DAUGHTER OF TIME

Rating:
Summary: what history is all about
Review: i read josephine tey's book for history class and found it surprisingly quick paced and fascinating. i found characterisation decent and the plot such that i couldn't put the book down. and, to me, the unbelieveable part is that the history was factual! what is, perhaps, more crucial is that this novel shows history as "high adventure," a mystery waiting to be solved (as if i weren't convinced already!). a must-read for any history buffs or mystery lovers!

Rating:
Summary: Fiction?
Review: This book was recommended to me during a family discussion on whether or not Richard III was guilty of killing his two nephews. I expected this book to be a biography, but it is presented in a fiction form of an inspector and a student looking into the mystery of Richard III while the inspector was bedridden. The dialogue in the book is between the inspector and the student, who is doing the research at the British Museum. The student then brings the research information back to the bedridden inspector. There are some good points made in the book which casts doubt on the general history's portrait of Richard III as the evil uncle. Although the book is well written and make interesting points, I cannot help be wonder whether or not the information is fiction because of the way Tey presented the story. Tey shows alternate theories of what may have happened to the Princes in the Tower.

Rating:
Summary: Worth it but sometimes tough going
Review: "The Daughter of Time" is a wonderful book but not without its difficulties. On the plus side is the way the laid-up detective slowly deduces the riddle of who killed the two nephews, and he does so without using traditional histories. We definitely get a feel that the "great man" theory of history is frequently, if not almost always, wrong, because everything he reads--from a children's schoolbook to Sir Thomas More--portrays Richard III as a vicious hunchback and poor administrator who had his nephews slaughtered for no good reason, but in reality none of that is likely to be true. This book invents (or, more likely, popularizes) social history, using things like diary entries, bills of lading, doctors' notes and the like to ascertain where people were situated and how they lived. On the other hand, traditional histories are motivated by politics and emotion and tend to flatter or condemn, and then those errors are perpetuated down through the centuries.

On the minus side, for Americans at least, are that this book reads best if you carry some background knowledge of the York/Lancaster "Wars of the Roses" of the late 15th century with you, also some idea of rights of inheritance and succession. (Precisely the things those of us who live in a republic don't need to know!) There is, at least, a genealogical table at the beginning of the book.

Rating:
Summary: When Fiction Holds More Fact Than History
Review: Josephine Tey's heroic Inspector Grant finds himself literally flat on his back in hospital: the result of his previous adventure. Unable to engage his mind on a case in the police blotter, he stumbles on mystery that is 500 years old. Who killed the princes in the Tower?

Part historical tableau, "Daughter of Time" is a true detective story. Just because the witnesses are long dead, written accounts remain and Grant's (i.e. Tey's) exegesis separates fact from propaganda. Intermixed with the history are Tey's charming cast of characters more reminiscent of a Noel Coward comedy than a traditional British mystery. Characters appear cliche at first introduction, but become more supple as the novel and Grant's recovery progresses.

Having the benefit of Derek Jacobi's narration, the players in the story are quite vivid. This is most appreciated early in the novel when the reader is introduced to the several characters of the cast at once. Later, Grant has moments of reflective solitude, and Jacobi ably translates this quiet time.

It is no wonder that this book is very popular. There is a little something for everyone. Fans of historical fiction get their fill. Students of history can learn the importance of first hand accounts. It still is very much a detective novel, and the characters are all likeable. (The one true bad guy has been dead since the 16th century.) It even carries the banner of a moral crusade: the pursuit of truth and the defeat of tonypandy.

But Jacobi's narration enlightens one of the drawbacks of this work. Just when the incidental characters -- the ones that will not appear in the next Grant adventure -- develop, the story ends. Unlike Grant and his regular cronies who have been sketched and shaped in previous stories, these new people grow with the reader. We like them and miss them when the novel ends. And "Daughter of Time" does end abruptly. The case is closed, and the colorful world of the last Plantagenets and first Tudors is closed with it.

Rating:
Summary: Fascinating historical mystery centered on modern logic
Review: Tey's examination of Richard III centers around the fictional story of a Scotland Yard inspector convalescing in a hospital and bored beyond measure. When a friend brings him prints of faces to study, one captures his eye. He forms a sympathy for the man behind the face, who turns out, to the inspector's surprise, to be the well-known evil king Richard III. The mystery that centers around the picture is one of the most classic in all history: did Richard III really murder his nephews, the Princes in the Tower? Tey shows that although the crime has been traditionally laid at Richard III's door, there are enough anomalies to create serious doubt about his guilt. She also raises questions about other possible suspects in the murder of the boys. Richard III's story is scandalous, exciting, and unbelievably sad at times, and while the book has little action, the suspense Tey creates is masterful. She also manages to give the reader a feel for that mysterious, sympathetic face--one comes to know it, even if one has never seen it.

Rating:
Summary: Doubly disturbing
Review: For those of us who crave a good mystery but are put off by the rather bland and often downright bad writing, Josephine Tey is a great find. Plot, character development, and creative ingenuity are her hallmarks, and her books are an absorbing read -- and more.

And more -- because I've read many of her books over and over, I've begun to notice a characteristic of her writing that I find very disturbing and disconcerting, but intriguing. While all authors decide who is good and bad and create a plot around that, she does something a little different in pursing her course: she manipulates the reader by a using a subtle emotional context for information that we then, because she causes us to like or dislike the character so much, accept as a likelihood if not actual fact. By the end of most of her novels, you've learned to dislike the "bad" people (who are unnecessarily bad, when you think about it) very very much and you are absolutely rooting for the main characters -- primarily because they have been challenged by these nasty bad people. This is most evident in this novel and in "The Franchise Affair," which includes a truly brilliant form of character assassination that I found almost frightening on subsequent readings. She would have been a fantastic political propagandist -- she wins you over to her point of view and gets you emotionally riled up about a cause. In "The Daughter of Time," we become very absorbed in Alan Grant's search for the real Richard (and are won over to the cause of clearing his name) but overlook the real truth that most of Alan's deductions are merely "the Richard I know wouldn't have done this or that," which has a foundation on his emotional reading of the portrait and his own assessment of what good younger brothers and uncles are like. He discounts the idea that most portraits flatter their subject to some extent, and that medieval nobility didn't live the kinds of emotional lives that we do. Josephine Tey is unsurpassed, I think, in anticipating the reader's objections and neutralizing them in advance. Doing so creates a sense of objectivity in the narrative and distracts from the emotional manipulation of her choices. Brilliant.

What I appreciate greatly about this novel is her ingenuity in setting up the frame and approach to this story, as well as the warm, three-dimensional portrait of Richard and his family and his milieu. I think there is more to Richard and his circumstances and it is great to be introduced to him as a complex individual in dangerous times -- rather than the cardboard evil king we know. However, I suspect that, in fact, he was responsible for his nephew's deaths -- bottom line: he was responsible for their welfare, and they probably died while in his care. One does not dispose of two boys who are in the care of the most powerful man in the land without his knowing. But, I suppose we will never know the answer for sure, and it is fun and rewarding to investigate all the intriguing options. Josephine Tey is not alone in advocating for Richard's innocence, but she has done a lot to popularize the conflict.

I would love to use this text in a history course and evaluate with the class this historical argument for innocence, based on this book, and then go back through take another look at argument along with an analysis of the author/proponents's use of propagandistic tools to manipulate the audience to believe in a cause. It would be interesting to take a "guilty/not guilty" vote after each review. The students (readers) could learn a great deal about how to "consider the source" which is a key element of critical thinking. How many people do we all know who believe every story they hear and go gung-ho in pursuit of their biases? I challenge you to read this book and be objective about her arguments. It's as fascinating as the story itself.

Rating:
Summary: A sort of Rear Window for Ricardians
Review: I recently found myself at SMSU's library with a few hours to kill and an overwhelming desire to read some fiction. The SMSU library's collection was not created with fiction readers in mind. So this is what I wound up with.

For the most part, I found Tey's approach to solving the mystery of Richard III intriguing. It could have been much better, however. The "frame" of the recuperating police detective researching, with the aid of his hospital visitors, the documentation of the allegedly murderous king does not have enough character of its own to sustain a few hundred pages of rather dry, repetitious examination of history texts. And it does get repetitious, though I'll allow that the repetition was sometimes necessary to get the confusing assortment of nobility straight. (And this is considering that the book had two genealogy charts in the front, both of which had been annotated in pencil by some kind soul who recognized their vagueness.)

I thought Tey made a number of interesting points, both regarding the reputation of Richard III and the concept of intellectual integrity as it relates to the study of history. But I didn't need to be repeatedly bonked on the head with said points.

I would not recommend this book for anybody seeking a light tale of mystery fiction. I might, however, recommend this to a high school student or undergraduate who is studying Richard III, as it may provide a new point of view on the subject.

Rating:
Summary: To read and reread.
Review: TRUTH is the daughter of time, and Alan Grant of Scotland Yard cannot abandon his relentless pursuit of truth. Even when he is flat on his back, convalescing in a hospital bed, staring at the ceiling and desperate for something to occupy his mind and his time.

To amuse him, a friend brings him prints of portraits from the National Gallery -- men, women and children -- since Grant has a reputation for being able to read a person's character in his face. Grant is successful in distinguishing offenders from victims, until he reaches the last portrait. A judge? A soldier? A prince? he wonders. The name on the back is Richard the Third.

Grant refuses to believe that the man's face can so belie his reputation as a murderer. And so, still on his back in bed, Grant gradually become determined to find out the truth about Richard the Third for himself. With the help of those around him (characters who are also intriguing in their own right), he assembles information from documents of history to help him decide the "case".

It is remarkable enough for Tey to have put together the evidence she assembles for Richard the Third's case. But to present that case in the hospital -- where the quiet, white, solemn setting is in stark contrast to the story of compassion, courage, suffering and betrayal that Grant's investigation reveals -- is inspired. Tey literally resurrects Richard and his story. Admiration, pity, and outrage are aroused in the reader for a man who has been dead for centuries.

And Grant, in his meticulous and painstakingly logical way, arrives at a conclusion that you are sure must close the book on the question of Richard's innocence forever.

All this (not to mention the subtle commentary on what is truth) in just over 200 pages. A book worth reading and re-reading.

Rating:
Summary: Mystery for history buffs (or a history for mystery buffs)
Review: Josephine Tey takes us through a wonderful unraveling of centuries old history. Was Richard III the evil murderer of the princes -- or not?

I think this book one of the most fascinating mixes of history and mystery (two of my favorite areas) and reread it regularly. So when my book club asked me to recommend a mystery, this was an easy choice (backed up by it's ranking as one of Amazon's best mysteries of the Century). Well, they hated it. Why bother solving a centuries old mystery? So I offer this experience to say that this is a terrific book if you like mysteries or English history. Others may not care for it.

Rating:
Summary: More history than mystery - but extremely well done
Review: It's a little deceiving to consider this book a mystery novel in the traditional sense; it's much more of an historical study. The topic itself is fascinating: was Richard III the murdering, amoral monster that Shakespeare made him out to be, or was he merely misunderstood? Tey makes a cogent and compelling argument that Richard did not, in fact, murder his young nephews in the Tower of London, nor possess the negative qualities so often ascribed to him. Her historical analysis is cleverly contained in a contemporary setting; Inspector Alan Grant of Scotland Yard is laid up in hospital and sets his mind to figuring out the conundrum of Richard III while he recuperates. Grant enlists the help of a young American researcher; dialogues between the two and Grant's internal analysis form the "action" or "plot" of the story. If you are in the mood for a classic whodunit, a body in library-type mystery, this is not your cup of tea -- no one in Grant's time is murdered and his "solving" of the crime is only speculation. If you like history and have an open mind about Richard III, this is a well-written, well-researched and well-argued book. One thing I had trouble with was the author's assumption that the reader is familiar with much more of English history than I was, so at times, I was a bit overwhelmed by the names and references I didn't always get. If, after finishing "Daughter of Time," you're interested in learning more about Richard III, try "Royal Blood," by Bertram Fields as a good and thorough overview, with arguments both pro- and anti-Richard set forth.