paperback

hardback

hardback

In the style of Dumas but more tightly plotted without the strict black and white contrasts between good guy and bad, though missing the overt set at comedy of The Three Musketeers is Weylands more modern and sophisticated swashbuckler romance. Without the tedious passages that make Dumas' swashbuckler overweight, this is a trim tightly focused story set in 16th C. France during the religious Wars when France was split into three factions -- the Huguenots of Henry of Navarre; the royalists of Henry Valois of France; and the Catholic League. I kick myself that I didn't discover this book when in my teens when I would have been utterly swept away on its emotional rollercoaster as intrigue, ambiguous characters, shifting alliances, and the complications of 16th C. French political history swirled around in my imagination.

As I turned the pages, I came to admire the author's talents and abilities in plot construction more and more. Not an incident is unearned, not a resolution happens deus ex. If luck is involved in any outcome, it is because the hero made his own luck, or his villain made his own bad luck.

Simultaneously, better than Dumas does, Weyland is adept at characterization and insight into the humanity of his hero, Sieur Gaston de Marsac a soldier of misfortune when we meet him and a man of no small mettle as we come to learn. Weyland pauses after scenes of action to let the reader and the hero catch their breaths, allowing de Marsac to think about himself in reference to the state, the crisis, the woman he loves, the scoundrels he must defeat, and his personal station and motives as the story progresses.

There are wonderful secondary characters, all distinct personalities who live just as largely on the page as when the hero or the kings occupy the spotlight. My favorite is the callow cleric, Simon, who I can best describe as the equivalent of a 16th C. French nerd, incapable of comprehending social signals and shocked by his own eptitude that springs from innate resourcefulness that he is unaware of, and graced by abiding loyalty to whomever he devotes himself.

My quibble -- and it is a small one, for this was Weyland's first novel -- is that he is weakest where writing women is concerned. Remembering the era portrayed in the novel, perhaps it is best to remember that women were more constrained and poorly educated by comparison to what we expect of female characters in books today. Still, I would have appreciated a bit more nuanced characterization than that of devoted wife, or shrewish "Kate." However, I admit that as the story progressed the two major female characters in the book did emerge as important pins in the plot and took greater part in the action. So, I credit Weyland for doing what could be done in 1893 with female characters "living" in 1588 action novels.

In sum, here is a rollicking good adventure that modern readers can still delight in. A Gentleman of France is worthy of a wider readership and Weyland of a living reputation alongside those of Dumas and Sabatini. Personally, I think he's better than either of them. ( )

I hated this book. The writing in it was atrocious and extremely difficult to read. I understand that it wasn't written by a modern author, but I have read historical documents before and didn't find them as bad as this book. The characters were dull and unlikeable, especially the main character who I instantly hated. I do not recommend this book. ( )