Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Doubleday (2009), Edition: First Edition, Hardcover, 880 pages
Description
A tale set against a backdrop of New York City's history from its founding through the September 11 attacks traces the experiences of characters who witness such periods as the Revolutionary War, the city's emergence as a financial giant, and the Gilded Age.
Media reviews
Rutherfurd's habit of also making up many of his characters makes this sweeping tale a much more fun read than anyone would suspect. This is history, but with a very readable story line.
Associated Press
"New York: The Novel" is the first foray into America for the British author, who as in previous works never hesitates to pause the narrative to explain to readers, in an easily understood way, the historical context of the time in which the action is unfolding. The result is a book as accessible
Show More
to the casual reader as it is to the history buff. Show Less
User reviews
LibraryThing member LisaMaria_C
My first Rutherfurd work was Sarum, his novel telling the story of the history of England by focusing on five lineages down the centuries in the area around Stonehenge and Salisbury Cathedral. The style wasn’t anything special, even clunky at times, and with almost 9,000 years of history to
I’m a native New Yorker, and as such so much of this book in the very beginning was irresistible. The book starts in 1664 when the population of New York City (New Amsterdam then) was only 1,500 people. I had a blast seeing all the Dutch Colonial origins of the name places around my city, some of which I knew (Wall Street, Canal Street, Harlem, Broadway, Manna hata, Bronck's land) and some not (Jonkers, Bouwerie, Pearl Street). The book, although focused on the Masters, also includes cameos by such historical figures as Peter Stuyvesant, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, J. P. Morgan, Enrico Caruso. The chapters are almost more connected short stories than one united narrative with decades sometimes passing between them. I found among the most striking the early chapters, “New York” and “New Amsterdam” (Margarethe de Groot featured there was among the strongest female characters in the book), “The Patriot” and “Vanessa” which skillfully depicted the growing divide between the colonies and Mother country, “Draft” about the 1863 Draft Riots, “Old England” where an Irish family reinvents its past.
Some reviewers complain the portrait of New York City isn’t diverse enough. I think that’s a casualty of Rutherford’s formula of trying to follow the history of the city through just a few families from the beginning, and particularly putting such emphasis on the Masters. I do feel Sarum did better in interweaving the various lineages over the centuries. Early in New York there was a thread about a family of African Americans. One early chapter was even written first person from the point of view of a slave in that family, but the African American story in the novel petered out and disappears after the Civil War. Irish and German immigrants don't come into the novel until after a good third of it has passed and Italians and Jews not until well after the half-way mark. Even though Rutherfurd mentions that there had been Jewish families in the city from the days of the Dutch, the novel doesn’t really deal with Jewish life in the city before the 1950s. I felt Rutherfurd missed an opportunity not making one such family a thread in his tapestry from the beginning, though I imagine he worried that might make things too unwieldy. He could have kept the Native American thread going too. Not many of the original Lenape are still here, that's true, but until recently there was a community of Mohawks in Brooklyn for over a century; a lot of Mohawks were involved in building our skyscrapers. No Asians are even mentioned until very late in the novel--there's nothing here about Chinatown at all. Centering the narrative on one family isn’t the best way to view such a dynamic, changing city. So many New Yorkers came from somewhere else, and few of us have roots that go deep: my father was born in Baltimore, Maryland, where his family had been for ages, my mother in rural Puerto Rico.
My family’s own intersection with the city would only cover the last 150 pages of this multigenerational saga. It’s in the last chapters from the 1970s on where I can speak from personal experience I found weakest, that I thought rushed and where parts didn’t ring true. It’s a small thing, but he got wrong the details about the top three public high schools students could enter through competitive examination. Hunter high school would have still been an all girls school at the time his character Juan Campos could have attended. The three magnet public high schools in the sixties and beyond a boy could attend were Stuyvesant, Bronx Science--and Brooklyn Tech, not Hunter. I went to one of those schools--much later than Rutherford’s character would have, but no I can’t imagine Puerto Ricans being discouraged from trying or attending the way Rutherfurd presented it--not by that time anyway. There was nothing about the homeless problem that hit New York City in the 80s that was such a shock to me when I first saw it in my youth. (I recently read New York City is home to 14 percent of the national homeless population.) Nothing about how AIDs hit the vibrant gay community in New York (Gays and lesbians are almost invisible in this massive novel. There's just a brief mention in one of the last chapters of someone in one of the families being gay and of the Stonewall riot.) And Rutherford had only this to say about the Dinkins years: “Mayor Koch had been succeeded by Mayor Dinkins who, as an African American, had been perceived as more sympathetic to the troubles of Harlem and the other deprived areas.” Nothing about the Crown Heights riot that took place during those years that were a watershed for the city. Rutherford devotes a chapter to the 1977 blackouts, but not one line about what was, I think, as much a shock to New Yorkers. Mind you, it’s still a bitter, still a controversial event; I realize that. Dealing with it and its repercussions in New York City would have taken guts. But what else is fiction for?
There are so many sides, so many strands to New York I pity anyone trying to tell our story. There was a lot in the book (including African American aspects) of the history of the city I never knew, so even a native like me felt I learned a lot. And a lot Rutherfurd got so very right. I couldn’t help smiling when John Master tells off a Thomas Jefferson determined to move the capital that, “New York is the true capital of America. Every New Yorker knows it, and by God we always will.” What proud New Yorker would disagree? In his introduction Rutherfurd called New York “a much-loved city.” His affection and respect for my city definitely came through.
Show More
cover, few characters ever felt fleshed out. It was a novel more broad than deep; it was historical fiction, almost more dramatized history text than stories with history as a backdrop. All of that can also be said of New York: the Novel which tries to encapsulate about 350 years of the history of New York City, mostly by following one family of English descent, the Masters, who early on married into one of the founding Dutch families, but as with Sarum, the effect is cumulative, and I found myself completely engaged through its 860 pages.I’m a native New Yorker, and as such so much of this book in the very beginning was irresistible. The book starts in 1664 when the population of New York City (New Amsterdam then) was only 1,500 people. I had a blast seeing all the Dutch Colonial origins of the name places around my city, some of which I knew (Wall Street, Canal Street, Harlem, Broadway, Manna hata, Bronck's land) and some not (Jonkers, Bouwerie, Pearl Street). The book, although focused on the Masters, also includes cameos by such historical figures as Peter Stuyvesant, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, J. P. Morgan, Enrico Caruso. The chapters are almost more connected short stories than one united narrative with decades sometimes passing between them. I found among the most striking the early chapters, “New York” and “New Amsterdam” (Margarethe de Groot featured there was among the strongest female characters in the book), “The Patriot” and “Vanessa” which skillfully depicted the growing divide between the colonies and Mother country, “Draft” about the 1863 Draft Riots, “Old England” where an Irish family reinvents its past.
Some reviewers complain the portrait of New York City isn’t diverse enough. I think that’s a casualty of Rutherford’s formula of trying to follow the history of the city through just a few families from the beginning, and particularly putting such emphasis on the Masters. I do feel Sarum did better in interweaving the various lineages over the centuries. Early in New York there was a thread about a family of African Americans. One early chapter was even written first person from the point of view of a slave in that family, but the African American story in the novel petered out and disappears after the Civil War. Irish and German immigrants don't come into the novel until after a good third of it has passed and Italians and Jews not until well after the half-way mark. Even though Rutherfurd mentions that there had been Jewish families in the city from the days of the Dutch, the novel doesn’t really deal with Jewish life in the city before the 1950s. I felt Rutherfurd missed an opportunity not making one such family a thread in his tapestry from the beginning, though I imagine he worried that might make things too unwieldy. He could have kept the Native American thread going too. Not many of the original Lenape are still here, that's true, but until recently there was a community of Mohawks in Brooklyn for over a century; a lot of Mohawks were involved in building our skyscrapers. No Asians are even mentioned until very late in the novel--there's nothing here about Chinatown at all. Centering the narrative on one family isn’t the best way to view such a dynamic, changing city. So many New Yorkers came from somewhere else, and few of us have roots that go deep: my father was born in Baltimore, Maryland, where his family had been for ages, my mother in rural Puerto Rico.
My family’s own intersection with the city would only cover the last 150 pages of this multigenerational saga. It’s in the last chapters from the 1970s on where I can speak from personal experience I found weakest, that I thought rushed and where parts didn’t ring true. It’s a small thing, but he got wrong the details about the top three public high schools students could enter through competitive examination. Hunter high school would have still been an all girls school at the time his character Juan Campos could have attended. The three magnet public high schools in the sixties and beyond a boy could attend were Stuyvesant, Bronx Science--and Brooklyn Tech, not Hunter. I went to one of those schools--much later than Rutherford’s character would have, but no I can’t imagine Puerto Ricans being discouraged from trying or attending the way Rutherfurd presented it--not by that time anyway. There was nothing about the homeless problem that hit New York City in the 80s that was such a shock to me when I first saw it in my youth. (I recently read New York City is home to 14 percent of the national homeless population.) Nothing about how AIDs hit the vibrant gay community in New York (Gays and lesbians are almost invisible in this massive novel. There's just a brief mention in one of the last chapters of someone in one of the families being gay and of the Stonewall riot.) And Rutherford had only this to say about the Dinkins years: “Mayor Koch had been succeeded by Mayor Dinkins who, as an African American, had been perceived as more sympathetic to the troubles of Harlem and the other deprived areas.” Nothing about the Crown Heights riot that took place during those years that were a watershed for the city. Rutherford devotes a chapter to the 1977 blackouts, but not one line about what was, I think, as much a shock to New Yorkers. Mind you, it’s still a bitter, still a controversial event; I realize that. Dealing with it and its repercussions in New York City would have taken guts. But what else is fiction for?
There are so many sides, so many strands to New York I pity anyone trying to tell our story. There was a lot in the book (including African American aspects) of the history of the city I never knew, so even a native like me felt I learned a lot. And a lot Rutherfurd got so very right. I couldn’t help smiling when John Master tells off a Thomas Jefferson determined to move the capital that, “New York is the true capital of America. Every New Yorker knows it, and by God we always will.” What proud New Yorker would disagree? In his introduction Rutherfurd called New York “a much-loved city.” His affection and respect for my city definitely came through.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Jennifyr
I procrastinated reading this book for quite a while for some reason, but about a week ago I finally picked it up, and once I started, I couldn't help but to read it at every single chance I could get. I've never really read a lot of historical fiction before, even though I love history, but this
I just can't praise this novel enough, and I would recommend it to anyone who loves history, amazing writing, social issues... or anyone who wants a truly incredible book to sink their teeth into and walk away feeling not only accomplished, but ready for more. It's not often I read a 900 page book and want to dive directly into another of the author's work, usually I need a break, but even after almost 1000 pages, I didn't want the story to end. That is the mark of a truly gifted story teller. Every New Yorker (or anyone who has spent time in the city) should at least try this book out. It makes you fall in love with it from an entirely different angle. And within the story of New York, there is the story of America, and of all the different people that make it up. It's a incredible tale of social change, social injustice, class struggles, the American dream, prejudice and acceptance, struggle and resurrection, and over all... strength.
Show More
has opened a new door for me to this genre. In fact, just today I picked up Edward Rutherfurd's "London" today to begin in a little while. Everything about this epic was incredible. Whether of the class of the wealthy, socially elite, or the underdogs of the slums (including viewpoints from African American slaves and free men, to the Irish, Italian, Jewish and Puerto Rican - the struggles are all different, yet at the core, are also the same), the characters were enriched, likeable, complex - the family histories were engaging and addictive, and maybe most importantly, believable. The families intertwine seamlessly with well, and lesser known, historical moments, and iconic and historic characters make an appearance now and then, but don't take over the story line. Rutherfurd is a writer who obviously respects history, and does his best to be true by it, which is admirable, when I feel so many other writers would take poetic license. You can tell Rutherfurd did his homework. It was exciting to hear of names and events you know of, and feel like you have the ability to live them through someone's eyes. I have always loved New York but now I can't wait to hop on a train and go there again as soon as possible. I'm hoping the next book of his I read will make me want to do the same with new lands that I've never been too. I just can't praise this novel enough, and I would recommend it to anyone who loves history, amazing writing, social issues... or anyone who wants a truly incredible book to sink their teeth into and walk away feeling not only accomplished, but ready for more. It's not often I read a 900 page book and want to dive directly into another of the author's work, usually I need a break, but even after almost 1000 pages, I didn't want the story to end. That is the mark of a truly gifted story teller. Every New Yorker (or anyone who has spent time in the city) should at least try this book out. It makes you fall in love with it from an entirely different angle. And within the story of New York, there is the story of America, and of all the different people that make it up. It's a incredible tale of social change, social injustice, class struggles, the American dream, prejudice and acceptance, struggle and resurrection, and over all... strength.
Show Less
LibraryThing member john257hopper
Another historical saga with intertwined families by the author who is, for me, the leading living exponent of this genre. This gives a good feel for the rich cultural diversity and breadth of New York and demonstrates its well deserved place as one of the world's great cities. The only slight
Show More
surprise was that the chapters on the 20th century skirted round the edges of all famous events between the Wall Street crash and 9/11. Not a criticism, as that is not the point of the novel, but I was a little surprised. This will never be my favourite Rutherfurd as I am ultimately more interested in British and Russian history than US history, but a fine read. I'd like to visit NY now. Show Less
LibraryThing member Cecrow
I've trusted this author before ("London", "The Forest") as researcher and tour-guide-through-time of the locales he writes about. New York has long interested me, so this novel was not to be resisted. Each chapter offers a vignette of New York at a different stage in its history, often advancing
"New York" is about a city and its growth. It begins with New Amsterdam in the 17th century, and winds up with the events of 9/11. Only on the macroscale do I have a gripe, noting there's a skewing of the pace and degree of detail that favours the first half of the timeline. It's most evident when you take the example of war coverage. I was expecting to read about New York's role during the American Revolution; what I didn't expect was a full detailing of all events leading up to the war and the war itself, told from both sides. The Boston Tea Party, Valley Forge, Saratoga, etc. - it's all in there. That's a strong contrast with the Civil War, which is only briefly visited in comparison and where the story centers on the Draft Riots. World War II is barely mentioned in passing - no scenes of troop ships, no ticker tape parade at war's end.
On the microscale, there is much to appreciate throughout. There is a very good capturing of a slave's perspective in one of the early chapters. I enjoyed the Ben Franklin 'teasers' prior to his actual appearance, and the cameo by the Albions from "The Forest", as well as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Caruso the Italian tenor, J.P. Morgan and other significant historical figures. Irish, Italian, Jewish and Puerto Rican immigrants are all well presented. Skyscraper construction in the 1920s and 1930s received its fair due. There are interesting details around how the stock market operated, then and now. The final chapters profile upscale characters who don't represent the Everyman of New York, but are a necessity for setting up the 9/11 sequence.
Historical fiction is a great genre for combining learning and entertainment, provided it steers close to actual fact. Rutherfurd remains very steadily on the factual side. The fiction in this novel is only a garnish, but it's enough to ease the journey: there's a world of difference between googling the origin of the name Bronx (Bronk's) on the Internet and 'witnessing' its naming. Straight history rarely conveys the sense of what it was to be there in that time and place. Throughout this novelized telling I felt fully present in a way that no straightlaced 'city-ography' can capture.
Constantly in the shadow of the late James Michener (and to whom he makes some fun references here, as if to acknowledge it), Rutherfurd is almost always considered the lesser talent. I always know Michener's characters more intimately and find them better rounded, but Rutherfurd is at least his match in terms of historical research and its non-obtrusive insertion into the flow of a story.
Show More
several years and sometimes to the next generation of families central to the narration. You don't visit with characters for very long before they're sequentially moved offstage, but you do see the unfolding of family fortunes through the centuries, like descending a family tree from its highest limbs to the present day at its roots. Accepting the setting as the novel's focal point rather than its characters, this structure works."New York" is about a city and its growth. It begins with New Amsterdam in the 17th century, and winds up with the events of 9/11. Only on the macroscale do I have a gripe, noting there's a skewing of the pace and degree of detail that favours the first half of the timeline. It's most evident when you take the example of war coverage. I was expecting to read about New York's role during the American Revolution; what I didn't expect was a full detailing of all events leading up to the war and the war itself, told from both sides. The Boston Tea Party, Valley Forge, Saratoga, etc. - it's all in there. That's a strong contrast with the Civil War, which is only briefly visited in comparison and where the story centers on the Draft Riots. World War II is barely mentioned in passing - no scenes of troop ships, no ticker tape parade at war's end.
On the microscale, there is much to appreciate throughout. There is a very good capturing of a slave's perspective in one of the early chapters. I enjoyed the Ben Franklin 'teasers' prior to his actual appearance, and the cameo by the Albions from "The Forest", as well as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Caruso the Italian tenor, J.P. Morgan and other significant historical figures. Irish, Italian, Jewish and Puerto Rican immigrants are all well presented. Skyscraper construction in the 1920s and 1930s received its fair due. There are interesting details around how the stock market operated, then and now. The final chapters profile upscale characters who don't represent the Everyman of New York, but are a necessity for setting up the 9/11 sequence.
Historical fiction is a great genre for combining learning and entertainment, provided it steers close to actual fact. Rutherfurd remains very steadily on the factual side. The fiction in this novel is only a garnish, but it's enough to ease the journey: there's a world of difference between googling the origin of the name Bronx (Bronk's) on the Internet and 'witnessing' its naming. Straight history rarely conveys the sense of what it was to be there in that time and place. Throughout this novelized telling I felt fully present in a way that no straightlaced 'city-ography' can capture.
Constantly in the shadow of the late James Michener (and to whom he makes some fun references here, as if to acknowledge it), Rutherfurd is almost always considered the lesser talent. I always know Michener's characters more intimately and find them better rounded, but Rutherfurd is at least his match in terms of historical research and its non-obtrusive insertion into the flow of a story.
Show Less
LibraryThing member SteveLindahl
I grew up in northern New Jersey, so the history of New York is fascinating to me. Edward Rutherfurd tells the story of people living in the city, starting in the 17th century when the settlement was called New Amsterdam and was governed by Peter Styverson and ending in the 21st century when Rudy
When I lived in the New York area, I went to the city often. I loved the museums, the theater scene from the small groups in store front theaters to the Broadway shows, and I went to countless concerts in Central Park and at the Fillmore East. I spent hours in the libraries, especially the main branch on Fifth Ave and the Library for the Performing Arts at Lincoln Center. But despite loving the city I didn't know much about its history. I had no idea about the early connection to the slave trade, Spanish Harlem was just a song to me, and I knew next to nothing about the financial district, especially during the years leading up to the depression. New York covered those aspects of the city in a way that held my attention. I loved the book for that.
I saw in some of the other reviews complaints that Rutherfurd did not spend time with the African American families living in the twentieth century. He did cover their experience, especially during the pre civil war years, but those families were only mentioned briefly during modern times. I don't agree with that criticism. Rutherfurd chose to write a story about the Master family and if he left their story for too long the plot would have lost its continuity. He covered the Italians and the Irish during the years when those nationalities were the bulk of the immigrants. The African Americans were in the city from early on, just as the English were. Another novel about their experience in New York would be equally fascinating, but this novel was primarily about the English experience. Perhaps he could have spent more time with the Puerto Ricans families, given their importance to modern New York, but he did touch on that experience and I learned a good deal. He discussed the Lenape Native Americans, but as with many of the other groups that section was from the point of view of the European (Dutch) settlers.
My chief complaint comes down to a single word. Here's the line from late in the book:
He'd been fortunate to get a low number in the lottery and avoided the draft.
The word I object to is low. Rutherfurd was talking about the 1970s here and anyone who lived through that period knows that a low number meant you were going to war, not the other way around. The problem with this mistake is it stops the reader who knows its wrong and casts doubt on the accuracy of the rest of the book. But I'm still giving this book a five star rating. Overall, I loved it.
Steve Lindahl - author of Motherless Soul and White Horse Regressions
Show More
Giuliani was mayor. The novel focuses on the Master family, but also looks at other families whose lives were intertwined with the Masters. I thought Rutherfurd did an excellent job of mixing history with fiction.When I lived in the New York area, I went to the city often. I loved the museums, the theater scene from the small groups in store front theaters to the Broadway shows, and I went to countless concerts in Central Park and at the Fillmore East. I spent hours in the libraries, especially the main branch on Fifth Ave and the Library for the Performing Arts at Lincoln Center. But despite loving the city I didn't know much about its history. I had no idea about the early connection to the slave trade, Spanish Harlem was just a song to me, and I knew next to nothing about the financial district, especially during the years leading up to the depression. New York covered those aspects of the city in a way that held my attention. I loved the book for that.
I saw in some of the other reviews complaints that Rutherfurd did not spend time with the African American families living in the twentieth century. He did cover their experience, especially during the pre civil war years, but those families were only mentioned briefly during modern times. I don't agree with that criticism. Rutherfurd chose to write a story about the Master family and if he left their story for too long the plot would have lost its continuity. He covered the Italians and the Irish during the years when those nationalities were the bulk of the immigrants. The African Americans were in the city from early on, just as the English were. Another novel about their experience in New York would be equally fascinating, but this novel was primarily about the English experience. Perhaps he could have spent more time with the Puerto Ricans families, given their importance to modern New York, but he did touch on that experience and I learned a good deal. He discussed the Lenape Native Americans, but as with many of the other groups that section was from the point of view of the European (Dutch) settlers.
My chief complaint comes down to a single word. Here's the line from late in the book:
He'd been fortunate to get a low number in the lottery and avoided the draft.
The word I object to is low. Rutherfurd was talking about the 1970s here and anyone who lived through that period knows that a low number meant you were going to war, not the other way around. The problem with this mistake is it stops the reader who knows its wrong and casts doubt on the accuracy of the rest of the book. But I'm still giving this book a five star rating. Overall, I loved it.
Steve Lindahl - author of Motherless Soul and White Horse Regressions
Show Less
LibraryThing member marient
From the early settlers and the Indian villages to the present day, New York is depicted in a fascinating book. Well written and completely absosrbing.
LibraryThing member santhony
I’ve read all of Rutherfurd’s work, and in my opinion he has been accurately described as a latter day James Michener. I’ve found some of his work outstanding (Russka and The Rebels of Ireland) and some, not so much (The Forest). In this work, Rutherfurd takes on a very rich topic, the city
As I noted in my review of The Rebels of Ireland, in my opinion Rutherfurd is most effective when chronicling a 300-400 year time frame, as opposed to Michener’s more standard span from prehistory to the present day. Doing so gives him the opportunity to more fully develop the characters and maintain a more cohesive story thread. Such is the case with this fine work, which examines the rich history of the city of New York, from roughly 1650 until the present day.
Rutherfurd tracks development of what is present day New York by following the Master family, from the early days of Dutch New Amsterdam through the terrorist attacks of 9/11. All of the high points of American history are touched upon as they impacted the city and its inhabitants. Of particular interest are cameos in which various immigrant nationalities are spotlighted including the Irish, Italian, German, Jewish and Puerto Rican perspective.
Even the period surrounding the American Revolutionary War, an era which I have studied extensively, contains new insights through focus on the Loyalist Master family, a viewpoint I’ve never encountered despite having read dozens of works on the Founding Fathers and the history of the time.
I imagine that inhabitants of the city, or even those who have visited more often than myself (I’ve been 4-5 times), would find the novel even more enlightening, as development of certain areas of the city, with which I am otherwise unfamiliar, are very well developed. Terms like Upper West Side, SoHo, Greenwich Village, Five Points, Harlem, I’m sure have more meaning to those who live in and around the area.
In any event, I highly recommend this novel for anyone who enjoys historical fiction or wishes to learn more about the city of New York, its history and its people.
Show More
of New York as it has existed over the past 350 years.As I noted in my review of The Rebels of Ireland, in my opinion Rutherfurd is most effective when chronicling a 300-400 year time frame, as opposed to Michener’s more standard span from prehistory to the present day. Doing so gives him the opportunity to more fully develop the characters and maintain a more cohesive story thread. Such is the case with this fine work, which examines the rich history of the city of New York, from roughly 1650 until the present day.
Rutherfurd tracks development of what is present day New York by following the Master family, from the early days of Dutch New Amsterdam through the terrorist attacks of 9/11. All of the high points of American history are touched upon as they impacted the city and its inhabitants. Of particular interest are cameos in which various immigrant nationalities are spotlighted including the Irish, Italian, German, Jewish and Puerto Rican perspective.
Even the period surrounding the American Revolutionary War, an era which I have studied extensively, contains new insights through focus on the Loyalist Master family, a viewpoint I’ve never encountered despite having read dozens of works on the Founding Fathers and the history of the time.
I imagine that inhabitants of the city, or even those who have visited more often than myself (I’ve been 4-5 times), would find the novel even more enlightening, as development of certain areas of the city, with which I am otherwise unfamiliar, are very well developed. Terms like Upper West Side, SoHo, Greenwich Village, Five Points, Harlem, I’m sure have more meaning to those who live in and around the area.
In any event, I highly recommend this novel for anyone who enjoys historical fiction or wishes to learn more about the city of New York, its history and its people.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Glorybe1
This is another great book by an excellent author, all about (yes doesn't take a genius to work it out!) New York!
It starts in 1664 and culminates in 2001 at the World Trade Centre.
It is a story of fiction for the most part, and tells the stories of 3 or 4 families down through history. Here and
An excellent read, very meaty, and I can well recommend it to anyone with an interest in "The Big Apple" or indeed general history.
It starts in 1664 and culminates in 2001 at the World Trade Centre.
It is a story of fiction for the most part, and tells the stories of 3 or 4 families down through history. Here and
Show More
there it got a little bogged down with political stuff but I suppose if you are telling the story of a vast city such as New York this is going to happen, but for the most part it had me hooked on the characters lives and loves.An excellent read, very meaty, and I can well recommend it to anyone with an interest in "The Big Apple" or indeed general history.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Clara53
"There is something very absurd in supposing a continent to be governed by an island" (Thomas Paine).
Another captivating epic, this time about the origins and development of New York - up until recent times. Loved it. My only grumble (as also with Rutherfurd's "Paris") is that the book starts with
"New York has always been a place for people who wanted more. Whether a poor immigrant or a rich merchant, people came to New York to get more. In bad times, they came there to survive, in good times to prosper..."
Another captivating epic, this time about the origins and development of New York - up until recent times. Loved it. My only grumble (as also with Rutherfurd's "Paris") is that the book starts with
Show More
the 1600s and not earlier - unlike what the author did in his "London" and "Ruska" where he started from the actual, historical beginning of the place. But other than that, it's a wonderful saga, encompassing events in history and generations of several families, with touching symbolism that Rutherfurd often uses so successfully in his historical fiction. Being an immigrant myself, I learned a lot of fascinating history from this novel."New York has always been a place for people who wanted more. Whether a poor immigrant or a rich merchant, people came to New York to get more. In bad times, they came there to survive, in good times to prosper..."
Show Less
LibraryThing member Mary6508
I've read several of Rutherfurd's historical novels, they never disappoint. And neither did New York. I've been a New Yorker all my life, and I can honestly say that I learned things from this book that I never knew before. I especially enjoyed how he tied in the relationships of the various
Show More
families beginning in the 17th Century and continuing down to the present. Thanks, Edward, for another enjoyable history. Show Less
LibraryThing member hsudonym
Wow, what an amazing undertaking!
I have read all of Rutherfurds' books to date, and find him one of my favorite writers. New York did not disappoint.
I grew up in NYS, and lived in New York for about 6 years. And I have to say that I gained more history in Rutherfurds, book than in all the years I
The Dutch shaped the trading industry of New York, but the English shaped the financial. Both histories are vital to how New York has survived the centuries; and remained as vital as it is in the world. Any number of the historical situations that happened could have brought the city to it's knees and ended its reign. However, due to its diversity in industrial, trade and financial markets, it survived and prospered.
I, at first, was sad at the coming and goings of different families, as they intertwined with the Masters. However, I finally realized that they each had their particular place in that area of the book, and the times it was focusing on.
I felt most of the female characters were terrible people, but towards the end of each segment, they showed backbone and strength, and made me reevaluate their character.
Some things I found interesting- the Revolutionary period, having the son and father at odds politically. The Draft Riots and how corrupt the reasons behind it, and how wide spread they were. The Civil War photography. The rise of the artistic community and refinement of the cultural life of New York. Plus so much more.
I think when reading this, one needs to remember it is not about the history of New York, but rather the historical events in New York that shaped the Master family, and their relationships with the dominant peoples of the times they were in.
One thing I also will mention, Rutherfurds' treatment of 9/11 was wonderful. I have to admit I was very moved; it was a hard time for me personally and those who loyalty never leaves the City, even if they do.
I have read all of Rutherfurds' books to date, and find him one of my favorite writers. New York did not disappoint.
I grew up in NYS, and lived in New York for about 6 years. And I have to say that I gained more history in Rutherfurds, book than in all the years I
Show More
took NYS history!The Dutch shaped the trading industry of New York, but the English shaped the financial. Both histories are vital to how New York has survived the centuries; and remained as vital as it is in the world. Any number of the historical situations that happened could have brought the city to it's knees and ended its reign. However, due to its diversity in industrial, trade and financial markets, it survived and prospered.
I, at first, was sad at the coming and goings of different families, as they intertwined with the Masters. However, I finally realized that they each had their particular place in that area of the book, and the times it was focusing on.
I felt most of the female characters were terrible people, but towards the end of each segment, they showed backbone and strength, and made me reevaluate their character.
Some things I found interesting- the Revolutionary period, having the son and father at odds politically. The Draft Riots and how corrupt the reasons behind it, and how wide spread they were. The Civil War photography. The rise of the artistic community and refinement of the cultural life of New York. Plus so much more.
I think when reading this, one needs to remember it is not about the history of New York, but rather the historical events in New York that shaped the Master family, and their relationships with the dominant peoples of the times they were in.
One thing I also will mention, Rutherfurds' treatment of 9/11 was wonderful. I have to admit I was very moved; it was a hard time for me personally and those who loyalty never leaves the City, even if they do.
Show Less
LibraryThing member KWROLSEN
This book sparked my interest because I'm from upstate New York and loved how I could imagine my ancestors living throughout the past 300 years. I liked how Rutherfurd chose to allow me to follow generations of specific families throughout the development of New York City, even referring to areas
Show More
beyond the central city. The incorporation of historical facts, varying socioeconomic statuses, and genuine human emotions kept my attention throughout the book. The ending was my favorite, as it left me thinking about my life, my ancestors, and my history. "New York: The Novel" inspired me to research my genealogy, allowing me to pass on my history to future generations. Show Less
LibraryThing member BooksForDinner
It took me half a year to finish this book, though only because the episodic, time and character jumping nature of it lent itself to being read in chunks of a few chapters at a time instead of all the way through; I read many other books during the breaks while reading this. However, this was a
If you are coming to this book for straight ahead history, go read a monograph, though it is obvious the author did plenty of research and got his facts straight. That said, if you are a reader of fiction and are interested in the history of New York, just not enough to go read a history book, I think you might enjoy this.
Show More
solid epic novel. Rutherfurd's prose is clean and easy to read, his characters are believable, and the repeated coincidence of descendants of characters from hundreds of pages earlier meeting each other is only a minor distraction. Fun really. If you are coming to this book for straight ahead history, go read a monograph, though it is obvious the author did plenty of research and got his facts straight. That said, if you are a reader of fiction and are interested in the history of New York, just not enough to go read a history book, I think you might enjoy this.
Show Less
LibraryThing member lissabeth21
I love when a novel drags you into a character's drama in the first two pages! I have a real affinity for the way Rutherfurd ties people and families together over the generations. It has a very buddist feel to me - that we are all connected throughout time. Cried with fear for these characters and
Show More
the thousands of New Yorkers like them during the 2001 chapter. I love when a book evokes that kind of deep emotion. Show Less
LibraryThing member Kiwimrsmac
As always, Edward Rutherfurd's books are seeped in fact, fantastic fiction, and are as utterly believable as fiction. Loved it. Loved recognising all the areas and buildings described in the book. The characters were perfectly described - loveable and villainous at the same time.
LibraryThing member siri51
Accurately described as a sweeping saga - I learnt much about New York history through the stories of several families over their generations.
LibraryThing member elsyd
This is one of my all-time favorites. One of those books you really don't want to end! If you live in New York or have ever visited New York, this is a must read!
LibraryThing member booklovers2
Listened to it on Audible Audio. This was really a great listen. Very interesting. Spanned several generations of New York families. Great history lesson on the beginning of New York to present day told as a fictional depiction through a generational family. There was a point towards the end that
Show More
started to be very depressing. Then the anticipation of the worse events for New York. I actually had to turn it off and regroup emotionally before completing the book. The only negative I have is that jumping into the next generation of family members, I felt like I wasn't ready for the end of the characters. The ending tied up and united the original families interesting enough to say I loved the book and will read another by this author. Show Less
LibraryThing member arobertallen
New York, The Novel is an excellent read. Rutherfurd follows generations of several families from the Dutch period all the way up to the tragic events of 911. I admire Rutherfurd’s handling of the numerous characters in the book, which spans 350 years. Despite the brevity of our time with each
Show More
generation, we get to know the characters fairly well before we move on to their children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. I often think that novels such as this would do a better job of giving s sense of history to young students than the typical textbooks we employ within our school system. Bravo to Edward Rutherfurd on a job well done! Show Less
LibraryThing member Kasthu
New York: The Novel is an ambitious book. Covering nearly 350 years of New York, and by extension American history, this book is the story of about a half a dozen families living in the city at various points throughout its history: the Dutch van Dycks, English Masters, Irish O’Donnells, German
New York is the third of Rutherfurd’s books I’ve read, after Sarum and London. His previous two books covered all of English history, from prehistory to the present; New York only covers about 350 years. There are good and bad things about focusing on such a (relatively) short period of history. On one hand, it’s a lot easier to keep track of the generations through the years, and there’s a lot more room for character development. On the other, I really wish that Rutherfurd had covered Manhattan history during the time it was owned by the Dutch.
The focus of the novel is on the Revolution and Civil War, particularly the Draft Riots of 1863, and the financial panic of the turn of the last century. The Great Fire of 1835 is ignored, as are the (often confusing) politics of Tammany Hall, the Astor Place riots, the amalgamation of the Boroughs, the General Slocum disaster in 1904, or the building of the subways. I realize there’s a lot to cover in a novel of this scope, but some mention of these defining moments of New York history would have been nice. The longtime tension between the Irish Catholics and native-born New Yorkers is downplayed, and it seemed a little odd to me that someone like Sean O’Donnell wouldn’t have run into at least some prejudice on his way up out of the Five Points. Or that Mary O’Donnell would go from being a maid in the Masters’ house to being one of Hetty Master’s best friends in society.
On the other hand, there’s a lot of territory to cover in this 860-page novel, so it’s also easy to understand why an author might have to be picky and choosy about what to include and what to leave out. The parts of the novel that the author does cover are well-researched, especially the chapters on the Revolution, the Draft Riots, the great blizzard of 1888, the financial bits, the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in 1910, the blackout of 1977, and 9/11.
As I’ve said, because this book covers less time that some of Rutherfurd’s other books, there’s less to keep track of in terms of family history. The Master family, for the most part, are the focal point of the novel. The story follows them, as merchants and Wall Street men, from the early 18th century to the present, so I really enjoyed following their story through the centuries. It was also interesting to witness New York growth through the years, from sleepy 17th century village to bustling 21st century metropolis. It’s also a fascinating story about the American dream, of a half a dozen families living that dream in one of the greatest cities in the world. For an excellent narrative history of New York (at least up through the 1960s), try Edward Robb Ellis’s The Epic of New York City.
Show More
Kellers, southern Italian Carusos, Jewish Adlers, and the descendants of the slave Quash, who are given the last name River. The novel opens in 1664, when New Amsterdam is bought from the Dutch by the English and becomes New York, and ends in the summer of 2009.New York is the third of Rutherfurd’s books I’ve read, after Sarum and London. His previous two books covered all of English history, from prehistory to the present; New York only covers about 350 years. There are good and bad things about focusing on such a (relatively) short period of history. On one hand, it’s a lot easier to keep track of the generations through the years, and there’s a lot more room for character development. On the other, I really wish that Rutherfurd had covered Manhattan history during the time it was owned by the Dutch.
The focus of the novel is on the Revolution and Civil War, particularly the Draft Riots of 1863, and the financial panic of the turn of the last century. The Great Fire of 1835 is ignored, as are the (often confusing) politics of Tammany Hall, the Astor Place riots, the amalgamation of the Boroughs, the General Slocum disaster in 1904, or the building of the subways. I realize there’s a lot to cover in a novel of this scope, but some mention of these defining moments of New York history would have been nice. The longtime tension between the Irish Catholics and native-born New Yorkers is downplayed, and it seemed a little odd to me that someone like Sean O’Donnell wouldn’t have run into at least some prejudice on his way up out of the Five Points. Or that Mary O’Donnell would go from being a maid in the Masters’ house to being one of Hetty Master’s best friends in society.
On the other hand, there’s a lot of territory to cover in this 860-page novel, so it’s also easy to understand why an author might have to be picky and choosy about what to include and what to leave out. The parts of the novel that the author does cover are well-researched, especially the chapters on the Revolution, the Draft Riots, the great blizzard of 1888, the financial bits, the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in 1910, the blackout of 1977, and 9/11.
As I’ve said, because this book covers less time that some of Rutherfurd’s other books, there’s less to keep track of in terms of family history. The Master family, for the most part, are the focal point of the novel. The story follows them, as merchants and Wall Street men, from the early 18th century to the present, so I really enjoyed following their story through the centuries. It was also interesting to witness New York growth through the years, from sleepy 17th century village to bustling 21st century metropolis. It’s also a fascinating story about the American dream, of a half a dozen families living that dream in one of the greatest cities in the world. For an excellent narrative history of New York (at least up through the 1960s), try Edward Robb Ellis’s The Epic of New York City.
Show Less
LibraryThing member librarian1204
History and more history. Only my New York state education kept me going.
Some parts really good and others dragged. I liked the England setting better.
Some parts really good and others dragged. I liked the England setting better.
LibraryThing member carebear10712
I just don't think Edward Rutherfurd is for me. I do love historical fiction but I don't like that one novel captures two hundred years. Even when it follows a few families, I can't connect to characters when they are only around for a few chapters, at most.
LibraryThing member Seven.Stories.Press
As a new New Yorker, I found this book to be quite fascinating. I'm not usually much for historical fiction, but it gave me a perspective on the city that I didn't have before. I'm going to seek out his other books to see if I enjoy them just as much.
That being said, it felt a little thin on the
That being said, it felt a little thin on the
Show More
20th Century end of the novel. Perhaps because so much time was spent on the 17th & 18th centuries there wasn't enough time to delve into the last 50-75 years, but certainly there wasn't the same level of detail as there was in the first half of the novel. Show Less
LibraryThing member mumfie
I very much enjoyed this sweeping account of New York, from start to present, but found it more of a collection of individual tales of different eras than a sweeping saga through the centuries. There were no bridges between the tales which served to make the book discontinuous rather than a single
Show More
piece. Show Less
LibraryThing member addictivelotus
I both loved this book and didn't love this book at the exact same time. The process of reading it was a fascinating relationship. I would become frustrated with the choppiness of the plot or the similarity of the point of view characters and set it aside and then be inexplicably drawn back and
Other reviewers have pointed out the lack of diversity in the characters (not bringing in Jewish characters until the 1950s, completely dropping the African-American storyline in the 1860s and never picking up the thread again, token Latino character for about a chapter who is then for all intents and purposes ignored, etc.), but I think that the major character problem is that toward the end everything got very rushed and I didn't get to know the characters well at all. I don't know why this is the case. I feel I got to know the earlier characters quite well. I understood why Mrs. Van Dyke acted the way she did; I rooted for Abigail Master; I felt genuine tension for Hudson and his family; I was legitimately sad when Anna Caruso died, but by the time the 30s rolled around we were speeding through decades so fast I didn't have time to understand the character's motives.
It was also sad to see interesting periods of New York's history completely brushed over. I can understand the brush-off of Five Points, because immigrant stories in that time and the draft riots do get discussion, but in the 20th century? After we realize the Masters are going to be okay, we skip to the mid-50s. No depression? No WWII? The turbulence of the 60s happens off screen, and the 70s (a seriously fascinating time in NYC's history as far as I'm concerned) get about a chapter that sums up things up: there's a killer, there's a blackout, time for the 90s. I realize there's a lot of ground to cover and very interesting things in the previous centuries were also skipped, but I think the lack of significant character development during the last quarter of the book exacerbates this problem.
I personally would have preferred that this book would have ended with the "Towers" chapter. While, yes, that would have been a cliche choice, the theme of the novel seemed to be everything is a cycle and the loss of the wampum belt seems to finalize the story which begins with it's delivery. Also, I personally found the epilogue a little preachy (not because of the "Spirit of New York" discussion, but the whole bit about people not really having ADD and kids today, etc).
Despite -all- of this, I really enjoyed this novel and I'm glad that I read it. The first 3/4 of the book is an engrossing look into the lives of an interesting family and the world around them.
Show More
unable to put it down for several hours.Other reviewers have pointed out the lack of diversity in the characters (not bringing in Jewish characters until the 1950s, completely dropping the African-American storyline in the 1860s and never picking up the thread again, token Latino character for about a chapter who is then for all intents and purposes ignored, etc.), but I think that the major character problem is that toward the end everything got very rushed and I didn't get to know the characters well at all. I don't know why this is the case. I feel I got to know the earlier characters quite well. I understood why Mrs. Van Dyke acted the way she did; I rooted for Abigail Master; I felt genuine tension for Hudson and his family; I was legitimately sad when Anna Caruso died, but by the time the 30s rolled around we were speeding through decades so fast I didn't have time to understand the character's motives.
It was also sad to see interesting periods of New York's history completely brushed over. I can understand the brush-off of Five Points, because immigrant stories in that time and the draft riots do get discussion, but in the 20th century? After we realize the Masters are going to be okay, we skip to the mid-50s. No depression? No WWII? The turbulence of the 60s happens off screen, and the 70s (a seriously fascinating time in NYC's history as far as I'm concerned) get about a chapter that sums up things up: there's a killer, there's a blackout, time for the 90s. I realize there's a lot of ground to cover and very interesting things in the previous centuries were also skipped, but I think the lack of significant character development during the last quarter of the book exacerbates this problem.
I personally would have preferred that this book would have ended with the "Towers" chapter. While, yes, that would have been a cliche choice, the theme of the novel seemed to be everything is a cycle and the loss of the wampum belt seems to finalize the story which begins with it's delivery. Also, I personally found the epilogue a little preachy (not because of the "Spirit of New York" discussion, but the whole bit about people not really having ADD and kids today, etc).
Despite -all- of this, I really enjoyed this novel and I'm glad that I read it. The first 3/4 of the book is an engrossing look into the lives of an interesting family and the world around them.
Show Less
Awards
Original publication date
2009-09
Physical description
880 p.; 6.46 inches
ISBN
0385521383 / 9780385521383