Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I finished Pillars last night. Not surprisingly my review is mixed. Here are my thoughts. Follett definitely understands how to create characters and plots. He's very adept at weaving the two together. I just wish he knew when to stop. I was frustrated with the book for many reasons. First, it's not a bad story. Even though I found it irksome I wanted on some level to continue reading it--I always find that annoying. I had the same response to The DaVinic Code and The Bridges of Madison County. Follett definitely did his homework with regards to the historical research, but after a while I felt that the novel was just a justification for his research. The plot goes on and on, from one political upheaval to another with little regards to any literary merit or value. Secondly, Follett's male perspective on sex and sexual fantasy is almost unwarranted. While, I enjoy a good steamy love scene as much as the next person I found little value in various characters lustful wanderings. What was the point other than cheap thrills? My true criticisms lie in Follett's inability to write with any literary skill. His syntax and idioms are far too modern for a work of historical fiction. Midway through the book it occurred to me that there were few metaphors, similes, just conflict after conflict which drove the plot. He writes without mood, feeling, or anything that makes language meaningful and beautiful. Since the book is devoid of literary beauty, I began to examine its plot more closely, since that is the strength of the work. At its core Pillars is about the rise of the middle class. The political machinations of Phillip and the drive of Aliena and Tom create a situation where the burgeoning feudal middle class begins to rise with some regularity. I found this interesting from sociological perspective and began to reflect on how different forms of government and church and state relationships foster the middle class and diminish it. Yet, William is always as a vehicle for destruction and a pawn of the powers that be. I grew weary of this tactic and began to wish for another villain. While, I found Waleran distasteful he lacked the gory sociopathic personality of William. Since so much of the novel focused on William I became interested in the psychology of his character. What had created such a monster? Follett gives a little insight into this when Regan dies and William has flashbacks of his mother screaming at him, but I wanted Follett to develop this more. If we had to spend so much time reading about William's raping and pillaging exploits, then I wanted to know what had created this monster. Overall, a very mixed review. The violence, sex, raping, and pillaging may have been common and true of the times, but somehow Follett manages to turn all of this into cheap entertainment. Disappointing at best.