One approaches a review of a book that won the Man Booker Award (2009) with some trepidation. Reviewers of the highest reputation made early judgments and raved about this 650-page opus magnus. So while one would like to start any book review with some positive comments, and in this case share some of the sheen of satisfaction manifested by the grand prize judges, it is not easy in a book with flaws that seem to overwhelm scholarship. undoubted and novelty of approach to an old and frequently told story.
The first and biggest problem is the writing style. Although not written in the first person, the narrative is presented from the perspective of the historical figure of Thomas Cromwell. The reader is rarely told that it is Cromwell who is speaking, and this often leads to passages that need to be reread carefully to fully understand the importance of dialogue. Cromwell’s words are always assigned by ‘he said,’ inducing in the reader the repeated question, ‘who said?’
A second problem is the character of Thomas Cromwell, who is presented as a man so far ahead of his time and his contemporaries that he provokes disbelief. One doubts that a person with his attributed humanitarian sentiments could have achieved such prominence in those brutal times of naked ambition. He talks about stabbing a man once below the ribs, but if he ever stabbed someone in the back, it is not recorded. The real Thomas Cromwell planned the execution of Anne Boleyn, but that was after the time of the end of the book, and it’s hard to imagine the Cromwell of the book.
Another problem involves both the title of the book and its ending. Wolf Hall is the home of the Seymour family and, as every schoolboy and schoolgirl knows, Jane Seymour was destined to become King Henry VIII’s next wife after Anne Boleyn. This unmentioned story is apparently intended to be a shadow looming over the narrative, but it is too weakly expressed to have the impact it might have otherwise achieved. Such a subtle fog might be appreciated by history teachers and the august judges of the Man Booker Prize, but one suspects it leaves most lay readers, including this critic, in a state of uncertainty.
The idea for the book is a good one and must have involved a great deal of historical research, but it could have been developed in a more dramatic way. The light touch leads to a long passage of narrative interest that fades. The only incentive to continue is to get the satisfaction of completing the 650 pages.