Scan barcode
A review by romanjones
1635: The Papal Stakes by Charles E. Gannon, Eric Flint
2.0
I can only give this two stars. I made it about halfway through the book then took a break to read something else. The plot starts off promising enough, but it begins to drag in the middle before finally picking up at the very end.
The majority of the plot seemed to me like a retread of 1635: A Parcel of Rogues. Specifically, the attempts led by Harry Lefferts to rescue Frank and Giovanna Stone were similar to the plot in “Rogues,” which involved Lefferts attempting to rescue the USE embassy from the Tower of London. Also, the character arc of Don Vicente in this book mirrors the character arc of Thomas Wentworth in “Rogues.” I understand “Rogues” was published after “The Papal Stakes,” but chronologically takes place before it. So I read “Rogues” months before reading 1635: The Cannon Law, which leads directly into “Stakes.”
The previous 2 books in this thread (1634: The Galileo Affair & 1635: The Cannon Law) were co-authored with Andrew Dennis, but for this one Charles Gannon fills in. I’m not familiar with Gannon’s work, nothing against him, but after reading this I wished Dennis had been able to stay on. There’s a different feel to this book, the prose and text aren’t quite the same compared to the previous entries. The characters feel like themselves in broad strokes, but slightly off in certain parts.
Overall this one was a miss, in a series that has mostly hits. Hoping the next one will be better.
The majority of the plot seemed to me like a retread of 1635: A Parcel of Rogues. Specifically, the attempts led by Harry Lefferts to rescue Frank and Giovanna Stone were similar to the plot in “Rogues,” which involved Lefferts attempting to rescue the USE embassy from the Tower of London. Also, the character arc of Don Vicente in this book mirrors the character arc of Thomas Wentworth in “Rogues.” I understand “Rogues” was published after “The Papal Stakes,” but chronologically takes place before it. So I read “Rogues” months before reading 1635: The Cannon Law, which leads directly into “Stakes.”
The previous 2 books in this thread (1634: The Galileo Affair & 1635: The Cannon Law) were co-authored with Andrew Dennis, but for this one Charles Gannon fills in. I’m not familiar with Gannon’s work, nothing against him, but after reading this I wished Dennis had been able to stay on. There’s a different feel to this book, the prose and text aren’t quite the same compared to the previous entries. The characters feel like themselves in broad strokes, but slightly off in certain parts.
Overall this one was a miss, in a series that has mostly hits. Hoping the next one will be better.