The Pillars of the Earth

_The Pillars of the Earth_ opens with a prologue that vaguely introduces future characters and a mystery that will gradually tie the numerous characters together. It is exciting and bizarre and sets the expectations high. It is apparent by this prologue alone that Ken Follett has done his research in terms of twelfth-century culture, a theme that is consistent throughout the novel.

After this, the book was disappointing at first. It was hard to get into, with the story following Tom Builder and his family in his struggle to find work in order to survive. At this point the writing seems pedantic - it is too simple, sometimes as if Follett is speaking to a child. It reflects the education level of the characters in focus, which is an interesting narrative tool but grew quite tiresome. The first part of the book took me three months to read because of this. However, I either got used to it or it lessened as the book went on - something that was most fortuitous.

Once the narration leaves Tom Builder, Follett begins to bring us into the major part of the story involving Brother Philip of St.-John-In-The-Forest. Philip is an incredibly engaging character, whose strong Christian conviction is honest without being preachy or comedic. This young, nobly ambitious monk is only one of the fine characters that make this novel worthwhile. Also of special note are Jack Jackson, the sharply intelligent and rebellious bastard son of a witch; Archdeacon Waleran Bigod, the self-serving and double-dealing priest who is just too slick for words; and Aliena, the beautiful daughter of a fallen earl who, though at great risk for becoming a dull and vapid Mary Sue, remains a fascinatingly admirable and sometimes unsympathetic character. None of the heroes are perfect - all of the protagonists have their flaws that make them undeniably human, something that most novelists don't do with their characters because it risks the character's likeability.

The story is long. It has to be - it's about the building of a Gothic cathedral, which takes twenty, thirty years to build .. and so the story spans some thirty years. Everything that could go wrong does go wrong, as is to be expected with a project of such expanse. At times it can be tedious but those points are rare. When the plot is not racing along to the point where one can't help thinking "Good Lord, what _else_ could happen?", one is learning about the culture of the twelfth century, which never reads like a textbook and always adds color and context to the story.

The unexpected thing about _The Pillars of the Earth_ is its political intrigue. It is not generally thought that such games of power would have to be played for the building of a cathedral, but this book proves it wrong. Such maneuverings are seen through the eyes of naive Philip, who must learn to move in this world if he wishes to see his cathedral built. We learn along with him what people must do for the king and just how far some are willing to go.

All in all, it is an incredible story. However, there is some gratuitous sexuality and violence that is not necessary for the plot. It seemed that all love was based around physical attraction and lust, even the most innocent of loves (never mind the constant rape scenes involving Lord William Hamleigh). This is, perhaps, to show a marked contrast between 'normal people' and the celibate monks, and also because the twelfth-century English culture did not blush at sexuality. Only a few scenes of Lord William's sexual abuse are integral to the plot; the rest are to enhance one's hatred of him and understanding of his mind. Don't read this, certainly, if you are squeamish - everything is put into its most vulgar terms (making it a historically accurate narration, and I was most impressed with that fact) and the violence is not flowery and romantic.

My other complaint was some words were used that were definitely not in the twelfth century, having been invented by either Shakespeare (such as "puke" and "weird") or someone long after his time. This will not stick out to most readers and ought not to affect the enjoyment of the novel unless one is a history buff or lover of word-lore - it might jar that sort of reader for a moment before one can move on. There are not enough instances of this for it to be distracting, and although the novel feels contemporary and the characters seem modern, it all fits ideally into the time period it was set in, making it a historical novel that is accessible to contemporary readers. Brilliant.

My recommendation? READ THIS BOOK. It is something that will stay with you for a very long time. The characters are bound to follow you at school, at work, anywhere you're not supposed to be reading. You will probably be disappointed when it finally ends. For me, it was a struggle to get through the beginning but once Philip was introduced it was quite a ride. Loved it. Read it. :)


A Rape Scene that Changed This Fan's Mind about Follett   November 17, 2007
 85 out of 101 found this review helpful

Fond memories: reading Ken Follett novels when I should have been paying attention in algebra class. I used to hold his paperbacks under the desk and give them all my attention, naively certain that the teacher never noticed.

"The Key to Rebecca," "Night over Water," "The Man from St. Petersburg," "Eye of the Needle": even as I was entranced by these books' plots, I marveled at the master who penned them. He wielded a magic wand; he bewitched me into turning those pages until I reached the final page. How did he do it? I wanted to do the same, to hold readers in thrall to a propulsive narrative. No less than sexual seduction, seducing millions of readers is a powerful, Darwinian gift.

Now, these many years later, I teach Follett to my writing students. I encourage them to think about what Follett does to get readers to turn those pages so breathlessly.

"Pillars of the Earth" changed my mind about Follett, so much so that it made me think, long and hard, about all popular entertainment, and my own consumption of it.

A two-dimensional villain tortures another man by lowering that man into a crackling fire. "Pillars" describes the victim's skin blistering, his cries of pain.

This torture scene doesn't contribute any twists or pace to the plot. It doesn't plumb the use of torture in the Middle Ages or today. It doesn't teach me or move me. I'm willing to read a difficult scene, to be taught, to be moved, to be changed, to be made a better person with a richer view of life. Rather, this torture scene in "Pillars" is there for ... entertainment -- the entertainment of "seeing" the torture victim's skin blister.

I found that reading a torture scene that was meant to be entertaining to be a very disturbing experience.

Not long after, there is a rape. The same two-dimensional villain who had tortured the man by roasting him catches a noble virgin alone in a defeated castle. The villain previously murdered her family and friends. He rapes the girl in front of her brother, and then invites his servant to rape the girl, as well.

Plot elements conspire to disempower the girl utterly. She can not attempt to resist; she can not attempt to seek justice.

A rape scene can be handled in any number of ways. If the author did not want to dwell on the rape, but to make the point that it did occur, he could have mentioned it and moved, quickly, on.

If the author wanted to make more of a point of it, he could have dwelled on what the rape did to the victim.

Follett chose to describe the rape from the point of view of the rapist, in a pornographic manner, in a way that would entertain someone who would enjoy such a scene by positioning himself as a vicarious violater. Follett dwells on the physical attractions of the girl, her complete powerlessness, how much she is hurt, and how much the rapist enjoys the rape.

Again, there is no greater point made about women as collateral damage in competitions waged by men for men's prizes, no greater point made about the status of women in medieval society.

After reading that scene, I resigned my figurative "Ken Follet Fan Club" membership card.

I ask myself, is it me that has changed? Were Ken Follett books always this way? I don't know. I haven't gone back to reread the ones I so enjoyed in my youth, before I gave these matters the unavoidable, pained thought I do give them in maturity.

My guess is that Follett, whom I'm sure is a great guy, had no intention of writing a scene that would do anyone any damage, that he was just using his tried-and-true, mix-and-match, sex-danger-crime-punishment elements to create reader involvement and suspense.

I'm saying that for me, given what I, and all too many other women, and too many men, girls, and boys, know about rape, that scene, written the way it was written, struck me as having been handled -- even if only accidentally -- in such a wrong way, that I can never approach a Ken Follett book in the same way.


You won't be able to put it down   November 14, 2007
 61 out of 85 found this review helpful

This is not a book I would have ordinarily chosen, however someone at work said that I just had to read it. I could not put it down and found myself up many a late night reading. I HIGHLY recommend this book.


an excellent piece of historical fiction   April 11, 2000
 46 out of 49 found this review helpful

I actually listened to this book on tape, while my wife read the paperback. Both of us loved it. I not only recommend the book, but also urge people to rent the Book on Tape version, narrated by David Case, whose acting and narrative talents shine through, bringing the various characters to life. (But still purchase the book from Amazon!) I came to Pillars of the Earth after spending about two solid years reading, in my spare time, nothing but medieval histories, with a focus on fourteenth century England and the Plantagenet kings. I had never before read a book by Follett, who I had assumed mass-produced pulp spy fiction. I only chose the book because of of my interest in medieval history. To my delight and surprise, I discovered the book to be a true work of literature, which might well still be read in 100 years. I found myself amazed by Follett's ability to create an extremely complex and compelling plot, with compelling characters, against a backdrop that seemed true to the histories I had been reading. The early twelfth century is a period neglected by us moderns; but it's one that's inherently interesting. Who, today, has even heard of King Stephen (who preceded the famous Henry II, immortalized twice by Peter O'Toole in the 1960s movies Beckett and Lion in Winter)? Because, in England at least, Stephen's reign was a time of virtual anarchy, Follett was able to use the period to create characters who demonstrate the brutal lengths to which people can go when unconstrained by law and an effective legal order. At the same time, though, he has created religious and other well-meaning characters who, if alien to us because of their belief in Hell and a God intervening almost minute-by-minute in human afairs, display courage and the best of intentions in the harsh face of barbarism. This juxtaposition of the brutal and the well-meaning makes for an interesting meditation on human nature and on the hope for the gradual further civilization of our species. His ultimate message is encouraging, though he certainly doesn't shrink from depicting the nastiness of which humans are capable. In short, the book is a marvelous piece of fiction, in which Follet has done an excellent job capturing the feeling of a distant and neglected period of history.


Wildly inaccurate rubbish   November 10, 2007
 46 out of 65 found this review helpful

This novel was recommended to me by a friend, and I bought it based on reviews on this site. It purports to be set in the twelfth century, which, however, appears to have unaccountably time-shifted to the late 20th. century. For example, women are described as "hot", and 12th. century boys appear to know all about monkeys (this was in a largely illiterate era when there were no published books, no TV, and no public zoos, Mr. Follett).

Other historical details are way off - Old Sarum Castle has apparently moved itself 6 miles so it's located conveniently next door to Salisbury Cathedral.

The final straw for me was that my paperback copy had a full back-cover color shot of author Follett
(taken by his wife), looking like a very self-satisfied chipmunk. I couldn't stand any more after 65 pages. Absolute balderdash. Avoid this book. Mine will be in the Laguna Beach Library used bookstore if you want a cheap copy.