Ship of Fools: Dorothy Dunnett's novels

Thread: Dorothy Dunnett's novels Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=027315

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

I know we have a few Dunnett fans on the Ship, and there has been a bit of chat on one of the other threads about her novels, so there may be mileage in a thread.

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The five Lymond novels are enormously fat and intimidating, Dunnett wrote a stand-alone novel about MacBeth which shows her strengths very well -- it's titled KING HEREAFTER.

I first discovered the Lymond novels as a teenager and was hooked. I'm a quick reader (and these days have a longish commute to work) so a thick book suits me fine as it will last for a couple of days, whereas a thin paperback is over and done with before the end of the journey.

They're quite clever, detailed stories that can be enjoyed on more than one level. Dunnett's historical research is quite impressive, but I particularly liked the progression of Lymond's character development throughout the series. This is something many writers don't do: the hero remains much the same though time passes, but the Lymond of the first novels is a callow youth who's still establishing himself and likes to show off (all those poetry quotes, if nothing else), who matures progressively through the books into an experienced, educated, worldly but compassionate older character.

I could never take to the Niccolo series, though it was quite interesting seeing flashes of Lymond-to-be in Claes/Niccolo. My favourite character, though, is still Jerott Blyth.

King Hereafter (and could I issue a gentle plea not to put book titles in caps, as it feels as if they're being shouted at you) is another fat book but a standalone one. It was good, an interesting take on the story of Macbeth, but not as stellar (IMO) as the Lymond books.

Posted by St Everild (# 3626) on :

I second what you say regarding the development of Francis Crawfords character throughout the books...and other characters too (Philippa?).

I love these books. And aren't the House of Niccolo linked with the Crawford of Lymond in some way...I can't quite remember.

Posted by Chamois (# 16204) on :

I read the Lymond series as a teenager but didn't take to them. But I love the "Dolly" series. Haven't tried the Nicolo ones, I thought as I hadn't enjoyed Lymond I probably wouldn't enjoy another historical series, and as Ariel says they are VERY thick.

The Dolly novels are funny, interesting, clever and certainly kept me guessing - I only worked out the identity of the villain in one out of the six.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

Lymond is a famously divisive character -- you either love him and the books or you hate him.

He is curiously reminiscent of Lord Peter Wimsey

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

Really? I never saw that.

I read the Lymond books a while back - I'm a quick reader, but I couldn't read them fast. Dunnett writes densely, doesn't she?

I liked the Macbeth book, too.

Never tried the Niccolo series - by that time school work had got different, and my brain couldn't cope with anything but a two day read at the weekend.

Posted by Scots lass (# 2699) on :

I love Lymond, but am another who could never really get into Niccolo. I read them all and enjoyed the foreshadowing aspects for Lymond but I don't think I would re-read the series. I do like the character development - Philippa especially is very well drawn and grows up realistically. Lymond's maturing is a little less obvious in the early books as we don't realise just how young he is until Pawn in Frankincense, although there are plenty of hints, and his character development is mixed with some horrific things happening to him. I've got a bit of a crush on Lymond, but my favourite character is probably Archie and his elephants...

I also really like that Dunnett will kill off her characters, although I do wish she wouldn't get you so attached to them first - I know it happened in real life but I was not pleased when Anselm Adorne died! And it might be real, but I find it difficult to forgive her for killing off Christian Stewart.

Posted by Sir Kevin (# 3492) on :

Would you lot care to lead a novel by her for the Ship's book club? I'd join in if you did, as long as it's somewhat after NaNoWriMo.

Posted by jacobsen (# 14998) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Lymond is a famously divisive character -- you either love him and the books or you hate him.

He is curiously reminiscent of Lord Peter Wimsey

That thought had crossed my mind. Peter Wimsey gets even more interesting in the Jill Paton Walsh continuations and so does Harriet.

But to get back to Ms Dunnett - I loved the Lymond series, but ran out of puff with the Niccolos; the final volume has been sitting unread on my shelves ever since it came out.

But the book I reread fairly regularly is Dolly and the Bird of Paradise. The character of Rita Geddes is gritty and appealing. Besides being a whodunnit,(no pun intended) the book is also IMO an essay on forgiveness.

Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :

If you wanted to read a Dorothy Dunnett book, where would you start? I don't *think* I've read anything of hers, but if I did it was a lo-ong time ago. I *think* my mother recommended Queen's Play as she bought and devoured several of them as they came out - we had plain blue hard back books on the shelves and this was amongst them. I must have been looking for something to read, but I don't remember if I actually read it.

Is it worth starting with Game of Kings?

(Though why I'm asking for book recommendations when I have a tall pile of books to read, but if I get this it will be on Kindle and I'm better at carrying a Kindle to commute as it's small and light in comparison to bits of tree.)

<tangent> on another thread a number of us were inveighing against the Jill Paton-Walsh massacres of Lord Peter Wimsey and Harriet</tangent>

[ 12. August 2014, 08:13: Message edited by: Curiosity killed ... ]

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Scots lass:
I also really like that Dunnett will kill off her characters, although I do wish she wouldn't get you so attached to them first - I know it happened in real life but I was not pleased when Anselm Adorne died! And it might be real, but I find it difficult to forgive her for killing off Christian Stewart.

Marthe died off as well, which didn't make me rejoice. There was a good plot line lost in her relationship with Jerott. And I'd have liked to see more of the Dame de Doubtance.

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

I went well off Sayers and Wimsey when in a short story Peter thrashed his son and this was viewed as a perfectly OK way of disciplining children. I can't be more specific on details as I returned the book to the Oxfam shop.

I've read Thrones Dominations - I didn't know Paton Walsh had written more. I liked her own book A Piece of Justice.

[ 12. August 2014, 16:58: Message edited by: Penny S ]

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
If you wanted to read a Dorothy Dunnett book, where would you start?

Either with "The Disorderly Knights", which is in the middle of the Lymond series and gives you a pretty good feel for her writing, or you could try "King Hereafter"

"The Lymond Poetry", which I hadn't realized until now she'd published, is now on my wishlist*: it's her versions and translations of some of the poems she quoted in the Lymond series - and if you haven't read the books, there are dozens of quotes, many of which stick in the mind, and tease.

* The cheaper version. Not the one priced at £4,470.35.

Posted by JoannaP (# 4493) on :

[Tangent]

quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I went well off Sayers and Wimsey when in a short story Peter thrashed his son and this was viewed as a perfectly OK way of disciplining children. I can't be more specific on details as I returned the book to the Oxfam shop.

IIRC (it has been several years since I read the short story myself), "thrashing" is an overstatement. It was viewed as perfectly OK by the child in question but Peter was clear that he would never physically discipline his other son (or one of this other sons), who was a more delicate soul. It probably was regarded as non-contraversial at the time it was written anyway.

To me, one of the interesting things about reading fiction written in the past is what one can learn about society and culture at the time, from things that the author takes as granted (although it can lead to unpleasant surprises as well).

[/Tangent]

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

The story was called "Tallboys" IIRC and the whole point of it was more or less to make fun of a character who had "progressive" ideas about the treatment of children that were actually unrealistic. The punishment was a minor episode in a story about stolen peaches; the progressive character thought physical punishment barbaric but was certain (on no evidence) that Bredon had taken them, while Peter administered the punishment (for a minor previous transgression) but had complete faith in his son regarding the theft.

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

I suspect that the making fun of the scare quoted progressive ideas led to my reaction.

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

So how does any of this tie in with Lymond (incidentally, how does one pronounce Lymond)?

Posted by jacobsen (# 14998) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:

<tangent> on another thread a number of us were inveighing against the Jill Paton-Walsh massacres of Lord Peter Wimsey and Harriet</tangent>

Which thread? I like the continuations bur would be interested to know why others may not.

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I suspect that the making fun of the scare quoted progressive ideas led to my reaction.

The story doesn't make fun of "progressive" ideas about not beating children. It makes fun of a particular kind of person - the lady in question pontificates at length on the "correct" way to raise children, whilst treating children as a fungible commodity, because clearly all children behave in the same way, and whilst believing that Bredon is lying, because he's a child and that's what they do. She is a person who claims to know all about "children", but has no interest in the individual character of the child in front of her.

Peter and Harriet, by contrast, know their son as an individual, know that under X circumstances he wouldn't lie to them, and so the story proceeds.

The fact that the lady on question (some poor spinster relative or hanger-on of the Duchess of Denver, IIRC, but I don't remember her name) holds an opinion about caning that most modern people would share is beside the point. She is ridiculous in spite of the fact that she opposes corporal punishment, not because of it.

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

Ah, the details are beginning to come back - and I am regretting that particular part of the last of the regular purges I administer to my bookshelves - though I currently have a box of unshelved books on the floor of my study awaiting the result of the next one.
Also regretting the Dunnett purge some years ago. But she did take up rather a lot of space.
Still wasn't happy about the corporal punishment, though.
I have an ex-brother-in-law who took the cane off his teacher. I went to a private school where the headmaster administered a PE slipper to the buttocks of the girls who "required" it. (He eventually had to marry one of the prefects who had a premature delivery of a son.) It does influence one's reactions a bit.

Posted by jacobsen (# 14998) on :

The beating in Tallboys was three strokes; one for the misdemeanor, one for being found out, and one for inconveniencing his father (Ithink). Lord Peter was a child of his period, and, while I'm not advocating corporal punishment, this was hardly fifty strokes at the mast. I suspect that they were also fairly light. The story ends with father and son collaborating to put something nasty in the lady's bed. She lays into the boy when she discovers it, thus demonstrating the worth of her principles.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

Heaven knows (you can read it in the Guardian) that corporal punishment is well known among adult Britons.Only in the past couple decades or so have attitudes shifted so drastically. It is like smoking -- note how in all the original Wimsey books people smoke because they are modern and sophisticated. Today the only smokers (in movies, TV, etc.) are villains. The attitude has completely flipped in our lifetimes.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0