Review↠The Queen of Four Kingdoms (Princess Michael of Kent)

Please use this sub-forum to discuss any fiction books or series that do not fit into one of the other categories. If the fiction book fits into one the other categories, please use that category instead.
Forum rules
Authors and publishers are not able to post replies in the review topics.
Post Reply
User avatar
Sparrow
Posts: 26
Joined: 10 Apr 2014, 01:27
Favorite Book: The Gulag Archipelago
Currently Reading: Médicis Daughter:
Bookshelf Size: 267
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sparrow.html

Review↠The Queen of Four Kingdoms (Princess Michael of Kent)

Post by Sparrow »

TITLE: The Queen Of Four Kingdoms
AUTHOR: Princess Michael of Kent
GENRE: Historical Fiction
TAGS: Historical Fiction, Royalty, Monarchy, 14th & 15th centuries, Naples, England, France, Yolande of Aragon, Louis II of Anjou, Aragon dynasty, Anjou dynasty, The Hundred Years War, Richard II of England, King Charles VI of France
RATING: (FROM 1-5): ★★

An advanced review copy of this title was provided to me, free of charge. It has in no way affected the content of my review.


Having already read Princess Michael of Kent's 3 non-fiction books, I was really excited to receive an Advanced Reader Copy of her first attempt at historical fiction. “The Serpent and The Moon: two rivals for the love of a Renaissance king” was about Diane de Poitiers & Catherine de' Medici's battle for the affection of King Henri II of France; the other two (“Crowned in a Far Country: Portraits of Eight Royal Brides” & “Cupid and the King”) were collectives that each focused on 5 people (queen consorts in one; royal paramours in the other). They were very much along the lines of Eleanor Herman's “Sex with the King/Sex with the Queen” collectives; though they lacked the entertainment value Herman's had. Pound for pound, PMK's were more historically accurate, albeit slightly dry reading at times. I value accuracy, so I had big hopes for her historical fiction.

I'll avoid spoilers here in the synopsis, though I am assuming you at least know the bare minimum about the protagonist, Yolande of Aragon. After waiting 9 years for her betrothed (Louis II of Anjou Duke of Anjou) to finish fighting and come home to claim her, the two are finally married, though Yolande is somewhat disappointed to learn that Louis had lost Naples only a year after winning it back. The marriage, arranged by Louis's mother, the formidable Marie of Blois, served the political purpose of putting an end to the contested claims upon the kingdom of Sicily & Naples between the two houses of Anjou & Aragón. During those years apart, their mothers exchange letters frequently, but Yolande only receives a handful from Louis himself-but they are sweet & imply a sincere desire for the union.

They meet; they marry, they procreate a bunch. By all accounts, they have a storybook marriage that is actually a love match, unlike most royal marriages. Louis is off fighting in the Hundred Years War for most of their marriage, and Yolande is left to run interference, keep the aristocracy happy, raise the kiddos, and hold down the fort, all of which she is very adept at. When Louis dies, Yolande is in a precarious position, which is made worse by the machinations of the Dukes of Burgandy and Orleans, both of whom want to have King Charles of France (Louis's cousin), declared incompetent due to insanity, & put a regent in his place. Having previously arranged a marriage between Yolande and Louis's daughter, with Charles, the dauphin of France, Yolande shelters the two while the Dukes keeps duking it out, & eventually manage to have King Charles declared unfit. They then make (give?) King Henry V of England the regent king of France, instead of the dauphin. When both Henry V of England and King Charles VI of France die, Yolande's son in law is finally declared King Charles VII of France; but there are some who feel that Henry VI of England- the infant son of the now deceased Henry V (regent) is the rightful heir. More war ensues. Enter Yolande, who becomes immersed in her son in law's fight for his crown, as she wheels and deals with the Dukes, encourages them to break treaties with the English, and throws her support behind the infamous Joan of Arc. In all, Yolande was an immensely intelligent, strong, driven, & loyal woman who did her best to keep the Houses of Valois-Anjou in power, arrange politically advantageous matches for her children, & was queen of her homeland of Aragon and three other puppet kingdoms (in theory, not in practice). She was instrumental in maintaining France's power & independence from England, and much of her husband's accomplishments were only achieved because of her astuteness,

Fascinating stuff- just not here.

With so much going for it, it's almost criminal that in telling this story, she very nearly put me to sleep. There is a massive amount of history of history to cover, but despite all this violence and blood and war and scheming, the book is rather dull. The history is there- and it's accurate, which is something that doesn’t always happen in historical fiction- and on that front, I give PMK kudos. I already had a fair understanding of the general politics that she covers, but admittedly, I often found myself running to my tablet to google names or places and battles. For someone who loves history- which I do- or someone who is already well versed in this particular portion of it- the book won't be a struggle. But for someone who is coming in blind, or who really prefers more character-driven fiction with their history, this would be a hard book to get into.

The bigger issue, for me, was that there is an awful lot of gloss, & ultimately, the book is a chimera. Everyone in the book is happy, happy, happy. They all have perfect lives; Yolande is beautiful, beautiful, beautiful. The people love, love, love her. Her husband adores her. It was love at first sight. Their marriage is paradisiacal; she has a stellar relationship with her mother in law, and the WHOLE. WIDE. KINGDOM. thinks she's just marvelous . And also that she's really, really beautiful- what, with her flowing long hair that glistens in the sun, and her tiny wasp-like waist, those breathtakingly impossible violet eyes, which are always dancing merrily over her legion of reverent little commoners, while she rides perfectly, atop her beautiful horse, who is the envy of all those in the land. They worship her. They will write sonnets about her, she's the reincarnation of Helen of Troy & every mythological Goddess that ever was. She is their reason for breathing.

In other words, the Mary Sue of Mary Sues.

Can you tell how obnoxious this gets? To make matters worse, PMK loves to tell you about the myriad of gowns Yolande wears, and the decor she demands, and yada yada yada. There's all this long, drawn out stuff about really ridiculously unimportant things, like their clothing and the verdant meadows and azure skies. And then there's this very thorough and very complex history in there that she more or less assumes everyone has a deep knowledge of. It's a quirky imbalance. One minute I felt like I was reading a harlequin romance novel, and the next I was tripping the light fantastic on college history notes. She's gunning for two audiences here- but neither overlap very well. For me, the history was the only interesting thing, but in that case, I might as well have just read a non-fiction book on it (and wish I had)- bc frankly, I couldn't stand another minute of the narrator waxing poetic on the many shades of stunning that the goddess elite. Did I mention she was beautiful? If you're the kind of person who likes the harlequin stuff (and I'm totally not judging you if you do), then you're going to be bored to tears with the history parts.

One of my pet peeves is reviewers who review a book and judge it poorly, because they don't like the author, for whatever reason. It's absurd- what the author does in their free time has absolutely no bearing on whether or not they are capable of writing a good book. Liking or disliking the author's personality should never be the deciding factor in reviewing or buying a book, barring some extreme ethical issue (like lining the pockets of a serial killer by buying his book, for example). But there are a few things in this case that I think need to be touched on.

Obviously, PMK is going to have knowledge and access to information that the average author does not, because this is her family’s history. That kind of insider access can go either way though- the book could be full of stunning revelations or give us a greater understanding of circumstances than we previously had. Or, the book could be a complete farce, bc the author has a very biased view of things & misrepresented things to make themselves sound better. The exception to this rule being when an author puts themselves into the book or discussions on it for whatever reason. PMK's lineage is something she often brings up; she once told an interviewer that she had "more royal blood in her veins than any person to marry into the royal family since Prince Philip". Then there was that skirmish in New York- if you're not familiar with it, here's it in a nutshell: while having lunch in NY with friends, PMK got a bit irritated that the group of black men who were at an adjacent table were talking so loudly. She complained, and in doing so referred to them as “rappers”, and told them that they should just "get back to the colonies” (you know, bc all black men are rappers). In reality, the group was comprised of an attorney, an investment banker, a journalist, & a music executive. Later, when the crap hit the fan, PMK tried to backtrack, and claimed what she had actually said was that she “would be glad to go back to the colonies”. Sort of like that telephone game you played when you were a kid, remember? One person whispers a sentence to the next person in line, and so on and so forth, and you all laugh at how garbled the message is when the last person repeats it. I don't think the public was buying it in PMK's case though.

Perhaps most damning of all is the Queen of England's reference to PMK as being "a bit too grand”. When the Queen of England calls you a diva, it's pretty indisputable.

So why do I mentions all this, after saying I didn't think books should be judged by their authors? Well, for starters, the subjects of her books are all her family, & she has, however unintended, inserted herself in the books by reminding us at every turn that she's related to all the players in them. And while the depth of her knowledge on these people is undoubtedly greater than the average writers, it feels like she's glossing over it all a bit. She is clearly a monarchist, and that's fine- but in being one, it sometimes feels as though she was trying to sell you on the fairy tale that is royal life in the public eye. If there's one thing we know about royal families, it's that none of them are without their skeletons, or their flaws (just like us peasants)- but PMK is selling us the fantasy, not the reality. I don't know if that was her motive- to make the royal family seem infallible and god-like- or if it was just too ingrained in her mind to never air the royal family's dirty laundry, even if it was 600+ years old. But whatever the reason, it hindered the book greatly.

In the end, all I can say is that fiction is not her forte. While her non-fiction sometimes lacks spirit, it's still highly readable, and I would buy another non-fiction book she penned. I would not bother with any more of her fiction though, unless she undergoes a radical re-evaluation of what is in good taste, and what is an over the top, blatant attempt to paint me a pretty picture so we all grow up to be good little ci-devants. Yolande & Louis are purported to have had a good marriage, and it's really cool to see that- so few royal arrangements were actual love matches- but I can't believe that the two never had a fight, that the woman never had a bad hair day, and that everybody down to her chamber maid adored her all day, all the time. That's just not real. And it's all rather a shame, as I've since found out that this was book one of a trilogy, and the next will focus on Agnès Sorel, who has been grossly underrepresented in the history books. I would love to read a novel about her. I may consider giving that one a go in a preview capacity, in case I've misjudged things, but I'm not holding my breath.

So if you're a history lover, check out her non-fiction- but skip the flowery solecism that is The Queen of Four Kingdoms.

Oh, and by the way, did I mention how beautiful she was?
Post Reply

Return to “Other Fiction Forum”