Reading 1001 discussion

This was an interesting twist on the murder mystery type of story, with ghosts and alternating chapters of modern and archaic spellings as the story shifts from modern day to the era in which the churches that form the foundation of the story were being built. The novel is also structured roughly along the same lines as the structure of the church plans the architect is making. Even without closer analysis this was an interesting sort of experimental novel. The historical fiction bits are cool, with all the alternate spellings and archaic ideas. My only real complaint is that the sleuth, Hawksmoor, is a stereotypical investigator-with-mental-issues, very much like many other British fictional investigators. Surely not all excellent male investigators are inches away from a mental breakdown or drowning themselves in booze. Still, this was a fun story, and while the ending seems a bit vague, it was vague in a nice, mystical way that fit the story.
I gave this book 5 stars on Goodgreads.

read in 2010
Hawksmoor was an architect who built the churches mentioned in the novel by Peter Ackroyd in his novel Hawksmoor (1985). In this, the historical Hawksmoor is refigured as the fictional Devil-worshiper Nicholas Dyer, while the eponymous Hawksmoor is cast as a twentieth-century detective charged with investigating a series of murders perpetrated on Dyer's (Hawksmoor's) churches. The novel is arguably a good example of magic realism.
to see the six churches; https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ca...

Reread: Still a pretty complicated read with the idea of time that is detrimental to the idea as linearly progressing direction in time simultanniety. Different layers of time. So characters with like names are both in 19th and 20th century. The historical parts; the 7 churches (all except one are real). The Commission for Building 50 New Churches of 1711, commissioned Hawksmoor to build 6 churches. The themes are enlightenment and rationalism verses those that believe in occultism and the mysticism realm.

I do like books that challenge our concepts of time. This time I listened to an audio version. It was still a difficult read but definately probably the best book by Peter Ackroyd. (updated 5/19/2025)

*** 1/2

This is an interesting murder mystery fiction set in a semi-historical context around the erection of six (seven in the fiction) London churches designed by Nicholas Hawksmoor at the beginning of the 18th century. However, Hawksmoor in this novel is the 1980s inspector charged with resolving a series of murders linked to these churches whose design was attributed to Nicholas Dyer. The latter was a devil-worshipper who aimed to conceal dark secrets within each of the churches he would build. The novel is also quite experimental, with chapters alternating between Dyer (in 18th century English) and Hawksmoor (in 20th century English) and several sentences, passages or events mirroring/repeating each other in both eras. Quite often, a subsequent chapter would start with the almost exact last sentence of the previous one. The Dyer chapters were a bit harder to read and decipher (and unfortunately, they were the longer ones). The novel was inspired by a passage of Iain Sinclair's poem Lud Heat broaching the same hypothesis about Hawksmoor and his churches. Quite good story, but not as speculative and rich as Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum which delves in the same satanic topics.

I had mixed thoughts about this book and ended up giving it 3 stars.

For the pro side, I found the way the narrative switched between eras while having some repetitions to show the connectivity of human history was very effective and well done. Ackroyd himself described that as "the perpetual present of the past" which "reemerges in the most unlikely ways." Which I really love: history is not something isolated from our present: it shapes it in so many ways. This bits about the churches themselves I actually found to be quite cool.

On the con side, I didn't love how this book seemed to position occultism and rationalism as both legitimate forces in conflict to define the nature of humanity. Especially considering as Hawksmoor gives over to being more Dyer like as it goes on- that occultism and Dyers cynical ideas about humanity, anti-intellectualism, and the 'insight of the irrational' are posited as more insightful. I know that appeals to some people- it's really not my jam though.

I am willing to concede that this is a well-written book and I enjoyed large parts of it, especially those parts set in the eighteenth century. The linkage between the chapters was good, with a similar sentence often ending one chapter and beginning another and I really enjoyed the use of eighteenth century English. Anything to do with the churches I also enjoyed.

But why did we hear only from the first two murder victims? And the lack of resolution at the end was very frustrating especially as this book was in part a murder mystery. (view spoiler)[I am willing to concede that this is a well-written book and I enjoyed large parts of it, especially those parts set in the eighteenth century. The linkage between the chapters was good, with a similar sentence often ending one chapter and beginning another and I really enjoyed the use of eighteenth century English. Anything to do with the churches I also enjoyed.

But why did we hear only from the first two murder victims? And the lack of resolution at the end was very frustrating especially as this book was in part a murder mystery. (hide spoiler)]

Intriguing historical fiction with two timelines In the early 18th Century, Nicholas Dyer is working for Sir Christopher Wren and has been tasked with building seven London churches. Sir Christopher is a cheerful exponent of Rationalism and the Enlightenment, but Dyer has had a lifelong involvement with the occult and plans to build the churches aligning with the principles of his own beliefs. In the 1980’s Nicholas Hawksmoor is a senior policeman investigating a series of mystifying murders centred around the same churches

This was really clever and well constructed with the recurring links between the past and present woven into the stories of the main characters. Each chapter starts with the words of the previous one’s ending, showing the continuity across time. The 18th century language is immersive, scattered with profanity and coarse language, reinforcing the contrast between Wren and Dyer and their views on life. The London setting is very strong in both timelines, with its pubs and lodging houses and the all-important churches where vagrants and homeless people gather.

Challenging and inventive, this was a compelling read.I think I would need to read it a second time to fully appreciate it, when I got to the end I wanted to reread the first chapter to see what I’d missed. This is innovative and original in a literary sense so I feel it deserves its place on the list.

The novel itself is well described above by other readers. I found the premise of rationalism and the occult vying with each other to provide order through a permeable sense of time very well done. Ackroyd's language use reflected well the history and the themes he was playing with, but I found it to be dusty and ponderous and as baroque as the churches that old Hawksmoor/Dryer built. I found this to be true of the modern usage as well as the ancient usage and so I paced slowly through the book. I found none of the characters to be complete, again perhaps because they needed their counterparts in the future/past to complete them, but always there was a sense of lacking for me. The side stories of the tramps, the whores, the architects, the worries of "Walter" all touched at something unique. However, I longed for something crisp and was given only the dust, dirt, downtrodden, dancing and the anxiety of those on the edge of mental illness. I hated the dialogue that turned into plays but loved the verses and songs that echoed down through time.
He definitely captured the essence of time and how history, song, stories, beliefs all carry with them the seeds if not the foundations from the past. I appreciated the churches themselves, now many in decay (in the book), but all in all did not love the reading.

For a book that was plugged as a murder mystery, this was pretty chockfull of philosophy and religion. The quote that sums up the central query is found in the middle, of course, but this is not a plot point:

"'Yes, the beginning is the tricky part. But perhaps there is no beginning, perhaps we can't look that far back.' He got from his desk and went over to the window ... He was not sure if all the movements and changes in the world were part of some coherent development, like the weaving of a quilt which remains one fabric despite its variegated pattern. Or was it a more delicate operation than this - like the enlarging surface of a balloon in the sense that although each part increased at the same rate of growth as every other part, the entire object grew more fragile as it expanded. And if one element was suddenly to vanish, would the others disappear also - imploding upon each other helplessly as if time itself were unravelling amid a confusion of sights calls shrieks and phrases of music which grew smaller and smaller?"

Okay, now my spoiler alert, here are the plot points that inform on this contemplation of the meaning of life and time: 1) a series of terrible traumatic events in 18th c England (plague and fire) supporting a very dismal view by a boy who survives it of the benevolence of the universe and the redeem-ability of humans and 2) the mirroring of characters and events 25o years apart, including all names except that of the actual famous architect with his modern detective (who gets the name while the original is now called Dyer), with increasing intensity and disorienting results. We also have Christopher Wren as the foil for enlightenment, the mentor for Dyer and who holds forth about experience and reason. This is Dyer's answer:

I know this is an Age of Systems, but there is no System to be made of Truths which we learn by Faith and Terrour: you may make your Planns to explain the effects of the Lodestone, the Ebbing and the Flowing of the Sea, or the Motion of the Planets, but you cannot lead to any Cause that satisfies the Truths of those who have looked into the Abyss or see Sacred Visions"

At this point, I felt some resonances with the arguments of conspiracy theorists in our own day. And as we descend into the more and more insular mindset of the dual main character, the more pronounced this parallel became. I am not sure if Ackroyd himself believes in ghosts and devils and the negative energy in the universe that is calling for sacrifice so that we can be forewarned about what awaits our un-save-able souls, but he gives a convincing portrait of it. Hiding out upstairs while your parents die of plague seems to me to have been a good reason to develop an existential despair. I'm not sure that the angst of our present age has the same force. And so, that is where this falls apart for me some, because I do not see the modern urgency for the churches to be re-sanctified with blood and neither do any of the modern characters. In the end I side with Christopher Wren, and poor Hawksmoor is driven mad unto death.

I liked the idea of this more than I liked the execution. There were chapters and passages (the "play" in chapter 10) that went on far too long, and if they had a purpose – narrative or thematic – it was lost on me. The pacing also felt off. I felt like Hawksmoor should have been introduced earlier to establish the timeline pattern, and when he’s introduced, the plot should have picked up. Instead, it just stagnates. Thinking about the book afterwards and answering the questions for our discussion made it more interesting to me than the process of reading it. Again, I like the idea of the plot and the themes more than the execution.

⭐ ⭐ 1/2

I knew nothing of this book going into it, other than that it was set in London and involved murder. So imagine my surprise at dual timelines where the earlier timeline is written like it really was 1712. I have no complaints about that though. I am skeptical to historical fiction because it often fails to convince me of its setting. No such problem here, except that the Pepys-like style of of the historical chapters actually made me feel like they were set a few decades earlier

Throughout this book I wondered why it was named after the least interesting character in the book, who doesn't even appear until about halfway through. Thanks to the other reviewers I now know that Hawksmoor was the real historical architect, re-imagined as the devil worshiping Dyer in the novel. The Hawksmoor of the novel is Dyer's modern counterpart, as uncomfortable in his time of new computer technology and Dyer is with the new technology and rationalism of his era. Every modern day chapter mirrors the previous chapter set more than two and a half century earlier. I especially liked how every chapter started with the same sentence or sentiment as the one before it, in an unbroken round of echoes.

I found the modern Hawksmoor to be a lot more incomprehensible and poorly fleshed out than Dyer. Dyer, while a madman, makes sense to me as a character. Hawksmoor does not. While there was a lot I admired and enjoyed in this book, I found it to be ultimately a bit too uneven. At one point Dyer is warned about Hawksmoor by a fortune teller, but I could never work out why. Hawksmoor is no threat to Dyer, he is but a poor, doomed shell of a man who, due to strange magics or the bonds of history, has much less agency than his predecessor.