Man, this book. I just...WOW.
The premise is actually super intriguing, IE following after Surratt rather than Wilkes yet titling your book “Booth”. I hadn’t paid much attention buying it and thought it would be about Booth, and, in a way, it was—painting a picture of Booth through the eyes of another.
The problem with this book for me, however, is just...the women, mostly. Sarah Slater (Ravenel for the novel, mostly) is a nude dancer who sleeps with Wilkes and has his baby. That’s why she’s helping the Confederacy—for him! Mary Surratt is a widower of a boarding house who...sleeps with Wilkes and unknowingly helps the Confederacy. These women and just the size of their roles in aiding the Confederacy continue to be debated to this day, but I sincerely doubt they took on such parts spurred by Wilkes’s prowess in the boudoir.
And speaking of the relationships—what was there between Sarah and John? He sees her dance naked, has one conversation with her at a later date, then they meet at his family’s boarding house and they have sex? He decides he has affection for her and values her? There’s literally no connection; they’ve barely even interacted with one another.
And Mary Surratt! Wilkes has ONE conversation with her and immediately leads her to her bedroom where they have sex. Mind boggling. The author says there has been debate as to whether they ever slept together. If they did in fact have sex, I sincerely doubt the middle-aged mother and widower who was known to be extremely devout would have instantly engaged in sex with a man she had known for all of possibly a half hour. That’s leaving aside it’s the nineteenth century where there were both customs for women as well as the pervading notion that actors (and actresses) were of a lower standing socially. Certainly it’s possible for people to act “poorly” in terms of what is expected of them, but it just doesn’t fit her character.
John Surratt himself, the protagonist, is the most puzzling of all. The author has made him into an easy target who bumbled his way into Wilkes’s confidences and was promptly used thoroughly, without any knowledge of his role as a tool for a bigger plot until it was made known to him. I find that also incredibly hard to believe. Wilkes was an outlier to his own staunchly Union family, so it’s obviously possible to have differing opinions between close blood relatives, but Surratt’s sister was known to be pro-Confederacy. His brother was a Confederate soldier. His mother was pro-Confederacy. He himself in actuality carried papers and smuggled things for the Confederates, and proudly boasted about how stupid the Yankees were to not catch him. You want me to believe he was a neutral bystander who only wanted the war to end? Who accidentally did all these things without meaning to do so? I simply cannot. Also it was incredibly dangerous to be pro-Confederate openly; why would Wilkes risk taking a chance on a man who was neutral? How would Wilkes come to be acquaintances with a man like this? The others in Wilkes’s plot were extremely pro-Confederacy; it doesn’t make sense to take someone into your fold who doesn’t feel the same was as you do when your very safety and life is on the line. John Surratt being a helpful fool isn’t a good enough reason; leaving someone in the dark in that manner would be a good way to have yourself accidentally exposed, and Wilkes was very clearly a calculating and intelligent man, regardless of his faults. I also cannot believe that Surratt was not pro-Confederacy in nature, and vociferously so.
I don’t wish to be cruel and only leave one star, because I know writing is difficult and books are acts of passion. I’d like to think of a good point to the book, which would be that it really was a page-turner, although it did slow a bit once Wilkes had done the deed. That’s no fault of the author; I recently read another book about Wilkes and those around him and it seems as though it, too, worked itself up to the events at Ford’s Theatre as a natural climax.
The author, too, seems to be well-versed on what took place and did a good amount of research, to list another good point in his favour. It’s a shame that the characters bother me as much as they do, however, or else I would give this book a higher rating.