i read a review of the
sequel to
at the sign of the star which made me want to read it. so i thought i should read the first part of the story. fortunately, it is a short little book, very good for carrying in ones bag and reading on the bus, so that was easy to accomplish. historical fiction is not really a genre i consider myself drawn to and it irks me professionally that so many of the books that are acclaimed as "good for kids to read" and frequently recommended or required fall into the category. but maybe that's just because it's so easy to do it badly. well, and also that much of it strikes me as didactic. but it's true that well done historical fiction can be a pleasure and in reality it's probably easier to point to historical fiction that i've read and liked than historical fiction that i've read and hated. so maybe it's just my own warped perception, or the fact that i try not to read stuff that i know i'll dislike.
which is a long winded way to note that at the sign of the star is historical fiction, taking place in seventeenth century london and concerning the life of meg moore, twelve year old daughter of a london bookseller, whose mother has died in childbirth. meg is atypical of her time, in her affinity for the written word and her slightly unconventional upbringing. at the same time, she is quite typical in her concerns for her future and her probable fate at the hands of marriage or service and dependence on the whims of inheritence. her desire to be somewhat master of her own fate is jeopardized by her father's marriage and the possible birth of a male heir.
meg's plight is very real and her voice is a convincing one. the book itself is decent and sort of interesting, although i wasn't exactly bowled over by it. i did however request the aforementioned sequel, so i was interested enough by the characters and impressed enough by the writing to give it a further go, so take it as you will.