Yesteryear

[Anonymous]

Just finished and I really liked it (and I liked The Village so it tracks!)

I really can’t see Anne Hathaway as this character, no way would that be believable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hated it. Def not satire, with nothing to add to conversation. It basically was an anti-feminist treatise -- all women are miserable, let's hate on the one who is the worst, and excuse all the slacker men. It was DCUM personified, frankly.

Clearly you don’t understand satire. Lol

HTH was that satire? I'll wait. (Just because it's marketed that way doesn't make it so.)

Also, interesting that the publisher has now changed the marketing. "A “tradwife” influencer, suddenly awakens in the brutal reality of 1855—where she must unravel whether this living nightmare is an elaborate hoax, a twisted reality show, or something far more sinister in this sensational debut." Everything after the dash is new. Probably because people are pissed off about the dumb ending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hated it. Def not satire, with nothing to add to conversation. It basically was an anti-feminist treatise -- all women are miserable, let's hate on the one who is the worst, and excuse all the slacker men. It was DCUM personified, frankly.

Clearly you don’t understand satire. Lol

HTH was that satire? I'll wait. (Just because it's marketed that way doesn't make it so.)

Also, interesting that the publisher has now changed the marketing. "A “tradwife” influencer, suddenly awakens in the brutal reality of 1855—where she must unravel whether this living nightmare is an elaborate hoax, a twisted reality show, or something far more sinister in this sensational debut." Everything after the dash is new. Probably because people are pissed off about the dumb ending.

Oh gosh, what a mistake to add that huge spoiler. I would have approached the book totally differently, and probably not liked it as much, if I had known that in advance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok I just finished it and I didn't see that coming at all and I still don't understand what happened.

She was a trad wife living in current times, she had a mental break and her husband indulged her fantasy to live in olden times. Her older kids left but the boys lived nearby. She had more kids, the last one of which had Down syndrome (that's what I got anyway).

Maeve had Down Syndrome? I missed that.

From my reading, it was a hypoxic brain injury due to a difficult delivery with no medical care. Sort of like Rosemary Kennedy.

You're right, I was wrong. Natalie's old age is what I was focusing on as more the culprit.

She was 40 when she had Maeve. Not really that ancient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why did Natalie go to prison for 30 years for 4 counts of child abuse? That seems excessive, and what was the abuse, not teaching them how to read? What did Caleb get? I guess she didn't get anything for strangling Shannon.

Why did she like having sex with Old Caleb but not Caleb?

I was confused about how Old Caleb became good at sex as well. It isn’t usually the case that adding another 20 years of marriage is the cure for a mutual lack of attraction.

[Anonymous]

I could not wait to be finished with this book. The premise sounded somewhat interesting and there was a lot of hype, but I was bored from the beginning. I found the characters meh, the plot was simultaneously boring and confusing, and the plot twists were dumb and incoherent.

The only thing I would like less than reading this book is watching Anne Hathaway in a movie based on this book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did Natalie go to prison for 30 years for 4 counts of child abuse? That seems excessive, and what was the abuse, not teaching them how to read? What did Caleb get? I guess she didn't get anything for strangling Shannon.

Why did she like having sex with Old Caleb but not Caleb?

I was confused about how Old Caleb became good at sex as well. It isn’t usually the case that adding another 20 years of marriage is the cure for a mutual lack of attraction.

Maybe taking on the role of dominant husband turned him on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hated it. Def not satire, with nothing to add to conversation. It basically was an anti-feminist treatise -- all women are miserable, let's hate on the one who is the worst, and excuse all the slacker men. It was DCUM personified, frankly.

Clearly you don’t understand satire. Lol

HTH was that satire? I'll wait. (Just because it's marketed that way doesn't make it so.)

Also, interesting that the publisher has now changed the marketing. "A “tradwife” influencer, suddenly awakens in the brutal reality of 1855—where she must unravel whether this living nightmare is an elaborate hoax, a twisted reality show, or something far more sinister in this sensational debut." Everything after the dash is new. Probably because people are pissed off about the dumb ending.

The AUTHOR wasn’t anti-feminist — only the character was, but the character certainly struggled with being anti-feminist. She was jealous of her fellow classmates who chose not to be trad wives, but she would talk herself into believing she was righteous. All of the commentary about anti-femininity was satire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hated it. Def not satire, with nothing to add to conversation. It basically was an anti-feminist treatise -- all women are miserable, let's hate on the one who is the worst, and excuse all the slacker men. It was DCUM personified, frankly.

Clearly you don’t understand satire. Lol

HTH was that satire? I'll wait. (Just because it's marketed that way doesn't make it so.)

Also, interesting that the publisher has now changed the marketing. "A “tradwife” influencer, suddenly awakens in the brutal reality of 1855—where she must unravel whether this living nightmare is an elaborate hoax, a twisted reality show, or something far more sinister in this sensational debut." Everything after the dash is new. Probably because people are pissed off about the dumb ending.

The AUTHOR wasn’t anti-feminist — only the character was, but the character certainly struggled with being anti-feminist. She was jealous of her fellow classmates who chose not to be trad wives, but she would talk herself into believing she was righteous. All of the commentary about anti-femininity was satire.

Why did the college roommate end up miserable and underemployed? Why did the woke producer fall for the moronic MAGA husband? Why did main character’s mom and sister call her horrible things? Why did the daughter not rescue her sisters sooner? Why did only the main character go to jail?

There was zero accountability for the men and every single woman was miserable and against each other.

You may think the author is a feminist, but she wrote an anti-feminist novel. And had nothing new to say — she just recreated the influencer model: let’s hate this woman.

She totally botched an amazing premise!