Finally, 150 pages into Making History – where, in my opinion, the ideal book would be reaching a climax – Stephen Fry finishes his exaggerated introduction and begins in earnest. That’s 150 pages of pure set-up. None of this jumping into the middle of the action nonsense, this book spends a long time setting up the slightly irritating central character as well as establishing the threads of history that are going to be paralleled in the middle section. It takes about 125 pages too long to do this. What doesn’t help is it is written in a prosaic style which, whilst fitting the character of the narrator, seems very flat after the Wodehousian style of the author’s earlier works.
Towards the end of the first ‘book,’ there’s an exciting bit, when the discussions and setting up have finished and the transition into the second part of the book is created. This is marked by the use of screenplay format. Screenplay format makes the pages turn faster because there are fewer words in descriptions and also makes the action more immediate as it is written in the present tense.
In the central section, we are back in prose, but now the prose doesn’t drag. The middle is where the meat is: It depicts a well-constructed alternate universe where the balance of power is completely different from how it is now, a world where the US is the underdog and stuck in the religious, homophobic, apartheid-like society of the 1950s. It’s a brilliant piece of “what-if” thinking. The question in this case, “What if Hitler had not been born and someone more calculating had filled the vacuum of power in 1930s Germany?” The realisation of the answer and the central character’s discovery of it and of how he played a part in it is compelling.
"A sinister cabal of superior writers."
Article comments
1 - Natalie Bennett
This article has been selected for syndication to Advance.net, which is affiliated with newspapers around the United States. Nice work!
2 - Palinurus
Have you actually cast more than a desultory eye over this novel? It's not the masterpiece it believes itself to be, but it's certainly not the tack-fest churned out in the hope of Hollywood glory that you portray it as. Your review is also appallingly badly written; riddled with supposition and grammatical errors. I am not Stephen Fry's most ardent fan, but the man deserves better than this.
3 - anaconda
I completely agree and identify with this review. I almost put the book down such were the disjointed and irelevant ramblings of the first 200 pages. Once actually in the story is a grand read and the humour intensity and ideas flow.