What do you think?
Rate this book
Hugh: A Hero Without a Novel
"Intriguing, ambitious, and pretty damn delightful. This is a unique and exhilarating journey." – Alexis Hall, author of Boyfriend Material
From an old family trunk comes a manuscript which never saw the light of day. Its pages tell of a young man awakening to himself, his sexuality, and his world in this love letter to the era of Tom Jones.
The slightly spoiled, slightly poetical, slightly absurd son of an ambitious baronet, Hugh Entwistle possesses the wealth and connections to make him a success in Georgian England. But before pursuing a posh military appointment, he will spend the summer of 1768 at his country estate – far from the turmoil in London this politically volatile year.
Only to discover a deeper, more profound turmoil within himself when he encounters the rebellious, and beautiful, son of the parish parson.
So begins the hilarious and heart-breaking collapse of a well-ordered world. Hugh paints a sprawling canvas of 18th century England – a world of wig powder and heeled slippers, of connivers and blackmailers, in which the search for Liberty will require Hugh to redefine the rules of the game.
Praise for Hugh: A Hero without a Novel:
“…a work of queer historical archiving that’s as admirable and remarkable as its hero.” – Kirkus Reviews
“Sui generis, thoroughly interesting, fabulously vivid in place and time...It's extremely and realistically Georgian. A queer bildungsroman with more than a nod to Tom Jones, Tristram Shandy and the like. I found it absolutely fascinating...” – K J Charles, author of The Secret Lives of Country Gentlemen
"Hugh is a deliciously satirical comedy, written in an antiquated syntax appropriate to the 18th century setting. At first entranced by, and then denied beauty, passion, and ecstasy (and what passion! ...the Sorrows of Young Werther came to mind...), Hugh becomes indifferent to offered pleasure until, at last, and in deathly fear of exposure, he attains the (outrageously, hilariously warped) Sublime." – Maria Huttenrauch, NetGalley
“As good as the story is, and it’s a grand, queer coming-of-age story filled with colorful characters, voice and writing made it a 10-star novel for me. The quality of the writing and the spot-on timbre of the voice fully immerses the reader into Hugh’s world without a misstep in this seamless historical narrative.” – Coffee and Ink
“This book was everything I look for in a book. Page turning, as in couldn't put it down, intelligent, believable, made me laugh, made me cry and inspired my first ever book review. I'm not a man or gay but David Lawrence's writing helped me see each character. His books should be required reading.” – Belinda Alexander, NetGalley Reviews
“To set something like this account in the eighteenth century is no mean achievement. It is a work of literature and a tour de force.” – Briefstalk, Amazon Reviewer
From an old family trunk comes a manuscript which never saw the light of day. Its pages tell of a young man awakening to himself, his sexuality, and his world in this love letter to the era of Tom Jones.
The slightly spoiled, slightly poetical, slightly absurd son of an ambitious baronet, Hugh Entwistle possesses the wealth and connections to make him a success in Georgian England. But before pursuing a posh military appointment, he will spend the summer of 1768 at his country estate – far from the turmoil in London this politically volatile year.
Only to discover a deeper, more profound turmoil within himself when he encounters the rebellious, and beautiful, son of the parish parson.
So begins the hilarious and heart-breaking collapse of a well-ordered world. Hugh paints a sprawling canvas of 18th century England – a world of wig powder and heeled slippers, of connivers and blackmailers, in which the search for Liberty will require Hugh to redefine the rules of the game.
Praise for Hugh: A Hero without a Novel:
“…a work of queer historical archiving that’s as admirable and remarkable as its hero.” – Kirkus Reviews
“Sui generis, thoroughly interesting, fabulously vivid in place and time...It's extremely and realistically Georgian. A queer bildungsroman with more than a nod to Tom Jones, Tristram Shandy and the like. I found it absolutely fascinating...” – K J Charles, author of The Secret Lives of Country Gentlemen
"Hugh is a deliciously satirical comedy, written in an antiquated syntax appropriate to the 18th century setting. At first entranced by, and then denied beauty, passion, and ecstasy (and what passion! ...the Sorrows of Young Werther came to mind...), Hugh becomes indifferent to offered pleasure until, at last, and in deathly fear of exposure, he attains the (outrageously, hilariously warped) Sublime." – Maria Huttenrauch, NetGalley
“As good as the story is, and it’s a grand, queer coming-of-age story filled with colorful characters, voice and writing made it a 10-star novel for me. The quality of the writing and the spot-on timbre of the voice fully immerses the reader into Hugh’s world without a misstep in this seamless historical narrative.” – Coffee and Ink
“This book was everything I look for in a book. Page turning, as in couldn't put it down, intelligent, believable, made me laugh, made me cry and inspired my first ever book review. I'm not a man or gay but David Lawrence's writing helped me see each character. His books should be required reading.” – Belinda Alexander, NetGalley Reviews
“To set something like this account in the eighteenth century is no mean achievement. It is a work of literature and a tour de force.” – Briefstalk, Amazon Reviewer
Kindle Edition
First published September 21, 2021
178 people are currently reading
3006 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
Read
September 8, 2021A queer bildungsroman with more than a nod to Tom Jones, Tristram Shandy and the like. It's extremely and realistically Georgian, with no holds barred in terms of the dirt, sordor, extreme drinking, politics, and brutal homophobia of the era. Very well written, and the style is mostyl pulled off very convincingly.
This is a hero without a novel in its picaresque approach to plot, but it's also a novel without a hero because Hugh is really unsympathetic: spiteful, selfish, and almost completely incapable of managing any aspect of his own life. Obviously this is deliberate--he's young, he has a manipulative father, he's in the weird position of being both grossly privileged and terrifyingly marginalised in a way that damages him profoundly from the start. Which all makes him an interesting rather than likeable character to spend time with.
It's about queer relationships (NOT A ROMANCE, just to be clear) in a way that clearly ties into Burke's conception of the sublime and the beautiful. Unfortunately I have forgotten everything I might ever have known about Burke, and I didn't quite feel the book gave me enough to make that work as it might do for someone better versed in the subject. We have Hugh with James Bramble, a beautiful young man who he more or less destroys, then with an older patron-type who can't let go of his desires for love and sex with men but is also desperate for a heteronormative life (possibly this is the Burkean idea of reverence?), and finally with Richard Brent, a boxer and popular hero who represents the sublime (awe and terror). This part was fascinating in that the writing accelerated, the plot whipped along, a really awful problem was solved in a brutal and uncomfortable manner that nobody was happy about, and I felt fully convinced that Hugh regarded Brent as sublime without in any way agreeing with him. You say sublime, I say controlling arsehole with a feminising fetish, let's call the whole thing off.
I did not quite buy into the ending with Brent and Hugh's confrontation with his family: it felt a bit of a fantasy (in part because a similar conversation was had in a dream sequence earlier and I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop, or for the entire Brent sequence to be revealed as delirium tremens). But then, the turn for the implausible is absolutely in keeping with the Georgian novels this is based on. God, this repays thinking about.
Basically, I found it absolutely fascinating, though it was quite a difficult read in many ways. There's a lot of homophobia and a really intense blackmail plot, and a lot of abuse treated as routine by the characters, so beware. (And I have to put in my usual howl of anguish at Americans writing regional British accents 'phonetically'. Just, could we not.)
Sui generis, thoroughly interesting, fabulously vivid in place and time, and I'm glad I read it. I had an ARC, as recommended to me by Alexis Hall.
This is a hero without a novel in its picaresque approach to plot, but it's also a novel without a hero because Hugh is really unsympathetic: spiteful, selfish, and almost completely incapable of managing any aspect of his own life. Obviously this is deliberate--he's young, he has a manipulative father, he's in the weird position of being both grossly privileged and terrifyingly marginalised in a way that damages him profoundly from the start. Which all makes him an interesting rather than likeable character to spend time with.
It's about queer relationships (NOT A ROMANCE, just to be clear) in a way that clearly ties into Burke's conception of the sublime and the beautiful. Unfortunately I have forgotten everything I might ever have known about Burke, and I didn't quite feel the book gave me enough to make that work as it might do for someone better versed in the subject. We have Hugh with James Bramble, a beautiful young man who he more or less destroys, then with an older patron-type who can't let go of his desires for love and sex with men but is also desperate for a heteronormative life (possibly this is the Burkean idea of reverence?), and finally with Richard Brent, a boxer and popular hero who represents the sublime (awe and terror). This part was fascinating in that the writing accelerated, the plot whipped along, a really awful problem was solved in a brutal and uncomfortable manner that nobody was happy about, and I felt fully convinced that Hugh regarded Brent as sublime without in any way agreeing with him. You say sublime, I say controlling arsehole with a feminising fetish, let's call the whole thing off.
I did not quite buy into the ending with Brent and Hugh's confrontation with his family: it felt a bit of a fantasy (in part because a similar conversation was had in a dream sequence earlier and I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop, or for the entire Brent sequence to be revealed as delirium tremens). But then, the turn for the implausible is absolutely in keeping with the Georgian novels this is based on. God, this repays thinking about.
Basically, I found it absolutely fascinating, though it was quite a difficult read in many ways. There's a lot of homophobia and a really intense blackmail plot, and a lot of abuse treated as routine by the characters, so beware. (And I have to put in my usual howl of anguish at Americans writing regional British accents 'phonetically'. Just, could we not.)
Sui generis, thoroughly interesting, fabulously vivid in place and time, and I'm glad I read it. I had an ARC, as recommended to me by Alexis Hall.
Read
December 18, 2021(Please note: due to a NG error, I originally only received the first half of the book, which affected my review. This is an updated review, reflecting my thoughts about the, err, the entire book).
Intriguing, ambitious, and pretty damn delightful.
This is one of books that feels that it was written with passionate, conviction and without compromise. Which is a complicated statement because I believe, in some ways, art flourishes within restriction as well as with liberty: I think it kind needs the perfect balance of both to be its best self. If there’s too much restriction, the text becomes a hollow reflection of the marketplace, if there’s too much freedom you essentially get, at worst, the author’s unedited ego splurged all over the page, at best a text that is indulgent in ways that do not wholly benefit either author or reader.
Basically where I’m going with this is as regards Hugh is that the book shines with all the compromises it doesn’t make—its influences are specific, politically dense, and unabashedly somewhat niche, the language is self-consciously archaic, and the evocation of place and time paramount. The characters are nuanced and complex—occasionally to the point of opacity—and not always sympathetic.
But, y’know, what? I kind of loved the book for this. It’s so unabashedly itself that it will absolutely sweep you along if you let it, and I was very much in the mood to be swept. I feel it was probably too long, and the pacing suffers in places, but it’s not like the books this is modelled on where renowned for their slim volume and taut plotting.
‘Hugh’ has the flavour of a queer Tom Jones or a queerer Tristram Shandy (in fact, I think both novels get a reference, alongside a handful of 18th century bildungsroman) and manages to chart a successful stylistic path between feeling like a homage to those works while still feeling like a uniquely modern twist on them. This is a genuinely impressive accomplishment, as is the satirical tone, and the archness of dialogue.
And obviously I was very here for all the queerness—even though navigating it in a restrictive, patriarchal, heteronormative society is a major theme of the book. Hugh himself is a complicated protagonist: both arrogant and insecure, privileged and marginalised, witty, careless and, err, constantly making terrible decisions. But then he’s also very young and part of the pleasure of a coming-of-age story is watching the protagonist come to a better understanding of both themself and the world they inhabit. In Hugh’s case this story intersects with his identity in fascinating ways: the stakes feel higher for him because he must learn how to find a place for himself amidst the hostility and inevitable secrecy that surrounds him.
This does take the book—for all his rompish satire—to some pretty dark places. There’s violence, the spectre of sexual assault, familial rejection, a blackmail plot that is incredibly stressful to read about and is resolved in way that feels like a tainted triumph to say the least. It’s also not a romance in the genre romance sense, although it doesn’t present itself as one. There are however strong romantic elements that play a significant role in the book, as Hugh tries to navigate the intricacies of three different relationships: an adolescent passion that crashes against the rocks of immaturity, a complicated not-quite-friendship with a man who is unable to sacrifice the comforts of heteronormativity, and … whatever the fuck Hugh had with Brent, the boxer dude at the end. Who, for the record, I super hated.
All the relationships offer a different perspective on queer unions while also exploring aspects of the Sublime and Beautiful (in the Edmund Burke sense, rather than general). Except part of the issue for me here was that, while I was neutrally sympathetic to the first two, I really needed Brent (for all he had a kind of raw charismatic power to him) to jump off a bridge somewhere. A boxer, a politician, and a national hero, he is determined to live openly (and the way Hugh navigates this with him is fascinating) but he’s also got a very specific and unyielding idea of what that will be like i.e. that Hugh will basically play wife to him while he gads about following his ambitions. And while Brent is explicitly meant to represent the Sublime, which—if I remember my Burke properly—is meant to be an experience of terror as much as anything … I’m not sure it was quite the right sort of terror I was feeling? He did come across as a force of nature, seeking and demanding the impossible. But he also came across as an abusive prick whose idea of gender dynamics, while they may have well been informed by his context, would have been immediately unpalatable had Hugh not been a male character. Of course, I’m slightly looking at the relationship with my “consumer of kissing books” hat on. It worked as part of the tapestry of the novel. It just also made me deeply uncomfortable, in ways I think it both was and was not meant to.
In any case: I thoroughly enjoyed ‘Hugh’ and it gave me a lot to think about, up and including the application of eighteen and nineteenth century philosophy to queer identity. So that was fun? While it’s a longish read, and may not be for everyone, if the idea of it is even a bit little appealing to you I sincerely recommend you pick it up. As a reader you have to meet it where it's at, but as long as you can do that, this is a unique and exhilarating journey. I think the only way to experience anything quite like it would be to literally read Smollett, and 'Hugh' is, honestly, a lot more fun.
Intriguing, ambitious, and pretty damn delightful.
This is one of books that feels that it was written with passionate, conviction and without compromise. Which is a complicated statement because I believe, in some ways, art flourishes within restriction as well as with liberty: I think it kind needs the perfect balance of both to be its best self. If there’s too much restriction, the text becomes a hollow reflection of the marketplace, if there’s too much freedom you essentially get, at worst, the author’s unedited ego splurged all over the page, at best a text that is indulgent in ways that do not wholly benefit either author or reader.
Basically where I’m going with this is as regards Hugh is that the book shines with all the compromises it doesn’t make—its influences are specific, politically dense, and unabashedly somewhat niche, the language is self-consciously archaic, and the evocation of place and time paramount. The characters are nuanced and complex—occasionally to the point of opacity—and not always sympathetic.
But, y’know, what? I kind of loved the book for this. It’s so unabashedly itself that it will absolutely sweep you along if you let it, and I was very much in the mood to be swept. I feel it was probably too long, and the pacing suffers in places, but it’s not like the books this is modelled on where renowned for their slim volume and taut plotting.
‘Hugh’ has the flavour of a queer Tom Jones or a queerer Tristram Shandy (in fact, I think both novels get a reference, alongside a handful of 18th century bildungsroman) and manages to chart a successful stylistic path between feeling like a homage to those works while still feeling like a uniquely modern twist on them. This is a genuinely impressive accomplishment, as is the satirical tone, and the archness of dialogue.
And obviously I was very here for all the queerness—even though navigating it in a restrictive, patriarchal, heteronormative society is a major theme of the book. Hugh himself is a complicated protagonist: both arrogant and insecure, privileged and marginalised, witty, careless and, err, constantly making terrible decisions. But then he’s also very young and part of the pleasure of a coming-of-age story is watching the protagonist come to a better understanding of both themself and the world they inhabit. In Hugh’s case this story intersects with his identity in fascinating ways: the stakes feel higher for him because he must learn how to find a place for himself amidst the hostility and inevitable secrecy that surrounds him.
This does take the book—for all his rompish satire—to some pretty dark places. There’s violence, the spectre of sexual assault, familial rejection, a blackmail plot that is incredibly stressful to read about and is resolved in way that feels like a tainted triumph to say the least. It’s also not a romance in the genre romance sense, although it doesn’t present itself as one. There are however strong romantic elements that play a significant role in the book, as Hugh tries to navigate the intricacies of three different relationships: an adolescent passion that crashes against the rocks of immaturity, a complicated not-quite-friendship with a man who is unable to sacrifice the comforts of heteronormativity, and … whatever the fuck Hugh had with Brent, the boxer dude at the end. Who, for the record, I super hated.
All the relationships offer a different perspective on queer unions while also exploring aspects of the Sublime and Beautiful (in the Edmund Burke sense, rather than general). Except part of the issue for me here was that, while I was neutrally sympathetic to the first two, I really needed Brent (for all he had a kind of raw charismatic power to him) to jump off a bridge somewhere. A boxer, a politician, and a national hero, he is determined to live openly (and the way Hugh navigates this with him is fascinating) but he’s also got a very specific and unyielding idea of what that will be like i.e. that Hugh will basically play wife to him while he gads about following his ambitions. And while Brent is explicitly meant to represent the Sublime, which—if I remember my Burke properly—is meant to be an experience of terror as much as anything … I’m not sure it was quite the right sort of terror I was feeling? He did come across as a force of nature, seeking and demanding the impossible. But he also came across as an abusive prick whose idea of gender dynamics, while they may have well been informed by his context, would have been immediately unpalatable had Hugh not been a male character. Of course, I’m slightly looking at the relationship with my “consumer of kissing books” hat on. It worked as part of the tapestry of the novel. It just also made me deeply uncomfortable, in ways I think it both was and was not meant to.
In any case: I thoroughly enjoyed ‘Hugh’ and it gave me a lot to think about, up and including the application of eighteen and nineteenth century philosophy to queer identity. So that was fun? While it’s a longish read, and may not be for everyone, if the idea of it is even a bit little appealing to you I sincerely recommend you pick it up. As a reader you have to meet it where it's at, but as long as you can do that, this is a unique and exhilarating journey. I think the only way to experience anything quite like it would be to literally read Smollett, and 'Hugh' is, honestly, a lot more fun.
October 8, 2021
I liked but...
I liked Hugh: A Hero without a Novel BUT it took me a while to get into the story. It is highly possible , is a case of - it's me not the book " situation going on here .
My main issue is , that I just couldn't connect with Hugh . Don't know if is the style book is written or/and the slow moving plot or/and I was expecting something else entirely.
Anywho, take my review with a grain of salt , check it out ; you might like it as many of my book friends and fellow reviewers found it to be a very charming and clever story.
I just reviewed Hugh by David Lawrence. #Hugh #NetGalley
I liked Hugh: A Hero without a Novel BUT it took me a while to get into the story. It is highly possible , is a case of - it's me not the book " situation going on here .
My main issue is , that I just couldn't connect with Hugh . Don't know if is the style book is written or/and the slow moving plot or/and I was expecting something else entirely.
Anywho, take my review with a grain of salt , check it out ; you might like it as many of my book friends and fellow reviewers found it to be a very charming and clever story.
I just reviewed Hugh by David Lawrence. #Hugh #NetGalley
Read
September 18, 2024This is a slightly odd book. It’s a historical novel, set in the mid-1700s and written entirely in the style of that period. No doubt it’s an impressive feat to copy the language of the time so skilfully, but it made the novel difficult to get into, at least for someone like me who has never liked Richardson and his contemporaries.
The novel shares some of the problems I have with the works of literature it imitates. It is slow, meandering and twice as long as it needs to be (a common flaw in eighteenth-century literature). It’s also quite dark, dealing with heavy topics without engaging with them in the manner we would expect from a contemporary novel. Readers who are triggered by descriptions of sexual violence and coercion should definitely avoid it. Then again, this is also typical of the period, as those who were forced to read Pamela in class can confirm. Finally, none of the characters in the novel are easy to like. They all do reprehensible things, including our main character, Hugh. As someone who often complains about historical novelists imposing twenty-first-century morals on their characters to make them more likeable to a modern audience, I can honestly say that this novel is different. Hugh’s morals are very much those of his time, as are those of any other character. I realise that the line the author of a historical novel has to walk for their characters to feel authentic to their time without making them irredeemable in the eyes of the reader is very thin. While most authors tend to err on the side of caution, Lawrence’s novel went in the opposite direction, which I found at times disturbing.
In conclusion, I am impressed by the (almost) flawless imitation of an eighteenth-century novel which David Lawrence has accomplished here. The way he copies not only the style of the time, but also skilfully intertwines the plot with actual historical events speaks of the amount of research which must have gone into this novel. At the same time, I can’t say that I enjoyed reading it. Not that I can blame the author for that, it’s just that his imitation is a little too good. The world he depicts, just like Richardson’s, is a bleak one and one I don’t really care to revisit.
The novel shares some of the problems I have with the works of literature it imitates. It is slow, meandering and twice as long as it needs to be (a common flaw in eighteenth-century literature). It’s also quite dark, dealing with heavy topics without engaging with them in the manner we would expect from a contemporary novel. Readers who are triggered by descriptions of sexual violence and coercion should definitely avoid it. Then again, this is also typical of the period, as those who were forced to read Pamela in class can confirm. Finally, none of the characters in the novel are easy to like. They all do reprehensible things, including our main character, Hugh. As someone who often complains about historical novelists imposing twenty-first-century morals on their characters to make them more likeable to a modern audience, I can honestly say that this novel is different. Hugh’s morals are very much those of his time, as are those of any other character. I realise that the line the author of a historical novel has to walk for their characters to feel authentic to their time without making them irredeemable in the eyes of the reader is very thin. While most authors tend to err on the side of caution, Lawrence’s novel went in the opposite direction, which I found at times disturbing.
In conclusion, I am impressed by the (almost) flawless imitation of an eighteenth-century novel which David Lawrence has accomplished here. The way he copies not only the style of the time, but also skilfully intertwines the plot with actual historical events speaks of the amount of research which must have gone into this novel. At the same time, I can’t say that I enjoyed reading it. Not that I can blame the author for that, it’s just that his imitation is a little too good. The world he depicts, just like Richardson’s, is a bleak one and one I don’t really care to revisit.
October 27, 2024
More clever than good.
Bildungsroman sans true growth.
Neat use of Wilkes, Burke.
Bildungsroman sans true growth.
Neat use of Wilkes, Burke.
August 13, 2021
I received a copy of this from NetGalley for reviewing.
I don't think I was clever enough or patient enough to read this book. Or perhaps it's just that I don't have enough experience reading books of this genre/style. So please take my review with the proviso that I bumbled my way through at least two-thirds of it.
I enjoyed Hugh although as previously stated, I didn't understand most of the language, and I was hoping the end of the book would wrap up the story nicely (and it didn't completely).
Hugh seems to move between an object of pity/scorn and one of hero worship. It seemed to me that his is a somewhat lonely life with no one his peer whom he can just be himself with.
The tale itself was very clever and in parts I was completely gripped in his story.
I don't think I was clever enough or patient enough to read this book. Or perhaps it's just that I don't have enough experience reading books of this genre/style. So please take my review with the proviso that I bumbled my way through at least two-thirds of it.
I enjoyed Hugh although as previously stated, I didn't understand most of the language, and I was hoping the end of the book would wrap up the story nicely (and it didn't completely).
Hugh seems to move between an object of pity/scorn and one of hero worship. It seemed to me that his is a somewhat lonely life with no one his peer whom he can just be himself with.
The tale itself was very clever and in parts I was completely gripped in his story.
August 31, 2021
I received a copy of this book via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
There is reference made to Edmund Burke's treatise on the Beautiful and the Sublime in the novel, and a reader can see that reflected in the men with which Hugh engages. The story focuses (mostly) on a three year period (and how full those years seem to be!) in which the eponymous character finds love, passion, and faces society but finds that he may not necessarily be so ensnared as he first believes.
His life reminds me a bit of the song "Billy Brown" by the singer MIKA, in which the character is told he is a victim of the times. So too is Hugh, who wants only to be free and to pursue love and have a home to call his own. The book is delicious; there are parts of great comedy, many more of sorrow, and I found it captivating from the first page to the last, wondering what would become of Hugh as I continued reading.
This is a historical fiction book, so I greatly appreciated the style of writing that reflected that. It really did read as one novel produced of that time, but not so overwrought as to be weighty and off-putting. I have plans to recommend this book to my friends, who would no doubt be enticed by the premise.
There is reference made to Edmund Burke's treatise on the Beautiful and the Sublime in the novel, and a reader can see that reflected in the men with which Hugh engages. The story focuses (mostly) on a three year period (and how full those years seem to be!) in which the eponymous character finds love, passion, and faces society but finds that he may not necessarily be so ensnared as he first believes.
His life reminds me a bit of the song "Billy Brown" by the singer MIKA, in which the character is told he is a victim of the times. So too is Hugh, who wants only to be free and to pursue love and have a home to call his own. The book is delicious; there are parts of great comedy, many more of sorrow, and I found it captivating from the first page to the last, wondering what would become of Hugh as I continued reading.
This is a historical fiction book, so I greatly appreciated the style of writing that reflected that. It really did read as one novel produced of that time, but not so overwrought as to be weighty and off-putting. I have plans to recommend this book to my friends, who would no doubt be enticed by the premise.
March 9, 2022
Oddly enjoyable.
April 15, 2023
** 3.5 Stars **
August 13, 2021
I loved Hugh. I loved his sassy and captivating persona. His internal monologues are also so much fun to read. I also loved the secondary characters, which seems to fall right out of those old renaissance-themed movies.
I liked that the romance wasn’t as dragged out, although I thought the narrative suffers a bit on the second half of the book because it feels like there’s a lot of telling more than showing.
The author also has an excellent grasp of the language of the time, which I appreciate here. Each character has a distinct vibe. His humor is on point; I find myself chuckling now and then.
Overall, I found this to be really sweet, humorous, and very interesting. It’s quite a different take from the usual queer historicals I’ve read before and is well worth my time.
An advance review copy was provided by the publisher, The Book Whisperer via Netgalley for an impartial and honest review.
Full review at Book Review: Hugh by David Lawrence (ARC)
I liked that the romance wasn’t as dragged out, although I thought the narrative suffers a bit on the second half of the book because it feels like there’s a lot of telling more than showing.
The author also has an excellent grasp of the language of the time, which I appreciate here. Each character has a distinct vibe. His humor is on point; I find myself chuckling now and then.
Overall, I found this to be really sweet, humorous, and very interesting. It’s quite a different take from the usual queer historicals I’ve read before and is well worth my time.
An advance review copy was provided by the publisher, The Book Whisperer via Netgalley for an impartial and honest review.
Full review at Book Review: Hugh by David Lawrence (ARC)
May 5, 2022
3.25 / 5 Stars
(I won a digital copy of this book in a Goodreads giveaway, thank you to author David Lawrence)
Honestly, more like Hugh: A Hero without an Editor (And on that note, I truly do not understand the "Hero without a Novel," thing. What does that mean? I'm actually asking... can someone explain that?)
Okay, that was much bitchier than it had any need to be, especially since I actually did enjoy the book, but I saw the joke and had to go for it. The reason I say this is twofold:
~Firstly, this is a dense, meandering read that feels much longer than its actual 500-ish pages. It took me a lot longer to read than a book this length normally would, at first because there was just other stuff going on in my life, but then also because when I put it down I just wasn't super driven to pick it back up-- like... I enjoyed it, but I wasn't invested, despite it being a different angle on a genre that I truly do like (which actually was super neat. I'm so used to the ladies of the time, seeing the men and all the nonsense and dude-stuff they get up to was truly entertaining).
It takes frequent detours from the story of Hugh's day to day to take the temperature of the time-period's politics. I mean, yes, Hugh's life is very much wrapped up in politics and general pop culture, but I more often than not felt that I didn't need the exposition I was reading (and usually forgot the names and doings of these people anyway) to understand the story, so it was kind of a waste of time.
~Secondly, I'm truly confused regarding two things in the synopsis and at the beginning. One, the casual mention of the book actually being a manuscript discovered in an ancestor's trunk/belongings-- I can't decide if this is true or if it was a plot device, as it's never expounded upon after that bit at the start. Two, "everything, except that thing stuck to the bottom of his heeled slipper." Is this... a euphemism? It's represented in the cover art as well (at least on my copy), but aside from the mention in the synopsis and the nod to it on the cover, I don't remember it ever being addressed?
On to the characters and their doings:
Hugh is a jackass, but that's mostly because he's an 18-22-year-old fuckboy. He's overly-dramatic, self-absorbed, and absolutely hilarious. But he does grow and develop throughout the book.
Seeing his ultimate (SPOILER) reunion with Bramble where he apologizes and owns up to all the stupid negging he put him through and the proprietary way he treated him, was very satisfying. (Even if I absolutely can't believe he never even addressed the fact that Bramble tried to rape his little brother!? Like, he was heat-of-the-moment absolutely ready to get back together with the guy. Yeah, you mucked it up, Hugh, but he definitely escalated the situation to an--in my opinion--unforgivable place.)
And that development and growth means that I was absolutely not satisfied to see him end up with Brent, when their relationship began with a brutal physical beating and then Brent went on to quite literally treat Hugh as his property ("I saved thee; and paid thy father for thee; and own thee.")--or maybe a pet--and basically relegate him to the time-period's role for women. Gender dynamics are murky, and as I am not a gay man, I guess I can't really speak to it, but since Hugh seemed a more dominant partner in most other relationships... this seems forced. I didn't like it and I didn't like Brent even though he somehow became the love of Hugh's life (though maybe--hopefully--not, since, again Hugh is 22 when the novel ends).
All of these issues, though, are more to do with the time-period and societal expectations of women and more effeminate men, and my comparatively modern view of how people should be treated and valued (i.e. WELL and indiscriminately).
Overall, I enjoyed the book, and it definitely got me riled up a couple times. It was a fun read, especially in comparison to the Austens and Brontës of the literary world. I'm happy I won and read it.
(I won a digital copy of this book in a Goodreads giveaway, thank you to author David Lawrence)
Honestly, more like Hugh: A Hero without an Editor (And on that note, I truly do not understand the "Hero without a Novel," thing. What does that mean? I'm actually asking... can someone explain that?)
Okay, that was much bitchier than it had any need to be, especially since I actually did enjoy the book, but I saw the joke and had to go for it. The reason I say this is twofold:
~Firstly, this is a dense, meandering read that feels much longer than its actual 500-ish pages. It took me a lot longer to read than a book this length normally would, at first because there was just other stuff going on in my life, but then also because when I put it down I just wasn't super driven to pick it back up-- like... I enjoyed it, but I wasn't invested, despite it being a different angle on a genre that I truly do like (which actually was super neat. I'm so used to the ladies of the time, seeing the men and all the nonsense and dude-stuff they get up to was truly entertaining).
It takes frequent detours from the story of Hugh's day to day to take the temperature of the time-period's politics. I mean, yes, Hugh's life is very much wrapped up in politics and general pop culture, but I more often than not felt that I didn't need the exposition I was reading (and usually forgot the names and doings of these people anyway) to understand the story, so it was kind of a waste of time.
~Secondly, I'm truly confused regarding two things in the synopsis and at the beginning. One, the casual mention of the book actually being a manuscript discovered in an ancestor's trunk/belongings-- I can't decide if this is true or if it was a plot device, as it's never expounded upon after that bit at the start. Two, "everything, except that thing stuck to the bottom of his heeled slipper." Is this... a euphemism? It's represented in the cover art as well (at least on my copy), but aside from the mention in the synopsis and the nod to it on the cover, I don't remember it ever being addressed?
On to the characters and their doings:
Hugh is a jackass, but that's mostly because he's an 18-22-year-old fuckboy. He's overly-dramatic, self-absorbed, and absolutely hilarious. But he does grow and develop throughout the book.
Seeing his ultimate (SPOILER) reunion with Bramble where he apologizes and owns up to all the stupid negging he put him through and the proprietary way he treated him, was very satisfying. (Even if I absolutely can't believe he never even addressed the fact that Bramble tried to rape his little brother!? Like, he was heat-of-the-moment absolutely ready to get back together with the guy. Yeah, you mucked it up, Hugh, but he definitely escalated the situation to an--in my opinion--unforgivable place.)
And that development and growth means that I was absolutely not satisfied to see him end up with Brent, when their relationship began with a brutal physical beating and then Brent went on to quite literally treat Hugh as his property ("I saved thee; and paid thy father for thee; and own thee.")--or maybe a pet--and basically relegate him to the time-period's role for women. Gender dynamics are murky, and as I am not a gay man, I guess I can't really speak to it, but since Hugh seemed a more dominant partner in most other relationships... this seems forced. I didn't like it and I didn't like Brent even though he somehow became the love of Hugh's life (though maybe--hopefully--not, since, again Hugh is 22 when the novel ends).
All of these issues, though, are more to do with the time-period and societal expectations of women and more effeminate men, and my comparatively modern view of how people should be treated and valued (i.e. WELL and indiscriminately).
Overall, I enjoyed the book, and it definitely got me riled up a couple times. It was a fun read, especially in comparison to the Austens and Brontës of the literary world. I'm happy I won and read it.
August 15, 2021
I would like to thank The Book Whisperer and NetGalley for allowing me to read this ARC free for an honest review. The author starts this novel by writing that when he took possession of a family estate, he found this manuscript, which was penned by his six times great-grandfather, Sir John Carleton, around 1779. What a lucky find! Young Hugh Entwistle is a character I found rather enchanting and captivating. He is eighteen and an intelligent, moneyed, charming and handsome lad. He lives at home and is devoted to making his father, Sir Frederick, proud of him. He is thoughtful, courteous, cares very much about his friends and family and drinks a bit to excess. Although his father doesn’t approve and thinks it’s a waste of time, Hugh seeks a commission in the military. The novel tells of Hugh’s secret love affair with the parson’s son, James Bramble, his interest in politics, his family and his family’s estate. When his father’s valet fails to post a letter from Hugh to James, so that he can use it to blackmail Hugh, it puts Hugh in a bit of a spot, as he would never want his father to know about his preference for men. I enjoy historical fiction and really liked this well-written book of Hugh’s desire to be the man he wants to be. I was especially surprised and delighted by the last chapter.
Want to read
November 16, 2021DNF for now, planning to come back to it later now that I know what to expect. From all the glowing accolades calling it "delightful," "exhilarating," "fun," "a romp," etc., I was expecting a very different kind of book. This feels like a classic novel that was required reading in high school - very long, dense sentences, and a slow plot. Which I know is many people's cup of tea, and it's mine too when I'm in the mood for it. But those aforementioned descriptors kind of had me expecting something a bit more modern and edgy. I'll try this one again when I'm in the mindset to read it.
{ Thank you to Goodreads Giveaways for providing me with a free copy of the book to review. }
{ Thank you to Goodreads Giveaways for providing me with a free copy of the book to review. }
April 24, 2023
This book was everything I look for in a book. Page turning, as in couldn't put it down, intelligent, believable, made me laugh, made me cry and inspired my first ever book review. I read Blue Billy's story first (a secondary character in Hughes story) and while it was set a couple of years later it was just as engaging and gave me insight into the period and certain references I may not have had otherwise. I'm not a man or gay but David Lawrence's writing helped me see each character. His books should be required reading.
November 14, 2021
As good as the story is, and it’s a grand, queer coming-of-age story filled with colorful characters, voice and writing made it a 10-star novel for me. The quality of the writing and the spot-on timbre of the voice fully immerses the reader into Hugh’s world without a misstep in this seamless historical narrative.
January 17, 2022
This could have been five stars, but then the author did that thing where he writes himself into a corner and then half-asses an ending.
September 21, 2021
I experienced this coming-of-age story of Hugh Entwistle as a multilayered thing...
Alternately hum-hawing and chuckling my way through it, I pitied Hugh's needs to mature within the excessively restrictive social and paternal restraints on the one hand, and was thoroughly amused by his silly, ingratiating antics to do so on the other. Read on this level, 'Hugh' is a deliciously satirical comedy, written in an antiquated syntax appropriate to the 18th century setting.
Since I had not been aware of Burke's treatise on the Beautiful and the Sublime, I took a brief, enlightening side-excursion into Wikipedia, which enhanced my reading pleasure and understanding. At this level, Hugh's three relationships, embodying Beauty, Indifference, and the Sublime became more meaningful to me; the satire became deeper, the novel emerged as a parody of Burke's Sublime. At first entranced by, and then denied beauty, passion, and ecstasy (and what passion! ...the Sorrows of Young Werther came to mind...), Hugh becomes indifferent to offered pleasure until, at last, and in deathly fear of exposure, he attains the (outrageously, hilariously warped) Sublime. His earlier, cutting remark in an overland coach to strangers thus becomes his destiny: "The Sublime, you know, as defined by Burke, is that extreme pleasure at the relief from Pain."
Although full of absurdities, exaggerations, and incongruities, this tongue-in-cheek novel is not necessarily only for relaxation. As many a truth is said in jest, the obvious theme of homosexuality and the subterfuge necessary to achieve bliss within the strict dictates of a punitive, heterosexually oriented society introduces another nuance to the novel, and one can leave that particular interpretation to the individual reader.
I thoroughly enjoyed 'Hugh', but feel that the novel might benefit from more thorough editing and proofreading, as I was, at times, irritated by recurring typos and editorial inconsistencies.
I found this an impressive debut novel and wholheartedly recommend 'Hugh' to those readers who relish a good chuckle whilst looking for something completely different ...
Alternately hum-hawing and chuckling my way through it, I pitied Hugh's needs to mature within the excessively restrictive social and paternal restraints on the one hand, and was thoroughly amused by his silly, ingratiating antics to do so on the other. Read on this level, 'Hugh' is a deliciously satirical comedy, written in an antiquated syntax appropriate to the 18th century setting.
Since I had not been aware of Burke's treatise on the Beautiful and the Sublime, I took a brief, enlightening side-excursion into Wikipedia, which enhanced my reading pleasure and understanding. At this level, Hugh's three relationships, embodying Beauty, Indifference, and the Sublime became more meaningful to me; the satire became deeper, the novel emerged as a parody of Burke's Sublime. At first entranced by, and then denied beauty, passion, and ecstasy (and what passion! ...the Sorrows of Young Werther came to mind...), Hugh becomes indifferent to offered pleasure until, at last, and in deathly fear of exposure, he attains the (outrageously, hilariously warped) Sublime. His earlier, cutting remark in an overland coach to strangers thus becomes his destiny: "The Sublime, you know, as defined by Burke, is that extreme pleasure at the relief from Pain."
Although full of absurdities, exaggerations, and incongruities, this tongue-in-cheek novel is not necessarily only for relaxation. As many a truth is said in jest, the obvious theme of homosexuality and the subterfuge necessary to achieve bliss within the strict dictates of a punitive, heterosexually oriented society introduces another nuance to the novel, and one can leave that particular interpretation to the individual reader.
I thoroughly enjoyed 'Hugh', but feel that the novel might benefit from more thorough editing and proofreading, as I was, at times, irritated by recurring typos and editorial inconsistencies.
I found this an impressive debut novel and wholheartedly recommend 'Hugh' to those readers who relish a good chuckle whilst looking for something completely different ...
April 29, 2025
While Hugh is an enjoyable queer rump of a historical novel (it IS a novel (though Hugh isn't much of a "hero"). I don't get the subtitle), there were a number of things about it I did not quite buy.
But mostly this: Having, in my youth, read my fair share of "classics", including a few of those explicitely mentioned here, I was not convinced by the pastiche/homage aspect. Even if many tropes of the classic Bildungsroman are present, the storytelling felt quite modern to me, and the attempts at 18th century language were inconsistent at best (particulalry in the last third, I'd say). There were also many sentences that were so convoluted as to become incomprehensible (not something I remember in the real thing). My suspicion is that, sloppily, some words have gone missing in many of those cases.
I also wasn't quite convinced by the relationship. The love we are supposed to believe is there (Hugh falls "in love" three times in as many years!) did not feel real to me, which is a problem in a book centered around those relationships (not a M/M romance though).
I was ready to love this but I was on the whole disappointed.
But mostly this: Having, in my youth, read my fair share of "classics", including a few of those explicitely mentioned here, I was not convinced by the pastiche/homage aspect. Even if many tropes of the classic Bildungsroman are present, the storytelling felt quite modern to me, and the attempts at 18th century language were inconsistent at best (particulalry in the last third, I'd say). There were also many sentences that were so convoluted as to become incomprehensible (not something I remember in the real thing). My suspicion is that, sloppily, some words have gone missing in many of those cases.
I also wasn't quite convinced by the relationship. The love we are supposed to believe is there (Hugh falls "in love" three times in as many years!) did not feel real to me, which is a problem in a book centered around those relationships (not a M/M romance though).
I was ready to love this but I was on the whole disappointed.
September 23, 2021
I received this book as a digital ARC from the publisher through Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
This book is a coming-of-age story set in 18th century London against the backdrop of politics and navigating family tensions and concealing sexuality. I liked the vivid descriptions of various locales and how the settings came to life. As far as the characters, they were slightly tepid; I wasn't particularly drawn to any of them. As the main character, Hugh was not sufficiently compelling to hold my interest. The things that happen to him throughout the story were certainly compelling and sympathetic, but I did not feel connected to Hugh as a character throughout his many ups and downs. The pacing of this book was also too slow. The first 2/3 dragged, but there was a definite improvement in the last couple of chapters. I did like the ending and how everything resolved itself. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in historical fiction and LGBTQIA+ literature.
This book is a coming-of-age story set in 18th century London against the backdrop of politics and navigating family tensions and concealing sexuality. I liked the vivid descriptions of various locales and how the settings came to life. As far as the characters, they were slightly tepid; I wasn't particularly drawn to any of them. As the main character, Hugh was not sufficiently compelling to hold my interest. The things that happen to him throughout the story were certainly compelling and sympathetic, but I did not feel connected to Hugh as a character throughout his many ups and downs. The pacing of this book was also too slow. The first 2/3 dragged, but there was a definite improvement in the last couple of chapters. I did like the ending and how everything resolved itself. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in historical fiction and LGBTQIA+ literature.
January 20, 2025
It was so nice to read a historical romance of Englad in the 18th century. Hugh Entwhistle is a man boy trying to please his father. To have grown up going from school to school. Bring bullied, beat up, and winning arguments through sheer wit and intelligence, but as soon as his heart gets involved . . . He becomes rather stupid. Knowing that getting caught in homosexual acts or relationships could get him hanged, he is not very discreet.
The book is well done. Research, as far as I can see, is pretty much on the money. Although his blackmailer was a total ass, what Brent and Hugh did to him was awful. I wish the author had let Hugh be a bit more forgiving to Jacob, but Brent pushed him to retaliate in a vicious way.
The story and writing are extremely engaging and all I can say . . . I'm glad I don't live in 1770.
The book is well done. Research, as far as I can see, is pretty much on the money. Although his blackmailer was a total ass, what Brent and Hugh did to him was awful. I wish the author had let Hugh be a bit more forgiving to Jacob, but Brent pushed him to retaliate in a vicious way.
The story and writing are extremely engaging and all I can say . . . I'm glad I don't live in 1770.
October 11, 2021
It sliced his heart, his lungs, his gut - this beautiful wretch who had nothing. Yet who had everything.
4/5
Thank you to NetGalley and The Book Whisperer for sending me an e-arc in return for my honest review.
Hugh is a coming-of-age story set in 18th century London that plays with the themes of politics, family and sexuality. I had my doubts going in as the story starts relatively slow and I am a relative newbie to historical fiction, though the author managed to capture my attention time and time again with the interesting and multidimensional characterisation of Hugh Entwistle. The novel does not shy away from its satiric and eccentric nature which intrigues from start to finish.
4/5
Thank you to NetGalley and The Book Whisperer for sending me an e-arc in return for my honest review.
Hugh is a coming-of-age story set in 18th century London that plays with the themes of politics, family and sexuality. I had my doubts going in as the story starts relatively slow and I am a relative newbie to historical fiction, though the author managed to capture my attention time and time again with the interesting and multidimensional characterisation of Hugh Entwistle. The novel does not shy away from its satiric and eccentric nature which intrigues from start to finish.
February 16, 2024
Arthur claims that the novel was inspired by The Adventures of Peregrine Pickle by Tobias Smollett. He says the theme of the book is the burden of Liberty. It is illustrated by the conflict of being out and losing everything else. Like the song Me And The Bobby McGee says "freedom is just another word for nothing else to lose". That is also why he includes John Wilkes an advocate for civil liberties as a character in the book. Written in an antiquated syntax appropriate to the 18th century England it is difficult to read with some words not in an American dictionary. The book starts very slowly until it gets to the main story. Overall I enjoyed the book.
July 8, 2025
A long wait but enjoyable.
This book sat on my TBR for years as others with more pressing deadlines needed my attention. It’s a long slow burn in the beginning as all the characters move into place, tell us their backstory, and allow us to see and feel location and history.
Loved the era schemes such as the South Sea Bubble, the Darien settlement, the Jacobite uprisings made and broke countless fortunes. With the entailed castles and convoluted inheritance laws, young men and heiresses could have their hopes dashed in an afternoon. The story meanders through its plot, the title is very apt.
This book sat on my TBR for years as others with more pressing deadlines needed my attention. It’s a long slow burn in the beginning as all the characters move into place, tell us their backstory, and allow us to see and feel location and history.
Loved the era schemes such as the South Sea Bubble, the Darien settlement, the Jacobite uprisings made and broke countless fortunes. With the entailed castles and convoluted inheritance laws, young men and heiresses could have their hopes dashed in an afternoon. The story meanders through its plot, the title is very apt.
dropped-dnf
November 5, 2021Dropped at 25%. I am so disappointed because this sounds like it's right up my alley. Unfortunately, the writing just doesn't flow well. Odd sentence structure and word choice made me have to reread entire paragraphs or just confused me. I'm not sure if this is more accurate language for the time period the story takes place or if Lawrence's writing is just not for me. I've read plenty of 1700s/Georgian period novels and while I can admit the dialogue is not always historically accurate, I've never had this kind of issue and it's just too annoying to wade through.
November 15, 2021
Never enough could be said...
If I ever should learn that this story wasn't truly found in an old chest in a dusty attic and published from the hidden manuscripts of Hugh Entwhistle, I think I will truly know a soul crushing heartbreak.
What an amazing divine into what it was like living as a gay man in the eighteenth century. I was capture by this writing and never released; even having finished reading, I believe High will occupy my mind for weeks to come.
5 Stars, would absolutely recommend to a friend.
If I ever should learn that this story wasn't truly found in an old chest in a dusty attic and published from the hidden manuscripts of Hugh Entwhistle, I think I will truly know a soul crushing heartbreak.
What an amazing divine into what it was like living as a gay man in the eighteenth century. I was capture by this writing and never released; even having finished reading, I believe High will occupy my mind for weeks to come.
5 Stars, would absolutely recommend to a friend.
October 7, 2021
This is an interesting, entertaining and dramatic story. It's very slow in the beginning, but it does eventually pick up. Hugh is a real character, he's eccentric and interesting, and he leads a life that's all his own. I found myself more intrigued as the story went on, and was quite satisfied with the ending.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the author. This is my honest and voluntary opinion of it.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the author. This is my honest and voluntary opinion of it.
January 7, 2023
Too long and too little in return
Unsatisfying ending after a book twice as long as it needed to be. The story was enough to see me through it, only to have the story stop without any sort of resolution. The writing wasn't bad and the story kept shifting enough to keep me interested despite the long-windedness. But with such little pay off in the ending I don't believe it was worth the time. I'd maybe be willing to try something else by the author though.
Unsatisfying ending after a book twice as long as it needed to be. The story was enough to see me through it, only to have the story stop without any sort of resolution. The writing wasn't bad and the story kept shifting enough to keep me interested despite the long-windedness. But with such little pay off in the ending I don't believe it was worth the time. I'd maybe be willing to try something else by the author though.
April 22, 2024
The Power of Social Pressure
These story is many things. It is confusing in it's use of language, sort of Old English. It is with prose and verse. It is witty. But what it is most, is a commentary on how social norms control our lives. The rules Hugh , his friends and family must follow are not today's rules, but both sets are binding. Learning to live within your rules is still difficult, but has offered suggestions.
These story is many things. It is confusing in it's use of language, sort of Old English. It is with prose and verse. It is witty. But what it is most, is a commentary on how social norms control our lives. The rules Hugh , his friends and family must follow are not today's rules, but both sets are binding. Learning to live within your rules is still difficult, but has offered suggestions.
June 16, 2024
I have submitted this review after listening to the audiobook of this title. (Audible Membership)
Looking at a history of gay revolution in England and the lives some men were forced to endure to conceal their true nature's.
Written in an old-fashioned style, which takes a few chapters to come to terms with, I believe it gives an insight into what those in society saw as abhorrent and law breaking. Risking death by each liaison with another male, with carnal intent.
Looking at a history of gay revolution in England and the lives some men were forced to endure to conceal their true nature's.
Written in an old-fashioned style, which takes a few chapters to come to terms with, I believe it gives an insight into what those in society saw as abhorrent and law breaking. Risking death by each liaison with another male, with carnal intent.
September 15, 2024
2.5 stars. I did enjoy this, to an extent, but like many of the other reviewers, I felt it was too long, it rambled about a bit too much; I had to leave it and then come back to it. And the ending left me a bit confused/disappointed. It’s meant to be manuscript of the life of Hugh, but it only covers a bit of the life, what happened at the end…. And why was he a Hero without a novel? This is a novel, and Hugh was not a hero. I listened on Audible and the narration was good.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews