“Random Pits of Blackness”

The end. Finally. Janet uncovered the truth! Of course, she also destroyed the relationship with her husband, but didn’t seem too worried about that. Neither was arrested or assassinated (yet), because Janet actually kept her mouth shut about the final outcome. So what was her true motivation, why did she pursue this quest at all costs? I can scarcely find an answer. Was it just for purse satisfaction of knowing the truth? Again, she did not talk to anyone about Mary being not guilty, not even her husband. No one. The last few pages of the novel compromise of Janet quietly contemplating everything she learned, and the only insight provided to the reason for this entire affair was this: “But now, at least, Janet had her answer, and perhaps greater wisdom than before. Tonight she would sleep undisturbed by bloody dreams.”* These are the last to sentences. Still, I don’t understand – what did this give her? She gained absolutely nothing, she can’t stand up for the deceased queen or anything like that, cannot even make her opinion public, her marriage might be ruined, and she only satisfied her curiosity. But why?

(now I feel like Janet in one of those disputes with her husband, quoted in the previous post)

Of course, the narrative continues to be split between the present and past as Janet finds still more people who can tell her the story (chronology of course perfectly chronological), but the focus on Janet and her struggles becomes stronger. She will not quit, and after reading the letter, she again directly disobeys her husband (who already clearly told her not to say one more word before they leave Edinburgh, or he would take measures) and goes to visit Cuthbert Ramsy (who knew someone who was in the conspiracy to murder the king), followed by Beth McCaig (who was there when Mary was abducted by Bothwell). The husband is obviously none too happy with this, and another fight ensues, this time ending with Janet getting slapped. The quarrel oddly resembles the previous one:
“’No! Be silent! Say nothing more. (...)’
‘We must leave on the morrow. Sir Richard-‘
‘I will decide when we will leave.’
‘Henry-‘
‘I said, keep silent, wife!’
‘Richard-‘
‘Silent!’
‘But-‘
He slapped her face. Hard.“**

Contrary to the review that I read, however, it doesn’t seem that the marriage is “broken beyond repair”. The situation between the two is tense and dramatic; Janet takes her husband’s words to heart and refuses to talk to him for an extensive period of time. By the very end, though, there is a “glimmer of hope”, if you will. Another theatrical conversation is had, this time with deep lines, like so: “‘There is always a choice.’ ‘Not-‘ ‘Always. There is always a choice’”; “ ‘You were my friend. (...) My friend. But no longer.’; “ ‘I cannot abide what you became in my eyes’”. All the above, naturally, in regard to Henry hitting Janet, after the two had such a wonderful relationship. Now for the glimmer of hope: “He sighed. ‘I apologize,’ he said, and sounded as if he meant it. ‘I value your regard, and am sorry I’ve lost it. What must I do to regain it?’ ‘Another eighteen years without raising your hand to me might have its effect.’ (...) ‘I’m saying that I will do my best not to give you sufficient reason to resort to violence if you will promise to make better choices in the future.’ (...) He kissed her, and she hoped all would be well.”***

Oh. How wonderful.

Never mind that Janet never apologizes for almost getting the two of them arrested.

I feel as though all that drama is trying to make some point (theme) about partnership, trust, freedom, or gender roles in both 16th century and today’s society, but I can’t quite find it.

Anyway, I must say that I am glad to be finished with the reading. I would love to have loved this book, or even somewhat enjoyed it, but, unfortunately, that’s not exactly the case. I would love to be able to say I learned a lot and gained insight into the particular historical period, but the way in which it was told was very confusing to someone without solid background knowledge. Of course, I know more about Queen Mary than I did before, but not enough to, say, engage in a conversation with someone about her, for fear of embarrassing myself.

The voice, unfortunately, was quite dull, and the way of narration not very lively or able to hold the reader’s interest (well, at least mine). If only there was more about Queen Mary and the people surrounding her – not dry facts, but some opinions, emotions, depth and interpretation of characters! I understand that this book was supposed to be as historically accurate as possible, but it is meant to be fiction; if readers wanted all the facts, they could look in plentiful and extensive works of nonfiction – readers deciding to pick up historical fiction most likely wants to understand the historical figures, see their real human side, see what drove and motivated them; they want to be able to relate to the figures, understand how they felt, see them as true, vivid individuals. Unfortunately, the only person who is made more “multi-dimensional” in this book is Janet, whose motives are still unclear. Again, I wish this book was narrated in a more interesting way, with each of the characters telling the story having their own individual, distinctive voice – so 1st person rather that 3rd. I wish there was more character development, more layers, a deeper meaning, a theme, or at least a colorful and engaging retelling of history.

Well, one thing is vivid – all the wonderfully detailed descriptions of torture and executions. This last part includes a thorough retelling (tone bordering on fascination) of the execution of those responsible for assassinating Darnley – they were “partially hanged”, followed by being cut apart and having their guts literally cooked or fried, don’t remember which, while still conscious. The killing of Queen Mary
is naturally also included (the axeman had to swing three times in order to severe the neck). It does get at times quite... intense.

I’m also glad this is the last post, because as much as I enjoy writing a blog, there’s no telling how long the posts would eventually become if there was more of them. As you’ve probably noticed, each so far has been longer than the last; this is because I wrote a lot for the first post, before even beginning the reading, because that’s how I am when allowed to write just anything, my own opinion, without a required format. For the second post, after reading the first five chapters, I, of course, had to make it longer – since I did the actual reading, I should have been able to write far more about the book than before even opening it. After that, it just became a matter of not writing less, as to not regress... So there. Actually, I think this post is shorter than the previous; again, I feel guilty about this, because should writing about the whole book when finished with reading not take longer than talking only about five chapters? Oh, well.

So, A Question of Guilt – not my type of book, but that doesn’t mean others wouldn’t enjoy it. I’m hesitant to recommend it, but if you’re someone really interested in Queen Mary and have read many other books on the subject, sure, read it. Will I ever read it again? No. However, since I love to read and occasionally enjoy historical fiction as well, I might try to find a historical fiction novel about the same subject matter, but written in a way more suitable for me, then compare the two. I’m sure Mary was a very fascinating and multi-faceted person, and many interesting works of fiction, many interpretations, can be created.

*p.307
**p.257
***p.305