The Lady of the Rivers

I'll admit that I don't read as much historical fiction as I feel I should. I love history and have always enjoyed fiction based on historical events in the past, so when I recently became interested in the Wars of the Roses, I figured it was a good time to sample a recent contribution to the genre. Unlike many reviewers, I have not read anything by Philippa Gregory before. I saw "The Other Boleyn Girl" in theatres, and thought it was entertaining, though perhaps lacking in accuracy. Additionally, during my brief time as a bookstore employee, it came to my attention that Philippa Gregory seemed to be the "go-to" author for historical fiction, so it seemed that she was the most obvious choice for my adventure into the genre. And, as luck would have it, she has several books out about the Wars of the Roses. Since I like to read chronologically when possible, I selected "The Lady of the Rivers" (the third of the series to be published, but the first chronologically) and began reading, expecting to enjoy a historically based story peppered with fictional elements. Much to my dismay, I was disappointed on both fronts. Spoilers follow. I'm going to start with a brief disclaimer. As mentioned above, I enjoy history and love learning new things; however, I am by no means a historian. Most of my knowledge of history comes from documentaries or what I learn from spending some time clicking around the Internet. Much as I wish I had the time to sit down and really research these time periods, I simply don't. So, with that in mind, I approached this more as a work of fiction with historical elements than a straight factual historical novel. I am not here to nitpick Gregory's research or her historical accuracy. It's historical fiction - I'm willing to overlook some historical accuracy if it keeps the story (the "fiction" side) interesting. Instead, I'm reviewing "The Lady of the Rivers" based on the reading experience it provided."The Lady of the Rivers" doesn't have a strict plot, per se. Instead, it acts as a vehicle to take us through Jacquetta's life. The story starts when she is a teenager living with her great aunt in Luxembourg. She meets Joan of Arc and shares some BFF time with her before Joan meets her unfortunate end. Then she catches the eye of John, the Duke of Bedford and is soon married to him. Her fears of being ravished and used by her husband are unfounded since the Duke of Bedford married her with the intent of keeping her a virgin so she can aid him in his alchemic experiences and attempts to see into the future. He dies not too long after, leaving her free to take control of her own destiny and plan her second marriage...this one a marriage of love to Richard Woodville, the squire of the Duke of Bedford. After this point, the book follows Jacquetta's friendship with Margaret of Anjou, bride of Henry VI, her rise to power as the Queen of England, and her eventual fall from grace when the Yorks overtake the throne.My main issue with the story is simply that it's, well, boring. As the queen's closest friend, Jacquetta would have been witness to many of the key events that marked the start of the Wars of the Roses. Combine that with the mystical elements Gregory added and this should be an intriguing tale full of drama, mystery, and excitement. Instead, the only excitement comes toward the end when Jacquetta finds herself fleeing with Margaret after a few disastrous battles before deciding that she can't continue to follow her queen and friend. The rest is a lot of slow, repetitive filler. A huge part of the problem is the pacing. The beginning is a little slow, but this isn't really an issue because Gregory uses this time to set a lot of things up with the mystical elements and the theme (more on that later). After Jacquetta marries Richard Woodville and Margaret of Anjou marries Henry VI, the pace slows to a painful slog through years of doing more or less the same thing: Richard goes to France to aid in the war effort, Jacquetta goes to court to be with the queen, Jacquetta goes into confinement to have a baby, Richard comes home, they spend time with their children, and repeat. I applaud Gregory for choosing to write about a lesser-known woman of history and I'm assuming that the lack of events taking place in the bloated middle portion come from there being very little information on Jacquetta during that time, but the book would have been better if most of this had been skipped. In the afterword, the author talks about how Jacquetta was later accused of witchcraft, suffered through the murder of her husband and eldest son, fled into sanctuary with her daughter, and became a prominent figure once again after her daughter's marriage to Edward IV. Now that all sounds incredibly interesting from Jacquetta's point of view! So why didn't she cover that period instead of wasting hundreds of pages on the same boring events? My guess would be that she didn't want to overlap "The Lady of the Rivers" too much with the next book, "The White Queen." Whatever her reason, so much of this novel is packed with long, repetitive, mundane events that it's difficult to maintain the interest needed to want to pick the book up and keep reading to get to the interesting bits.I also wasn't particularly wowed by the writing. Since Philippa Gregory pops up often as the "go-to" author for historical fiction from this time period, I had been expecting writing that would pull me in and really put me in Jacquetta's head as events unfolded around her. Instead, much like the plot, I found the prose to be repetitive and underwhelming. Many readers have complained about Gregory's tendency to have Jacquetta refer to characters by their full name and title every time she mentions them. With so many Johns, Richards, Edwards, and Henrys, I can see why she felt the need to distinguish one from the other with their titles. However, it's incredibly unnecessary for Jacquetta to reference her first husband as "my first husband, John, the Duke of Bedford" to Margaret of Anjou, for example. They're friends...Margaret probably hasn't forgotten who Jacquetta's first husband was. The author should have had some faith in her readers - we'll be able to figure out which character is being talked about based on context clues (and the fact that some were present less than 10 pages earlier). Also, while it's clear that Gregory has done a lot of research into life of the time period, aside from the descriptions of clothing, I never felt particularly pulled into the setting. There simply wasn't enough description for me to become engrossed in the setting and story. I wasn't expecting elaborate, complex prose, but the writing presented in "The Lady of the Rivers" felt lazy and phoned-in.Additionally, Gregory seems to have a problem with shoving the feminist angle down the readers' throats. The prevalent theme of the novel is that women who try to achieve power in a man's world will be seen as unnatural and will likely be persecuted for not adhering to the accepted norms. Ok, fair enough. It's well known that there was no gender equality at the time and that the traditional gender roles were followed, so I'll buy that as a theme. The author uses several prominent examples to illustrate this: Joan of Arc being burned at the stake for leading men into battle, the Duchess Eleanor being stripped of power and imprisoned, Margaret of Anjou falling out of favour with the English people and dethroned for trying to rule in Henry VI's stead and then trying to retake London for her son, and even Jacquetta must be mindful of not displaying her gifts or inserting herself too fully in the political scene. Unfortunately, the author feels the need to have Jacquetta lament numerous times throughout the novel about how unfair it is to be a woman in a "man's world." She does this after the events I listed as well as at other various points. Again, the readers should have been given more credit - the theme was more than adequately represented in the examples given. Rather than beat us over the head with blatantly stating it over and over again, Gregory should have trusted us to glean the theme from what she shows us. It's also incredibly distracting to be reading along and then suddenly hit one of Jacquetta's inner dialogues about living in a world ruled by men. It doesn't feel particularly authentic for the time period. While I'm sure the inequalities between the genders would have been noted, I felt that Jacquetta's wording was more that of modern woman than a woman living in the times of the Wars of the Roses. In the afterword, Gregory goes on and on about wanting to tell these women's stories since history often does them a disservice by only remembering powerful men, and I get the impression that she's a little too pleased with herself for this. It's clever when the inequality is demonstrated through period-accurate events, it's annoying when it's awkwardly shoved in our faces every few chapters.I really liked the inclusion of the mystical elements. Jacquetta's family is rumored to have descended from Melusina, a water goddess, which gives some of the women in her family certain gifts: having a limited affinity to see into the future via scrying in a mirror, tarot cards, or through the use of a charm bracelet. There's also an emphasis, especially in the beginning of the novel, on alchemy and the other dark arts. These more fantastical touches added a unique feel to the book and definitely made certain events more interesting. It doesn't feel too out of place in a historical novel because, while Jacquetta's powers are fictional, it isn't unreasonable that people of the time would have believed and, to an extent, feared alchemy and similar controversial areas of study. I very much enjoyed that Jacquetta seemed to look upon her powers as both a blessing and a curse. The mystical elements are unique and intriguing...I only wish we could have seen more of them!Moving on from the story to the characters, I have to say that Jacquetta's character was remarkably disappointing and undeveloped. For a woman who had so much influence with key figures and was present for so many events, she doesn't seem to have much of an opinion on anything. I completely understand why she wouldn't necessary speak her mind, but "The Lady of the Rivers" is a first person point of view novel, so we should know what's going on in Jacquetta's mind. Sadly, even in her head, she's a weak character. Going back to Gregory's mission to tell the stories of the underappreciated women of history, how does making Jacquetta such a bland protagonist accomplish that? Why not give her opinions and thoughts beyond how much she misses Richard and her children? Surely she must have felt strongly about some of the issues of the time. Her character also doesn't grow at all. She spends most of the book as a dutiful wife, loving mother, and caring friend and ends it in the same place. Her thoughts don't evolve, her ideas don't change, and she never moves forward as a character. Not only is she a poor protagonist, she's even worse as a narrator. We don't really get her bias or unique point of view; she just describes everything as it happens with little to no inner commentary. Gregory also has the tendency to make Jacquetta think something and then say exactly what she was thinking, which only makes the story feel longer than it is and doesn't add anything in the way of content. It's a shame, Jacquetta seems like an interesting, largely forgotten woman of history, but the author does her no favours by presenting her as such an uninteresting, passive character.The other characters are equally uninteresting. I was kind of astonished by the lack of characterization that was present throughout a book written by such a popular author. Many of the figures can be summed up in a couple of words and don't develop beyond their basic descriptions. Richard is loyal to the king and loving and supportive of Jacquetta and their children. Henry VI is childish, pious, and weak. The Yorks are stuck-up and aggressive. Most of the men Jacquetta encounters are self-important and arrogant. The Duke of Somerset dotes on Margaret nonstop. And speaking of Margaret, I wasn't sure how we were supposed to feel about her. Historically, she was incredibly ambitious, often thought of as a she-wolf who would stop at nothing to put her son on the throne. Gregory's portrayal of her is that of an annoying, spoiled child that stamps her feet and throws a tantrum when she doesn't get her way. I don't necessarily have a problem with that in and of itself, but I got the impression that we were supposed to admire Margaret for her tenacity and gumption to stand up for her interests in a "world ruled by men." Instead, I was constantly frustrated by her lack of maturity and found myself cheering when London shut its gates to her because, honestly, I wouldn't want her in my town, either. The only side character I even remotely liked was Jacquetta's first husband, John, the Duke of Bedford (look, I can use full titles, too!) because of his competence, confidence, and interest in alchemy. However, I don't think we're supposed to like him because he never desires Jacquetta as a woman and only sees her as a pretty object...or something like that. Either way, most of the characters are very one-note, more like cardboard cutouts than truly realized characters, and it makes the reading experience quite disappointing when none of the book's figures show any depth.This brings me to perhaps the novel's biggest failing. As mentioned earlier, after the death of her first husband, Jacquetta chooses to marry Richard Woodville, a man whose status is significantly below hers. It was quite a scandal that damaged Jacquetta's standing and reputation. I'm normally not fond of romance, but I wanted to see what led her to do this. What made her love this man so much that she was willing to risk everything to marry him? Unfortunately, the characterization is so shallow that we never really get a feel for why they love each other so much...they just sort of do. It's as bad as the "insta-love" that's present in a lot of Young Adult novels. As the Duke of Bedford's squire, Richard didn't go particularly above and beyond for Jacquetta: he taught her how to ride a horse and searched for her when she got lost. That's very dutiful of him, but it doesn't warrant intense feelings she claims to have for him. Sure, Jacquetta says she loves him and they get busy a lot (enough to produce 16 kids!), but there's no real chemistry between them, nothing that makes you feel like they have to be together no matter the cost. Show us why their love is so strong, don't just tell us! There's a similar problem with Jacquetta's relationship with Margaret. We're told that they're close, but it always seemed like Jacquetta found Margaret to be more of an annoyance than a friend. The characters are so bland that none of the significant relationships feel genuine. Gregory tells us everything, but she never shows us enough to understand why Jacquetta feels the way she does toward her husband and the queen, two people she risked a lot for, and that should be one of, if not the biggest draw of the novel.On a random, relationship-related note, I cringed when Jacquetta's idea of taking control of her own destiny turned out to be having Richard get her pregnant without him knowing (after she assured him that she was taking herbs to prevent such an event). She's pretty lucky that Richard was concerned enough about her honor that he wanted to marry her. I couldn't be happy that Jacquetta made her own plans to beat the system because the whole thing was too sneaky for my liking. Instead, I just felt bad for Richard for being so badly tricked.I wanted to like this book, I really did. The Wars of the Roses is a very interesting time period, and I had hoped that this book would kick off my interest in Philippa Gregory's "The Cousins War" series and keep me engrossed in this time of intrigue a little longer. Some reviewers have claimed that this is sort of a miss for Gregory. I hope that's the case since she's such a prominent writer in the genre. As it stands, the only things I liked at all about "The Lady of the Rivers" were the alchemy and mystical elements and the author's choice of a lesser-known heroine. Otherwise, this was simply a chore to get through, so I can only give it one star. Gregory's other books may be better, but I think I'll try a different author next time I'm in the mood to read some historical fiction.

The Lady of the Rivers got off to a slow start but very soon I was hooked and couldn’t put it down. Who knew history could be so interesting? Can’t wait to see what happens in the next novel!

This is a wonderful and robust read! It was difficult to have to put the book away and stop reading. Jacquetta's story is riveting and full bodied - enjoy!!

As a huge fan of The White Queen series on Starz, I loved being able to read Jacquetta’s story to understand what happened previously. This is one of my favorite books by the author, it kept me turning the pages well past my bedtime.

Beautifully written , lovingly told. Everything a mother should be. Brave and loyal to the true love of the man God has given her. For true love lives on through all circumstances.

First, I think I should be clear that the only reason I went looking for anything on the War of the Roses was because of the Song of Fire and Ice (aka Game of Thrones) series by George RR Martin. In an interview he said that a lot of his inspiration for the series came from the War of the Roses.If you like courtly intrigue and medieval power struggles, then this is a novel for you. The whole story will make you very grateful that you did not have to live during the age of feudalism, especially as a woman. Even the author says that she would never ever want to live in any of the courts that she writes about.I think this book could be retitled, "Margaret of Anjou: Hell hath no Fury like a Woman Scorned." This is mostly a book about Margaret of Anjou and her quest for revenge against everyone affiliated with the house of York, with Jacquetta acting largely as a narrator. Part of the book is devoted solely to Jacquetta, her husband(s) and her 14 children but I would estimate that at least 70% of the book is about interaction with Margaret.There is a lot of witchcraft in this book, which is mostly used as a plot device for foreshadowing. Some reviews have complained about the abundance of witchcraft references in the book, but I think they serve two purposes: (1) the foreshadowing of events and (2) to demonstrate how dangerous it was to be a woman who also attempted to have any social power/influence outside of sewing with her ladies. In modern times most people will say that the idea of blaming everything on witchcraft is ridiculous, but in the middle ages there were legitimately a lot of people who believed in witchcraft/magic/witch related superstitions. It's not any more ridiculous to believe in witchcraft than it is for people to believe that they can turn iron into gold and use it to fund their massive armies. However, I do agree there is a lot of overly witchy references, to the point that I half expected the Monty Python witch/floating/ducks float scene to take place in one of the villages.This is a prequel to The White Queen of the same series, and a lot of the witchy foreshadowing references events in The White Queen (about Jacquetta's daughter Elizabeth), so you could read this before The White Queen and catch all the reference later or read it after The White Queen and consider it backstory

Excellent!The second book I am reading in the series of THE COUSINS WAR.very well researched and written, like all books by Phillipa Gregory.

Love this author. Have read most of her books.

Entgegen den Erwartungen der Leser hält sich Frau Gregory noch damit zurück, einen Roman über Elizabeth von York zu schreiben und geht stattdessen weiter in die Vergangenheit, zu deren Großmutter. So weit so gut, da sind die Erwartungen erstmal etwas heruntergesetzt, da Jacquetta von Luxemburg bereits sehr ausführlich im Roman über ihre Tochter, "Die Königin der Weißen Rose", vorgekommen ist.In diesem Werk geht es somit sogar in eine andere Geschichtsperiode, nämlich den Hundertjährigen Krieg zwischen Frankreich und England. Wie bei Frau Gregory gewohnt sorgt die weibliche Sichtweise dafür, dass Kriegsgeschenisse zurückstehen, aber das ist nicht weiter schlimm (in diesem Fall kann ich Rebecca Gablé "Die Hüter der Rose" empfehlen). Denn zu Anfang des Buches tritt Jeanne d'Arc als Gefangene auf, die in Jacquettas Haushalt lebt. Zwischen der stolzen Hochadligen und dem rebellischen Bauernmädchen entwickelt sich eine seltsame Freundschaft, die aber wegen Jeannes tragischem Schicksal auf dem Scheiterhaufen zum Scheitern verurteilt ist, Jacquetta aber dennoch für immer prägt. Allerdings zieht Jacquetta durch einen dahingesagten Satz die Aufmerksamkeit des Herzogs von Bedford auf sich, der sie nach dem Tod seiner Frau heiratet. Doch in Wahrheit ist er nur an ihren angeblichen spirituellen Fähigkeiten interessiert, während Jacquetta sich in den Knappen ihres Mannes verliebt. Das Rad des Schicksals dreht sich weiter und die Herzogin wird die Hofdamme der der neuen englischen Königin, der hitzköpfigen Marguerite d'Anjou, die das Gegenteil ihres frommen Gemahls, Henrys VI., zu sein scheint. Jacquetta wird diese Frau begleiten, bis sich eine Katastrophe anbahnt...Ähnlich wie bei den Weißen Königin wird sehr viel über Magie gesprochen, wobei Jacquetta hier noch deutlich zurückhaltender ist als in dem früheren Buch. Vielmehr wird hier glaubhaft eine Zeit vorgestellt, in dem Aberglauben und Alchemie zum Alltag gehören, ob historisch verbürgt oder nicht. Durch die feinere Vorgehensweise ist es wie gesagt bis auf wenige Ausnahmen glaubwürdiger, aber dennoch muss der Leser eine gewisse Akzeptanz für Magieglauben aufbringen können. Allerdings wird der Aberglaube geschickt mit feministischen Gedanken vermischt, die aber der Zeit entsprechen und somit Mitgefühl und Tiefe für die Figuren erzeugen.Außerdem ist die Darstellung von Königin Margaret sehr gut gelungen. Es handelt gewiss um keine komplexe und wohl eher oberflächliche Analyse, aber trotzdem versteht man, wie es nach dem ewigen Krieg gegen Frankreich zu dem Rosenkriegen, der Katastrophe im eigenen Land, kommen konnte. Margaret wird wie die Hauptfigur lebendig und zwiespältig beschrieben, auch wenn eine Szene sehr stark an "Die Schwester der Königin" erinnert. Trotzdem beschleicht sich bei einer Figur wie Jacquetta immer der Verdacht, ob sie und ihre Familie tatsächlich so einflussreich waren, wie sie geschildert werden, da bei Frau Gregory die Hauptfigur häufig sehr positiv und bedeutend erscheint, was wohl auch an der Ich-Perspektive liegt.Insgesamt habe ich den Eindruck, dass sich die Autorin erst in das Thema Rosenkriege hereinfinden musste, wodurch sich die Bücher im Verlauf verbessern, denn ich halte dieses Buch für ihr bestes der Reihe bisher. Übrigens handelt der vierte Band auch nicht von Elizabeth von York, sondern von den Neville-Schwestern, die die Brüder Edwards IV. heiraten.

The story is beautifully told and truly gripping. It's great to read about the lives of women which were so important but often overlooked by both fiction and nonfiction.I will definitely be reading all the other books by Philippa Gregory.

Having overcome my initial snootiness about "historical novels" and my misgivings about "The White Queen", I surprised myself by thoroughly enjoying "The Red Queen". The character of Jacquetta of Luxembourg (mother of Elizabeth Woodville, the White Queen) looms large in both the previous books and I sense that Philippa Gregory was especially intrigued by her. She appeared in many contemporary references, and appeared, despite the antipathy later felt towards the Rivers family, to be adjudged a beautiful, charming and clever woman. Too much so; so of course, that meant she must be guilty of witchcraft. The whole supernatural thing in this series initially caused me problems, but I have settled into the series and gone with the author's assertion that a belief in the supernatural and witchcraft was almost universal in the late middle ages, even amongst the well-educated. The protagonist was extremely well-born and connected (didn't like the Joan of Arc connection bits, though - felt they were a bit laboured) and was married off at 17 to the much older Duke of Bedford, brother of the by now late Henry V, and at the time of the marriage, the Regent of France. This section was a bit novelettish, but the horror felt by society towards her love match to her late husband's squire, Richard Woodville, came across as genuine. The fact that despite this, and the subsequent fine (as the King's Aunt she was required to seek Royal permission for subsequent marriage), that she retained her position of second lady in the land after Henry VI's Queen, Margaret of Anjou, was in itself a testament to her charm and force of character. She was principal lady in waiting to the Queen, and her husband Sir Richard (later Baron Rivers) was an extremely loyal supporter of the Lancastrian ruling house. It was only after the defeat of Lancaster, and the ascendancy of York, and most especially her daughter Elizabeth's marriage to the Yorkist King Edward IV, that the jealousy and fury of the old aristocracy at the ascendancy of the Rivers (Woodville) family gave rise to the accusations of witchcraft which dogged her and later her daughter. Melusina was not too prevalent, and I really wanted to know about this fascinating and important woman, who has now been relegated to the margins of history. She gave birth to a very large family, all of whom were adjudged (through gritted teeth) to be charming, good looking and intelligent. Several met the bloody end visited upon leading families during the wars of the roses, but both her daughter and granddaughter became Queens Consort of England. Quite a legacy.