I also found I didn’t like the narrator, Veronica (in fact, I wasn’t even sure which sibling she was as she only referred to herself as ‘I’). I felt that, as a reader, I didn’t know her and the only information I could glean was that she seemed to be complaining about everything and everybody; she didn’t have any sympathy for her mother (who I thought was either ill or depressed) and seemed in general to be extremely angry and bitter for no reason I could understand apart from possibly the fact that her parents had so many children. I kept constantly wondering at what point in the book we were going to find out more about the narrator. It also bothered me that I didn’t feel I could rely on Veronica as a truthful narrator; I doubted what she remembered and said, eg, she described a scene involving her grandparents and it reads as fact as there is so much vivid detail and yet I then realised Veronica can’t have witnessed this scene as she wasn’t yet born. So, at best, this scene can only be one that has been told to her and she has then embellished (which then raises the question of which aspects of the scene are true and which are embellishment), or (as I was increasingly suspecting) she had no knowledge at all of such a scene and had just made the story up. I’m also not certain if she actually believed these stories herself – did she imagine the scene in her head and then believe it was a genuine memory, perhaps? I generally felt that the whole book was a waste of my time as I would learn something about Ada the gran, for example, and yet have to keep in mind that it could all be an invention. Therefore, what had I actually gained from reading that chapter – I felt the answer was nothing at all, apart from a stronger suspicion that the narrator was perhaps slightly mad and prone to making up stories. The ghosts that kept appearing to Veronica also make me feel that she was unclear about what was real and what was unreal. She seemed to be living in an angry confused daze.

I also didn’t like the writing style as it felt very disjointed and unfocused and jumped around, and I found the book wasn’t at all enjoyable or gripping. For quite a lot of the book, I felt very frustrated and that I could have been spending my time reading something else far more enjoyable.

Fate features a great deal in this story and how fate ties people together and brings them together come what may (similar to the theme in the above mentioned film, really). But I felt this book wasn’t a particularly romantic version of fate, or at least Fermina and Florentino don’t seem like a match made in heaven or destined to be together and as a reader I don’t yearn for them to be together. I found myself hoping really that this book wasn’t about fate or destiny, as it doesn’t correspond to my ideas of these things.

I was intrigued as to whose tale of love this actually was; I first thought it was Florentino’s and his passion for Fermina, then I wondered if it was Dr Urbino and his passion for Fermina.

I was touched by Urbino’s feelings coming back home to his county after being away studying for years and how he’d romanticised the place in his head when he was away and then was shocked by the reality when he saw it again and by how dirty and poor it was – I can sympathise with this when returning to different places I have lived. It was perfectly described in the book, and how sad and disappointed it makes you, and the ability of your mind and memory to play tricks on your recollections.

I found the book intriguing as it begins with the end of the characters’ lives, and then the reader learns about their earlier life that led to this point. I find this style a bit disconcerting but interesting; it makes me have to keep going back to the beginning of the book to remind myself of the characters’ endings now I have learnt more of their earlier life.

Florentino is a strange character and I have a mix of feelings for him. I feel sorry for him that his deep love for Fermina was not reciprocated and the hurt he carries with him after her rejection. I am puzzled by my feelings for this character; I feel I should like him as he seems incredibly romantic and sensitive and loving and giving and surely his level of attention and adoration would be what every woman would be flattered to receive, and yet (I imagine all due to the author’s subtle writing of the character) I find I feel the same about him as Fermina feels; namely that he’s slightly odd and a bit creepy. As I say, this is difficult to fathom as his display of feeling should make him the ideal, and he doesn’t do anything offensive that would cause people to feel repulsed by him but I do feel that repulsion. I can only think that it is the intensity of his adoration and passion, but, yet again, theoretically I think most women would think they wanted to be adored to this degree. I am intrigued by this character and my seemingly incomprehensible feelings towards him, and intrigued at how the author makes me feel this way.

I found it an interesting book and one that has made me think about it long after it’s finished, but to be honest I didn’t think it was that special and struggle to see why it was so highly regarded and celebrated.

I didn’t feel as if there was much development of the characters in the book, but I felt it was a fantastic story and must have been amazing to the readers of that time with plenty of tension-building particularly as the party travels across the Amazon and on the plateau where they discover the dinosaurs. I did think it seemed a little over-simplified, and I found this a shame as I felt it could have been done in much more depth and detail and been a more involving and exciting story. I imagine it was this book that inspired Michael Crichton’s story, which does have the tension and detail and depth that I craved, but perhaps I only felt this because I’d read Crichton’s book first and I was looking at Conan Doyle’s book with more modern eyes.

I also found myself disappointed with the inconsiderate actions taken by the characters with no thought of how their actions may have been interfering with the ecosystem and pattern of life there, and particularly with the killing that they do, eg basically wiping out the entire race of Apemen with no thought as to whether this was a right or wrong action; even though the Apemen seem to be preying on the Indians, the loss of the Apemen could have a catastrophic effect on the delicate balance of life on Lost World. I also felt uncomfortable with them killing and eating the dinosaurs; obviously they had to survive, but it just seemed throughout that the group didn’t solely observe but that they interfered and affected things with no consideration of the consequences. Again, maybe this is modern eyes judging a book and themes from another time, and in 1912 when the book was written perhaps humans’ effect on the planet and the species within it were not so widely thought about as today.

It was an enjoyable read and I very much admire the idea and recognise it as a brilliant story, but personally I think Conan Doyle was better with Sherlock Holmes stories.

I love the image of the Queen reading; waving to the crowds with one hand from her coach, while holding a book with the other hand just below the level of the window so it remains unseen. I love the Queen’s suggestion of how good she’d be on a pub quiz team with all her knowledge and experience of capital cities, although she admits she wouldn’t be as strong on pop music. I love the image of her meeting her public and instead of her stock polite questions of how far they’ve travelled, she’s asks them what they’ve read and often introduces long discussions on Dickens’ books and pulling her present book out of her handbag to discuss further – wouldn’t this be wonderful? And I really chuckled at her saying that she’s saving the Harry Potter books for a rainy day. I was also fascinated by her choice of books and found myself noting titles and authors that I hadn’t read but that she had. I felt her view of books as “how one book led to another, doors kept opening whenever she turned and the days weren’t long enough for the reading she wanted to do” is exactly how I feel about books and so exactly describes how addictive and wonderful and fulfilling books can be. This book celebrates reading and really touches how people feel about books and how important they are to people’s lives. I would love the Queen to be ‘human’ like this, and I would love to know what she thinks of this book – I feel sure she couldn’t resist smiling at it, it is written so tactfully and isn’t ‘against’ royalty. I do so hope she’d approve.

This is the first Alan Bennett book I have read, and I was thoroughly impressed.

I think of this book as being all about the characters and it is these that stay in my head and who I am quick to remember when thinking about the book, rather than the plot itself. That’s not to say that the plot isn’t fantastic, as it is, being full of twists and turns and surprises and good and evil, but it’s the characters in this book that steal the show for me and what dominates the book in my mind. But the storyline itself, and the different threads within it, is a continual surprise and is packed full of drama and tension. There is a wonderful mix of nice and nasty characters; some involved in romance; some involved in murder; some involved in swindling; some rich; some poor; some improving in qualities as they go along and turning out good; some accepting temptations and turning out bad; some materialistic; and some generous.

I loved all the names of the characters and the amount of characters there are – it feels like such a treat to read a Dickens book as there are such a wealth of characters, it is so full of people and their different stories. I adored Mr & Mrs Boffin and their graciousness and generosity with their newly acquired fortune, Mr Boffin seems like such a lovely man. I also adored how kind they are to Sloppy and Betty Higgard, and so tactful with their help. I did feel quite anxious about Mr Boffin throughout most of the book, firstly that he would be cheated by some swindler, and then secondly that he seemed to be hardening himself too much against potential cheats and was losing his gentle and generous character (I should have know, however, that Dickens had it all in hand!). I did struggle, however, to reconcile myself to the plan that Mr Boffin had devised and followed; I found his aim in that quite twee and a little unbelievable.

Twemlow is another amusing character, particularly with his attempts at judging who exactly are the Vemeerlings’ oldest friends, and the reader is shown how ridiculous and how shallow this world of privilege and riches can be.

I found Betty Higgard’s life and her horror of ending up in the workhouse so very sad, and her determination to be independent and avoid being a burden actually meaning that she didn’t accept help from those who genuinely wanted to help her. Her pride was admirable, but I felt sad that she didn’t allow others to help her and to reduce her difficulties.

I also liked the sarcastic and cynical lawyer Eugene Wrayburn, although I was not completely certain of his motives as he sets out to deliberately annoy people and be quite stubborn and sarcastic and infuriatingly evasive when questioned, but I suspected he really did care for Lizzie Hexham and went out of his way to gently and kindly help her. I found Eugene’s comments wonderfully humorous and sarcastic, particularly regarding Riderhood and his character, and also Eugene and Mortimer’s analysis of their guilty feelings of what may befall the daughter after her father, Gaffer, had been captured and their part in this. I loved the romance of Eugene’s feelings and intentions for Lizzie, though they seemed to take a while to materialise and to convince me that they were good intentions. It was probably Eugene that I struggled most to get to know as a character and had most doubts about, but I felt myself at the end being very worried and concerned about him and his health.

I was fascinated by Jenny Wren, the dolls’ dressmaker, who was still a child though acts so wise and much older than her years; she must have had such a hard life. She could be quite short and cutting in her comments and judgements particularly when scolding her father whom she treats as the child. She was a very complex and unusual but sad character.

I also liked the beautiful and lovelorn Miss Peacher who is in love with Bradley the school-master though she knows there is no hope of his ever returning her affection, and throughout continually correcting Mary Anne on pronouns, etc.

The description of love at first sight that Bradley experiences when he first sees Lizzie and how he can’t subdue it or control it, is quite a romantic passage. I was astonished at how passionate Bradley was when declaring his love for Lizzie; I wouldn’t have thought he had such depth of feeling in him, and I almost felt quite sorry for him when she gives him her answer.

I didn’t guess at all about the identity of John Harmon, but so admired the man and how considerate he was by not wanting to declare who he was and therefore take away the Boffin’s fortune, and by wanting the woman he loved to love him for himself not for his money or to have her forced into marrying him in any way. I also felt for him so much when people were being unkind to him, not realising for a moment that they owed everything they had to him.

I felt very frustrated and angry towards Charlie Hexham and how he could be so cruel and hurtful and ungrateful towards his sister, Lizzie, who had always been so self-denying for him. I was astonished at how he became so arrogant and self-centred after he’d been brought up by such a gentle person as she.

I found Mrs Wilfer very funny as she is such a ridiculous character; so above herself and thinking so well of herself and yet coming across as proud and foolish, and she could be quite cruel to people especially to her poor husband. Within the same family, I loved Bella Wilfer and her father’s relationship; they were so loving towards each other and genuinely friendly and trusting and caring. Bella could seem quite proud at times, like her mother, but the nicer part of her character came out when she was with her father. I also loved Bella’s romance and how sweet her and her admirer were together.

Silas Wegg must be one of Dickens’ most horrible characters, I could hardly believe how underhand and nasty he was after feeling quite sorry for him at the beginning with his wooden leg and his obviously difficult life scratching out a living with his stall. It sickened me how he was so unappreciative of Mr Boffin’s kindnesses and demanded more and more, and so obviously despised the kindness and saw it as a weakness of Mr Boffin’s, though accepting all that was offered.

I felt quite exhausted when I finished this book as there was so much going on in it that it was occupying my every thought. I also feel that now I’ve finished I want to immediately read it again as there is just so much in there. My favourite books of Dickens so far are Bleak House and Little Dorrit, both of which I’ve read time and again, and I feel this book joins them without a doubt. It is quite simply an incredible piece of work.

It is the story of Armino, an Italian tour guide, who sees his childhood nurse in Rome while he is with a party of tourists and later she is found murdered. He goes back to his birthplace to discover more about her life and what could have brought about its end. There he gets caught up in the tensions between rival university students and their preparations for a dramatic festival, and also discovers surprising secrets about his own family. The village also still seems haunted and influenced by its brutal 15th century resident Duke Claudio, also known as The Falcon.

I found the relationship between the brothers very interesting; one is very strong but seems to be bad and/or mad, and the other is not so strong but very moral and good.

The descriptions of Italy and Italian villages are lovely and romantic and inspiring, and beautifully described by Du Maurier.

As I say, this book is not as gripping or tense as her other works; it is an enjoyable read but not remarkable, I thought.

This is another book where I enjoyed the insight of the life of a writer, although I found it a slightly strange and unusual book and was left puzzled at the end (and, indeed, often throughout). The author/main character tells the story in a chatty and humorous way and I feel I warmed to him. All the place names and historic events dealt with in the book were rather lost on me as I don’t know very much about the history of Sweden and Denmark so found it difficult to build up a picture in my mind of what the characters were seeing and experiencing.

The story seems to be more the story of Henry and Leo told by the narrator rather than the story of the narrator Klas, so this feels quite unusual and it did seem a bit slow at first and I struggled a little to continue with it. The description on the back of the book makes it sound as if the author is telling the true story of these people that he met, and so I was intrigued throughout reading the book whether this was actually the case. When the narrator writes of Leo and his poems it does feel as if it’s a report of a true real-life person, more so than with Henry as Henry seems to be doing wild and unlikely and fictional-type things, whereas Leo’s poems are quoted and the story of Leo feels almost biographical. I am very intrigued as to whether this is all truth or fiction, and have searched on the internet to try and find out.

I was interested in the different labels given to Henry throughout the telling of his story, eg Henry the clerk, Henry the secret agent. I can imagine Henry forming these labels in his own head and almost playing the part/role of that title at that time – or are these labels used sarcastically/humorously by the narrator to laugh at Henry and tease him?

I did struggle to decide what was the main theme or story of the book. It was exciting reading about Leo’s search for the truth of Verner’s dad’s disappearance as I was finding the rest of the book quite slow at this point; I thought at the time that this section was perhaps what the book was building up to although it seemed a long way into the book, but then all of a sudden this theme seemed finished and dealt with. Or I wondered if the main story was the excitement of Henry’s hunting in the tunnels for gold. As I read, I kept wondering what had caused the disappearance of Henry and Leo and who their enemies are, as referred to at the beginning of the book – is the reason one of the stories above?

I found the end of the book inconclusive, and I did find it annoying that the reader doesn’t discover what happened to Henry and Leo and why. Again, I am intrigued if this is real-life or fiction.

The book does keep the reader interested as it begins with the narrator barricaded in a flat with Henry and Leo having disappeared, so all through the book the reader is keeping that in mind and waiting to discover more. The book essentially ends where it begins.

It is a very interesting idea that Flora is writing about someone who she doesn’t really know and so therefore finds out things about her life and character along the way, almost like a mystery unfolding in the way she (and the reader) gradually discover more and more detail and nuggets of information about Claudia. There are tantalising clues about Claudia revealed from other people’s descriptions and memories, although some of these stories paint different pictures of Claudia so it is a challenge for Flora to determine her true character.

I was intrigued by the description on the back of the book as it sounded very ‘bookish’ with an author writing a biography of an author, and the story is indeed lovely and ‘bookish’ with the whole family being immersed in books and writing and literary launches, etc, which is fascinating to read. I also loved the description of Flora’s life as a writer; I imagine most keen readers dream of being a writer themselves, so to have this insight into a writer’s world is fascinating.

I like the style of writing in this book; I found it drew me in and made me feel involved in the characters. I did, however, feel slightly frustrated with how the stories are interspersed and that a dramatic occurrence was often not referred to again for many chapters eg, we learn of Sister Mary Joseph facing death on the operating table but then the reader is led away to Dr Hemlatha on a plane and all the details of her life, when I was wanting to continue with the drama unfolding around the Sister.

I very much enjoyed the book, to my surprise. I did feel apprehensive that it would all be about distressing things such as war and famine and not contain anything positive or uplifting at all, but that wasn’t the case. There are difficulties to be faced at times in Ethiopia but the author doesn’t labour the point or make the reader feel uncomfortable.

I like the character of Marion and how he conducts his life; trying to be true to himself and his conscience, and determined to emulate and be faithful to his ‘father’ Ghosh, and his determination to be a surgeon even though he is trying to make his way in the foreign country of America. When Marion was ill, I actually found myself reaching for the tissues.

The book is well written with believable characters and is an epic piece of work, and I much admire the research the author must have done to produce such a detailed book. It struck me that this was a story that was a huge and very important one for the author to tell, and this passion and dedication comes through the pages. Definitely a remarkable book.

I was surprised at how harsh a landscape Australia is and how difficult (in fact, almost impossible) it is to scratch a living there and all the barriers such as the intense heat, the years without rainwater, the often deadly insects – it all made me wonder if humans should actually be living there.

I have never seen the TV programme of the book, but will definitely get myself a copy.

I wasn’t really expecting much from this book as I’m not a science-fiction/fantasy fan, but the story gripped me right from the start and I can (and will!) happily enthuse about the book to anyone. I like the way it is written as someone’s account, like a diary almost, and I like the character of Mike Watson and his wife Phyllis, and I enjoyed the unfolding mysteriousness of the story.

I admire the way the action and drama is interspersed with long periods of inactivity and debate and uncertainty, as I felt this built up the tension and also seemed more realistic as there often is a great deal of planning and checking and disagreement and stalling by authorities when action needs to be taken. The slowness of people to believe a disaster is taking place and what form that threat was taking also seemed realistic and I think this would be just how people would be likely to react; by refusing to accept that it is the action of aliens and spending a great deal of time looking desperately for alternative solutions.

I found it very thought-provoking that many of the disasters and threats detailed in this story written decades ago mirror our fears today and the threat to our world, such as the rising of the seas (although not, I’m fairly certain, caused by aliens!).

A very enjoyable and intelligent and unusual book with plenty of tension and terror, and I am full of admiration for such a well-told story – and definitely made aware again not to prejudge a book.

This was an interesting book; it didn’t grab me at first but it did get a bit more gripping when Teddy’s crime was about to be discovered. I found it interesting that the main characters of the book changed in importance as the book progresses, and I wouldn’t say it was a book particularly about Teddy as the first part of the book has Clara and Hugo as the main characters and the end of the book is more about Crystal, and yet other characters that seem important such as Teddy’s wife Susan are dispatched surprisingly abruptly – I was interested in the author’s thinking behind this.

I was also very intrigued by Teddy’s choice of crime, i.e. abusing the trust of elderly clients, and whether this was related in some way to his childhood where his trust was abused by his parents/elders. And I found it interesting to search for the reasons behind Teddy’s crime, i.e. his attempt to provide the security for his family that he never experienced as a child.

I did have this labelled in my mind as a pretty ordinary book, but I find after I have finished it that I am thinking over the content of it more and more and becoming more aware of interesting things in it.

I feel a bit guilty saying this but I find myself not feeling any sympathy for Isabelle and really struggling to like her; if she’d suffered some kind of trauma that had caused her to react in this way then I could understand it, but there doesn’t seem to have been any such trauma – on the contrary, this inability to speak seems (to me) to be more stubbornness mixed with a personal desire to reach a target of days of non-speaking. I couldn’t help feeling as I was reading the book that she was just a stubborn and indulged child who realised she had power over her parents, and she could speak if she had chosen to and it just suited her not to (being more generous, perhaps it had gone too far for her to easily correct and she then didn’t feel in control of it herself which obviously would have caused her distress). I felt huge sympathy for her parents who were bending over backwards for her and desperately worried and who had turned their lives upside down for her, risking their marriage and careers and totally taken over by their concerns for her to the detriment of everything else.

At times Isabelle seemed quite selfish, eg if she doesn’t get what she wants such as the breakfast in the café or the visit to the giftshop museum because she doesn’t voice her desires then she is angry and sulks, yet she won’t talk and express her wants and she just expects her parents to guess and then punishes them when they don’t guess correctly. I can see that perhaps Isabelle’s silence is due to a control issue, much as anorexia, and I do want to feel sorry for her but I can’t decide if she could speak and just chooses not to or if she is unable to control it and it is a symptom of an illness or problem. Yet another part of me thinks it is for attention and effect. She is an interesting character as I think she is aware of the distress she is causing her parents and she seems to hate herself for this, so I’m intrigued by the fact that she’s aware of others’ feelings as this doesn’t seem the act of a selfish person, and also the hating herself could be then adding to some kind of depression she is suffering. I am interested in the fact her parents have been told she hasn’t got Asperger’s or Autism as her love of order and routine would seem to possibly point to this.

I was intrigued as to how the author wants the reader to view Isabelle – is it to sympathise with her or to disapprove of her? And is it Isabelle’s story and experiences being told or is it her parents’, and who does the author want us to sympathise with? My sympathy throughout the book is definitely with the parents and I struggle to feel any sympathy for Isabelle.

I find Isabelle’s thoughts and logic and comments on things and people she sees very interesting, I’m not sure if they’re the thoughts of an 11 year old as they seem very considered and mature. Perhaps Isabelle is more mature than other 11 year olds and her thought processes have developed with the loss of her voice, but I wonder if they are actually the author’s thoughts and this would explain why they don’t read right and seem quite adult thoughts in a child’s mind (I personally think this is the case, which explains the slightly unbelievable feel to Isabelle’s thoughts). I also wonder if the author has any experience with mental issues in children, as it doesn’t really read like it to me.

At the end of the book, my thoughts were the same as Isabelle’s mum’s – that if Isabelle does speak again it doesn’t mean then that the whole dreadful experience is behind them; Isabelle could go silent again if her parents do anything to upset or anger her. Therefore the potential of her being silent again would be a very powerful threat or weapon present all the time – as mum says, “A march through a minefield where any misstep might be the end of them.” A child shouldn’t have that level of power and control over their parents.

So, all in all, this book made me think a great deal and was interesting to read, but there seemed a few inconsistencies that bothered me.

The description on the back of the book gave no hint that this was some kind of fantasy/supernatural story instead of a normal detective ‘whodunnit’ story so I wasn’t prepared at all for stories of the Devil and Hell and possession, etc, and I probably wouldn’t have picked up the book if this had been apparent to me, but perhaps O’Neill is known for these types of books.

I think Robert is fast becoming one of my favourite male characters in literature; he is such a fair and considerate person who can empathise with others’ feelings; he is able to appreciate the consequences of his actions, as he knows the course he is pursuing will bring a guilty person to justice and avenge his friend yet he knows the discovery of the truth will cause pain to other innocent people he cares for; he is honest with himself and questions his own motives before he acts rather than just having blind confidence in himself (which is a contrast to the often high level of arrogance and self belief common in rich male characters of that day with their unquestioned rights and power); he also questions his own character to determine whether his suspicions are fact or are all just imaginings by a lonely bachelor; he recognises his own weaknesses in being tempted to abandon his investigations and go back to his easy life; he is generous with his money, tipping waiters liberally; he is kind-hearted, taking in stray dogs; he has a strong moral code as he won’t question a child even though he knows he’ll gain information from the boy’s innocent answers. I do wonder if these admirable qualities of Robert are actually present because it is a woman writing a man’s words and thoughts.

I adore Mary Braddon’s phrasing (and therefore Robert’s); her words are so thoughtful and accurate and beautifully put. I was quite touched by many of Robert’s thoughts, and some of the ones that stay in my mind include when he is considering how rare it is to find complete happiness and says if a man was to make, “a calculation of his existence… in which he has been thoroughly happy… really entirely at his ease… without the most infinitesimal cloud to overshadow the brightness of his horizon… and discovers the pitiful smallness of the amount. He will have enjoyed himself for a week or ten days in thirty years perhaps.” Also when Robert is considering his love for his uncle and says, “grateful affection was so much a part of himself that it seldom found an outlet in words.” And his thoughts on the subject of women made me smile, “To call them the weaker sex is to offer a hideous mockery. They are the stronger sex, the noisier, the more persevering, the most self-assertive sex.”

I was a bit uneasy with the diagnosis of Lady Audley’s madness, as it seemed as if all her actions and behaviours can therefore be explained away by this illness rather than the possibility that she may just be selfish and conniving and comfortable with hurting people. Robert certainly seems keen to adopt this convenient label of ‘madness’ as this means there is then no criminal trial and his uncle’s name is protected. I initially thought the author was taking the easy way out with a convenient solution and I was disappointed as the story seemed of a higher quality than that, but I wonder now if she is actually sarcastically pointing out to the reader how commonly used this diagnosis was at the time.

This is a very interesting and admirable book with an unusual story, particularly for the time it was written.

I found this quite a confusing book to read, however, as one chapter speaks in the third person talking about what Alice is doing, the next chapter speaks in the first person talking about “I” for Alice, and then another chapter will be from her mum’s life (Ann) or Grandma Elspeth. The book also seems to jump around in time from Alice at present day, to her university life, to being a child at home, to working for the Literature Trust and meeting John, therefore when each chapter begins it isn’t immediately apparent which time period the story is being told from and I found this quite disjointed and frustrating to read, but I did wonder if it was a clever way of representing how Alice’s thoughts were jumping around when she was in a coma (but then I would have thought every sentence would have been phrased “I”, plus Alice wouldn’t have been able to describe mum’s and grandma’s activities). I can appreciate that the jumping around from narrator to narrator does contribute to the building of tension and it was useful to see things from different characters’ perspectives, however when the devastating event was finally revealed I found I had to go back to the beginning of the book to re-read all of Alice’s accounts as at the first reading I’d been too confused to take all the detail in.

I had thought this was going to be just a chick-lit book, but it is so much more than that; it is a gripping book and a very touching one and I did enjoy it (but I found the writing style a little annoying and off-putting).

It is a novel full of mysteries and, having read The Angel’s Game, I fully anticipated these mysteries not being tidily explained at the end of the story; I therefore found myself frantically trying to remember all the different names and the little bits of information and odd situations mentioned in the hope it would help me tie it all together later, but the novel is also so beautifully written that I felt I didn’t want to rush through it to get to the solution at the end. All the characters in the novel seem connected to Julian Carax in some way, and I constantly felt I wasn’t seeing the full story.

I loved the atmospheric descriptions of old Barcelona and its streets and history, although I was alarmed at the details of the regime in place at the time and particularly the fear that Barcelona’s residents had of the police (an organisation that I have always expected to alleviate fear and intimidation, not cause it). At the time of the novel, the beautiful city of Barcelona doesn’t seem a safe place to live at all and is one where people can be spirited away if they say or do something out of turn.

This is a very interesting book; very involving and enjoyable. I did constantly feel throughout that I was missing some vital clue enabling me to understand everything going on, and am looking forward to reading it again. I think when comparing The Shadow of the Wind to The Angel’s Game I would say I preferred the latter, mostly because this was so incredibly involved and had so many threads that kept me pondering about it long after I’d finished the book, but I think The Angel’s Game is one of those rare books that don’t come along that often.

I love the brilliant touch of the children’s nursery rhyme on the wall of the ten boys and how each dies until ‘then there were none’, and the deaths of the people on the island following the order and manner of the deaths in the rhyme – what a excellent way to build tension; knowing someone else will be killed and having a rough idea of how, and being completely unable to prevent it or to escape. I also love the ten statues on the table, with one disappearing each time a person dies.

What an imagination this author has. This is the type of book you could easily read in one sitting, and one I’d be surprised if any reader guessed the solution of. Totally ingenious, and possibly her very best book.

This is a light and very enjoyable read and, as with all her books in my view, you can depend on enjoying it thoroughly.

It feels very much like a book of contrasts as the doctor and Roseanne seem to be very similar but very different; he is writing about losing his wife and his worries about their relationship before he lost her, at the same time Roseanne is writing about her relationships; he makes it obvious that he and his wife couldn’t have children and remembers his wife doesn’t want to be where children are, and Roseanne remarks on her remembrances on Strandhill Beach where she sees children everywhere, she also seems to have borne a child but then ended up being childless and this causes her as much pain as the doctor’s wife; and there are even small similarities such as both the doctor’s wife and Roseanne like and tend for their roses.

The book is tantalising as it keeps giving hints on why Roseanne was sectioned, both in Roseanne’s remembrances and in the documents the doctor discovers, but the whole details are never revealed to the reader all at once.

I found it very intriguing that the doctor’s and Roseanne’s telling of her early life don’t tally, eg, the doctor read that Roseanne’s father was a policeman whereas she talks of him as a gravedigger and a rat-catcher and is upset when the doctor refers to him as a policeman, and the circumstances behind her father’s death differ wildly. I found myself spending a lot of time pondering which one was the correct account and for what reason there could be an incorrect one. It also occurred to me that if Roseanne’s account was the incorrect one then how much can the reader believe of the rest of her account, which is the larger part of the book, and if her account is incorrect is this due to her forgetfulness and vagueness or by her deliberately misleading the reader and perhaps also herself? However, the doctor’s account is by Father Gaunt who is the man who caused Roseanne to be committed and seemed to want to destroy her and who seemed malicious and able to abuse his huge power, so would his motives and therefore account be impartial and accurate?

I did feel a sense of foreboding throughout reading the book as it is obvious that unpleasant things have happened to Roseanne, and I felt almost anxious each time I turned a page as to whether these were about to be revealed. I was also very surprised at the twist at the end of the book as I didn’t guess this.

A couple of other points that struck me about the book was that it made me realise that I don’t really know much about Irish history and so I felt that the parts of the book relating to this rather went over my head, and I was also intrigued to see another of the author’s books is The Whereabouts of Eneas McNulty as Eneas is quite an important character in The Secret Scripture, so I would be interested to read this book also.

I found this a very readable book and quite a clever one. I thought it was similar to The Vanishing Act of Esme Lennox as it deals with similar subjects and I had read both books quite close in time to one another. However, I think I prefer the Esme Lennox book.