I've been looking at some reviews of Dodger, having read the book a couple of times now - and I've noticed that some of them look like they haven't even read the book at all!
What I mean is simple: some of the reviewers set the book in the 1870s or even earlier. Now, as many of us will know,
That in itself should ring alarm bells for anyone who is au fait with the history of the British monarchy - but even if you're not, it only takes a few seconds to look up those people, and see that
and
It's also annoying because
died in 1870, so if the book was set in the 1870s, there's no way that he would've been included in it!
So for all those reviewers, all I can say is this: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:
Anyway, don't mind me. I'm just having a good old rant... :whistle: :whistle:
What I mean is simple: some of the reviewers set the book in the 1870s or even earlier. Now, as many of us will know,
Queen Victoria is young in the book - and Albert the Prince Consort is still alive.
Albert died in the 1850s,
Queen Victoria would have been 60-ish in the 1870s (so not young at all)!
It's also annoying because
Mister Charlie (i.e. Charles Dickens)
So for all those reviewers, all I can say is this: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:
Anyway, don't mind me. I'm just having a good old rant... :whistle: :whistle: