Status
Available
Call number
Collections
Publication
William Morrow (2004), Edition: First U.S. Edition, Hardcover, 304 pages
Description
A tremendously vivid, page-turning and plausible novel that depicts the rise and fall of Anne Boleyn, the most spirited, independent and courageous of Henry's queens, as viewed from both the bedrooms and the kitchens of the Tudor court. Everyone knows the story of Anne Boleyn. Henry VIII divorced his longstanding, long-suffering, older, Spanish wife for a young, black-eyed English beauty, and, in doing so, severed England from Rome and indeed from the rest of the western world. Then, when Henry had what he wanted, he managed a mere three years of marriage before beheading his wife for alleged adultery with several men, among them his own best friend and her own brother. This is the context for Suzannah Dunn's wonderful new novel, which is about -- and told by -- two women: Anne Boleyn, king's mistress and fated queen; and Lucy Cornwallis, the king's confectioner, an employee of the very highest status, who made the centrepiece of each of the feasts to mark the important occasions in Anne's ascent. wunderkind musician, the innocent on whom, ultimately, Anne's downfall hinged... Suzannah Dunn has all the equipment needed for literary-commercial success: wit, a mastery of dialogue, brilliant characterization, lack of pretence, and good humour. The Queen of Subtleties adds to that mix a wonderfully balanced, strong story; Dunn has plumped for a fascinating retelling of one of the most often-told, most compelling stories of our islands' history. In doing so, she's turning from contemporary stories to historical fiction. The result is sensational.… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member PuddinTame
I had supposed when I opened this book that the title "Queen of Subtleties" would be applied to the two narrators in different senses: to Lucy Cornwallis as the pastry chef and Anne Boleyn as a plotter. There is no subtlety whatsoever to the portrayal of Anne. There is none in the interweaving of
The Lucy Cornwallis sections could have been completed into a very interesting historical novel. Since Lucy, like most of the common people of the time, sided with Catherine of Aragon, this could have made a very interesting counterpoint to Anne Boleyn's tale. One of the things that is most fascinating about it is the look at behind-the-scenes at the palace, not the world of the courtiers, but of the common people who did the real work of running the place. Particularly interesting is the informal look at the relationship between them and Henry. I feel somewhat cheated to after all I have read about the Tudors, I didn't know that Henry played cards with his cellerer (and lost!) until I read this. Readers with an interest might want to read Joan Glasheen's The Secret People of the Palaces: The Royal Household from the Plantagenets to Queen Victoria, which is rather dry (a lot of it is simply lists of offices) but contains a number of interesting anecdotes as well. All the King's Cooks: The Tudor Kitchens of King Henry VIII at Hampton Court Palace by Peter Brears should obviously be right on point.
Unfortunately, this promising piece is never completely developed and is paired with a flat, simplistic account of Anne Boleyn. This is supposed to be written on the eve of her death, intended for her daughter Elizabeth, but I regard it as a complete failure. It simply doesn't ring true as an account of someone looking backwards, worrying about how their child will think of them, knowing that they are to die the next day. Only at some of the points when Anne is actually thinking about her daughter is there any nuance to her character, reflection, or any sense of leave-taking. Otherwise, she is always shrill, literally and figuratively, crude in all senses of the word and utterly without character development. Anne, as seen by Dunn, apparently had no inner life and insight into herself and other people, which I think is the point of a novel. Otherwise, one can simply read an encyclopedia article. There is no point recounting this oft-told tale unless the author has something more to offer than this flat, simplistic account. Or if this is how she wants to present Anne Boleyn, maybe she should have told the story from the point of view of Mary Tudor, Henry and Catharine's daughter. For better Anne Boleyn novels, I'd read The Concubine by Norah Lofts or Brief gaudy hour,: A novel of Anne Boleyn by Margaret Campbell Barnes. At this point, I believe Eric Ives' The Life and Death of Anne Boleyn is considered the best biography; I also like Marie Lousie Bruce's Anne Boleyn..
The language of this section is deliberately (according to the notes) modern and jarring. apparently in intentional contrast to the Lucy Cornwallis section. I am not normally a stickler for historic accuracy in language, absolutely accurate language would difficult to read, but this is painful. I can only suppose that Dunn means the contrast to signify that England would have been a better, gentler place without Anne Boleyn. I can't imagine what else she thinks it accomplishes.
Only for the VERY dedicated historical novel reader.
Show More
the two narrations, either. They don't necessarily match in time or theme, so I suppose that Dunn simply chopped up the two stories based on page numbers or to avoid writing seques. The Lucy Cornwallis sections could have been completed into a very interesting historical novel. Since Lucy, like most of the common people of the time, sided with Catherine of Aragon, this could have made a very interesting counterpoint to Anne Boleyn's tale. One of the things that is most fascinating about it is the look at behind-the-scenes at the palace, not the world of the courtiers, but of the common people who did the real work of running the place. Particularly interesting is the informal look at the relationship between them and Henry. I feel somewhat cheated to after all I have read about the Tudors, I didn't know that Henry played cards with his cellerer (and lost!) until I read this. Readers with an interest might want to read Joan Glasheen's The Secret People of the Palaces: The Royal Household from the Plantagenets to Queen Victoria, which is rather dry (a lot of it is simply lists of offices) but contains a number of interesting anecdotes as well. All the King's Cooks: The Tudor Kitchens of King Henry VIII at Hampton Court Palace by Peter Brears should obviously be right on point.
Unfortunately, this promising piece is never completely developed and is paired with a flat, simplistic account of Anne Boleyn. This is supposed to be written on the eve of her death, intended for her daughter Elizabeth, but I regard it as a complete failure. It simply doesn't ring true as an account of someone looking backwards, worrying about how their child will think of them, knowing that they are to die the next day. Only at some of the points when Anne is actually thinking about her daughter is there any nuance to her character, reflection, or any sense of leave-taking. Otherwise, she is always shrill, literally and figuratively, crude in all senses of the word and utterly without character development. Anne, as seen by Dunn, apparently had no inner life and insight into herself and other people, which I think is the point of a novel. Otherwise, one can simply read an encyclopedia article. There is no point recounting this oft-told tale unless the author has something more to offer than this flat, simplistic account. Or if this is how she wants to present Anne Boleyn, maybe she should have told the story from the point of view of Mary Tudor, Henry and Catharine's daughter. For better Anne Boleyn novels, I'd read The Concubine by Norah Lofts or Brief gaudy hour,: A novel of Anne Boleyn by Margaret Campbell Barnes. At this point, I believe Eric Ives' The Life and Death of Anne Boleyn is considered the best biography; I also like Marie Lousie Bruce's Anne Boleyn..
The language of this section is deliberately (according to the notes) modern and jarring. apparently in intentional contrast to the Lucy Cornwallis section. I am not normally a stickler for historic accuracy in language, absolutely accurate language would difficult to read, but this is painful. I can only suppose that Dunn means the contrast to signify that England would have been a better, gentler place without Anne Boleyn. I can't imagine what else she thinks it accomplishes.
Only for the VERY dedicated historical novel reader.
Show Less
LibraryThing member LadyN
A disappointing read, the ultimate flaw of which is the juxtaposition of the point of view of a character about whom we know a great deal (Anne Boleyn), with that of a character who's life needs to be entirely fictionalised as history records nothing of her but her name (King's confectioner, Lucy
I found the Anne Boleyn chapters - supposedly an account written from Boleyn to the infant Princess Elizabeth - to be monotonous and unfulfilling.
The Lucy Cornwallis chapters did nothing to add to the plot, which of course centres around Boleyn's fall from grace. I'm not sure what the author was trying to achieve.
The attempted inclusion of a romantic storyline lacked direction or compulsion - a problem which applied to much of the "below stairs" thread.
I have no problem with the "fiction" aspect of Historical Fiction, but Philippa Gregory does it much better.
This book earns its two stars for being ok enough to finish, and that it's set in a favourite historical period of mine. I won't be reading any sequels though.
Show More
Cornwallis). I found the Anne Boleyn chapters - supposedly an account written from Boleyn to the infant Princess Elizabeth - to be monotonous and unfulfilling.
The Lucy Cornwallis chapters did nothing to add to the plot, which of course centres around Boleyn's fall from grace. I'm not sure what the author was trying to achieve.
The attempted inclusion of a romantic storyline lacked direction or compulsion - a problem which applied to much of the "below stairs" thread.
I have no problem with the "fiction" aspect of Historical Fiction, but Philippa Gregory does it much better.
This book earns its two stars for being ok enough to finish, and that it's set in a favourite historical period of mine. I won't be reading any sequels though.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Cariola
Oh, dear, another dud by Suzannah Dunn. I have to say that this one suffers more from dullness than, like The Confession of Katherine Howard, absudity. But apparently anachronisms, particularly in terms of language, are her forté, as she uses them irritatingly in all of her novels. I'm not exactly
There are so many much better novels about Anne out there; don't waste your time on this one. I have one more of Dunn's books on the shelf, The Queen of Sorrows, but I think three strikes and she's out for me. I'll probably give that one away unread.
Show More
sure why she interspersed Anne Boleyn's story with that of Lucy the confectioner. I guess we were supposed to draw some kind of feminist analogy from the fact that both were 36, liked sweets (which included "subtleties"), and had the hots for the much younger Mark Smeaton. Blech.There are so many much better novels about Anne out there; don't waste your time on this one. I have one more of Dunn's books on the shelf, The Queen of Sorrows, but I think three strikes and she's out for me. I'll probably give that one away unread.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tekajust
It was too confusing. I didn't relate the confectionary to Anne other than she liked sweets!
Perhaps the authors thoughts were too sublte for me to understand or she just felt it was a twist for the tale to be more interesting to read. Anyways, I was glad to put it down and only would recommend for
Perhaps the authors thoughts were too sublte for me to understand or she just felt it was a twist for the tale to be more interesting to read. Anyways, I was glad to put it down and only would recommend for
Show More
reading if someone was trying all of Dunn's works. Show Less
LibraryThing member lecari
I suppose I expected another ‘The Other Boleyn Girl’, which was unfair. I did enjoy parts of this book. It follows two points of view (first person), one is Anne Boleyn writing to Elizabeth the day before she is to be beheaded, while the other is the confectioner in the kitchens. Both are
I just wasn’t very sure why the author decided to focus on both. I know she says at the start that she was interested that Lucy was the only woman on the kitchen payroll, but there doesn’t seem to be any other reason. Or is it just as a contrast, or to show the impact Henry’s decision had? I just wasn’t really sure what the purpose of it was, especially as each one tells a slightly different period of time. For example, in Anne’s account, she is beheaded way before Lucy’s has even got to that point – I think if she had kept them more in sync, I would have found the differences in points of view much more interesting.
Show More
‘Queens of Subtleties,’ whether it be in social situations or in the delicacies they make. Lucy, the confectioner, becomes friends with Mark the musician, who is eventually accused of having slept with the Queen and is held in the Tower and beheaded.I just wasn’t very sure why the author decided to focus on both. I know she says at the start that she was interested that Lucy was the only woman on the kitchen payroll, but there doesn’t seem to be any other reason. Or is it just as a contrast, or to show the impact Henry’s decision had? I just wasn’t really sure what the purpose of it was, especially as each one tells a slightly different period of time. For example, in Anne’s account, she is beheaded way before Lucy’s has even got to that point – I think if she had kept them more in sync, I would have found the differences in points of view much more interesting.
Show Less
LibraryThing member nevusmom
Another story of Anne Boleyn. The chapters alternate between Anne's letter to her daughter, written the day before she is to be beheaded, and the memoir of Mrs. Cornwallis, the palace confectioner. Honestly, this wasn't that interesting.
LibraryThing member mazda502001
I like historical fiction and was looking forward to reading this book but after a couple of chapters my interest just waned and I couldn't go on with it.
Back Cover Blurb:
Lucy Cornwallis is confectioner to King Henry VIII. The only woman in a kitchen of two hundred men, she sculpts sugar into
Anne Boleyn - stunning, ambitious, headstrong - has changed the history of England. By taking Henry from his wife the new Queen has now made enemies of all but a favoured few. Powerful forces are gathering to make her pay dearly for her prize. And now the innocent Lucy and her musician confidante Mark Smeaton are caught in the maelstrom that will claim her life - and could destroy their dreams.....
Back Cover Blurb:
Lucy Cornwallis is confectioner to King Henry VIII. The only woman in a kitchen of two hundred men, she sculpts sugar into
Show More
fantastic 'subtleties', for royal celebrations - and tries to avoid the twisted complexities of court life.Anne Boleyn - stunning, ambitious, headstrong - has changed the history of England. By taking Henry from his wife the new Queen has now made enemies of all but a favoured few. Powerful forces are gathering to make her pay dearly for her prize. And now the innocent Lucy and her musician confidante Mark Smeaton are caught in the maelstrom that will claim her life - and could destroy their dreams.....
Show Less
LibraryThing member nellista
Story of the downfall of Anne Boleyn told in alternating chapters by Anne Boleyn leaving her story to her daughter, and Lucy Cornwallis the royal confectioner relating the story in normal time sequence. The Anne Boleyn sections are written in quite a personal manner, referring to people by
Show More
diminutive names, but I didn't really like her referring to her father as "DAD"! I liked some of the details of the confectioners work (food history interests me), and Lucy's background is a bit mysterious. Unfortunately, her story peters out at the end, and there is no answer to the mystery of her and her relationship with her adopted "son" and apprentice Richard, and we don't know what happens to her in the future. Show Less
LibraryThing member MichelleCH
Ditto to what others have said. The tone was way too modern.
I laughed out-loud when Henry told everyone to skedaddle so that he could be alone with Anne. The image in my head was priceless, I doubt it was what the author was intending. Henry is a poor, befuddled mess and thank goodness Anne is
Anne also liberally uses the F-word and yes, even to Henry. Funny thing is that this word might not have been in use at that time; and if so, was so taboo that it wasn’t even written down. I doubt Anne bandied it about so casually in conversation. “You f…. promised Henry!” She also has a nickname for the Queen, “Fat Cat’. Could Anne be on The Real Housewives? I think yes.
So the story alternates between Anne’s modern point of view and that of the confectioner for the King, Lucy Cornwallis. Her every moment is spent in spinning sugar treats – a few chapters in, I really wondered if anyone had any teeth left. Lucy also develops this rather weird and not very plausible relationship with Mark Smeaton, who comes by just to shoot the breeze in his fancy doublet. Maybe this is how they roll on Wisteria Lane.
Another bizarre twist is that Alison Weir gives it thumbs up!
I laughed out-loud when Henry told everyone to skedaddle so that he could be alone with Anne. The image in my head was priceless, I doubt it was what the author was intending. Henry is a poor, befuddled mess and thank goodness Anne is
Show More
there to save the day. She knows how to handle Wolsey, the divorce and home renovations. Anne also liberally uses the F-word and yes, even to Henry. Funny thing is that this word might not have been in use at that time; and if so, was so taboo that it wasn’t even written down. I doubt Anne bandied it about so casually in conversation. “You f…. promised Henry!” She also has a nickname for the Queen, “Fat Cat’. Could Anne be on The Real Housewives? I think yes.
So the story alternates between Anne’s modern point of view and that of the confectioner for the King, Lucy Cornwallis. Her every moment is spent in spinning sugar treats – a few chapters in, I really wondered if anyone had any teeth left. Lucy also develops this rather weird and not very plausible relationship with Mark Smeaton, who comes by just to shoot the breeze in his fancy doublet. Maybe this is how they roll on Wisteria Lane.
Another bizarre twist is that Alison Weir gives it thumbs up!
Show Less
LibraryThing member HeatherLINC
I liked how the story was told alternatively by Anne Boleyn and the royal confectioner, Lucy Cornwallis, but I found the use of modern language extreme irritating and felt it detracted from the whole story.
LibraryThing member a1stitcher
I have always wondered about the title of this book as I have never considered anything about Anne Boleyn to be "subtle". I found this book interesting. I have read some of the reviews and many of them seem to unhappy about the author's writing style. Yes, she did use modern language-foul and
Show More
otherwise-but for me, it didn't detract from the essential story. I found Anne Boleyn's narration to be pretty believable. I can just imagine her impatience and frustration! Lucy was a bit out there for me, but interesting. It's a unique book about a dramatic and sad era. Show Less
LibraryThing member dalexander
The life of Anne Boleyn as told as writings to her daughter Elizabeth intertwined with the views of a confectioner for the king.
LibraryThing member nordie
From my bookshelves. This edition is a "Not for resale" that looks like it was a freebie with a copy of Red magazine. I (attempted to) read this slim novel immediately after The Constant Princess by Philippa Gregory. The former is twice the size of the latter, and whilst The Constant Princess is
Anne Boleyn
Whilst in The Constant Princess, the first affair acknowledged by Catherine of Aragon is Anne Boleyn (thus setting up the rest of the Tudor series) The Queen of Subtleties presents that Catherine knew of previous affairs and attended the baptism of the illegitimate Fitz, even if she never formally acknowledged him.
The book starts the day before Anne's execution and she's looking back on where it all started, as a letter and a warning to her daughter Elizabeth. As with other fiction books about Anne Boleyn, she is betrayed as scheming, manipulative, but ultimately rather naive and deluded.
Henry didnt divorce Catherine because of me. For me, yes; in the end, yes. But not because of me.
It is interspersed with the narrative Lucy Cornwallis, the King's confectioner, whose narration covers 1535 - 1536.
The following from an article in The Scotsman about this book makes both Lucy - as the maker - and Anne as the received, both Queen of Subtleties
Subtleties are, or rather were, intricate sugar sculptures and statues created as beautiful centrepieces for Medieval feasts - the beginnings of modern-day sugar craft, although this was rather more like sugar art. The exquisite adornments are thought to have been created in the early 15th century with subtleties appearing at the coronation feast of eight-year-old Henry VI in 1429.
I have to admit this was a DNF. I got about 50% through (bearing in mind this was a very short book) before the anachronistic language was simply too much. Anne called her parents "mum" and "dad". When angry she said words like "fuck" and "christ". I know this is classed as a "reimaging" but Dunn and her publishers would do well to look at books like Longbourn by Jo Baker (loved the story AND how it was told) or Death Comes to Pemberley by PD James (not so sure about the story, but liked how it was told). In other words - you shouldn't sacrifice the way the book is written in order to get attention....I do wonder whether the book or the deal with Red's publishers came first, and am I being snobbish about Red's circulation?
Show More
focussed on Catherine of Aragon, this book tells of Anne Boleyn.Anne Boleyn
Whilst in The Constant Princess, the first affair acknowledged by Catherine of Aragon is Anne Boleyn (thus setting up the rest of the Tudor series) The Queen of Subtleties presents that Catherine knew of previous affairs and attended the baptism of the illegitimate Fitz, even if she never formally acknowledged him.
The book starts the day before Anne's execution and she's looking back on where it all started, as a letter and a warning to her daughter Elizabeth. As with other fiction books about Anne Boleyn, she is betrayed as scheming, manipulative, but ultimately rather naive and deluded.
Henry didnt divorce Catherine because of me. For me, yes; in the end, yes. But not because of me.
It is interspersed with the narrative Lucy Cornwallis, the King's confectioner, whose narration covers 1535 - 1536.
The following from an article in The Scotsman about this book makes both Lucy - as the maker - and Anne as the received, both Queen of Subtleties
Subtleties are, or rather were, intricate sugar sculptures and statues created as beautiful centrepieces for Medieval feasts - the beginnings of modern-day sugar craft, although this was rather more like sugar art. The exquisite adornments are thought to have been created in the early 15th century with subtleties appearing at the coronation feast of eight-year-old Henry VI in 1429.
I have to admit this was a DNF. I got about 50% through (bearing in mind this was a very short book) before the anachronistic language was simply too much. Anne called her parents "mum" and "dad". When angry she said words like "fuck" and "christ". I know this is classed as a "reimaging" but Dunn and her publishers would do well to look at books like Longbourn by Jo Baker (loved the story AND how it was told) or Death Comes to Pemberley by PD James (not so sure about the story, but liked how it was told). In other words - you shouldn't sacrifice the way the book is written in order to get attention....I do wonder whether the book or the deal with Red's publishers came first, and am I being snobbish about Red's circulation?
Show Less
Subjects
Language
Original publication date
2004
Physical description
304 p.; 8.2 inches
ISBN
0060591579 / 9780060591571