I finally finished reading The Lion and the Lamb by John Henry Clay. I say finally, because it took me around two weeks to read and I can usually read one book a week during term time. The reason for this is partly because Wimbledon has been on so I’ve been reading less, but also because the novel is set in Roman times (something I’m not too knowledgeable about) and took quite a bit of thought on my part.
Having finished that book I’ve now started to read The Queen of Four Kingdoms by Princess Michael of Kent. I should say, right off the bat, that I’m a republican and I’d get rid of all the royals today. However, it’s not for that reason that I’m not enjoying HRH’s offering and I think I can pin it down to two reasons: Firstly, the book appears to have been proofread by someone not well versed in the English language with a series of grammatical errors. This is not unique to this book however, and is something I’m noticing more and more in the books I am reading. Hey, I’m aware that my own grammar leaves much to be desired at times but these are glaring errors.
Besides this, my real bone of contention is that the book is written in the present tense. I can’t remember the last book I read that was written in the present and it’s just not something I enjoy. I’ve been wondering why it bothers me when other narrative issues don’t. For example, I’m not bothered if a book is told in the first or third person (I have read the odd fan-fiction offering which is in the second person, which is always bizarre and should never ever be attempted!)
So yes, I don’t know why it bothers me that this book is told in the present tense. Could it be that it’s because I’m reading historical fiction and therefore the ‘time difference’ is just too much to compute? Possibly. Either way I’m regretting lining this particular royal’s pockets through choice.