Amy

I read this because it was on the NYT list of books to read. I've not read The Night Circus so I have nothing to compare it to. I am an avid reader and I have a pretty strong tolerance for meta. Morgenstern's imagery is beautful, very poetic, but the book reads like a bad nightmare. I couldn't tell if we were in an RPG or if the vignettes were an inside look at the brain of a dementia patient. Either would have been refreshing. The author expects a LOT from the reader here. The Millennials and the Gen Z crowd probably have more tolerance for the disjointed non linear style than do the Gen X or Boomers. Character development-apparently not essential, they are merely vehicles in which the author is able to present the overly complex underground world she has created, in which all stories are written down, while simultaneously being live and mutable, and possibly also being lived above. To me it came across as pretentious. Is it a book, or merely an impression of a book that I have been reading for days, or weeks, or years? I continually felt as though I was right on the cusp of grasping what the book was about, but there was too much meta, too much complexity. Maybe it doesn't need to be about anything, maybe we are simply meant to enjoy the imaginary world of interwoven scenarios where time and consistency of thought are meaningless?

I picked this up as an audiobook on my library app. Honestly, the cover looked intriguing, and I had heard of the author but can't recall if I have read anything by her. I didn't realize Tom Hanks was narrating it until I began listening. I loved how the story really is about his sister, but from the somewhat clueless viewpoint of a man who has had women doing for him and supporting him his whole life. The story moves slowly, but be patient, the language is so descriptive, and it unfolds in such interesting layers. The narration by Tom Hanks is perfect, his intonation lends believability to the character Ann Patchett wrote. I'm so glad I read/listened to this book.