You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.68 AVERAGE
3.68 AVERAGE
This book was nothing like I expected and I'm glad for that. As someone who loves the Little Women story, this novel gave me a perspective on the time and place that I never would have had otherwise. Sad and in some ways defeatist, this was nonetheless a beautifully crafted and moving story.
adventurous
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Working my way through Pulitzers has been interesting in part because of the very stark range in quality among them, but March is pretty easily the one I've liked the least. The prose is mediocre at best, but I don't think even great prose could save Brooks here, because she's clearly torn between what she actually wants to write (something exclusively about Bronson Alcott, weather it be narrative nonfiction or just a novel specifically about him) and trying to fit it into the confines of Little Women in ways that grind more and more as the book goes on.
March isn't a character, he's a vessel for the cool facts Brooks wants to share about Alcott. And Marmee isn't a character either, she's a mouthpiece when Brooks wants to clarify or reinforce March's abolitionist beliefs. It's not just that she's written selflessly to the point of disbelief (her original character was maybe too), it's that she simply does not have a self that isn't in relation to hating slavery, and it flattens the story to an extreme degree. Grace (maybe Canning as well if I'm being generous) is the closest thing this book has to a nuanced character, and I actually hate close to everything about her storyline, which imo comes off very strange in terms of how it's used to define March.
The only other Brooks I've read was Horse, which was an interesting concept but very uninspiring prose (and I personally hated the ending). The prose in March was frequently awkward and grating. Again, it's abundantly clear that Brooks came at this book from the angle of "I love this historical figure and know a lot about him, but don't think his story is enough for a book on its own" and worked backwards from there, with some cringeworthy results. I actually laughed at Beth saying "Well, I know we do not consume milk or cheese any longer, because these are the rightful property of the calf" because it is so blatantly Brooks trying to fit this fact in and absolutely failing at doing so in any naturalistic way.
The scenes with Emerson and Thoreau felt familiar to me in a way I couldn't place until I was texting my SIL about books my niece might like and remembered the children's lit genre of "plucky heroes go back in time to hang out with cool historical figures". Obviously there's no time travel involved, but March's encounters with these characters feel so utterly detached from the reality that Little Women is set in.
The second part, although jarringly brief relative to the rest of the book, is a little better. There's an actually interesting disconnect between the Marmee we hear March talk about - who physically harmed her husband when he suggested moderating her speech on slavery and who she actually is, and the second star is granted for that. The 60 pages from Marmee's POV are a more interesting character study than the prior 200 pages of March's, and I think the fact that Brooks isn't torn between trying to align her with a real person the way she does with March works to her benefit.
I think there might be a solid novel buried somewhere in there, about the conflict an abolitionist dedicated to non-violence faced when he went to war. But any of the good ideas Brooks had are crushed under the weight of trying to fit it into an existing literary world AND serving as an excuse to biograph Bronson Alcott's life. A true mess of a book.
ETA: On further reflection I also think Brooks kind of just loathes Little Women lol
March isn't a character, he's a vessel for the cool facts Brooks wants to share about Alcott. And Marmee isn't a character either, she's a mouthpiece when Brooks wants to clarify or reinforce March's abolitionist beliefs. It's not just that she's written selflessly to the point of disbelief (her original character was maybe too), it's that she simply does not have a self that isn't in relation to hating slavery, and it flattens the story to an extreme degree. Grace (maybe Canning as well if I'm being generous) is the closest thing this book has to a nuanced character, and I actually hate close to everything about her storyline, which imo comes off very strange in terms of how it's used to define March.
The only other Brooks I've read was Horse, which was an interesting concept but very uninspiring prose (and I personally hated the ending). The prose in March was frequently awkward and grating. Again, it's abundantly clear that Brooks came at this book from the angle of "I love this historical figure and know a lot about him, but don't think his story is enough for a book on its own" and worked backwards from there, with some cringeworthy results. I actually laughed at Beth saying "Well, I know we do not consume milk or cheese any longer, because these are the rightful property of the calf" because it is so blatantly Brooks trying to fit this fact in and absolutely failing at doing so in any naturalistic way.
The scenes with Emerson and Thoreau felt familiar to me in a way I couldn't place until I was texting my SIL about books my niece might like and remembered the children's lit genre of "plucky heroes go back in time to hang out with cool historical figures". Obviously there's no time travel involved, but March's encounters with these characters feel so utterly detached from the reality that Little Women is set in.
The second part, although jarringly brief relative to the rest of the book, is a little better. There's an actually interesting disconnect between the Marmee we hear March talk about - who physically harmed her husband when he suggested moderating her speech on slavery and who she actually is, and the second star is granted for that. The 60 pages from Marmee's POV are a more interesting character study than the prior 200 pages of March's, and I think the fact that Brooks isn't torn between trying to align her with a real person the way she does with March works to her benefit.
I think there might be a solid novel buried somewhere in there, about the conflict an abolitionist dedicated to non-violence faced when he went to war. But any of the good ideas Brooks had are crushed under the weight of trying to fit it into an existing literary world AND serving as an excuse to biograph Bronson Alcott's life. A true mess of a book.
ETA: On further reflection I also think Brooks kind of just loathes Little Women lol
challenging
emotional
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I'd be inclined to go 2.5 stars if that were an option, but the ending of the novel just tips it up into 3. I read this for a book group, or I might not have persevered. I think the problem is that I don't really buy the narrator as a man. The late section, narrated by Marmee, is much better. I don't remember Little Women well enough to comment in any detail, but I had trouble reconciling what I do remember with what's here--Marmee's insane and violent temper, for example, seems to me to be just WAY out of character. Grace is the best character by far, and the ending makes up for a lot.
adventurous
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No