Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm_Girl
I agree with these points. I think that Tey wanted to explore both "how" history is constructed (e.g. myths, propaganda, biases, through the winner's eyes) as well as the "sources." She makes a point of Grant progressing through several different types of sources in his investigation as his interest in solving the mystery grows, i.e. children's history, popular history and scholarly history. Also, the title of the book asserts that time may separate fact from fiction in the future in its reference to Francis Bacon's quote: "Truth is the daughter of time, not of authority."
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookpossum
To me the book was all about going to the primary sources and not to secondary sources, ie the documents of the time rather than reading and trusting history books as the sole source of any case you are trying to build.
|
Thank you - I find your points illuminating and very helpful. I was so distracted by Grant leaping to conclusions, and his lack of critical analysis, that it completely blinded me to what Tey was hoping to do with the novel. You’ve really increased my regard for both her and the book.
That said, I agree wholeheartedly with
gmw that she chose the wrong player for the part. To me, Grant simply didn’t act like a trained investigator. To add insult to injury, she had Carradine swallow it whole, when he was supposed to be academically trained in history. And
Catlady calling out the ridiculous premise that Grant would put so much stock in a person’s face fits here too. Very galling
Authors have some obligation in terms of internal consistency, or it can break the spell for their readers - as it did for some of us. My guess is that since she had already created Grant, she decided to try and make it work with him, but it did compromise the believability.
However, Tey was human, after-all. This discussion certainly helps me make room for what she actually wanted to do, rather than just take the book at face value.
And I’ve started reading Singing Sands, and so far, I’m not bothered by the same issues with Grant. I enjoy him. So I really think having a police officer investigate Richard III just wasn’t the best choice for this book.