Summaries and Customer Reviews are supplied by Amazon.com

Average Customer Rating:

zzzzzzzzzz

Customer Rating:

I do hope this review is published for I have learned that some I have written the past were not. It is very disapointing. Any how, first off I was hestitant upon buying this book. First of all, I had never heard of it or the author. I make an effort to only start reading a book I am confident that I will enjoy for there is nothing more disapointing than a lame book. Secondly, though nothing is more interesting than the subject of alternative history, reading Harry Turtledove has caused me to seriously doubt that many have the ability to write a good alternative history novel! Yet, with 1862 I took the chance. Shame on me this time. I'll start off with the style of writing. Not colorful, in fact, pretty dim, dull, dank. No ridges, turns, or dips. When I read, I usually do so while eating a bowl of ceral or ice cream. Honestly, while reading 1862 I found the Super Fudge Chunk more interesting! One of example of this strange style of writing (actually no style at all) are the conversations between the character of widow socialite Rebecca and her nympho friend. In many of the scenes, Rebecca's French friend is constantly asking about her sex life. The conversations between these two females sort of remind me of scenes from amature sex blogs. On one page, "Do you want Nathan to touch you, Rebecca? Do you want him to make love to you? Do you want it to go further?" During another scene, Rebecca's French girlfriend seduces her with a drug and champaign. Though this scene in the book doesn't stand out as being any better written than the other scenes, it is written with a language that hints maybe the author has a personal fetish. I come to this conclusion because the scenes between Rebecca and her girlfriend seem to be wedged into the story and also seem very out of character in a novel about the Civil War period! I do not advocate against this subject being in books. I only advocate that books should be better written. Lastly, the writer seems to of made dozens of historical mixups. -Bill the sharpshooter using a Sharps Rifle 1859. During the Civil War, short barrel, breach loading rifles were not prefered for sharp shooters. -The Union ironclad, Monitor is deployed months before the Confederate iron clad, Virignia is finished. The Virginia had not only begun being built before the Monitor but its design was the inspirtation for the Northern inventer to build her. -The author places Union General Sumner at the head of the Federal invasion of the Sheandoah Valley when historically it was General Banks. Even though this is an alternative history novel, the twist (England coming into the war)would of had no influence on which Union general invaded the valley. Even if there had been, the author chose not to explain. -The author expresses that the majority of the English population was against the Confederate war because they felt the Confederacy was fighting for slavery. However, the opinions of a widely read London Newspaper and popular English writer of the period expressed the TRUE opinions of the English, "The contest is realy for empire on the side of the North and for independence on that of the South." -London Times, November 7, 1861 "The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states."-Charles Dickens, 1862 The subject line of 1862 was an awesome concept to be sure. Sadly, the author's delivery of it fell short.

Utterly Predictable and poor overall

Customer Rating:

The historical improbabilities have been covered in other reviews but what killed this book for me more than anything was the Rah-Rah "USA! USA!" bias. As an American (and Northern for the record) I would obviously like to see 'my side' win but this book paints almost everyone & everything Southern/Canadian/English as incompetent, arrogant, ignorant etc. Once the antagonists have painted as obviously inept again and again the story becomes very predictable. (To put it in context, the Star Wars movies wouldn't have been terribly interesting if Darth Vader had been a complete putz.) My only thought was that this was the only way the author could overcome the historical inaccuracies that so many others have mentioned. Save your money and just as importantly your time for a better read.

Puts the "alternate" in alternate history

Customer Rating:

I agree with many of the reviewers who panned this book that Britain completely outclassed the Union by any number of metrics in 1862. The reason this is an excellent book, however, is that it provides plausible explanations for why deploying that might would be problematic. I also find it credible that when faced with an obvious threat like Britain the U.S. would take the significant actions it needed for ultimate victory sooner. In short, Conroy has written an enjoyable piece of fiction that challenges conventional wisdom and paints a picture of how the Union might react with its back to the wall. It's true that Conroy doesn't invest as much in character development as someone like Harry Turtledove, but if you've ever given up on one of Turtledove's series because they seemed to wander with no end in sight you'll appreciate this book. Conroy has rediscovered the lost art of telling an entire story in a single book. I agree with other reviews that the romance sub-plots were unnecessary and not particularly well executed, hence only four stars.

Good Palate Cleanser

Customer Rating:

This would have been a fun read if I had been interested in the history of the Civil War, but since I'm not really, I didn't enjoy it much. The fact that it is a fantasy, a genre I don't care for, didn't help, either. But, someone recommended it for a group read, and belonging to the group, and having one of my suggestions for a similar group read accepted, I felt somewhat obliged to join in. I'm not sorry I did, however, I could have spent my time otherwise and felt it better used. I know, these are all personal problems, so what about the book? This is one of a type of book I call a palate cleanser, the kind of book I enjoy after a hard slog through something on the order of Our Mutual Friend or The Violent Bear it Away. This type of book is the sherbet of the book world. Pleasantly sweet, little substance, no lingering aftertaste and soon forgotten in the red meat of Dostoevsky or the superb taste of a good Graham Greene. Another reviewer of this book called it a Harlequin Romance for men. Not too far from the mark, but just a little harsh considering that it is of a style that encourages reading by those who may otherwise not. The story itself, as I said, is a fantasy (some call it alternate history, but I'm of the call a spade a spade set). As the title implies, it is set in fantasyland in the year 1862. There is a Civil War raging and the British have been drawn in with hopes of weakening the growing threat of the United States. As the story unfolds armies fight, territory is lost and won, people die, or lose important body parts, allies are duplicitous, the women are bawdy and the men horny. Typical of this genre I suppose. I know it's typical of this kind of four hundred page pot-boiler, of which I have some experience in my youth, before I discovered what a real book could be. Much to my surprise and delight, I did not find the usual assortment of misspellings, fractured syntax, broken paragraphs and gaping plotholes that bring me up short and slingshot me out of the fantasy and back into my chair. For that I am grateful to the thoroughness of the author and his editors. Good editing can make almost anything go down smoothly, especially an action adventure book. Some books, even if they are edited by God, cannot be saved. This fortunately is not one of them. The style is modern action with few interruptions for character development, introspection, or emotions that make characters real, and worth caring for. What I find makes a page turner is action, action, action and this has it in spades. The man-action is only interrupted three of four times with gratuitous sex, both hetero and homo. I really don't care much for explicit sex in novels, it all seems to emerge from the same cookie cutter, which is generally dull aound the edges. There were a few subplots that were fun, but petered off into nowhere. In retrospect some of these seem to be there just to fill up the page, not advance the story. A great example is the slave rebellion. If this was to get certain papers into British hands, then it was totally unnecessary and could have saved twenty or so pages that ultimately went nowhere. Oh, well, remember, action, action, action. I can see this book providing hours of good reading to many people, mostly men, but I don't think I will read anymore of these for a while, I hope. One disadvantage to group reads (which I like a lot, don't get me wrong) is that not everyone has the same taste. Even though the book is four hundred pages, it reminds me of a thin broth or soup. It has a watery texture, with no complexity or depth, just action, action, action.

The British can't take a joke.	Customer Rating:
Not as good of an overall read as Conroy's 1901. Still Grant's campaign in Canada was worth a read. Also nice to see Winfield Scott treated decently.