rachel_menard's review against another edition
dark
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
I can see why this is so popular. It's a book about a woman who had a trash boyfriend and decided to use her apothecary skills to poison other women's trash boyfriends and husbands. Huzzah!
The only downside to this book was Caroline.
Told in an alternating present/past perspective with three narrators, Caroline is the modern day woman of our story and the most unoriginal part of it. She's your typical middle-America wife who supports her career husband and wants to start a family when BAM! She's shocked to find out he's been cheating on her and now she is off on a find-yourself journey.
(It was pretty clear from our first sighting of him that he's been gaslighting her for their entire relationship, and Caroline just looked naïve for not recognizing it sooner.)
Where this book really worked was the story-telling through Nella and Eliza's perspectives, our apothecary killer and a young maid who accidentally gets mixed up with her. I was immediately hooked by Nella's tale and the unfolding question of "What is going to happen to her?" which is where the present day storytelling gained its importance.
The reveal of the events surrounding Nella and Eliza's story was flipped between their account of it and Caroline's reveal of it while she was also dealing with her own predicament. It's because of this expert story-telling and the uniqueness of both Nella and Eliza that I was able to forgive Caroline, and I ripped right through this book.
The only downside to this book was Caroline.
Told in an alternating present/past perspective with three narrators, Caroline is the modern day woman of our story and the most unoriginal part of it. She's your typical middle-America wife who supports her career husband and wants to start a family when BAM! She's shocked to find out he's been cheating on her and now she is off on a find-yourself journey.
(It was pretty clear from our first sighting of him that he's been gaslighting her for their entire relationship, and Caroline just looked naïve for not recognizing it sooner.)
Where this book really worked was the story-telling through Nella and Eliza's perspectives, our apothecary killer and a young maid who accidentally gets mixed up with her. I was immediately hooked by Nella's tale and the unfolding question of "What is going to happen to her?" which is where the present day storytelling gained its importance.
The reveal of the events surrounding Nella and Eliza's story was flipped between their account of it and Caroline's reveal of it while she was also dealing with her own predicament. It's because of this expert story-telling and the uniqueness of both Nella and Eliza that I was able to forgive Caroline, and I ripped right through this book.
jifter's review against another edition
1.0
The concept and overall atmosphere of this book were so promising, it was exactly what a good book needed. A serial killer running an apothecary only for women, and a historian who just wants to know more. It was so promising. I just wish that the plot had been as good as the concept. I have so many things that this book could have done better. However the plot of Nella and Eliza was something that I wish I could have read more of, although their relationship seemed rushed their bond was wholesome and sweet.
Some of my issues with this book were petty and simply a me problem, however some were things that I believe that many people also picked up on. The themes of child loss and pregnancy seemed like a grasp at some sort of connection between the two women and the book could have done without it. The husband's character seemed weird and the 'twist' seemed out of character, even our main character realized this. Some words, such as infidelity, were used when a simpler cheaper word could have been used and these words showed up multiple times, it made it seem like the author was trying to use academic words and overall failing to get their intend reaction to these words. I also found it annoying that Eliza's potion worked, I thought it was going to be a matter of innocence leads to tragedy but I think that suddenly adding this magic aspect in was weird for the overall world of the book which had no indications of magic.
I feel like this book was a world built and characters made that were thrown at a hurriedly made plot that did not do it justice.
Some of my issues with this book were petty and simply a me problem, however some were things that I believe that many people also picked up on. The themes of child loss and pregnancy seemed like a grasp at some sort of connection between the two women and the book could have done without it. The husband's character seemed weird and the 'twist' seemed out of character, even our main character realized this. Some words, such as infidelity, were used when a simpler cheaper word could have been used and these words showed up multiple times, it made it seem like the author was trying to use academic words and overall failing to get their intend reaction to these words. I also found it annoying that Eliza's potion worked, I thought it was going to be a matter of innocence leads to tragedy but I think that suddenly adding this magic aspect in was weird for the overall world of the book which had no indications of magic.
I feel like this book was a world built and characters made that were thrown at a hurriedly made plot that did not do it justice.
andipants's review against another edition
1.0
This is probably my biggest letdown of the year so far. Dual timelines, historical research, mysterious artifacts from the past, women subverting an unfair system— all of that is 100% exactly my catnip. How could it go so wrong?
To start, the historicity in the 1791 timeline is shoddy at best. This problem permeates everything from small details (fine ladies walking down the street carrying shopping bags) to significant plot points (an establishment openly advertising itself as a "magick shoppe" — and being written up glowingly in a newspaper as such — in a time and place where simply claiming magic was real was a criminal offense). The only thing that seemed to get any real attention to detail was the poisons, and my god did the author want you to know she'd done her research on old-timey poisons — there's an entire list of ingredients and goddamn instructions in the back of the book, for cripes' sake. It honestly got a bit tedious.
Plotwise, the entire 1791 storyline relies on mind-blowing negligence. Nella's shop is disguised as a storage room, with a secret method of placing orders without the customer seeing her — but when they come to pick up the order, she greets them face to face and brings them back into the secret area of the shop anyway, so what was the point? Her insistence on writing down her customers' names — and crimes — as a means of preserving their existence for posterity, in a book she can never share with anyone else, is utterly pointless and careless. She couldn't at least have created a code to disguise what they were buying? Come the fuck on. And why on earth would you send out poisons in branded packaging? Literally none of this story would have happened if Nella had a single ounce of common sense; as it is, it's entirely unbelievable that she's lasted this long.
In the modern timeline, the description of Caroline's forays into research are distractingly facile. A vague, two-word search of the library catalog immediately brings her an obscure document that is key to solving the mystery. Later, a single search in a newspaper database (spanning hundreds of years and publications) for a not-terribly-unique name immediately brings up an article (as the first hit, even!) talking about the exact person she's seeking and going into extremely convenient and credulity-breaking detail about the exact things she wants to know. Every step in her quest is marked by extraordinary leaps of logic and coincidences, leading to her.
In fact, nearly everything in the modern timeline suffered from a significant case of that's-not-how-things-work-itis. Caroline becomes BFFs with Gaynor, a library employee, after meeting her in a professional capacity exactly twice. She assumes that Gaynor, a history buff, will be horrified that she. She decides almost on a whim to And she assumes that
The subplot with Caroline's ex was likewise awful. It starts out okay, if very clichéd, with the discovery of his infidelity and her reflecting about the dreams she'd set aside in favor of their relationship. Then he follows her to London without permission — whoa buddy, red flag there — but we're focusing on Caroline's conflicted feelings; okay, this could still be interesting. Then, James is ARGH. Fuck. That. Noise.
And that brings me to my final point, which is the pervasive attitude of misandry that seems to be bubbling under the surface for most of the book. As a feminist and a lesbian, I can certainly understand frustration with men as a group and chafing under a monstrously unfair patriarchal system, but Nella's vow to poison unfaithful men out of vengeance for her own betrayal at the hands of a man isn't systemic critique; it's individualized hatred. The only male character who isn't a clear antagonist is Tom, and he appears in one short scene and has maybe half a dozen lines of dialogue; literally every other named man in the book is an adulterer, abuser, or some combination of the two. We're clearly supposed to see Nella's refusal to harm women specifically as noble, but it feels like this was only set in the past so the author could have an excuse to create a sympathetic man-hating serial killer. Even when Nella briefly reflects on the mistakes she's made, she doesn't seem to regret pursuing gendered vengeance for its own sake, but rather because it seems negative consequences are finally imminent. And the book further undercuts this regret by having it just be a brief narration of her thoughts, compared to the copious loving descriptions elsewhere of the various poisons and their methods and Nella's work manufacturing and dispensing them. In some places, it felt a bit like hanging out at some reactionary stereotype of a feminist book club, where every discussion about female empowerment somehow devolves into just bashing men and high-fiving each other. It felt very radfemmy, and not in a good way.
So long story short, I did not enjoy this book. It had so many elements I was prepared to love, but they were betrayed by poor writing, lazy characterization, and an unexpected streak of misandry.
To start, the historicity in the 1791 timeline is shoddy at best. This problem permeates everything from small details (fine ladies walking down the street carrying shopping bags) to significant plot points (an establishment openly advertising itself as a "magick shoppe" — and being written up glowingly in a newspaper as such — in a time and place where simply claiming magic was real was a criminal offense). The only thing that seemed to get any real attention to detail was the poisons, and my god did the author want you to know she'd done her research on old-timey poisons — there's an entire list of ingredients and goddamn instructions in the back of the book, for cripes' sake. It honestly got a bit tedious.
Plotwise, the entire 1791 storyline relies on mind-blowing negligence. Nella's shop is disguised as a storage room, with a secret method of placing orders without the customer seeing her — but when they come to pick up the order, she greets them face to face and brings them back into the secret area of the shop anyway, so what was the point? Her insistence on writing down her customers' names — and crimes — as a means of preserving their existence for posterity, in a book she can never share with anyone else, is utterly pointless and careless. She couldn't at least have created a code to disguise what they were buying? Come the fuck on. And why on earth would you send out poisons in branded packaging? Literally none of this story would have happened if Nella had a single ounce of common sense; as it is, it's entirely unbelievable that she's lasted this long.
In the modern timeline, the description of Caroline's forays into research are distractingly facile. A vague, two-word search of the library catalog immediately brings her an obscure document that is key to solving the mystery. Later, a single search in a newspaper database (spanning hundreds of years and publications) for a not-terribly-unique name immediately brings up an article (as the first hit, even!) talking about the exact person she's seeking and going into extremely convenient and credulity-breaking detail about the exact things she wants to know. Every step in her quest is marked by extraordinary leaps of logic and coincidences, leading to her
Spoiler
locating the apothecary's shop, untouched, hidden behind a single, flimsy, unlocked door, which apparently, despite the area having been extensively built up in the meantime, nobody had bothered to open for over 200 yearsIn fact, nearly everything in the modern timeline suffered from a significant case of that's-not-how-things-work-itis. Caroline becomes BFFs with Gaynor, a library employee, after meeting her in a professional capacity exactly twice. She assumes that Gaynor, a history buff, will be horrified that she
Spoiler
found a phenomenally unlikely historical site and...took some pictures of it?Spoiler
apply for a master's program in a foreign country, and then does so literally overnight — no tracking down 10-year-old transcripts, no scrounging for letters of recommendation, no discussion of admissions interviews or visas, just — does the author think applying for grad school is like filling out a one-page application to work at Wendy's?Spoiler
sharing the detail that it was Eliza who jumped off the bridge, not the apothecary, would "catapult [her] dissertation work to the front page of academic journals". Setting aside, for the moment, the fact that she's doing her degree in literature, not history — no one knows this story to begin with. The newly discovered historical site in the middle of London would likely make a splash, but that specific detail is not a twist to anyone in the world of the book; this is an incident that merited two small articles in a short-lived periodical over two centuries ago, in which neither woman was mentioned by name. No one else knows the story at all, so finding out one woman jumped instead of the other wouldn't subvert expectations; it's just how they would learn the story.The subplot with Caroline's ex was likewise awful. It starts out okay, if very clichéd, with the discovery of his infidelity and her reflecting about the dreams she'd set aside in favor of their relationship. Then he follows her to London without permission — whoa buddy, red flag there — but we're focusing on Caroline's conflicted feelings; okay, this could still be interesting. Then, James is
Spoiler
accidentally poisoned and Caroline has some serious inner turmoil. She genuinely cares about him, but doesn't want to be married to him anymore; he seems remorseful and is giving her space, but him being decent doesn't automatically mean they should stay together. It looks like there is some compelling emotional conflict to work through — until it turns out he INTENTIONALLY POISONED HIMSELF to manipulate her into staying with him. Because NUANCE IS DEAD. We can't have two flawed people bumping up against each other's conflicting needs and mutually working out the best way forward; no, one of them must be an unmitigated villain, else how will we be sure Caroline is making the right decision in leaving him?And that brings me to my final point, which is the pervasive attitude of misandry that seems to be bubbling under the surface for most of the book. As a feminist and a lesbian, I can certainly understand frustration with men as a group and chafing under a monstrously unfair patriarchal system, but Nella's vow to poison unfaithful men out of vengeance for her own betrayal at the hands of a man isn't systemic critique; it's individualized hatred. The only male character who isn't a clear antagonist is Tom, and he appears in one short scene and has maybe half a dozen lines of dialogue; literally every other named man in the book is an adulterer, abuser, or some combination of the two. We're clearly supposed to see Nella's refusal to harm women specifically as noble, but it feels like this was only set in the past so the author could have an excuse to create a sympathetic man-hating serial killer. Even when Nella briefly reflects on the mistakes she's made, she doesn't seem to regret pursuing gendered vengeance for its own sake, but rather because it seems negative consequences are finally imminent. And the book further undercuts this regret by having it just be a brief narration of her thoughts, compared to the copious loving descriptions elsewhere of the various poisons and their methods and Nella's work manufacturing and dispensing them. In some places, it felt a bit like hanging out at some reactionary stereotype of a feminist book club, where every discussion about female empowerment somehow devolves into just bashing men and high-fiving each other. It felt very radfemmy, and not in a good way.
So long story short, I did not enjoy this book. It had so many elements I was prepared to love, but they were betrayed by poor writing, lazy characterization, and an unexpected streak of misandry.
erindorrien's review against another edition
2.0
I wanted to like this story. I loved the set up but I just didn’t connect to any of the characters. Almost dnf
ecrocker23's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5
sjwomack8981's review against another edition
4.0
I thought this was an exceptional book until the very end. I was disappointed by some things but won't spoil it. I wanted more! But still a great book that I definitely recommend.
mcc004's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
informative
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
kickstand's review against another edition
4.0
Told in 3 points of view, this is a hard one to define how I feel at the end. This is at once a sad story, for women's lives in the 18th century left them with little options, but it's also a story of hope and of renewed dreams, and of friendship between women, and a story of mothers and daughters. I won't soon forget this tale