David Lawrence's "Hugh" offers readers a compelling glimpse into the intricate tapestry of 18th century England, as seen through the eyes of the titular character. This four-star novel unfolds a love letter to the era of Tom Jones, weaving a tale of self-discovery, societal expectations, and the pursuit of liberty.

Set against the backdrop of Georgian England, the narrative follows Hugh Entwistle, a slightly spoiled yet poetic and absurd young man from a prestigious family. Possessing wealth and connections, Hugh is poised for success in a society that values pedigree and privilege. However, as he prepares for a military appointment, a summer at his country estate unveils a deeper turmoil within himself.

Lawrence skillfully paints a vivid picture of Georgian England, capturing the essence of the era with its wig powder, heeled slippers, and a society rife with connivers and blackmailers. The story takes an unexpected turn when Hugh encounters the rebellious and beautiful son of the parish parson, sparking a journey of self-discovery that challenges societal norms and redefines the rules of the game.

The novel seamlessly balances humor and heartbreak, offering readers a glimpse into the complexities of relationships, identity, and the pursuit of personal freedom. Lawrence's writing captures the spirit of the time, immersing readers in a world where political volatility mirrors the inner turmoil of its characters.

Hugh's character development is nuanced and authentic, and his journey resonates with universal themes of love, acceptance, and the quest for individual liberty. The supporting cast adds depth to the narrative, with each character contributing to the sprawling canvas of 18th century England.

While the novel navigates themes of self-discovery and societal expectations, some readers may find certain plot elements somewhat predictable. However, the strength of the storytelling lies in Lawrence's ability to evoke the atmosphere of the period and create a memorable and engaging narrative.

In conclusion, "Hugh" is a captivating journey through 18th century England, offering readers a rich blend of historical detail, humor, and poignant moments. David Lawrence's novel is a delightful exploration of a young man's awakening, making it a worthy read for those interested in historical fiction and tales of self-discovery. With its well-crafted characters and vivid setting, "Hugh" earns a well-deserved four stars.

Thank you NetGalley and the publisher for a copy of this book. I really enjoy reading historical fiction but the language of this book was intentionally old fashioned and made it not easy to read. The story of Hugh who wanted to be another person living another life was well written and could transfered to the present.

I'm a huge fan of historical fiction, and this book sounded fascinating. I'm also an avid reader of Regency romances. It's excellent to get more diverse narratives- everyone wasn't straight, and white, at any point in history! Hugh is the story of a young nobleman, coming to terms with being gay at a time when that was a crime and could have got one executed. The unfairness of those attitudes and the fear experienced are all brought out, it's very sad to read of it. Good read for fans of KJ Charles and Cat Sebastian. Trigger warnings: sexual assault

Thank you to NetGalley and The Book Whisperer for sending me an e-arc in return for my honest review.

Hugh is a coming-of-age story set in 18th century London that plays with the themes of politics, family and sexuality. I had my doubts going in as the story starts relatively slow and I am a relative newbie to historical fiction, though the author managed to capture my attention time and time again with the interesting and multidimensional characterisation of Hugh Entwistle. The novel does not shy away from its satiric and eccentric nature which intrigued me from start to finish.

I liked Hugh: A Hero without a Novel BUT it took me a while to get into the story. It is highly possible , is a case of - it's me not the book " situation going on here .

My main issue is , that I just couldn't connect with Hugh . Don't know if is the style book is written or/and the slow moving plot or/and I was expecting something else entirely.

Anywho, take my review with a grain of salt , check it out ; you might like it as many of my book friends and fellow reviewers found it to be a very charming and clever story.

I just reviewed Hugh by David Lawrence. #Hugh #NetGalley

This is an interesting, entertaining and dramatic story. It's very slow in the beginning, but it does eventually pick up. Hugh is a real character, he's eccentric and interesting, and he leads a life that's all his own. I found myself more intrigued as the story went on, and was quite satisfied with the ending.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the author. This is my honest and voluntary opinion of it.

I'm not sure how to pass on a book once you've been approved for reading. I couldn't get into this one, I really tried. It wasn't what I was expecting. 3 stars.

(Please note: due to a NG error, I originally only received the first half of the book, which affected my review. This is an updated review, reflecting my thoughts about the, err, the entire book).

Intriguing, ambitious, and pretty damn delightful.

This is one of books that feels that it was written with passionate, conviction and without compromise. Which is a complicated statement because I believe, in some ways, art flourishes within restriction as well as with liberty: I think it kind needs the perfect balance of both to be its best self. If there’s too much restriction, the text becomes a hollow reflection of the marketplace, if there’s too much freedom you essentially get, at worst, the author’s unedited ego splurged all over the page, at best a text that is indulgent in ways that do not wholly benefit either author or reader.

Basically where I’m going with this is as regards Hugh is that the book shines with all the compromises it doesn’t make—its influences are specific, politically dense, and unabashedly somewhat niche, the language is self-consciously archaic, and the evocation of place and time paramount. The characters are nuanced and complex—occasionally to the point of opacity—and not always sympathetic.

But, y’know, what? I kind of loved the book for this. It’s so unabashedly itself that it will absolutely sweep you along if you let it, and I was very much in the mood to be swept. I feel it was probably too long, and the pacing suffers in places, but it’s not like the books this is modelled on where renowned for their slim volume and taut plotting.

‘Hugh’ has the flavour of a queer Tom Jones or a queerer Tristram Shandy (in fact, I think both novels get a reference, alongside a handful of 18th century bildungsroman) and manages to chart a successful stylistic path between feeling like a homage to those works while still feeling like a uniquely modern twist on them. This is a genuinely impressive accomplishment, as is the satirical tone, and the archness of dialogue.

And obviously I was very here for all the queerness—even though navigating it in a restrictive, patriarchal, heteronormative society is a major theme of the book. Hugh himself is a complicated protagonist: both arrogant and insecure, privileged and marginalised, witty, careless and, err, constantly making terrible decisions. But then he’s also very young and part of the pleasure of a coming-of-age story is watching the protagonist come to a better understanding of both themself and the world they inhabit. In Hugh’s case this story intersects with his identity in fascinating ways: the stakes feel higher for him because he must learn how to find a place for himself amidst the hostility and inevitable secrecy that surrounds him.

This does take the book—for all his rompish satire—to some pretty dark places. There’s violence, the spectre of sexual assault, familial rejection, a blackmail plot that is incredibly stressful to read about and is resolved in way that feels like a tainted triumph to say the least. It’s also not a romance in the genre romance sense, although it doesn’t present itself as one. There are however strong romantic elements that play a significant role in the book, as Hugh tries to navigate the intricacies of three different relationships: an adolescent passion that crashes against the rocks of immaturity, a complicated not-quite-friendship with a man who is unable to sacrifice the comforts of heteronormativity, and … whatever the fuck Hugh had with Brent, the boxer dude at the end. Who, for the record, I super hated.

All the relationships offer a different perspective on queer unions while also exploring aspects of the Sublime and Beautiful (in the Edmund Burke sense, rather than general). Except part of the issue for me here was that, while I was neutrally sympathetic to the first two, I really needed Brent (for all he had a kind of raw charismatic power to him) to jump off a bridge somewhere. A boxer, a politician, and a national hero, he is determined to live openly (and the way Hugh navigates this with him is fascinating) but he’s also got a very specific and unyielding idea of what that will be like i.e. that Hugh will basically play wife to him while he gads about following his ambitions. And while Brent is explicitly meant to represent the Sublime, which—if I remember my Burke properly—is meant to be an experience of terror as much as anything … I’m not sure it was quite the right sort of terror I was feeling? He did come across as a force of nature, seeking and demanding the impossible. But he also came across as an abusive prick whose idea of gender dynamics, while they may have well been informed by his context, would have been immediately unpalatable had Hugh not been a male character. Of course, I’m slightly looking at the relationship with my “consumer of kissing books” hat on. It worked as part of the tapestry of the novel. It just also made me deeply uncomfortable, in ways I think it both was and was not meant to.

In any case: I thoroughly enjoyed ‘Hugh’ and it gave me a lot to think about, up and including the application of eighteen and nineteenth century philosophy to queer identity. So that was fun? While it’s a longish read, and may not be for everyone, if the idea of it is even a bit little appealing to you I sincerely recommend you pick it up. As a reader you have to meet it where it's at, but as long as you can do that, this is a unique and exhilarating journey. I think the only way to experience anything quite like it would be to literally read Smollett, and 'Hugh' is, honestly, a lot more fun.

I did not get to read this book because it is no longer available on NETGALLEY. It is now archived. I’m giving it three stars to be in middle ratings wise.

There is reference made to Edmund Burke's treatise on the Beautiful and the Sublime in the novel, and a reader can see that reflected in the men with which Hugh engages. The story focuses (mostly) on a three year period (and how full those years seem to be!) in which the eponymous character finds love, passion, and faces society but finds that he may not necessarily be so ensnared as he first believes.

His life reminds me a bit of the song "Billy Brown" by the singer MIKA, in which the character is told he is a victim of the times. So too is Hugh, who wants only to be free and to pursue love and have a home to call his own. The book is delicious; there are parts of great comedy, many more of sorrow, and I found it captivating from the first page to the last, wondering what would become of Hugh as I continued reading.

This is a historical fiction book, so I greatly appreciated the style of writing that reflected that. It really did read as one novel produced of that time, but not so overwrought as to be weighty and off-putting. I have plans to recommend this book to my friends, who would no doubt be enticed by the premise.

This will be a tough read for many readers due to the language and so-so writing. I didn't stay engaged, and the story was both uneven and occasionally disjointed. It was a worthwhile effort, but maybe a better editor is required.

Thanks for the review copy!

I would like to thank The Book Whisperer and NetGalley for allowing me to read this ARC free for an honest review. The author starts this novel by writing that when he took possession of a family estate, he found this manuscript, which was penned by his six times great-grandfather, Sir John Carleton, around 1779. What a lucky find! Young Hugh Entwistle is a character I found rather enchanting and captivating. He is eighteen and an intelligent, moneyed, charming and handsome lad. He lives at home and is devoted to making his father, Sir Frederick, proud of him. He is thoughtful, courteous, cares very much about his friends and family and drinks a bit to excess. Although his father doesn’t approve and thinks it’s a waste of time, Hugh seeks a commission in the military. The novel tells of Hugh’s secret love affair with the parson’s son, James Bramble, his interest in politics, his family and his family’s estate. When his father’s valet fails to post a letter from Hugh to James, so that he can use it to blackmail Hugh, it puts Hugh in a bit of a spot, as he would never want his father to know about his preference for men. I enjoy historical fiction and really liked this well-written book of Hugh’s desire to be the man he wants to be. I was especially surprised and delighted by the last chapter.

I don't think I was clever enough or patient enough to read this book. Or perhaps it's just that I don't have enough experience reading books of this genre/style. So please take my review with the proviso that I bumbled my way through at least two-thirds of it.
I enjoyed Hugh although as previously stated, I didn't understand most of the language, and I was hoping the end of the book would wrap up the story nicely (and it didn't completely).
Hugh seems to move between an object of pity/scorn and one of hero worship. It seemed to me that his is a somewhat lonely life with no one his peer whom he can just be himself with.
The tale itself was very clever and in parts I was completely gripped in his story.

DNF at 20% in.
I didn't get that far into this book but I knew that I wasn't going to enjoy it the more I read. the writing was very convoluted and I had no idea what was happening or why it was happening. There were a couple scenes where i wasn't even sure who the pov was as I thought that the chapter had sorted from one person's pov but suddenly i was in someone else's head with no paragraph break.

To be honest, I had a hard time getting into this book simply because the writing was not my cup of tea. This book is about a coming-of-age of Hugh Enwhistle that is set in 18th centurt England and then discovers a lot about himself and faces a lot of challenges throughout the book.

I did not connect to any characters except James Bramble and I sometimes wish he was the main character. I don't really understand Hugh in some moments and that's okay, i think. The book was a bit slow than I wanted it to but there were also a lot of funny moments and I actually enjoyed some of the moments in the book. It was so fun to see a good ending but this book was just not for me but I do recommend this to people who loves reading historical fiction.

This book is a coming-of-age story set in 18th century London against the backdrop of politics and navigating family tensions and concealing sexuality. I liked the vivid descriptions of various locales and how the settings came to life. As far as the characters, they were slightly tepid; I wasn't particularly drawn to any of them. As the main character, Hugh was not sufficiently compelling to hold my interest. The things that happen to him throughout the story were certainly compelling and sympathetic, but I did not feel connected to Hugh as a character throughout his many ups and downs. The pacing of this book was also too slow. The first 2/3 dragged, but there was a definite improvement in the last couple of chapters. I did like the ending and how everything resolved itself. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in historical fiction and LGBTQIA+ literature.

I often find historical novels quite heavy, but this one was entirely unexpected. It’s a coming-of-age story of Hugh Entwistle as he steps into the world of the wealthy and a society bounded by rules, with secret dalliances on the side that must always remain secret.

At first, I didn’t feel that involved with the story, but when Hugh meets his three relationships – the beautiful, the sublime, and the indifferent. Yep, from Edmund Burke’s A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, the story’s narrative just flowed smoothly.

I loved Hugh. I loved his sassy and captivating persona. His internal monologues are also so much fun to read. I also loved the secondary characters, which seems to fall right out of those old renaissance-themed movies.

I liked that the romance wasn’t as dragged out, although I thought the narrative suffers a bit on the second half of the book because it feels like there’s a lot of telling more than showing.

I’d also like to commend the author because he has an excellent grasp of the language of the time, which I appreciate here. Each character has a distinct vibe. His humor is on point; I find myself chuckling now and then.

Overall, I found this to be really sweet, humorous, and very interesting. It’s quite a different take from the usual queer historicals I’ve read before and is well worth my time.

Hugh by David Lawerence is an incredible novel, I loved reading it and I think that the imagination of David Lawerence is incredible.

This had to have been a me problem. I for what ever reason could not get into this book. I kept finding my self skimming over the words. So I threw in the towel.
I'm sure others will love this. It just wasn't for me

I experienced this coming-of-age story of Hugh Entwistle as a multilayered thing...

Alternately hum-hawing and chuckling my way through it, I pitied Hugh's needs to mature within the excessively restrictive social and paternal restraints on the one hand, and was thoroughly amused by his silly, ingratiating antics to do so on the other. Read on this level, 'Hugh' is a deliciously satirical comedy, written in an antiquated syntax appropriate to the 18th century setting.

Since I had not been aware of Burke's treatise on the Beautiful and the Sublime, I took a brief, enlightening side-excursion into Wikipedia, which enhanced my reading pleasure and understanding. At this level, Hugh's three relationships, embodying Beauty, Indifference, and the Sublime became more meaningful to me; the satire became deeper, the novel emerged as a parody of Burke's Sublime. At first entranced by, and then denied beauty, passion, and ecstasy (and what passion! ...the Sorrows of Young Werther came to mind...), Hugh becomes indifferent to offered pleasure until, at last, and in deathly fear of exposure, he attains the (outrageously, hilariously warped) Sublime. His earlier, cutting remark in an overland coach to strangers thus becomes his destiny: "The Sublime, you know, as defined by Burke, is that extreme pleasure at the relief from Pain."

Although full of absurdities, exaggerations, and incongruities, this tongue-in-cheek novel is not necessarily only for relaxation. As many a truth is said in jest, the obvious theme of homosexuality and the subterfuge necessary to achieve bliss within the strict dictates of a punitive, heterosexually oriented society introduces another nuance to the novel, and one can leave that particular interpretation to the individual reader.

I thoroughly enjoyed 'Hugh', but feel that the novel might benefit from more thorough editing and proofreading, as I was, at times, irritated by recurring typos and editorial inconsistencies.

I found this an impressive debut novel and wholheartedly recommend 'Hugh' to those readers who relish a good chuckle whilst looking for something completely different ...