a better read, but since it is supposed to be a mystery I would've liked it if the reveals - and there were a few of them - weren't so bleeding obvious. And I have to say that I'm usually a bit slow on the uptake myself, and can often get taken for a ride by something which should've been obvious but wasn't, so if I saw the 'twists' coming a mile away, I'm sure others saw them from several hundred miles...
The ending did get better, though. Instead of drudging through various backstories and histories, we get back into the narrator's head - the best place to be in the story. Yes, the backstory is important - how can we sympathize with our aspiring murderer if we don't know the reasons for it, and hate his enemy even more than we might hate him. But far more interesting are his emotions and mental state.
The language wasn't off-putting for me, though I'm not sure I really got a feel for the era. It was well researched to be sure, but the footnotes became a distraction. It wasn't that important that I know where a certain restaurant was, or when some famous or important person mentioned was born and died. I wanted to skip over them, but, being the mildly obsessive person that I am, couldn't. They didn't provide humor, like Pratchett's footnotes, and they didn't provide layers of world building like Clark's footnotes. They just offered trivia - trivial trivia - and were generally unnecessary.
The facts of the story, and its overall plot, were fair to middling. As I said, the mystery is easily solved and the narrator's amount of lacking on this point was frustrating.
But if you are someone who can enjoy a story for the journey, and not the destination... if you care more for how something comes about than the obviousness of what's going to happen... then perhaps you will enjoy it. If you are all destination, tho, then you won't.
I'm a bit of both. I enjoyed the how. Even when I could see the impending betrayal coming from a mile away, I was still curious as to how and when it would happen, and, more importantly, what the reaction would be. Even though you know how this book will end, it's the getting there that matters.
I know I seem to be contradicting myself - but I'll elaborate by saying it's the mental getting there, not the factual getting there. The latter part was still too drawn out.
But for those times when we were in the mind and heart of the narrator... when we don't get get the facts that he knows... but when we are brought into how he thinks and feels. Oh, these times are wonderfully and wickedly delicious. It's like a taste, almost - a decadence of the mind that lingers in the memory.
It's just a pity that it didn't all live up to to the same standard.
One final note - this is a book that you have to read when you're in the mood for it, for it does require a certain mind-set, in a way. It's not something that's easily taken in drips and drabs - for a few passing moments here and there. This is a book that you need to take your time with, to really immerse yourself into. I kept being interrupted, annoyingly enough, which I think hampered my enjoyment somewhat.
It's not a quick meal... it's something you want to have time to savor... so you should partake when you have the time and inclination to do so.
This is another book which is, in a way, hard for me to review. The book was not without its flaws. In many ways I can think of more negative things to say about the book than positive ones - but, despite that, I still liked it. I didn't love it, and I wouldn't rave about it or say that it's a must read... but it is interesting, and I wouldn't suggest you not read it, either.
The book started with promise, and I was enthralled. It was texture and sumptuous, as we journied with Edward through his first murder and his reaction to it. We get into his head - his madness and paranoia - as we see things unravel, even as he seems to think himself calm and rational. The first couple hundred pages were excellent.
But then we get to the backstory, and here things slow down a pace. Some parts were interesting, some less so, but it seemed to drag. I think the biggest problem was that we learned some of the same things multiple times from different sources. It's supposed to be pieces here and pieces there, putting them together to get the whole picture, but the whole picture was frustratingly obvious and it took far too long for the narrator to put them together! I always hate it when the "detectives" (and here I use the term loosely) are so much stupider than their audience.
It's a failing, to be sure - but whether it's a failing in that the author made the protagonist too slow on the uptake or whether he gave the audience too much information at the outset is left up to the reader. I think fixing either would've made it a better read, but since it is supposed to be a mystery I would've liked it if the reveals - and there were a few of them - weren't so bleeding obvious. And I have to say that I'm usually a bit slow on the uptake myself, and can often get taken for a ride by something which should've been obvious but wasn't, so if I saw the 'twists' coming a mile away, I'm sure others saw them from several hundred miles...
The ending did get better, though. Instead of drudging through various backstories and histories, we get back into the narrator's head - the best place to be in the story. Yes, the backstory is important - how can we sympathize with our aspiring murderer if we don't know the reasons for it, and hate his enemy even more than we might hate him. But far more interesting are his emotions and mental state.
The language wasn't off-putting for me, though I'm not sure I really got a feel for the era. It was well researched to be sure, but the footnotes became a distraction. It wasn't that important that I know where a certain restaurant was, or when some famous or important person mentioned was born and died. I wanted to skip over them, but, being the mildly obsessive person that I am, couldn't. They didn't provide humor, like Pratchett's footnotes, and they didn't provide layers of world building like Clark's footnotes. They just offered trivia - trivial trivia - and were generally unnecessary.
The facts of the story, and its overall plot, were fair to middling. As I said, the mystery is easily solved and the narrator's amount of lacking on this point was frustrating.
But if you are someone who can enjoy a story for the journey, and not the destination... if you care more for how something comes about than the obviousness of what's going to happen... then perhaps you will enjoy it. If you are all destination, tho, then you won't.
I'm a bit of both. I enjoyed the how. Even when I could see the impending betrayal coming from a mile away, I was still curious as to how and when it would happen, and, more importantly, what the reaction would be. Even though you know how this book will end, it's the getting there that matters.
I know I seem to be contradicting myself - but I'll elaborate by saying it's the mental getting there, not the factual getting there. The latter part was still too drawn out.
But for those times when we were in the mind and heart of the narrator... when we don't get get the facts that he knows... but when we are brought into how he thinks and feels. Oh, these times are wonderfully and wickedly delicious. It's like a taste, almost - a decadence of the mind that lingers in the memory.
It's just a pity that it didn't all live up to to the same standard.
One final note - this is a book that you have to read when you're in the mood for it, for it does require a certain mind-set, in a way. It's not something that's easily taken in drips and drabs - for a few passing moments here and there. This is a book that you need to take your time with, to really immerse yourself into. I kept being interrupted, annoyingly enough, which I think hampered my enjoyment somewhat.
It's not a quick meal... it's something you want to have time to savor... so you should partake when you have the time and inclination to do so.
February 16, 2013
I once read that there were over ten thousand books written during the Victorian period. This period that lasted roughly from the early 19th century to its close spawned some of the most popular and celebrated authors in the history of literature. Dickens, Elliot, Trollope, and the under appreciated Wilkie Collins all released great books that have been enjoyed by countless generations of readers ranging from mid 19th century lawyers to early 21st century web designers. These books have survived the test of time and remained on bookshelves while millions of other books have fallen into obscurity.
So now I present you with an interesting question: Why would anyone be interested in reading books written today set in these time periods and setting by people who were born almost a century later? What possible insight into the reality of these periods would any author in the opening years of the 21st century have about 19th century Victorian London? Well, the only answer I can offer is that these new books are a celebration of the great novels of M.E. Braddon or Collins.
Granted, you could probably spend the rest of your life reading all of the books written during the Victorian Era but reading a book such as the Meaning of Night leaves you with a feeling that you really can’t tell the difference. Michael Cox’s research into this period gives a very fresh and realistic feel. If you weren’t aware, you could almost be mistaken that this was even written by Wilkie Collins. Unfortunately, this major strength is also its weakness. There are almost too many similarities between this novel and some of the sensation classics of the 1860s such as ‘No Name’. If this novel were written during that time period it probably would not stand out and ultimately fall into obscurity. The writing here is great but there were many parts of the novel that inhibited the pacing that really leaves you to believe that it really is inferior to the classics.
So my advice to you is this: Read Collins, Braddon, Trollope, and Elliot. If you have exhausted the repertoire of these authors and are hungry for more then read The Meaning of Night. But you’ve got a lot of reading to do and if you don’t get to this book don’t worry. You are really not missing a lot.
So now I present you with an interesting question: Why would anyone be interested in reading books written today set in these time periods and setting by people who were born almost a century later? What possible insight into the reality of these periods would any author in the opening years of the 21st century have about 19th century Victorian London? Well, the only answer I can offer is that these new books are a celebration of the great novels of M.E. Braddon or Collins.
Granted, you could probably spend the rest of your life reading all of the books written during the Victorian Era but reading a book such as the Meaning of Night leaves you with a feeling that you really can’t tell the difference. Michael Cox’s research into this period gives a very fresh and realistic feel. If you weren’t aware, you could almost be mistaken that this was even written by Wilkie Collins. Unfortunately, this major strength is also its weakness. There are almost too many similarities between this novel and some of the sensation classics of the 1860s such as ‘No Name’. If this novel were written during that time period it probably would not stand out and ultimately fall into obscurity. The writing here is great but there were many parts of the novel that inhibited the pacing that really leaves you to believe that it really is inferior to the classics.
So my advice to you is this: Read Collins, Braddon, Trollope, and Elliot. If you have exhausted the repertoire of these authors and are hungry for more then read The Meaning of Night. But you’ve got a lot of reading to do and if you don’t get to this book don’t worry. You are really not missing a lot.
March 19, 2022
Being compared to two books I didn't enjoy and one I loved sounded like a fun challenge to see if I would end up liking it. Bit unfortunately it did not work for me. Kinda disappointed because it's one of the more beautiful books I own. But back to second hand it goes
April 12, 2014
Perusing Goodreads or Amazon reviews written by readers ( not only about this book but about many others), I came to the conclusion that people sometimes don´t know why there is a scale from one to five stars as they easily give books one star (if they didn´t like something in the book not considering its other aspects) and five stars (if they enjoyed it even if it didn´t deserve that five star rating). So I am in awe with some one star reviews I came across about this book: ok, I agree that the plot twists were predictable and perhaps, its 700 pages could have been reduced and still it would be a superior novel. If you add that the main protagonist had many faults (the biggest one being him murdering a innocent man at the beginning of the novel), I can understand why readers were giving Michael Cox`s debut novel a mere three star rating. But less than that, it´s a blatant injustice. I just loved Michael Cox´s command of the Victorian period ( my favourite parts being when a villain character is compared to Spring Heeled Jack and when another character asks the protagonist if he read a book written by Mr. Curran Bell) so his depiction of the period was flawless. His prose is rich and erudite and though the plot twists were not shocking as Sarah Waters, at least they were riveting enough to compell us to read more and know how it will end the revenge taken by the protagonist towards his foe.
I surely enjoyed it and recommend it .
I surely enjoyed it and recommend it .
May 20, 2013
A quite disappointing book, so far not comparable with the second volume of this series The Glass of Time which I rated with 4 stars.
If you want to read a good victorian mystery book, please avoid this book, there are much better books on this subject.
If you want to read a good victorian mystery book, please avoid this book, there are much better books on this subject.
April 22, 2008
Michael Cox's The Meaning of Night is fantastic. It mixes the Victorian novel with the noir crime thriller to make for a completely engrossing reading experience.
While the story never leaves England, it has an epic feel. It follows the cursed life of Edward Glyver from birth in Dorset to troubled academic career to fixer for a London law firm. The tortuous path allows Cox to describe a wide range of English scenes from the hellish London to the idyllic Evenwood, home to Glyver's greatest enemy.
Glyver is driven, to the point of madness, to take revenge on the one who caused all of his failures and setbacks in life. Glyver is no hero. In the first pages of the book, he murders an innocent so that he can be ready when it counts. While he pines for a high born love, he has a prostitute lover, and also sleeps with the lower rent hookers. He drinks to the point of passing out in ditches and is a frequent user of opium. And there is more.
Astoundingly, Cox has made this unlovable rogue largely sympathetic. Part of it is his eloquence, but it also the sense of righteousness he brings to his quest for vengeance. As we learn more of what his enemy has done, we become more and more invested in his story and how he might find redemption. While those well-read in the genres are likely to spot the plot twists, the story is so fast paced and well described, you won't care. Few will see how nearly everything mentioned eventually ties back into the main story.
I particularly liked how Cox paints a wide English canvas without building up the overlong subplots that weigh down Victorians like Trollope and Dickens. We see Eton, the dark part of London, the law offices, Dorset and country life without having to wade through excessive detail and oceans of characters. Those looking for the Dickensian groteques will delight in the likes of Fordyce Jukes, Glyver's downstairs neighbor and co-worker and source of constant irritation.
Amidst all of this, there is a question (SPOILER) as to how reliable Glyver actually is. He is clearly a paranoid maniac, but is he an Ahab or is he Verbal Kint? There are odd little elements throughout that might sway your opinion, I remain uncertain. (/SPOILER.)
This book has me all fired up for the unread Victorian homages on my shelves. Fingersmith and the Crimson and White, here I come.
While the story never leaves England, it has an epic feel. It follows the cursed life of Edward Glyver from birth in Dorset to troubled academic career to fixer for a London law firm. The tortuous path allows Cox to describe a wide range of English scenes from the hellish London to the idyllic Evenwood, home to Glyver's greatest enemy.
Glyver is driven, to the point of madness, to take revenge on the one who caused all of his failures and setbacks in life. Glyver is no hero. In the first pages of the book, he murders an innocent so that he can be ready when it counts. While he pines for a high born love, he has a prostitute lover, and also sleeps with the lower rent hookers. He drinks to the point of passing out in ditches and is a frequent user of opium. And there is more.
Astoundingly, Cox has made this unlovable rogue largely sympathetic. Part of it is his eloquence, but it also the sense of righteousness he brings to his quest for vengeance. As we learn more of what his enemy has done, we become more and more invested in his story and how he might find redemption. While those well-read in the genres are likely to spot the plot twists, the story is so fast paced and well described, you won't care. Few will see how nearly everything mentioned eventually ties back into the main story.
I particularly liked how Cox paints a wide English canvas without building up the overlong subplots that weigh down Victorians like Trollope and Dickens. We see Eton, the dark part of London, the law offices, Dorset and country life without having to wade through excessive detail and oceans of characters. Those looking for the Dickensian groteques will delight in the likes of Fordyce Jukes, Glyver's downstairs neighbor and co-worker and source of constant irritation.
Amidst all of this, there is a question (SPOILER) as to how reliable Glyver actually is. He is clearly a paranoid maniac, but is he an Ahab or is he Verbal Kint? There are odd little elements throughout that might sway your opinion, I remain uncertain. (/SPOILER.)
This book has me all fired up for the unread Victorian homages on my shelves. Fingersmith and the Crimson and White, here I come.
January 14, 2023
„𝑨 𝒐𝒏𝒅𝒂 𝒍𝒆𝒈𝒐𝒉 𝒏𝒂 𝒌𝒓𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒕, 𝒕𝒆𝒔̌𝒌𝒐 𝒅𝒊𝒔̌𝒖𝒄́𝒊, 𝒈𝒍𝒆𝒅𝒂𝒋𝒖𝒄́𝒊 𝒌𝒓𝒐𝒛 𝒌𝒓𝒐𝒗𝒏𝒊 𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒛𝒐𝒓𝒄̌𝒊𝒄́ 𝒋𝒆𝒅𝒏𝒖 𝒔𝒂𝒎𝒐𝒕𝒏𝒖 𝒛̌𝒎𝒊𝒓𝒌𝒂𝒗𝒖 𝒛𝒗𝒆𝒛𝒅𝒖 𝒌𝒐𝒋𝒂 𝒋𝒆 𝒗𝒊𝒔𝒊𝒍𝒂 𝒏𝒂 𝒏𝒆𝒃𝒆𝒔𝒌𝒐𝒎 𝒔𝒗𝒐𝒅𝒖, 𝒌𝒂𝒐 𝒌𝒓𝒉𝒌𝒂 𝒏𝒂𝒅𝒂, 𝒖 𝒃𝒍𝒆𝒅𝒐𝒎 𝒃𝒆𝒔𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒋𝒖 𝒋𝒖𝒕𝒓𝒂.“
Majkl Koks je trideset godina razmišljao o ovom romanu i nažalost tek ga je bolest poterala da ga konačno napiše. Uspeo je da iznedri delo koje se može posmatrati kao viktorijanski klasik, iako napisano 2006. Čađavi London, prostitutke, opijum, ali pre svega detalji po pitanju knjiga, umetnosti i istorijskih događaja čine ovaj roman nečim što je 𝑚𝑢𝑠𝑡 za sve ljubitelje viktorijanskog doba. Ovo je drugi put da je čitam, a obuzela me kao i pre deset godina, toliko da sam je čitala pod temperaturom i to mi je bilo skroz okej, čak je doprinelo viktorijanskom vajbu, zagađenom vazduhu i sveukupnoj atmosferi.
Od prve rečenice mi znamo da je Edvard Gliver ubica, ali kako se klupko razmotava, u stanju smo da razumemo njegove postupke i da saosećamo sa njim, jer nam se ispoveda poput nekog Hamberta Hamberta, mada ipak u nama budi skroz drugačija osećanja.
Gliver je kompleksan lik koji se lako može obožavati. Vođen je osvetom i to je njegova opsesija, ali mi i te kako možemo da ga opravdamo. Učinjena mu je velika nepravda i oduzeto mu je sve što mu pripada iz čistog kaprica jedne odvratne osobe. Sav njegov ogromni potencijal je bačen zbog nepravednih okolnosti, a te okolnosti nastavljaju da budu okrutne kako roman odmiče i kako jadni Gliver baš nema sreće, što u čitaocu poput mene budi bes i frustraciju. Okej, priznajem i da, kada sam se prvi put zaljubila u ovu knjigu, zaljubila sam se i u Edvarda Glivera i uspeo je opet da me opčini. On je moj drugi omiljeni fiktivni Edvard odmah posle Ročestera. Na momente je možda i nepouzdani narator poput likova Done Tart (konzumira laudanum, počinio je ubistvo, na jednom mestu se čak upoređuje sa bahantom usled dejstva opijuma). Uprkos svemu, mene je ubedio da je u dubini duše pošten i dobar, jer postoji dosta situacija u kojima se pokazao kao takav u odnosu prema drugima. Gliver je bibliofil i antiheroj, a što bi se reklo, 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑦 𝑖𝑠 𝑚𝑦 𝑓𝑎𝑣𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑟.
𝑆𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑜 𝑛𝑜𝑐́𝑖 je neverovatna priča o osveti, sudbini i nemogućnosti da se oslobodimo okova sopstvenog porekla, ponavljajući nesvesno greške svojih roditelja. Opet mi se desilo da žalim što kraj nije bio drugačiji, iako znam da je to bio jedini logičan sled, psihološki i karakterno opravdan.
Majkl Koks je trideset godina razmišljao o ovom romanu i nažalost tek ga je bolest poterala da ga konačno napiše. Uspeo je da iznedri delo koje se može posmatrati kao viktorijanski klasik, iako napisano 2006. Čađavi London, prostitutke, opijum, ali pre svega detalji po pitanju knjiga, umetnosti i istorijskih događaja čine ovaj roman nečim što je 𝑚𝑢𝑠𝑡 za sve ljubitelje viktorijanskog doba. Ovo je drugi put da je čitam, a obuzela me kao i pre deset godina, toliko da sam je čitala pod temperaturom i to mi je bilo skroz okej, čak je doprinelo viktorijanskom vajbu, zagađenom vazduhu i sveukupnoj atmosferi.
Od prve rečenice mi znamo da je Edvard Gliver ubica, ali kako se klupko razmotava, u stanju smo da razumemo njegove postupke i da saosećamo sa njim, jer nam se ispoveda poput nekog Hamberta Hamberta, mada ipak u nama budi skroz drugačija osećanja.
Gliver je kompleksan lik koji se lako može obožavati. Vođen je osvetom i to je njegova opsesija, ali mi i te kako možemo da ga opravdamo. Učinjena mu je velika nepravda i oduzeto mu je sve što mu pripada iz čistog kaprica jedne odvratne osobe. Sav njegov ogromni potencijal je bačen zbog nepravednih okolnosti, a te okolnosti nastavljaju da budu okrutne kako roman odmiče i kako jadni Gliver baš nema sreće, što u čitaocu poput mene budi bes i frustraciju. Okej, priznajem i da, kada sam se prvi put zaljubila u ovu knjigu, zaljubila sam se i u Edvarda Glivera i uspeo je opet da me opčini. On je moj drugi omiljeni fiktivni Edvard odmah posle Ročestera. Na momente je možda i nepouzdani narator poput likova Done Tart (konzumira laudanum, počinio je ubistvo, na jednom mestu se čak upoređuje sa bahantom usled dejstva opijuma). Uprkos svemu, mene je ubedio da je u dubini duše pošten i dobar, jer postoji dosta situacija u kojima se pokazao kao takav u odnosu prema drugima. Gliver je bibliofil i antiheroj, a što bi se reklo, 𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑦 𝑖𝑠 𝑚𝑦 𝑓𝑎𝑣𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑟.
𝑆𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑜 𝑛𝑜𝑐́𝑖 je neverovatna priča o osveti, sudbini i nemogućnosti da se oslobodimo okova sopstvenog porekla, ponavljajući nesvesno greške svojih roditelja. Opet mi se desilo da žalim što kraj nije bio drugačiji, iako znam da je to bio jedini logičan sled, psihološki i karakterno opravdan.
May 21, 2013
Obviously Mr. Cox worked long and hard on this novel, it's seven hundred and three pages long AND was named one of the ten best books of the year by The Economist, the Washington Post, Booklist and Booksense. So it must be great, right?
I loved the cover, most especially the spine of the book, it's beautiful and I eagerly anticipated the story within. I fully expected to become engrossed in a fabulously long tale of treachery set in Victorian England. I love historical novels of suspense which is what I thought I was getting with this story.
What I found instead was a story that was so painfully drawn out that almost all of so called the suspense was completely deflated. This was a simple story stretched like taffy. The footnotes that were supposed to add an element of authenticity to the pretense that this was a true confession did nothing but distract and annoy me. I felt the footnotes actually bordered on obnoxious. If Mr. Cox thought the information was important enough to include a foot note perhaps it should have been incorporated into the text instead. I did not get the flavor of London in the mid 1800s, it all seemed like vanilla to me. I was very disappointed.
But obviously The Economist, the Washington Post, Booklist and Booksense can not all be wrong about this book it must be me that's wrong so please disregard my humble opinion, buy the book and find out for yourself.
On the other hand, if you'd like me to suggest something for you to read like this that was in my opinion actually very good I would steer you to Silent In the Grave and Silent in the Sanctuary by Deanna Raybourn or any of the Julian Kestrel Mysteries by Kate Ross.
Star of the Sea by Joseph O'Connor shares many similarities with Meaning of Night and is another great book, the writing and the story telling are both very well done.
I loved the cover, most especially the spine of the book, it's beautiful and I eagerly anticipated the story within. I fully expected to become engrossed in a fabulously long tale of treachery set in Victorian England. I love historical novels of suspense which is what I thought I was getting with this story.
What I found instead was a story that was so painfully drawn out that almost all of so called the suspense was completely deflated. This was a simple story stretched like taffy. The footnotes that were supposed to add an element of authenticity to the pretense that this was a true confession did nothing but distract and annoy me. I felt the footnotes actually bordered on obnoxious. If Mr. Cox thought the information was important enough to include a foot note perhaps it should have been incorporated into the text instead. I did not get the flavor of London in the mid 1800s, it all seemed like vanilla to me. I was very disappointed.
But obviously The Economist, the Washington Post, Booklist and Booksense can not all be wrong about this book it must be me that's wrong so please disregard my humble opinion, buy the book and find out for yourself.
On the other hand, if you'd like me to suggest something for you to read like this that was in my opinion actually very good I would steer you to Silent In the Grave and Silent in the Sanctuary by Deanna Raybourn or any of the Julian Kestrel Mysteries by Kate Ross.
Star of the Sea by Joseph O'Connor shares many similarities with Meaning of Night and is another great book, the writing and the story telling are both very well done.
February 25, 2016
Frankly I'm shocked this book has a GR's rating of 3.7. It's brilliant! It left me wanting for nothing. I read for three hours at one point and when I looked to see what time it was, I had been reading for three hours, when I guessed it had been 10 minutes. The writing is sharp and intelligent. The story was part historical fiction, part mystery, part thriller, and it had love in it, albeit twisted. This book is a good example of why I'm in love with reading. It transported me to another time and place, i could see and touch the characters, I thought about the book when I wasn't reading it, I wanted to get to the end to find out what happened, but I didn't want the book to end. My emotions were tried and stretched. Toward the end, my heart was beating so fast it was visible through my shirt. This book had everything I look for in a 5⭐️ book!
September 4, 2019
I enjoyed this book! Meticulously researched, the historical detail bogged down the book, but that was its only flaw. The characters and their surprising actions were fascinating and the intricate plot moved unpredictably.
February 11, 2018
Ovo je bilo naporno!
Knjiga je bila preporuka, te sam probao da joj se posvetim. Ne znam da li je bio u pitanju period u godini, praznici, slave, proslave, euforija, ali kada god bih seo da je čitam, nakon dva poglavlja sam bio spreman da idem na spavanje. Trebalo mi je skoro dva meseca da je završim...
Zaintrigirala me je pozadinska priča ovog dela. Rukom pisani spisi, pronađeni u nečijoj biblioteci, koji opisuju stvaran zločin i Koksova tridesetogodišnja borba da te spise pretoči u roman i popuni praznine autorskom šminkom.
Ja volim knjige pisane u prvom licu, daju mi neku određenu dozu istine, drže me bliže priči. Jednostavno... tu sam. Ova je u početku imala poteškoća da mi se tako predstavi. Hej, pa knjiga počinje ubistvom! „Kada sam ubio riđokosog, otišao sam do Kvinsa da večeram ostrige...“ Zašto sam ubio riđokosog?! Kakve ostrige i ko normalan može da večera nakon što nekom prereže grkljan u nekoj pustoj uličici pod maglovitom svetlošću gasne svetiljke?! Zašto sam stavljen u um ovog psihopate?!
E onda nas je osoba, koja sebe naziva Edvard Gliver, vratila u prošlost i počela priču od početka, prepričavajući je jednom od svojih retkih prijatelja. Tu sam polako počeo da shvatam razlog iza njegovog motiva, počeo sam da saosećam sa njim, a kako su strane odmicale i da ga tiho bodrim u njegovoj životnoj borbi da povrati ono što mu je rođenjem oduzeto.
Prepoznao sam izdaju i pre nego što se desila, osetio njen gorak ukus u ustima i podržao Edvardov opijumski lek za slomljeno srce. Jer kada čoveku oduzmu sve, preostaje mu samo osveta. Nisam ni primetio u kom trenutku sam postao Edvard, ali osetio sam snežne pahulje kako se tope na mom licu tog 11. decembra 1854 god. Osetio krckanje snega pod svojim salonkama, dok sam pazio da gazim po već ugaženim tragovima. Čuo svoj glas dok pozivam svog dugogodišnjeg neprijatelja, osetio kako mi se usta suše, a dlanovi počinju da se znoje, uprkos hladnoći. Umirujući stisak oko koštane drške noža, dok mu predajem poruku... ubod po ubod, a potom ga ostavljam u okrvavljenom snegu. Na trenutak ja više nisam ja, čitalac. Ja sam Edvard Gliver, rođen Edvard Čarls Diport i moja osveta je izvršena. Oko za oko, zub za zub, krv za krv...
„O, moja najdraža devojčice! Postao sam smrt zbog tebe!“
Čitao sam je skoro dva meseca. Govorili su mi da odustanem. Govorili su mi da nije za mene. Znate šta? Kada jednom počnete da odustajete, pređe vam u naviku. Ova knjiga jeste za mene!
Čitao sam je skoro dva meseca, ali vredelo je! Ova knjiga treba da zauzima počasno mesto na polici i to prednjom koricom okrenuta ka znatiželjnim očima. Kao poziv i kao upozorenje, jer ako vas ščepa (makar i na kraju), znaćete da nikada više ni jednu nećete voleti na taj način, kao što ste voleli nju.
Knjiga je bila preporuka, te sam probao da joj se posvetim. Ne znam da li je bio u pitanju period u godini, praznici, slave, proslave, euforija, ali kada god bih seo da je čitam, nakon dva poglavlja sam bio spreman da idem na spavanje. Trebalo mi je skoro dva meseca da je završim...
Zaintrigirala me je pozadinska priča ovog dela. Rukom pisani spisi, pronađeni u nečijoj biblioteci, koji opisuju stvaran zločin i Koksova tridesetogodišnja borba da te spise pretoči u roman i popuni praznine autorskom šminkom.
Ja volim knjige pisane u prvom licu, daju mi neku određenu dozu istine, drže me bliže priči. Jednostavno... tu sam. Ova je u početku imala poteškoća da mi se tako predstavi. Hej, pa knjiga počinje ubistvom! „Kada sam ubio riđokosog, otišao sam do Kvinsa da večeram ostrige...“ Zašto sam ubio riđokosog?! Kakve ostrige i ko normalan može da večera nakon što nekom prereže grkljan u nekoj pustoj uličici pod maglovitom svetlošću gasne svetiljke?! Zašto sam stavljen u um ovog psihopate?!
E onda nas je osoba, koja sebe naziva Edvard Gliver, vratila u prošlost i počela priču od početka, prepričavajući je jednom od svojih retkih prijatelja. Tu sam polako počeo da shvatam razlog iza njegovog motiva, počeo sam da saosećam sa njim, a kako su strane odmicale i da ga tiho bodrim u njegovoj životnoj borbi da povrati ono što mu je rođenjem oduzeto.
Prepoznao sam izdaju i pre nego što se desila, osetio njen gorak ukus u ustima i podržao Edvardov opijumski lek za slomljeno srce. Jer kada čoveku oduzmu sve, preostaje mu samo osveta. Nisam ni primetio u kom trenutku sam postao Edvard, ali osetio sam snežne pahulje kako se tope na mom licu tog 11. decembra 1854 god. Osetio krckanje snega pod svojim salonkama, dok sam pazio da gazim po već ugaženim tragovima. Čuo svoj glas dok pozivam svog dugogodišnjeg neprijatelja, osetio kako mi se usta suše, a dlanovi počinju da se znoje, uprkos hladnoći. Umirujući stisak oko koštane drške noža, dok mu predajem poruku... ubod po ubod, a potom ga ostavljam u okrvavljenom snegu. Na trenutak ja više nisam ja, čitalac. Ja sam Edvard Gliver, rođen Edvard Čarls Diport i moja osveta je izvršena. Oko za oko, zub za zub, krv za krv...
„O, moja najdraža devojčice! Postao sam smrt zbog tebe!“
Čitao sam je skoro dva meseca. Govorili su mi da odustanem. Govorili su mi da nije za mene. Znate šta? Kada jednom počnete da odustajete, pređe vam u naviku. Ova knjiga jeste za mene!
Čitao sam je skoro dva meseca, ali vredelo je! Ova knjiga treba da zauzima počasno mesto na polici i to prednjom koricom okrenuta ka znatiželjnim očima. Kao poziv i kao upozorenje, jer ako vas ščepa (makar i na kraju), znaćete da nikada više ni jednu nećete voleti na taj način, kao što ste voleli nju.
August 26, 2014
This is one is somewhere between a four and five for me, but I'm going with a five. I have really come to love Michael Cox as a writer and am saddened that his was another life ended way too soon due to cancer. He was clearly passionate about his subject material, Victorian England, and filled his novels to bursting with details of the period. There are a lot of these sort of books out there nowadays, but what I admired about this one was that it lacked the cheesiness. I adore history--always have--and since a young age I've been incredibly fascinated by the past, not necessarily an uncommon thing. I can blow through all sorts of historical fiction like the next gal and be entertained. The difference here was that not only did I relish the story, I also completely respected it. I'm definitely no book snob and a little fluff makes these books digestible and fun to read….let's face it. But I'd be lying if I said I didn't find myself wincing every once in awhile at a corny and obvious description of a period detail, at the often annoyingly admirable qualities of the main character, or at the modern-day 'tough as nails' heroine that has been woven into the storyline. I didn't get any of that with this book, and to me that made it legitimate. Yes, I can definitely acknowledge the many reviewers that have criticized the plodding first third or half (or heck, the whole thing depending on your opinion) of the book. Lots of details, thorough backstory, and not much of it is action for quite some time. I'll admit that this was the slowest going part for me, but I immersed myself in the setting and took my time. Some reviewers were annoyed by the footnotes; my personal opinion was that it made the story meatier. To me it was the opposite of the fluff I referred to earlier, something I could go look up later if I wanted even more. It's evident that Michael Cox meticulously researched his setting and wanted to use what he found; I enjoyed that, but I understand why someone may not, or just see it as plain pretentious. For me it was beneficial in the long run, as it all built slowly, but surely, toward the climax. It became the story itself, and not just stuff I needed to 'get to the point'. By the end of the book, I really had a solid grip on everyone's perspective, their personality, and their motives (cliche, but I felt like I knew them), and it all came together pretty brilliantly. I was also reading this knowing I would follow it up with the companion book, The Glass of Time, so I was invested; knowing all of those details from The Meaning of Night only made my Glass of Time experience that much richer. And speaking of that-- quite honestly, even if the whole book had been mediocre at best (it wasn't! I loved it!), it all would have been worth it for The Glass of Time…..
February 9, 2008
Entertaining enough, until I realised that there really wasn't going to be a big twist at the end, and I really did know a third of the way through *exactly* how it was going to end, down to to the last detail.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 20, 2008
Disappointingly bad, I found this poorly written historical novel about murder and revenge to be a turgid read. The author's attempts at "Victorian" prose were forced and awkward, and the contrivances of the structure clumsy and unnecessary. Add to that a predictable plot, shallow characters and gratuitous and unconvincing period detail, and you have a pretty bad book. Not recommended.
February 8, 2018
Pomešajte Dikensov London, Ekovu bibliofiliju i Dojlov smisao za zločin i misteriju- čak je i radnja spora, jezik visokoparan i autentičan, pogotovo u dijalozima i korespodenciji. Vredi strpljenja, jer vas neprimetno uvuče, tako da uhvatite sebe da, što se knjiga bliži kraju, stranice lete, a vi se, iako više nema gotovo nikakve neizvesnosti, teško odvajate od ovog romana koji je nastajao trideset godina!
March 16, 2017
It's a bit daunting to pick up an audio CD book at the library to see it contains 19 disks. However, this story used every one of the disks to a great advantage. With each disk, it kept you wanting to know more. By the time you reach disk 16, the story is full-blown and the final disks fly by! Amazing storytelling with the novel taking place in the 1850's. Well worth a listen!! 8 out of 10.
Read
March 4, 2020It breaks my heart to not finish a book but I've given up on this one. I imagine it's got great reviews but unfortunately it became a bit of a slog for me. I don't mind long books but I couldn't see putting in the time to continue with this one.
I can't give you much of a synopsis except to say that it starts off with a murder, then maybe some blackmail of the murderer, then we jump into the past of the main characters arch enemy.. and why? Well that's as far as I got...
124 pages, no rating
I can't give you much of a synopsis except to say that it starts off with a murder, then maybe some blackmail of the murderer, then we jump into the past of the main characters arch enemy.. and why? Well that's as far as I got...
124 pages, no rating
May 10, 2017
The Meaning of Night was a very engrossing read for me and I enjoyed it immensely. It’s my favourite read of the year so far, even despite its flaws. Yes, it does have its flaws.
What I found to be absolutely terrific about it was the writing.
The writing made the time period come alive for me and was such that I became totally absorbed and would totally forget about my surroundings while I read (sorry, boyfriend). But the absolute best thing about this novel for me was the voice of the main character, Edward. You are taken into his head and thus follow his internal and external journey to reclaim his birthright by any means possible and I found myself sympathizing with his struggle whilst knowing he wasn’t someone I should be sympathizing with. And yet I did. I consider it a great accomplishment of the author that he managed to blur the line between being a victim and a villain in such a way that I've seen people write in their reviews that they consider the outcome of Edward's struggle a disappointment. I must admit I did too initially, but then, upon reflection, I’ve found a much better appreciation for the outcome. (I don't want to give spoilers so I'm being purposely vague here).
What I found amiss with this novel ? Well, several things, unfortunately.
The footnotes being an obvious one, although they weren’t objectionable to me in the sense that they were distracting or jarring. I was thankful actually, that Mr Cox chose this particular format, so it didn’t interrupt the flow of the story much for me, being able to read a footnote at a moment I favoured. (And on a side note: my appreciation for this fact has only been increasing since I've been reading The Alienist and feel the flow of the story is bogged down by the vast quantity of incorporated historical research – I find it’s not the better for it).
However, I do agree with others that there were way too many footnotes, especially since they didn’t seem to serve a real purpose. I guess they were added to expand the world building and/or backstory but I found they did neither - at least not in a profound way. I believe they could’ve offered another dimension to the story though, added another interesting layer through emotions like humour or sarcasm.
For instance, the footnotes could've focused on making Evenwood and its extraordinary library the sole center of them, thus making Evenwood a character in its own right and at the same time elaborating on the concept of why this great house was coveted so passionately by both Edward and Phoebus. Show the ways in which the grand prize to be had was such a strong motive for both characters.
In other words, I didn’t object to the footnotes as such but felt they served no truly useful purpose here while they very much could have.
The other flaw of this novel was no minor one, I believe, namely the plot itself.
The setup was absolutely great and felt like there was going to be a puzzle in need of completion, yet you aren’t confronted with any missing puzzle piece at any one time. There were a few reveals along the way but I could see everything coming a mile away - and I’m usually lagging behind - so, that only increased my expectations that the author surely was going to surprise me with a twist and/or a turn later on (much like Fingersmith so beautifully managed to do for instance)... but alas, nothing came.
Now that didn’t ruin my enjoyment of the novel as a whole, mind you. Due to the writing voice, the sumptuous language that had me utterly enthralled, I never found my attention or enjoyment dwindling, yet I firmly believe the story would’ve benefited from some unexpected turn of events at some point. It would’ve made for a more compelling/suspenseful read.
By now, I think I have put some people well off reading this novel I guess, which was NOT my intention at all but I did say this novel has flaws... and I do believe this book certainly will not be for everyone. Therefore I wouldn’t recommend it to just everyone despite it having become a personal favourite of mine. The main reason it’s become an immediate favourite is because this book made me think about a lot of things long after having read the last page. I consider that one of the best things an author can achieve with his/her writing.
I was very sad to learn Mr Cox has passed away. A great talent lost.
What I found to be absolutely terrific about it was the writing.
The writing made the time period come alive for me and was such that I became totally absorbed and would totally forget about my surroundings while I read (sorry, boyfriend). But the absolute best thing about this novel for me was the voice of the main character, Edward. You are taken into his head and thus follow his internal and external journey to reclaim his birthright by any means possible and I found myself sympathizing with his struggle whilst knowing he wasn’t someone I should be sympathizing with. And yet I did. I consider it a great accomplishment of the author that he managed to blur the line between being a victim and a villain in such a way that I've seen people write in their reviews that they consider the outcome of Edward's struggle a disappointment. I must admit I did too initially, but then, upon reflection, I’ve found a much better appreciation for the outcome. (I don't want to give spoilers so I'm being purposely vague here).
What I found amiss with this novel ? Well, several things, unfortunately.
The footnotes being an obvious one, although they weren’t objectionable to me in the sense that they were distracting or jarring. I was thankful actually, that Mr Cox chose this particular format, so it didn’t interrupt the flow of the story much for me, being able to read a footnote at a moment I favoured. (And on a side note: my appreciation for this fact has only been increasing since I've been reading The Alienist and feel the flow of the story is bogged down by the vast quantity of incorporated historical research – I find it’s not the better for it).
However, I do agree with others that there were way too many footnotes, especially since they didn’t seem to serve a real purpose. I guess they were added to expand the world building and/or backstory but I found they did neither - at least not in a profound way. I believe they could’ve offered another dimension to the story though, added another interesting layer through emotions like humour or sarcasm.
For instance, the footnotes could've focused on making Evenwood and its extraordinary library the sole center of them, thus making Evenwood a character in its own right and at the same time elaborating on the concept of why this great house was coveted so passionately by both Edward and Phoebus. Show the ways in which the grand prize to be had was such a strong motive for both characters.
In other words, I didn’t object to the footnotes as such but felt they served no truly useful purpose here while they very much could have.
The other flaw of this novel was no minor one, I believe, namely the plot itself.
The setup was absolutely great and felt like there was going to be a puzzle in need of completion, yet you aren’t confronted with any missing puzzle piece at any one time. There were a few reveals along the way but I could see everything coming a mile away - and I’m usually lagging behind - so, that only increased my expectations that the author surely was going to surprise me with a twist and/or a turn later on (much like Fingersmith so beautifully managed to do for instance)... but alas, nothing came.
Now that didn’t ruin my enjoyment of the novel as a whole, mind you. Due to the writing voice, the sumptuous language that had me utterly enthralled, I never found my attention or enjoyment dwindling, yet I firmly believe the story would’ve benefited from some unexpected turn of events at some point. It would’ve made for a more compelling/suspenseful read.
By now, I think I have put some people well off reading this novel I guess, which was NOT my intention at all but I did say this novel has flaws... and I do believe this book certainly will not be for everyone. Therefore I wouldn’t recommend it to just everyone despite it having become a personal favourite of mine. The main reason it’s become an immediate favourite is because this book made me think about a lot of things long after having read the last page. I consider that one of the best things an author can achieve with his/her writing.
I was very sad to learn Mr Cox has passed away. A great talent lost.
September 2, 2007
A book lover and a murderer... isn't that something that will make you curious why? So, I'm reading. =) lets see how it ends up tho.
A very long story... I haven't had the time to finish this yet. i'm still on the part where I can't understand what his purpose is. =) hopefully, i'll be able to finish soon.
Sept 15, 2007... I have finally finished reading this book. I can't say that I love it, but I can say that I liked it... a little.
A story full of twist, turns and mystery which have prompted me to finish. It was kinda boring during the first few chapters, nothing made sense, in fact.I just started to understand and figure things how it will end in the middle of the book.
It was a little drab for me... it was taking a lot of time to get to the bottom of things. Although there may be some good points in the story that preempted the ending, I still think there are things that are not needed.
But the story is superb. As I have said, its full of turns, twist, deceptions, lies... etc. I kinda wonder, who in the world would give up a son just for the heck of punishing someone you think should be punished for little things? Well, maybe I'm speaking too soon. I know there are a lot of women who give up their kids, but its mostly because of poverty, not because of hatred. Usually, when a baby is born all hatred vanishes. But this story? Can't even imagine.
All the lies and deception, will eventually lead to your own downfall. Too much pain for G---. I think that is what pushed him to his limits, and with nothing else to turn to, what else is left... sanity I guess. But that too was taken from him.
Oh well, its a nice read to pass time, i guess. Maybe you'll find the book more interesting than I did. After all, we all have our own tastes for whatever reason. =)
A very long story... I haven't had the time to finish this yet. i'm still on the part where I can't understand what his purpose is. =) hopefully, i'll be able to finish soon.
Sept 15, 2007... I have finally finished reading this book. I can't say that I love it, but I can say that I liked it... a little.
A story full of twist, turns and mystery which have prompted me to finish. It was kinda boring during the first few chapters, nothing made sense, in fact.I just started to understand and figure things how it will end in the middle of the book.
It was a little drab for me... it was taking a lot of time to get to the bottom of things. Although there may be some good points in the story that preempted the ending, I still think there are things that are not needed.
But the story is superb. As I have said, its full of turns, twist, deceptions, lies... etc. I kinda wonder, who in the world would give up a son just for the heck of punishing someone you think should be punished for little things? Well, maybe I'm speaking too soon. I know there are a lot of women who give up their kids, but its mostly because of poverty, not because of hatred. Usually, when a baby is born all hatred vanishes. But this story? Can't even imagine.
All the lies and deception, will eventually lead to your own downfall. Too much pain for G---. I think that is what pushed him to his limits, and with nothing else to turn to, what else is left... sanity I guess. But that too was taken from him.
Oh well, its a nice read to pass time, i guess. Maybe you'll find the book more interesting than I did. After all, we all have our own tastes for whatever reason. =)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,171 reviews