Of Swords and Parasols

This is Alexander’s third Victorian-set book about Emily Ashton, who drinks port, reads Mary Elizabeth Braddon, and is in love with anything related to ancient Greece. While the first book was historical fiction and self-exploration and development with a mystery subplot and a romantic subplot, the second leaned closer to being historical mystery, and this one is closer still.

While at a house party, Richard Brandon, the husband of Emily’s best friend, Ivy, is “dismissed” by his unpleasant political patron. When the man is later found dead, Richard is arrested for the murder, and asks Emily to help clear his name. They pretty much can’t stand each other at all, but they both love Ivy, so she agrees and travels to Vienna, where he believes the real murderer is. There, she learns that her fiancé, Colin, is also involved in an investigation, and has been reunited (not in that way) with his former lover, who is also a spy.

This was a bit of an odd book for me. I liked that Emily got a female rival, was annoyed that it was over a guy (can’t women in fiction have rivalries over something else?) was happy when they worked together (to protect the guy) and then annoyed with how it turned out. And yet, I liked the impact it had on Emily and Colin’s relationship, and how she didn’t ever believe that he was cheating on her. Yet, I still would have rathered the book been about Emily and Ivy (and Emily’s other friends, Cecile and Margaret) running around and solving the mystery while Emily’s mother lectured in the background. Colin can come too, of course. Uhm…there’s also anarchists and murdered princes and more secret plots, which are always fun. Then there’s the villain who, for some reason I never quite understood, gave Emily a bullet at several of their meetings. I’m fairly certain this was meant to be threatening, but it was mostly baffling.

Though not as good as And Only To Deceive, like A Poisoned Season, A Fatal Waltz is still pretty enjoyable, particularly considering that it’s a sequel to a book that didn’t need a sequel.

May I first take a moment to address a point of irritation? The book is set in 1887, and the lead recommendation quotation (whatever they’re called…long day…when authors rec other authors) is from Martha O’Connor, and reads “Had Jane Austen written The Da Vinci Code, she may well have come up with this elegant novel.” Now, I haven’t read The Da Vinci Code. Too many people I trust have told me I wouldn’t care for it, and it doesn’t sounds incredibly interesting to me anyway. (Movie trailers bored me, but that’s nothing to judge the book by.) That said, Jane Austen? Martha O’Connor, I’m sure you are a lovely person and a good writer but go back to your history class. Seriously. When will the world stop comparing every book set in or around England between 1750-1900 to Jane Austen? *tears out hair*

But back to the point.

When Emily agreed to the marriage proposal of Philip, Viscount Ashton, she didn’t do it for love, money, or his title. She did it to escape her overbearing mother. Inoffensive and an avid hunter, Emily thought Philip would be a decent but dull husband who would be too busy hunting in the country and in Africa to trouble her. But Philip died on a Safari soon after their wedding, leaving Emily a widow. For the first year and a half of her widowhood, Emily’s chief concern was the uncomfortableness she felt around Philip’s friends and family, who truly grieved him, making her feel like an intruder. Later, however, she learns through Philip’s friend, Colin Hargreaves that Philip, in addition to being a great lover of Homer and Greek antiquities, Philip was madly in love with her, calling her the Helen to his Paris, and giving her the private nickname of Kallista.

Reading the papers given to her by Hargreaves, Emily comes to know and love her husband through his writings, which recount his version of their courtship, and through him, to develop her own love for the Greeks, both the writings and the antiquities. Eventually, however, she begins to uncover information indicating that Philip may have been involved in forging antiquities, and may have left a number of illegal artifacts to her. There are all sorts of interesting things here. There is, obviously, the aspect of The Iliad, of all things, making Emily fall for Philip, as well as Emily befriending Parisian artists and, through them, developing very liberal ideas and starting to develop suffragette sensibilities. There’s also a look into England’s interest in Greece and antiquities, as well as an exploration into forgeries.

Technically, the book is extremely good and well told, but there was something bugging me and holding me back from getting involved, and it took me a while (almost half the book) to realize what it was. Once I realized it, I started reading the book a bit differently.

( cut for vague spoilers and length )