An Instance of the Fingerpost

Compré esto porque recibí otra de las palabras del autor, Arcadia, como regalo y había sido el primer volteador de páginas adictivo y completamente absorbente que había leído en un tiempo, pero esa es una reseña diferente. Como Arcadia fue uno de esos libros que te dejan desprovisto cuando terminan, busqué más del mismo autor y ordené An Instance of the Fingerpost. Mientras que la novela anterior me tenía adicto y buscaba excusas para salir del trabajo, la crianza de los hijos, etc. para escabullirme y obtener una solución rápida de la página 1, este me atrapó más lentamente al principio, pero la vertiginosa historia de varias capas creció a niveles de obsesión nuevamente. El lector se dedica a tratar de precisar la verdad, o lo más cercano a la verdad, a través de cuatro narraciones diferentes de los mismos eventos por parte de los cuatro narradores diferentes, y la claridad total siempre parece estar un paso por delante de usted. Al principio parece que estás leyendo una novela, luego otra hasta que poco a poco la comprensión se da cuenta en todo su esplendor. En las dos novelas que he leído, el autor abarca conceptos enormes y corre con ellos haciendo buenas lecturas intelectualmente estimulantes y juguetones.

For all that I agree with the other reviewers--this book is one of the best written, most intricately plotted I've ever read--I have to confess--I skipped through the third section (character). He was so disagreeable, following an equally disagreeable second narrator (that's half of this 725 page book), and I was so exhausted with surely the most densely historically detailed book I've ever picked up, with the equally difficult task of keeping all the characters straight. (I do wish I'd known of the character index at the end of the text.) I'm sure I missed important details, but I simply couldn't sustain attention. Since I liked the fourth narrator, I engaged again at that point and am grateful I did as here was the, new word, "fingerpost", and I wouldn't have missed it for the world. It is here that the true mystery is revealed, and I'm left with amazement and wonder. Has Pears simply invented this story or is there truth to it? (I mustn't reveal what "it" is.) I'm fascinated and must do further research (!) on my own to discover the answer.But this points to the second of the two flaws in this book the first being simply, as I said, that it is TOO LONG!! (Surely we could have been spared SOME of the details of the 17th century.)The second is that the actual kernel of intrigue is hidden so cleverly that one is not illumined ENOUGH regarding it. Surely it's of more importance than all the political intrigues, yet is given relatively little exploration. He's buried the lead, I think, which deflates it.I will admit this lack is what leaves the book lingering and teasing at my imagination.Surely many kudos to the interwoven intrigues and tidiness of plotting accomplished by Mr. Pears, not to mention the research. I've read many of his books, and I admire him greatly. Just....you know....edit a LITTLE bit out of the 17th century, please.

La compré porque lei buenas críticas. Sin embargo, aunque la novela está bien y explota con inteligencia recursos que ya usaron Faulkner y Eco, me desilusionó.

This was my first book by Iain Pears and by no means the last one.Written as a story told by different people, and hence different views. You start with the journal like recollections of Marco da Cola a gentleman from Italy and a student of medicin who was called in to London to check up on family business that has suffered a loss due to the untimely death of a trusted partner. You are here seing the story from the center of the storm, though you do not yet know it. Marco da Cola seems like he is very much out of place in post Cromwellian England and seeks the patronage of Mr Boyle, and bumps into dr Lower who then becomes his confidant and friend, however hot headed and fickle in his ways. He also gains a patient of the less prominent kind and embarks on a teatment involving the transfusion of blood, which he states is the reason behind telling his story as he feels dr Lower steals his discovery.In this first part of the story all of the major caracters in this plot is intorduced but you cannot really see the plot yet...You are left with a picture of a continental gentleman that is not exepted by the fickle society of the Englishman and that he left the country with a wish of never returning, and many unanswered questions that needs answering...The story is then told through the "ramblings of a madman" which might not be as mad as one thinks, and puts another conspiracy into the equation that darkens the plot. He is haunted by the ghost of his dads action during the Cromwell rule as he was at the forefront of the quest for a royal England. Jack Prescott becomes obsessed with vindicating his family name and in obtaining the thruth he goes mad.You are then seeing the same events seen through the now half blind Dr Wallis, the doctor, priest and head crypographer for Cromwell as well as for the new King of England. Dr Wallis thinks of himself as a man who is smarter than everyone, even Jhon Thurlow (Cromwells confidant and chief spy). But as he tells his story you learn that he sees conspiracy everywhere and often misunderstand the situation at hand as he is to much of a narcisist to see his own mistakes.The last one to tell the story of events is Anthony Wood, a antiquarian and avid hstory fan who sits on the outskirts of events, but yet sees more than most.In my opinion this book is brilliant, and I am sure that the fourth version of the story lies between the three versions, and as you read it a second or third, even fourth time you will notice something you didn't at first.Iain Pears has chosen to write in the style of writing as done in the times this story is set, which might be a challenge at first, but when you get used to it this really hightens the experience. When he writes about the experiments with blood and transfusion and other experiments you are taken back and can imagine the wonders of the discovery of something as common as transfusion of boold or the properties of arcenic. When he writes about how they practiced medicine with the aid of Galen, astronomy and astrology as well as the fact that they tasted the urine of the patient you get that feeling of past glory. Even the way they discuss any matter of business by aplying philosophy and logic puts you thouroughly in that time and as mentioned before hightens your experience even more.A tour de Force and my favourite book, and for anyone wanting an exiting read full of twists and turns, conspiracy, murder and exitment this is definatley the book for you!hoe to have been of assistance and please enjoy!

The time was 1663. The place, England. The monarchy had been restored only three years before, and Charles II's crown rested uneasy on his head, in a country still divided by the effects of the civil war of Cromwell's time, and the bitter division between Protestant and Catholic.And in Oxford, at the time the home of the likes of John Locke, Richard Lower, and Robert Boyle (all of whom play a part in the story), a gentle Oxford Don was murdered, and his sometime servant was accused of the crime, confessed to it, and was hanged.Now, at some unspecified time in the future, four people who were involved in the affair have set down their versions of the story. This multiple-narrator mystery has (not unjustifiably) been compared with Umberto Eco's novel _In The Name of the Rose_, and it has elements in common with the film _Roshomon_ as well. But you may well see it as more like the Dickens novel Dickens never got around to. Those familiar with the works of the contemporary novelist Peter Ackroyd may also discern some parallels.Most of the characters, down to the apothocary who makes an appearance in the first segement, actually existed (there's a list of them in the back). But the story is Pears's own, and it gets increasingly complicated as each chronicler, the fictional da Cola and Prestcott, followed by the real John Wallis and Anthony Wood, supply their own take on the sad events of the hanging of Sarah Blundy (fictional) and offer their opinions on why she did confess to the crime she clearly did not commit. Each of the narrators is not quite what he seems to be, and each one adds more facts to the tale until at the end, the entire events are apparently revealed.While a knowledge of English history is helpful, it isn't necessary for the enjoyment of the tale. More important is to read carefully. The novel may be long, but nothing is wasted.