The current It Book of the Interwebs is Yesteryear by Caro Claire Burke.
We're introduced to Natalie, a tradwife influencer who lives with her husband and their children on an immaculate farm in Idaho. We quickly learn that the "flawless Christian mother" image Natalie shows the world is nearly the opposite. She has nannies, farm help, and her perfect marriage is a sham. Natalie knows if The Angry Women who read her blog are just jealous, but if they knew the truth, that jealously would no longer be there.
But one day Natalie wakes up and it's 1855. She's still married to Caleb, but her children, while familiar, are not her children. Her house has the same bones as the house she's used to, but there's no heating, no running water, and no modern electricity. Is this a hoax (a reality show?)? Is this some sort of paranormal, karmic retribution for Natalie's modern life? How can she get back to where she wants to be?
Spoilers:
Look, the hype machine really let me down here. The premise is so good, but the execution was lacking.
I figured out the "twist" as soon as she kept referring to her husband as Old Caleb and that she wasn't pregnant. I mean, I didn't know how it all went down, but I knew it was actually Future Natalie, not Time Travel Natalie.
And because of that, I don't think the twist was earned. How did she forget that it was her idea to take all modern elements of the farmhouse, let alone all the effort that had to be done to change it?
Okay, forget that. Maybe her being drugged is the answer. Let's discuss the bigger picture.
I wanted this book to be a criticism of this whole tradwife/women shouldn't vote/men should be in charge of the household/societal move towards a version of religiosity that puts women in charge only in a domestic sphere/yay for patriarchy! movement. And maybe that's my fault. Based on the premise, that's what I assumed was going to happen.
Instead what I got was a suggestion that women are mentally ill?
Natalie is a caricature of a type of woman - she's selfish, mean, and judgmental. I wanted her to be nuanced. I wanted her to be someone I could understand. I mean, I wouldn't necessarily agree with her, but I wanted to understand. Instead, she was so nasty that I struggled really hard to get through the first third of the book. It's not that she's unlikeable that's the problem - it's that it's not clear why or how she got this way. She's a smart(ish) woman who gets into Harvard and meets a dude from a wealthy family and somehow this is how she turns out?
And when it turns out that she's an addict (?) or mentally ill (?), it became clear that the author didn't want to actually engage with people who are part of this movement towards making The Handmaid's Tale a reality, but simply to excoriate them. Those people are sick. They belong in jail.
There's no real acknowledgement that Natalie was a young woman suffering from postpartum depression/anxiety, whose husband was cheating on her, and who experienced domestic violence. There's no acknowledgement that the social anxiety might be a sign of other issues. There's no acknowledgement that Natalie herself was a victim of patriarchy, just more and more pointing out of how mean she was. And since the book is told from Natalie's perspective, maybe that's okay. The people around her wouldn't have acknowledged it. But people comment on how bad she looks - why don't they ever try to get her help?
That's not what I wanted. I don't want to be told women are sick or addicted. I don't want to be told that women are villainous and cruel. I want an examination of the true villain here. Who's the true villain? I don't know. Patriarchy? Technology? Religious institutions? The two party system in the United States? Innate human nature that means appearance is all that matters? I would have liked more than just "woman is drugged" and "woman is bad." I wanted some sort of thematic examination of larger cultural elements at play than handwaving "Natalie ignores politics and what is happening in front of her own eyes."
It goes right to the end. The woman is punished and who the hell knows what happens to the husband who was equally culpable? Men don't deserve consequences, clearly.
I did go to a Q&A event with the author on Tuesday and it seems like the author is just not interested in these larger structural conversations, or at least, she was okay letting it go when her editors suggested that long explanatory passages were not necessary in fiction. Burke is mostly interested in power and power hierarchies and how Natalie grapples with her own identity as an ambitious woman in a world that expects women to be beautiful mothers and homemakers who don't think particularly hard. And if you view the book from that lens, it sort of meets the mark. But if you're going to delve into hard topics, I think it does a disservice to do them superficially.
Excellent premise, but this one was a miss for me.
3/5 stars
Lines of note:
That’s the thing about being a mother and a wife and an influencer, all at the same time: it’s basically like breastfeeding three babies simultaneously. Like seducing three lovers at once. (location 155)
Gross.
This is a completely obvious notion, when you take a moment to really think about it, but most people don’t take a moment to really think about anything. Most people are morons. (location 223)
See how mean she is?
There comes a point in every marriage when a woman realizes that the man she married is a freak. This is inevitable. It cannot be avoided. (location 2018)
I'm in the queue for this so I skipped over your review entirely - but the queue is long so remind me when I finally get to read it, six months from now! Lol.
i own this book and am going to read it soon! I read the first little bit and liked it. I thought she was supposed to be unlikeable. Anyway I skipped over your hidden content, but I"ll come back and read it soon when I've finished the book. Then we can discuss!
I didn't like this book either. It reminded me of Yellowface, but Yellowface was much more well done in terms of satire. I read some reviews that were all "She's unlikeable but eventually I gained some sympathy for her." Nope, I never had sympathy for her. There was also no reason for it to be so long. This book also reminded me that I almost never like these type of super-popular buzzy books, so I am hereby giving up on them!
I never gained sympathy for her because I never understood why she was doing anything! I wanted to read this one because of the premise, but I wish I had enjoyed it half as much as a lot of other people.
At the book event, there were hundreds of people (mostly women) and they were definitely fans.
This book became available through my library’s “skip the line” flash rental, so I was able to read it much earlier than I expected. Unlike you, I did not figure out the twist ahead of time, so when it was revealed I was mostly just disappointed. I kept hoping the main character would show some growth or redemption by the end, but that never really happened. Kind of a bummer.
I had no idea this was an It Book, but it's on my TBR list, so I carefully skimmed this post to avoid potential spoilers. 3/5 stars isn't a great review, but it doesn't sound terrible either.
Totally different take--I thought this was a great book. Natalie is a twisted and tortured character, almost Lady Macbeth. She is trying so hard to shove herself into the perfect christian housewife role while smothering and distorting her own ambition and its eating her from the inside out. She's a perfectionist who imprisons herself in her own constructs. (Like how she basically imagines herself into being much more trapped on the 1855 farm then she really is). In her mind, she can't have achievement on her own terms, only through manipulating and bullying her husband and children while putting on a public performance of loving submission. She's encouraged and enabled in doing this by the weirdness of social media and influencer celebrity culture. The women around her--proxies for us the reader--aren't entirely innocent, either. Her college roommate is an immature b*tch, her producer is two-faced and backstabbing. They're perfectly happy to feel better about themselves while watching Natalie self-destruct. I see this as a commentary on how women accept and perpetuate the patriarchy, how destructive that participation can be. Its also a commentary on the toxicity of influencer culture--the lack of public-private boundaries, the sense of surveillance and constant performance (pleasing her audience and pleasing God start getting weirdly intertwined), the inauthenticity that leads to utter rot. The influencer only exists if its a two-way relationship, which implicates everyone in the audience, too.
Your last paragraph might be what's so upsetting to me. We're blaming women for the patriarchy now? What can't we blame women for? I just honestly think this book is about hating women and I don't have time for that in my life.
I don't see her college roommate as a bitch (why censor yourself?) - she seems like a completely normal woman who would graduate from Harvard. Her producer isn't perfect, of course, but she's just acting like how I think a lot of people would act if they didn't agree with basic morals of the organization where they work, but it's tied to their livelihood. We only see these women through Natalie's perspective, so it's unkind and uncharitable. That's a fine writing choice, I think, but it also means that to suggest that the women as proxies are not good people/people just trying their best.
But, I think your reading is closer in line to what Burke says about the book, so your interpretation is definitely defensible and interesting.
I liked this book, but I clearly didn’t put as much thought into it as you did. Not uncommon, you are such an amazing reader. I also figured out the twist early on, but then I talked myself out of it thinking it was too obvious, and why the hell would anyone do that.
I have just read about this book today on Stephany's and your blog. It being placed in Idaho does trigger some interested. The rest of it... I am not sure. But I think this could be an audiobook I can fly through.
I *do* have a different take than you in that I thought this book was genius, and I *loved* the twist. And I actually found Natalie to be a nuanced character. I despised her, of course, but there was also depth to her that made her such a fascinating character to follow. I really appreciated her commentary on the tradwife movement, influencer culture, and motherhood as a whole. I thought it was so interesting that Burke decided to make Natalie someone who really hated being a mother and found it MUCH harder and less natural than she previously thought. She could have taken Natalie in a completely different direction, and I appreciated that she decided to do someone a bit outside the norm.
So I just finished the book and I REALLY liked it!!! I totally get what you're saying, but it was a hit for me. I kind of figured out the twist about halfway through- I mean I was starting to have an idea but couldn't put the details together. My take on it is, this is what can happen to a woman who already is disposed to mental illness, and then is raised in a strict Christian way, expected to marry and have lots of children, and then also sucked into the instagram/influencer culture. I'm not saying these things are excuses for behaving horribly, but they're extra harmful for someone who is already teetering on the edge. Anyway- most of all, it was a really compelling read for me. I couldn't wait to see how it was going to end, and not that I've finished it I can't stop thinking about it. I wish we could all have an in-person book club discussion about it!
Huh. I thought the first part was a real slog and not that compelling at all. I think I mean the same thing when I say I figured out the twist - like I knew broad strokes, but not specific details on how it got that way. I 100% agree with you that this is such a great premise - someone who has all these cards stacked up against them like Natalie does and what would happen. I guess I just didn't like the execution. I never understood why Natalie got to be the way she was. I want to *understand* these women, not just hate them/punish them. Burke and I obviously are not on the same page.
I'm in the queue for this so I skipped over your review entirely - but the queue is long so remind me when I finally get to read it, six months from now! Lol.
ReplyDeleteLol. You won't need my ancient take on it when you read it!
Deletei own this book and am going to read it soon! I read the first little bit and liked it. I thought she was supposed to be unlikeable. Anyway I skipped over your hidden content, but I"ll come back and read it soon when I've finished the book. Then we can discuss!
ReplyDeleteYes, she's supposed to be unlikeable. And that's not really my problem. I have so many other issues!
DeleteI didn't like this book either. It reminded me of Yellowface, but Yellowface was much more well done in terms of satire. I read some reviews that were all "She's unlikeable but eventually I gained some sympathy for her." Nope, I never had sympathy for her. There was also no reason for it to be so long. This book also reminded me that I almost never like these type of super-popular buzzy books, so I am hereby giving up on them!
ReplyDeleteI never gained sympathy for her because I never understood why she was doing anything! I wanted to read this one because of the premise, but I wish I had enjoyed it half as much as a lot of other people.
DeleteAt the book event, there were hundreds of people (mostly women) and they were definitely fans.
This book became available through my library’s “skip the line” flash rental, so I was able to read it much earlier than I expected. Unlike you, I did not figure out the twist ahead of time, so when it was revealed I was mostly just disappointed. I kept hoping the main character would show some growth or redemption by the end, but that never really happened. Kind of a bummer.
ReplyDeleteRight? And it's so judgmental of women. I don't want to judge Natalie - I want to understand her.
DeleteI had no idea this was an It Book, but it's on my TBR list, so I carefully skimmed this post to avoid potential spoilers. 3/5 stars isn't a great review, but it doesn't sound terrible either.
ReplyDeleteI hid the spoilers. I'm not a villain!
DeleteThank you for that!
DeleteTotally different take--I thought this was a great book. Natalie is a twisted and tortured character, almost Lady Macbeth. She is trying so hard to shove herself into the perfect christian housewife role while smothering and distorting her own ambition and its eating her from the inside out. She's a perfectionist who imprisons herself in her own constructs. (Like how she basically imagines herself into being much more trapped on the 1855 farm then she really is). In her mind, she can't have achievement on her own terms, only through manipulating and bullying her husband and children while putting on a public performance of loving submission. She's encouraged and enabled in doing this by the weirdness of social media and influencer celebrity culture. The women around her--proxies for us the reader--aren't entirely innocent, either. Her college roommate is an immature b*tch, her producer is two-faced and backstabbing. They're perfectly happy to feel better about themselves while watching Natalie self-destruct.
ReplyDeleteI see this as a commentary on how women accept and perpetuate the patriarchy, how destructive that participation can be. Its also a commentary on the toxicity of influencer culture--the lack of public-private boundaries, the sense of surveillance and constant performance (pleasing her audience and pleasing God start getting weirdly intertwined), the inauthenticity that leads to utter rot. The influencer only exists if its a two-way relationship, which implicates everyone in the audience, too.
Your last paragraph might be what's so upsetting to me. We're blaming women for the patriarchy now? What can't we blame women for? I just honestly think this book is about hating women and I don't have time for that in my life.
DeleteI don't see her college roommate as a bitch (why censor yourself?) - she seems like a completely normal woman who would graduate from Harvard. Her producer isn't perfect, of course, but she's just acting like how I think a lot of people would act if they didn't agree with basic morals of the organization where they work, but it's tied to their livelihood. We only see these women through Natalie's perspective, so it's unkind and uncharitable. That's a fine writing choice, I think, but it also means that to suggest that the women as proxies are not good people/people just trying their best.
But, I think your reading is closer in line to what Burke says about the book, so your interpretation is definitely defensible and interesting.
I liked this book, but I clearly didn’t put as much thought into it as you did. Not uncommon, you are such an amazing reader. I also figured out the twist early on, but then I talked myself out of it thinking it was too obvious, and why the hell would anyone do that.
ReplyDeleteRight? Why would they do that? Crazy.
DeleteI have just read about this book today on Stephany's and your blog. It being placed in Idaho does trigger some interested. The rest of it... I am not sure. But I think this could be an audiobook I can fly through.
ReplyDeleteIt's got some good hype, but I honestly don't think it's a necessary read unless you have FOMO because of the discourse.
DeleteI *do* have a different take than you in that I thought this book was genius, and I *loved* the twist. And I actually found Natalie to be a nuanced character. I despised her, of course, but there was also depth to her that made her such a fascinating character to follow. I really appreciated her commentary on the tradwife movement, influencer culture, and motherhood as a whole. I thought it was so interesting that Burke decided to make Natalie someone who really hated being a mother and found it MUCH harder and less natural than she previously thought. She could have taken Natalie in a completely different direction, and I appreciated that she decided to do someone a bit outside the norm.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry it wasn't a winner for you!
I think your take is fascinating because I didn't think she was nuanced at all. I guess there are different books for all different readers out there.
DeleteSo I just finished the book and I REALLY liked it!!! I totally get what you're saying, but it was a hit for me. I kind of figured out the twist about halfway through- I mean I was starting to have an idea but couldn't put the details together. My take on it is, this is what can happen to a woman who already is disposed to mental illness, and then is raised in a strict Christian way, expected to marry and have lots of children, and then also sucked into the instagram/influencer culture. I'm not saying these things are excuses for behaving horribly, but they're extra harmful for someone who is already teetering on the edge. Anyway- most of all, it was a really compelling read for me. I couldn't wait to see how it was going to end, and not that I've finished it I can't stop thinking about it. I wish we could all have an in-person book club discussion about it!
ReplyDeleteHuh. I thought the first part was a real slog and not that compelling at all. I think I mean the same thing when I say I figured out the twist - like I knew broad strokes, but not specific details on how it got that way. I 100% agree with you that this is such a great premise - someone who has all these cards stacked up against them like Natalie does and what would happen. I guess I just didn't like the execution. I never understood why Natalie got to be the way she was. I want to *understand* these women, not just hate them/punish them. Burke and I obviously are not on the same page.
Delete