shelfreflectionofficial's reviews
825 reviews

This book is a bit of a slow burn but definitely worth it in the end. As with a lot of psychological thrillers, there are a lot of ‘normal’ (read repetitive) days we have to read through until the next ‘thing’ happens.

I’ve read a few other B.A. Paris books and that is her MO as well. Quite a bit of build up until things come together at the end. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t.

While a few times I felt the drag and just wanted to get on with it already, I mostly wasn’t bothered by the pacing. It’s not a very long book anyway which helped.

The basic premise is this: Alice, the main character, has moved into a house with her new-ish partner only to find out after the fact that her partner kept something from her: someone was murdered in their home.

The previous owner Nina— a therapist— was supposedly murdered by her husband. After he was accused he committed suicide and the investigation died down.

Alice is trying to fit into the tight-knit gated community of twelve homes— The Circle, but something is off and she starts to become convinced that the murderer is still out there and may be sneaking into her house. And everyone in The Circle seems more than content to forget anything ever happened.



I think the setting of this one definitely added to the psychological uncertainty. It’s twelve houses set in a circle around a central green space. It’s a gated community and has cultish vibes.

With so few houses, everyone knows everyone’s business and their comings and goings. It’s the perfect setting for neighbors to lie or deceive each other or for new neighbors to feel ‘out of the loop’ and suspicious of something the community might hide from newcomers.



The format of the book is mostly in the present with a few flashbacks to a therapist’s office sprinkled throughout the book. We aren’t sure who the therapist is in these flashbacks until the end.

There was an emphasis on the ‘relaxation therapy’ that seemed like it was going to be a thing but then ended up not and that was a bit strange. Usually when things are repeated and said at the end of a chapter they’re significant. I guess not?



I didn’t have this one figured out. I had some suspicions but Alice accused pretty much everyone at some point so it was hard not to follow along with her every whim.

I was very satisfied with the reveal and thought the suspense was good.



There were a couple indications throughout the book about something in Alice’s past. When Paris revealed what it was, it didn’t seem very influential to me. It didn’t seem worth including in the story unless it was going to be more consequential to Alice figuring out what happened.

I suppose it was important in terms of relationship to Leo, but when it was revealed in the story it was almost an afterthought and not really something the reader was too invested in anyway.



I have mixed feelings about Alice. She obsesses over the murder and starts to annoy her neighbors with all her questions and nosiness. She also shows paranoia about someone being in her house at night— which may or may not have happened.

No, she’s not the smartest protagonist we could have had and some of her choices are questionable.

But at the same time, I’ve read worse. B.A. Paris does seem to like this trope, and I can say that her use of it in The Breakdown was more frustrating than in this book. There weren’t constant remarks about her forgetfulness or being over-emotional or flighty.

She was mostly a normal person who is just trying to process something shocking that happened in her home and the distrust with her boyfriend who never told her about it. So in some ways the behavior can be explained by that.

To me, it didn’t seem like just another insecure and unstable female character who can’t be trusted.



One thing I was pondering as I read the book was how big a deal everyone was making about living in the house after a murder happened.

So I had to ask myself- would I ever live in a house where someone was murdered? Or at least murdered in a similar context as Nina?

I think I’ve been so far removed from murder, only really ‘encountering’ it in fictional stories that part of me says it wouldn’t bother me. But then I think that I would feel different in real life when it was so close to me.

I don’t know though. The housing market is crazy right now so if you could get a bigger, nicer house for a lot less money, it would be seem like enough to not let the house’s past bother you.

[Sidenote: If you like the concept of someone being in a house with a secret past, you may enjoy the book The Villa by Rachel Hawkins.]



I’ve read a lot of books by British authors so I’m coming across fewer words or phrases that I don’t know, but there were still a few in this book that I’ll mention, since I do that kind of thing.

People carrier= as far as I can tell, this is… a van. But with a lot of extra syllables. It also sounds like what my kids would call a van if they didn’t know the word van. And do smaller cars not carry people? What an odd word.

Gate-crasher= I’ve heard of wedding crashers, or party crashers, but gate-crasher is new. Probably because people in England have gardens instead of yards and those probably have fences with gates.

Peaked cap= based on Google images, this is a like a newsboy hat, however there were also pictures of police or military hats.

This isn’t a term, but apparently Brits have a special compartment in their wallets for stamps?! Am I missing something in American wallets?! Honestly, I don’t even have stamps in my house so I don’t know why I would put them in my wallet. That’s for my million retail store rewards cards.



Anywho.

I think this is an awesome book that is worth the slowish somewhat repetitive parts because the ending was so good. Plus it’s a pretty clean book with minimal swearing and no sexual content.

A lot of reviewers that have given this book a low rating have mentioned the ‘stupidity’ of Alice as the main reason for it, so if that’s something that can really get on your nerves, maybe you won’t like this book.

I didn’t think her behavior was so far-fetched that it was ridiculous to read, but I’m usually able to give some grace on ‘unrealistic’ behavior for the most part when I’m reading a psychological thriller.

So I’d say, definitely give this one a try!


[Content Advisory: minimal swearing; no sexual content.]

[4.5 rounded up]

“When you’re the matriarch of the richest family in southern Massachusetts, everybody wants a piece of you.”


This was a compelling premise and a suspenseful read.

And if you are interested in a suspenseful read that doesn’t have death in it or a murder to solve, this would be a great option for you!

After her grandma’s sudden death (okay ONE death…), almost 18-year-old Lily is sent on a ‘treasure hunt’ for her supposed inheritance.

Some have said this book has The Goonies vibes (which is actually referenced in the book) or is similar to The Inheritance Games. I haven’t seen the former or read the latter, so I can’t speak to whether those are accurate comparisons.

However, I just googled The Goonies and I see it’s described as a group of misfits who find a map and go on a treasure hunt, so (minus the pirates), yes, it does appear to be similar.


Lily is a loner and jealous of her cousin, Daisy (who is essentially the Spare), and her group of friends.

“I’d rather be alone than feel alone with friends who only care about my last name and how much money is in my bank account. Which is currently, like, none.”


Part of the treasure hunt seems to be Gram bringing people into Lily’s life and creating an unexpected group of friends, bonded by the hunt and the danger that it puts them through.


I liked the premise of this book and the context of where the treasure hunt starts. If you haven’t noticed yet, flower names are the theme in the Rosewood family. Hyacinth was the first matriarch and managed to create an entire town (with the family namesake). Then there was Petunia, then Iris (Lily and Daisy’s grandma). Iris had twin sons named Arbor and Alder.

The setting of a town kinda ‘ruled’ or ‘reigned over’ by the Rosewood family creates a close-knit community (with flowers planted everywhere). Lily’s dad and uncle ended up getting a lot of the townspeople into some financial trouble so when Gram dies and the family fortune appears to have ‘disappeared’ it sends the entire town into a hubbub.

“Not only are we up against whatever tricks Gram has in store for us, but now we also have competition? If we don’t solve her clues fast, someone else could get to it first.”


One thing that I didn’t like was the map. Lily ends up having to find three other people with pieces to the map. I wish the map had served more of a purpose than just bringing the four people together. There weren’t really any clues to be found in the map, and they didn’t really need it to solve the clues. I think it should have played a bigger role.

The clues the teens follow are also story-specific so it’s not something the reader can ‘figure out’ alongside the characters. It can be done either way in books, and sometimes it’s fun to be try to solve a riddle or something, but it worked out just fine to merely be a spectator in this story.


I wouldn’t say that I was shocked at any point in the story and I could kind of predict most of the ending. Again, it was okay in this book. It’s a YA book so it makes sense that the author isn’t going to create an overly complex plot line. It didn’t make it less enjoyable for me to read. I was still curious what Gram was up to and how it would all play out.


A major thread in this book is friendship. Reed writes in her acknowledgements, “While The Rosewood Hunt is a story about many things, at its heart, it’s about the friendship that blooms during an unexpected journey.”

(Again the connection to flowers!)

I have mixed feelings about the friendship vibes. With the exception of Gram and Daisy and Lily’s relationship, almost every other familial relationship in the book was strained, negative, or non-existent. This was a story where friendship really seemed to replace family.

I think for teen readers, friendship will hit a lot of chords and is something they are interested in reading about. That’s cool. But at the same time, I feel like it’s pretty rare to maintain high school friendships beyond high school. Friends aren’t always, or usually, forever… at least in a consistent way.

I get it, Lily has lost all her family (besides Daisy) and so in some ways friends will become her family. But I don’t think this is the norm for teens. It almost seemed to glorify friendships above family relationships. And it’s hard to argue when their parents are all terrible. But as a reader who IS a parent and already sees ways the family structure and the role of parents in a child’s life is being undermined, I guess I would have liked to see some more positive family relationships or at least some sort of reconciliation with teens and parental figures.

I could see teens reading this and thinking— ‘all I need is my friends; they will love me better than my parents.’ And the majority of the time, that’s just simply not true.

But, I would be curious what teen readers think when they read this. Perhaps their perception of the story understands those idiosyncrasies.



Another thing I noticed, which I’m not sure I would necessarily want changed, was the caliber of dialogue these teenagers are engaging in. It’s a typical observation I make when I read YA novels so it’s probably just ‘the way it is,’ but sometimes these teenagers are way more self-aware than they would be in reality. And able to articulate some of the feelings in a very mature way (i.e. why they struggle with relationships and getting close to people and why they find it hard to connect with people).

Daisy’s character seemed more in line with what I would expect. But I’m not sure I would want to read a book full of Daisy-caliber characters so I’m not sure how much I should request realism here haha.

And actually, most of the dialogue was well-done and interesting to read. I enjoyed some of the humor sprinkled in as well.



Most YA novels with an adventure have a character who says something heroic like- ‘I can’t have any more people I love getting hurt, so I’m going to finish this by myself. I love you guys and need to protect you because this is all my fault anyway.’ The Rosewood Hunt is no exception.

Do I think teenagers would do this? No. But at the same time, I suppose it’s not a bad thing to portray a character thinking about someone other than themself. I remember being a teen and teens are pretty inward focused and can’t always see how their choices or words affect others. If a character in a book makes them look outward more and desire to put others ahead of themselves, that’s probably a good thing for teens to be reading.


I thought Reed did a good job with the hunt- making it work in the modern setting and considering it came on the heels of the death of a loved one. Sometimes I wondered why characters did or didn’t do something or say something, but for the most part, those ‘holes’ were explained by the end.

Except for Lily’s mom. I’m still not sure what the deal is with both of the moms, really.

And, I do have a money question… if there were very large trusts heavily invested in Rosewood Inc. and then their owners were able to just pull them all out, wouldn’t that tank the company? Also, I really don’t think the trusts should have been fully available at the age of 18— that’s way too much money for a person whose frontal lobe is not fully developed yet…



Recommendation

I would definitely recommend this for an adult audience, but for a YA audience I would see my content advisory below to see if it’s something you would want your teen reading or not.

It’s not a dark, twisty, murderous thriller; it’s a lighter, yet suspenseful read with a fun adventure inspiring friendship. It’s a quick read and one I think a lot of people would enjoy.

I do wish it had less swearing (it seemed to increase in the last 2/3 of the book) and more emphasis on family, but I still liked the book. Especially for a debut novel, I think Reed has crafted a great book!


**Received an ARC via NetGalley*

[Content Advisory: 43 f-words, 54 s-words, 7 b-words, no sexual content, four prominent characters are LGBTQ]

“It is only in death that the full measure of their accomplishment can be revealed.”


I wanted to like this book. I’m into spy stuff and this book was written with declassified files obtained through the Freedom of Information Act so I was ready to get the scoop.

There were a few things here and there that were surprising, interesting, or enlightening, but for the most part I felt bored reading this book.

I fell asleep every time I picked the book up to read.

I think it would have engaged me better if it didn’t feel so disjointed.

It felt like whenever there were finally interesting things that caught my attention, she would cut to something else.

For example, one of the women is in a taxi and the driver misses the turn and drives her out in the middle of nowhere and stops. She thinks she’s about to be tortured or killed. Eventually he just drives her back into the city and she gets out of the taxi. But Holt never tells us what that was all about. I’m guessing we just don’t know, but even that wasn’t said.

This type of writing didn’t create suspense, it was a tease and it was frustrating.


Holt tracks the lives of five women who contributed to the creation and continuation of the CIA. It begins in WWII and talks about post-war operations, the Bay of Pigs, the Cold War and nuclear race, etc.

“Eloise’s career had taught her that it wasn’t the flashy operations that gained the most useful results. Instead, it was the maneuvers that the cowboys described as tedious, the ones that operated with small budgets, little attention from headquarters, and no uniformed personnel. It required an officer to engage in tasks that yielded no personal glory, entailing perseverance but not, preferably, bloodshed.”

Holt tries to draw connections between the five women, but there really isn’t much significant overlap.

She jumps around from one woman to another within the same chapter. Even though there are clear breaks between the switches, it was hard to keep their stories straight as to who was where and what struggles they were facing and what missions they were on.

I think it would have been a lot more engaging and easier to read if Holt broke the book up into five parts, chapters written focused on one woman at a time. Then we would get a better chronological view of their career and what sequence things happened.

I also wonder if this wouldn’t be better as a documentary with interviews and visuals.


Some of the interesting things I learned:

The microdot camera was becoming perfected by the 1940s which is a lot earlier than I realized. Technology is crazy to me. I remember this spy technique being used on a postage stamp in a movie (was it Mission Impossible?) but for some reason I think I thought it was futuristic spy tech. It was actually old school!

City 40 was the site of nuclear bomb testing and the radiation there was worse than Chernobyl. The CIA knew about it because of their reconnaissance missions on Soviet nuclear progress, but they kept it secret from the public because they didn’t want the Soviets to know about their surveillance. So all the citizens living in and around that city had no idea they were exposed to radiation.

Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA.

The CIA has mandatory retirement, usually at the age of 60, but sometimes 65. The FBI has it too, but theirs is age 57.

The CIA acknowledges that they engaged (probably still do?) in covert operations which were not necessarily hidden in terms of results but were supposedly untraceable to the CIA. Things like influencing elections of foreign countries or actions that would overthrow foreign leaders or influence certain laws. And I realize that if they have no qualms with influencing foreign elections, how am I supposed to believe that US elections are on the up and up? There just really is no way to trust an election is there? But I also don’t know what to do with that information so I think I just have to pretend everything is fine….



A common thread throughout the book is the inequality of women and men in this industry.

In 1952, 40% of the CIA was women but only 20% were getting paid the same salary level as 70% of the men when they were doing the same work. Some of the women even had advanced degrees.

“Male, pale, and Yale” was the formula for recruitment.

Each woman’s story includes many examples where they were denied promotions or raises or job assignments because they were women or mothers.

It was a common thought that women were not good hires or good to send overseas because they either had families or could get married and start families.


I suppose some of that train of thought still exists today.

But considering the nature of the work at the CIA I’m not sure to what extent I would agree or disagree with this train of thought.

Should certain military or intelligence positions be for men only? I don’t know if women should be denied just because they are women, but I think it makes sense that women may not be as interested in those types of jobs if they have families.

If there is a discrepancy in number of male to female agents in the field, I think it would make sense that there would be less women who would want to do that.

I do see how women could be particularly helpful in obtaining intelligence because people may find them easier to trust or to talk to. They probably do blend in better than men in a lot of ways and are less suspected of nefarious work.

I don’t know where I land on it all. I’m not sure I would go as far as outlawing women from doing certain jobs just because they are women, but I wonder if there’s wisdom in women refraining from certain positions (for a variety of reasons that space does not allow a rundown of in this context.)

For example, I would never want the military to be so inclusive of women that they would make women part of a draft, so there is obviously some difference there. I’m just not sure how far ‘protections’ should go, how much should be legislated, and how much should just be up to the woman.

Regardless, this book depicts five women who were up against ‘the man’ in trying to excel in a field that they were good at. Holt writes to expose their tenacity and perseverance and the sacrifices they made for their career and their country.

“Today roughly half of all CIA officers are women, working in locations spread across the globe… obtaining coveted field positions despite the ‘hazards’ the male CIA administrators of 1953 once warned of: partners, marriages, and children.”


Holt writes,

“To become a spy, you do not merely fill out a job application. The decision will override all other life choices, can never be altered, and is occasionally deadly. You are signing up not merely for a job, but a way of life. No family member, or friend will ever again have your complete confidence. You will surrender the comforts of your home and live abroad, likely for years. Your work and accomplishments are unlikely to ever be acknowledged outside your own intimate circle. Even death may not lift the shroud of secrecy.”

So yeah… I don’t think I’ll sign up to be a spy today. And I can imagine a lot of other women, especially those who desire families, would probably feel the same way.

There may be a disparity in number of women in the CIA, but in a lot of ways, it makes sense.

Obviously equal pay for equal work should still apply regardless of how many women are in the CIA, but I don’t know if we need to go all out trying to recruit women if the majority of women just prefer different careers.



Recommendation

I am interested in history and learning and the premise of this book was very intriguing, but the execution was lacking. I don’t think this book is for everyone.

If you are a history buff and have a knack for keeping multiple similar story lines distinct, you’ll probably love this book.

If you’re looking for a more exciting exposé on the CIA and women’s role in it, I think you’ll be disappointed.

Kristin Harmel’s blurb on the back of the book felt misleading to me. She says, “With the lyrical ease of a natural storyteller, Holt weaves deep research into an impossible-to-put-down tale that reads like historical fiction, though every word is true.”

I’m a fan of Harmel’s historical fiction, but this book does not come close to the same type of storytelling Harmel does. I wouldn’t call the writing lyrical, or with ease. And it was definitely put-downable for me.

The research Holt did was very evident. She put in the work to gather the information. I just think if she had organized it differently the storytelling would have vastly improved.



Related Reading

If you are interested in women’s role during WWII with cryptanalysis I would recommend the historical fiction books: The Rose Code and The Bletchley Women. Holt references Bletchley several times in this book.

There is also talk of the nuclear race. If that interests you, I would recommend Broker of Lies (talks about the Freedom of Information Act and takes place in Oak Ridge, TN- a site of the Manhattan Project ) or An Affair of Spies (talks of exfiltrating scientists working on German nuclear weapons and the Manhattan Project.)

Bomber Mafia is a non-fiction book that talks about those first bombs and how the invention of bomb sights changed warfare.

[Content Advisory: none]

“She willed herself to look back. He was there, just as she knew he would be… She lifted herself with her last remaining strength and jumped.”


Set in the late 1800s in post-war Philadelphia, this is an atmospheric mystery with disappearance and mysterious deaths, murder, and cover-ups.

The main character is a female physician, Dr. Weston, of Indian (India) descent during a time when females were not given much respect in the professional (or personal) world.

Having treated Anna, the missing young woman, in the past, Dr. Weston aids the police investigation into what happened to her.

Obviously technology is not the same then as it is now, so it was interesting to consider their methodology in following leads, determining cause of death, and tracking down a killer.

Some reviewers have commented that there are inaccuracies to this point. I have no qualifications to confirm or deny that, but to the average reader I don’t think there are any major discrepancies that would influence one’s enjoyment of the book.


I would give caution though, that you may not want to read this book on your lunch break. There are several medical scenes, including an autopsy, that are a bit graphic and not conducive to eating while reading.


Dr. Weston is Indian, but there wasn’t much of her heritage developed as far as character detail goes. There were a few descriptors here or there of items in her home that speak to her background, but otherwise, it was very much back burner and honestly, I even forgot a few times that she wasn’t white. (Which is probably partly because I’m white and it’s reflex to read my own ethnicity into characters, but partly because it just wasn’t a major part of her character as the author wrote it. )

This book speaks a lot to the disparities in class (rich vs poor) and gender (male vs female). I admit that sometimes I get tired of the discriminated-against-woman-living-in-a-man’s-world-and-having-to-prove-herself trope because it’s very popular right now. I’m probably not allowed to say that, especially as a woman, but hey, it’s what I often feel.

In Murder by Degrees the trope makes a lot of sense because of the context of the time period and so it didn’t get too annoying and the author didn’t make every male character to be against the protagonist so I appreciated that as well. All men, regardless of time period, aren’t misogynists.


Learning Corner

I had not read much during this time period and location so it was interesting to ‘travel’ somewhere new. There were a lot of references to places or streets that may mean something more to readers familiar with the Philly area, but I am not so if there were meant to be significant meaning behind any of it, it was lost on me.


As for the time period, I learned some interesting stuff.

The omnibus— an option for mass transport— was a thing. I found a picture of one here:

(photo in original post)

Body-snatching was a common occurrence. Corpses were stolen from graves and sold to medical schools for anatomy and dissection purposes. Sellers could get several month’s pay for a body so it was a lucrative ‘business.’

If you pour water into molten iron it will explode.

Mercury was used as a ‘healing’ agent. Thank goodness for scientific progression in medicine. Mercury has a whole host of negative side effects and harm to the body. It is also connected to the ‘Mad-Hatter’s’ disease because mercury was used in the felting process done by hatmakers and often resulted in tremors, anxiety, and depression.

Doctors were learning more about anesthesia during this time. This was coming off the Civil War when so many soldiers had to have limbs amputated… without anesthesia! I can’t even imagine.

The life expectancy in the 1800s was in the 60s during this time and it’s quite surprising considering the state of medicine at the time amongst other things! Quality of life, though, perhaps not as good.

Reading this book made me very thankful for modern medicine and doctors who know not to prescribe mercury…


SPOILER COMMENT

..


...


....



So, after knowing the ending, I was thinking back to when Paul ran away from the police that one time they came back to the house. Then he’s just MIA and everyone is just like, oh yeah, we don’t know where Paul is.

But no one was ever too concerned about it. A couple times they were like, hey is Paul back, and they were told no and they just didn’t seem to think that was significant.

I think that disconnect between that moment and what we know at the end of Paul’s role feels like a hole I wish was filled.

....


...


..


SPOILER OVER



Other Comments

After they find the body in the river, Dr. Weston was unsure about something.

“Something else was troubling her. It was what they hadn’t found. Something was missing and she couldn’t quite place it.”

I was curious to know what that was but I’m not sure if Mukerji ever closed that loop specifically.


There is a brief Halloween party scene. I read this in October so it had some fun October vibes and if you’re needing a book for a reading challenge that has a holiday in it, this may fit that prompt for you.


The title: Murder by Degrees.

I was trying to figure out what this title meant and why it was chosen. I can’t really tell. The only thing I can think of is that the murder was issued indirectly… by degrees… as in ‘six degrees of separation’ and how many people away someone is from you?

I don’t know if that’s right. That’s just all I could come up with because I don’t think the murder had to do with advanced educational degrees or with temperature, and it wasn’t a death where if, for example, a bullet missed by a tiny fraction.

What else is there?

So I think this book would have benefited from a different title. Unless I’m missing something.


Many reviewers seem to think that this will be a series.

I’m not sure why this is widely thought; this book could easily just be a standalone. There is no cliffhanger. Perhaps if they continue it, we’ll see the professional relationship between Dr. Weston and Davies (the police guy) continue to develop. There’s currently tension as Davies doesn’t take her very seriously, so there would be room for him to continue to grow in respect for her work and intellect and ability to help solve cases. I could see their partnership becoming a friendship.

That could work, but I don’t know how likely that would be.

Dr. Weston is a likable character and someone readers would definitely want to root for, especially given the era she lives in.

“It was her keen insight, her tenacity, and ultimately her courage that had brought them to the end of this arduous case.”


Recommendation

I would recommend this book. It’s not going to be a twisty hard-hitting thriller, but it’s a good mystery set in an interesting time period/place with a likable protagonist.

The beginning really draws you in and though I suspected some of the reveals, it was written in a way that did make me second guess myself.

I also appreciate that the book was clean. There was no cursing or sexual content other than stating some facts regarding the case or suspects in the case.

I think some of the medical details can take away from the story, the title could have been better, and a couple nitpicky things about the plot could be changed, but nothing that would make me think it’s not worth reading.

I say, go for it!


**Received an ARC via NetGalley*

[Content Advisory: none]

“‘My memory is nearly gone. But I remember two things: that I am a great sinner, and that Christ is a great Savior.’”


This is the year (2023) that we celebrate the 250th anniversary of the first singing of the hymn, Amazing Grace, by John Newton.

“The hymn has endured through two-and-a-half centuries and become today a powerful symbol for many people of hope in the midst of tragedy.”

This may be one of the most well-known songs in the country, but the story behind it— not so much. I grew up in the church and I had heard of John Newton, of course, but it was the post-repentant John Newton. The song’s message is even more powerful when you read of everything that came before it.

You’ll find Hindmarsh and Borlase’s book, Amazing Grace, to be enlightening, angering, and encouraging. It will challenge and convict but bring you to a place of hope and freedom.

Be warned: this is not an easy book to read. John Newton was an active participant in the slave trade from an early age. Not only was my knowledge of Newton expanded, but my knowledge of the slave trade was as well. It’s very hard to read about the dehumanization of the African people and the things that were done to them, the conditions and the abuse they endured.

“I was blind, but now, I see” is a poignant phrase. Utter blindness is the only explanation because there is no excuse for the near universal acceptance of the slave trade. And to God’s glory that even the deepest of sins can be forgiven. There is no wretch out of reach of God’s grace.

That is the story of John Newton.


“Where do we find hope today in the midst of deep divisions in society and violent disagreements? Where do we find hope for the human condition? Where do we find hope for all the griefs and sorrows that threaten to undo our own lives? Perhaps we need to look again at the perennial message of ‘Amazing Grace.’ Perhaps here we might find a renewed hope that however difficult the troubles in our lives, however deep our personal shame and regret, however dark the evil that stalks the earth, there is a mercy that is deeper yet, a forgiveness that makes all the difference, and a power for reconciliation greater than ourselves.”


The book is written from multiple sources including Newton’s autobiography, his diaries, logbooks, letters, and other published writings. There have been some creative liberties taken to fill in other facts and framework and thus this book would be considered a “dramatized biography.”


It didn’t read like a textbook. The writing was very well-done as they unraveled the story. Some of the language used was indicative of the times and not used in a condoning way (i.e. whore).

Even as the people in the story engage in sin in all matter of ways, including their words, the message of the book is not in accordance with that. The dignity of humanity, made in the image of God, is very much the conclusion. We are brought through the sin and failures of John’s life into his salvation and the continual process of being refined by the grace of God to the truth of humanity, sin, and reconciliation.


The Beginning

John’s father was an intimidating ship captain that instilled fear in John from an early age. Within the first chapter we see a six-year-old John sneaking out at night to see the dead body that was hung near the docks earlier that night. Shortly thereafter his mother dies of consumption. His father remarries and John is sent to boarding school where he endured beatings from his headmasters.

Considering this early trauma and the crude environment of growing up among sailors, it’s no surprise that John became a risk-taking, selfish, and rebellious teen. Many of his choices are driven by his forbidden love for Polly (Mary) who, after many tumultuous years, eventually becomes his wife.

When John finally gets to work on a ship as he had dreamed, the power goes to his head.

“He wore arrogance like a shield and used mockery as a whip.”

“Newton could barely utter a single sentence without resorting to profanities, and he had a particular disdain for anyone who declared himself a serious Christian.”

Until a series of events result in him being treated as a slave… or rather “servant of slaves.”

“Not an hour a day went by in which John was not humiliated in some way. He tried to ignore it, to block out the taunts and the abuse… He was trapped. There was no escape. All he knew— and he was ever going to know from this point on— was pain.”

These events were just the beginnings of the wild life of John Newton. The book continues and tells of more deaths and harrowing circumstances John finds himself in, some by surprise and some by consequence of his own behavior and choices.

In fact, the majority of the horror happens before John is even 28 years old.

We see many different forms of ‘faith’ in Newton’s life: from obedience and going to church because it was important to his mom; to complete rejection; to a near-death experience averted because of a church service inciting him to think he must be a saint in response; to finding obedience too hard and giving in to his fleshly desires and pleasures; to complete despair; and eventually to a right understanding of grace, mercy, and obedience out of love and gratitude.


The Slave Trade

The slaver ships would take goods from Europe down along the Guinea Coast to buy slaves. Once they got 100-200+ slaves they would make the trek across the Middle Passage to the West Indies to sell the slaves for sugar and rum and then head back to England. The voyages would typically take a year or more.

At one point, John lives in Africa with another slaver (Evans) and his royal, African wife (P.I.)— who was actually running the slave factory there. She had all the power and she didn’t like John so she turned Evans against him. He became their slave.

We know it is sin that corrupts. Slavery has been a historical staple in all cultures for many many years, though in different ways and practices. We can’t deny the major role white people played in the Trans-Atlantic slave trade business, but we also must be careful not to think that any one sin is bound to one race. Sin is nondiscriminatory.

- - - -
A few terms:

Royal African Company: held a monopoly on trade and shipped more slaves in trade than any other company
press-gang: the forced enlistment of men into the British Navy
bilgewater: water that collects at the bottom of the ship
thumbscrews: torture device often used on slaves
roundrobin: a petition, often against authority, which is printed in the middle of a paper and signed all around the outside of it to prevent the order of names or a ringleader to be identified; in this book, mutiny against the captain
- - - -

By the end of the book we are into the early 1800s and the public opinion about the slave trade is shifting. Hindmarsh introduces us to William Wilberforce and his dealings with Parliament to get the slave trade banned.

We hear the shocking tale of the Zong slave ship. After sickness struck their ship and they knew they’d suffer financial loss, the captain, knowing insurance didn’t cover profit loss due to sickness but did cover slaves thrown overboard as from storms, etc. he threw 130 slaves overboard alive in order to collect the insurance.

However, the insurance company refused to pay and the case went to court.

“Initially the jury sided with the crew, but the subsequent appeal— which created widespread publicity— ruled against the ship’s owners. It was a landmark decision, and one that brought the horrors of the Middle Passage to the public’s attention like never before.”



John Newton gave transparent and honest legal testimony against the slave trade.

He shared that “The people are gentle when they have no communication with the Europeans” and dispelled myths: “Most Africans did not endorse the trade. They were not naturally lazy. Their contact with Europeans did not civilize them but instead dragged them to the lowest levels of corruption.”

He also wrote against it, “‘There was nothing quite so iniquitous, so cruel, so oppressive, so destructive, as the African Slave Trade… [it] will always be a subject of a humiliating reflection to me, that I was once an active instrument in a business at which my heart now shudders.’”


We are also introduced to the relationship between John Newton and William Cowper, famous poet. Cowper (pronounced Cooper) experienced a lot of spiritual warfare and depression in his life, but he penned some very profound poems. Here are a few lines from his poem ‘Charity’

“But ah! what wish can prosper, or what pray’r,
For merchants rich in cargoes of despair,
Who drive a loathsome traffic, gauge, and span,
And buy the muscles and the bones of man!

Canst thou, and honour’d with a Christian name,
Buy what is woman-born, and feel no shame?
Trade in the blood of innocence, and plead
Expedience as a warrant for the deed?”


Newton’s Conversion and Hymn

Throughout his life Newton had several ‘come-to-Jesus’ moments in which he recognized God intervening in his life. However, it was indeed a journey to his salvation and his full realization of his sin.

The most major spiritual surrender happened when he found himself at sea in a vicious storm that left their ship in shambles. The crew even called him Jonah for bringing such devastation to their ship. The crew spent 27 days on board bailing water and trying to survive until somehow the ship found land again.

John finally had confessed in what he felt were his final moments, ‘I am a wretched sinner… Do with me as you please.’

“It was the moment where John finally placed his trust in the cross of Christ. It was the point when he finally realized that he needed God to do for him what he could not do for himself. He was a wretch, and he needed grace.”

However, there was more repentance to come because it was after this storm that John eventually becomes captain of his own slave ship.

“According to his logbook, he bought and imprisoned 468 African men, women, and children on board his ships. Sixty-eight of those people died on his watch, while the rest he delivered into the deadly slave system that powered the plantations of the West Indies.”

It is a lesson in cognitive dissonance that we can see Newton despairing of his (certain) sins and desiring to be obedient to God and do what is right and good, yet climbing aboard a ship and selling chained people like product.

“When John took his place on deck while the slaves were eating, surveying the men, women, and children that he had bought and held captive on his ship, he could only rest content and thank God. To his eyes, as he looked at men in leg chains, women fearful of rape, and children taken from their families, it looked like a peaceful, happy scene. he was so certain of this he made a point to write that they were ‘more like children in one family, than slaves in iron and chains.’”

“With few distractions and plenty of time alone in his cabin [to read, write, and pray], John was convinced that his time as a captain in the slave trade was a God-given gift that would allow him to mature as a Christian.”

It does not make sense. The blindness is blinding.

But thankfully, his story doesn’t end there, and after a few journeys at sea he is convicted more and more by what he is taking part in. Though illness was the catalyst to his leaving the trade, he eventually recognizes the horrors that he was part of.

He becomes ordained in the Church of England and writes many hymns to accompany his sermons.

“From his earliest childhood memories, John knew the power of hymns, and as a preacher he knew the limits of his sermons. He wanted people to be able to experience the grace and mercy of God for themselves up to a knowledge that went beyond the head and straight to the heart.”


On January 1, 1773, Amazing Grace was sung for the first time. At this point it was titled ‘Faith’s Review and Expectation.’ I think the eventual name change was a good choice.

But the lyrics of this song hit a different way when you realize the spiritual turmoil Newton had knowing his own wretchedness and accepting forgiveness for things too shocking to read.

“Through many dangers, toils, and snares
I have already come
This grace that brought me safe thus far
And grace will lead me home

Amazing grace how sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me
I once was lost, but now I'm found
Was blind but now I see”


Modern Blindness?

One thing struck me as I contemplated the “appalling and near universal blindness” surrounding the slave trade. People in Europe put sugar in their tea, ignorant of the true price of that sugar. Or perhaps they had vague knowledge, but they were blinded to its sinfulness because they would rather have sugar than have to face the reality of how the sugar got to them.

I couldn’t help but think of a different form of human trafficking that is still prevalent today. I don’t think there is a universal blindness to the wrongs of human trafficking, but I do think there is a blindness to the market that fuels that human trafficking.

Porn.

This is not talked about in the book at all, this is a connection I’m making on my own that I felt compelled to share here. We are rightly horrified by the people who were willing to turn their back on the slave trade so that they could have sugar in their tea.

Yet people sit behind computers and phone screens consuming porn as if there is no harm in how that porn came to be. People are blind to the destruction that comes before and after porn.

People may not be sold because of the color of their skin, and we can be thankful for that, but the war on slavery is not over. People— namely children and women— are being sold as sex slaves and there seems to be a widespread belief that porn has no connection to it.

We are ignorant if we believe porn is an industry of righteousness, honesty, consensus, and freedom.

We may think we could never be like those Europeans. But sin. And our deceitful hearts. We are not immune to the lures of sin.

John confesses, “Custom, example, and interest, had blinded my eyes.”

“If something is accepted by everyone (custom), and everyone else is doing it (example), and it is to my benefit (interest), then we, too, are in danger of self-deception.”

Don’t be blinded by your desire for sugar. Let’s not wait for another Zong massacre before we finally open our eyes to the destruction porn’s market cultivates.

We learn many things from John Newton’s story, and the top of that list is God’s grace and forgiveness, but let’s not miss the conviction to treat humanity with dignity because porn and the industry it fills stands in direct opposition to that in every way.



Four Profound Truths

If you’re not sure what we should take away from this book, Hindmarsh and Borlase summarize the four profound truths we can learn from John Newton’s story:

- I can be forgiven. “Whatever shame or guilt you carry, however deep the regrets in your life, no matter what you have done, there is a mercy that is deeper yet.”

- I can be deceived. “If something is accepted by everyone (custom), and everyone else is doing it (example), and it is to my benefit (interest), then we, too, are in danger of self-deception.” “Majorities routinely oppress minorities and tell themselves convincing lies to justify this. Dehumanization is always a first step toward violence.”

- I can make amends. “even if it happens slowly and in stages… we must face up to the truth, repudiate what we once believed, and do what we can, however costly, to make amends.”

- I can be more like Jesus. “God’s grace changes us over our lifespan to make us more like Christ.”


Conclusion

I honestly thought I might be a bit bored by this book and had taken awhile to get to it on my list. Because I thought I knew what I was getting myself into.

I did not.

This is not a book that you say was ‘fun’ to read. But it was a powerful book, to be sure.

It enlightens you, educates you, and encourages you. It will make you feel sad and angry, but it’s a book of hope and forgiveness. It’s a book that reminds us that God is a God of both forgiveness and justice. In a world full of violence and oppression, we know that he sees and we know he will have final vindication.

It reminds us to reflect on our own sin. To confess where we’ve been blind. And to accept his forgiveness when we have repented. We are not disqualified from his grace. If God can save someone like John Newton, he can save us too.

We don’t have to have it altogether when we come to him. Newton didn’t. But God will continually refine us to look more like himself. His grace abounds!

“It is perhaps one of the most amazing things about God’s grace in the cross of Christ— that though the message of grace comes to us with impure hands, stained with violence, it yet offers hope and redemption to the wretched, and it plants the seeds of justice, reconciliation, and healing for all peoples in its universality and affirmation of the common humanity and dignity of every person.”




**Received an ARC via NetGalley**

[Content Advisory: descriptions of the slave trade and all the atrocities done in its name]

I didn’t read this book to figure out how to be the man God wants me to be… because I’m a woman.

But I was curious how Fuller approached the term ‘masculinity’ in a time when it’s pretty much only used negatively.

I’m a woman, but I’m married to a man and I’m raising two sons. My husband is bombarded with the term ‘toxic masculinity’ and my sons will have to figure out their place in a world where they’re made to feel guilty just for being a male.

While this book is primarily written for males, I think women can benefit from reading this in three major ways: recognizing and encouraging biblical masculinity in our husbands, knowing what to look for in a potential husband if we are single, and knowing what to teach our sons if we are mothers.



Fuller acknowledges throughout the book the ways males have hurt others, often with their strength or dominance. But he offers this:

“I want to argue that there’s a difference between that definition of ‘traditional masculinity’ and what we could call ‘biblical masculinity.’”

The traits of ‘traditional masculinity’ the American Psychological Association have identified as often psychologically harmful are: “stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression.”

Fuller clarifies: “To say that some traits can be harmful if indulged excessively is not the same as saying that they always are.”

For example: “…we honor and give thanks for [soldiers’] stoicism and aggression during armed conflict… Competitiveness can be useful in driving innovation. If I’m in a building that’s on fire, I’d like the firefighter to assert some dominance and order me around.”

Certain traits are not inherently bad, but they can be used for good or for harm. So instead defining ‘traits’ of what a man should look like, Fuller provides principles in how men can be more godly men.



I like that Fuller points out how we’ve approached this topic in a negative way— stop doing this, stop acting like that— instead of offering young men a positive vision of what they should be striving for. Constant negativity demoralizes a person, but even in parenting you recognize the change in attitude and results if you shift from a negative ‘Stop hitting your sister’ to a positive ‘You need to have gentle and kind hands.’ It changes from ‘I’m bad’ to ‘I can be good.’

This book attempts to fill in that gap and provide men a positive and helpful framework for living in the world.

He quotes Jordan Peterson, one of the few who promote positive direction, who boils ‘being man’ into two directives: “taking responsibility and living for a purpose.”

These are good, but Fuller fleshes them out in this book and gives them legs, based on Scripture. We shouldn’t just be asking what kind of man or woman we should be, but asking what kind of man or woman God wants us to be. Because what the culture tells us and what God tells us, especially when it comes to identity, are two very different things.

In fact, the culture kinda just wants to throw out the term ‘male’ altogether. We get a hodge podge of contradicting ideas in which gender becomes a fantasy, men are oppressors, men should be more like women, women are better men than men, etc.


This book doesn’t tackle all of that and doesn’t get into the political weeds which I think was good for the purposes of this book. If you want to read more about some of the other tangents of this conversation, check out the list of related books at the end of this review.



To get right down to it these are his seven principles “that describe a biblical, healthy, confident, helpful masculinity”:

1. Men and women really are different (but don’t exaggerate it)

- He covers some controversial passages here (1 Cor 11; Eph 5) and reiterates that what is appropriate for dress and showing respect can differ according to culture and we can’t be too prescriptive here

- He brings in relevant studies that talk of the real biological differences in men and women, physically and neurologically, etc.

2. Take responsibility

- He looks at Adam’s role and responsibility in Eden showing men’s headship is grounded in creation and defined by Christ’s sacrificial love for the church (Eph 5)

- It’s important here to point out that Fuller rightly says that women are not called to submit to all men as many read out of that infamous passage. The biblical submission asked of women is in the context of her committed marriage to her husband with the expectation that the husband is loving her sacrificially not holding dominance over her.

3. Be ambitious for God

- This is the recognition of men’s bent towards achievement and recognizing what ambitions are selfish or not

- He talks about men’s relationship to work and encouraging men to be productive, not idle, with the emphasis on ‘productive’ not ‘paid’ work. There is always something to do that is productive, whether or not you’re getting paid for it. How you spend your time should signify serving in some capacity and with eternity in mind.

4. Use your strength to protect

- This (and the next one) may be one of the most contested ones in the list because of people’s very real experiences in which men were violent or manipulative.

- “Violence towards the wicked is required in order to provide protection to the innocent. So we shouldn’t be surprised that we see that same model in the Bible. God himself is described as a warrior who fights to protect his people.”

- Before your feathers are ruffled, he clarifies that the physical “protective, measured aggression” that Moses shows in Exodus when he comes down to the golden calf would not be condoned today but is the equivalent of church discipline— fiercely protecting the Word of God, God’s church, and God’s people. There is emphasis here on raising hands in prayer, not in violence, but still with a zeal to guard and protect what is good.

- He covers 1 and 2 Timothy 2 where the role of women in the church is discussed. (He holds a complementarian view if you’re wondering)

5. Display thoughtful chivalry

- He says, “Chivalry is using strength to serve.”

- He acknowledges that when women are antagonistic towards men opening doors or helping them, we shouldn’t be quick to judge because there’s usually an experience or a pain that may be behind that reaction. It doesn’t mean men stop helping women, and they can be gracious and unoffended when their help is rejected.

- There is brief talk of pornography here and how watching porn dehumanizes women.

- There is also a small section on how to treat women while dating and pursuing marriage.

6. Invest in friendships

- “Hardship + friendship = maturity
 Hardship + loneliness= destructive sin”

- “when we talk about our triumphs it can create competition; when we talk about our failures it builds community.”

- We always need people around us who are willing to kindly rebuke us when we have strayed and men have a tendency not to keep close friends or talk of their failures, but this is essential for growth and becoming more Christlike.

7. Raise healthy ‘sons’ (sons is in quotes because, like Paul to Timothy, men can be father figures to young men or boys who are not their biological sons)

- “Part of training is discipline. Boys do need boundaries, and it’s kind to provide them. I’ve yet to see a tennis match where the players complain that someone has painted lines on the ground.”

- He reminds us that discipline should not be harsh, bullying, or belittling, but kind and wise.

- “Every Christian dad needs to model to their children that the Christian life is not one merely or primarily of moral conformity— it is a life of repentance and faith. It’s a life in which behavior flows out of knowing that God accepts us, not out of a desire to achieve acceptance.”

- We have to be ready to admit our own wrongdoings to our kids and ask for forgiveness.



“We can boil all of these down to something like this: Being a godly man means taking responsibility to lead, being ambitious for God’s kingdom, using your strength to protect the church and serve others, investing in friends, and raising godly ‘sons.’”

These points are simplified here. I don’t think you can just take this list and run with it without reading his explanations further. I know just the word chivalry probably conjures certain feelings for a lot of people. So this list is the bare bones and can easily be taken out of context and thrown out without giving Fuller a chance to show what he means.

In that regard, I think this would be a good book for a group of men to go through together. It’s short so it’s a pretty quick read and would foster some good conversations and areas where they can provide each other with accountability.



This book is not meant to be exhaustive or prescriptive. These are broad-stroke principles not daily routine schedules. I think there is always going to be a vagueness to ‘what should it look like to be a godly man or woman’ because we encounter so many diverse situations and challenges. It’s not a list of traits we can check off each day, but principles we can act towards based on a heart that is grounded in Christ’s love and sacrifice. There is room for differences here— every man is not going to look the same or like the same things, but ‘manhood’ is more defined by a right posture before God and towards others.

My husband didn’t read this book (at least at the time of writing this review) but I did discuss it with him to see what he thought about it. I asked what he would or would not want to read when he picked up a book with this title. He said he would be turned off if the author talked about masculinity being about ruggedness. (Fuller did not.) He said he would like to read about biblical masculinity being about men as bold leaders in ministry, in their homes, and in the world. About men being protectors and servants. (Fuller delivered.)



Obviously, my view of this book can only go so far. I’m not a man and I don’t fully understand the struggles that men face in being men. I don’t fully understand what they’re up against when they’re at the receiving end of ‘toxic masculinity’ rhetoric.

I do know that it’s a confusing time to be a man just as it is a confusing time to be a woman. It seems whatever we choose is wrong— according to the culture. But we can’t look to the ever-shifting definitions of the culture for this.

And that’s why Fuller’s book is important and helpful. He shows us the timeless truths of the Bible and the principles given on how we relate to one another and work out of God’s design for males and females.

As a woman reading this book, I feel like Fuller did a good job of defending women and validating a lot of the fears and anxieties women may have towards men that men don’t understand or think about. I appreciated the inclusion of the pornography discussion because that is too often overlooked or deemed irrelevant when that couldn’t be further from the truth.



I liked how he reiterated that getting married isn’t a qualifier for being a godly man. Paul and Jesus were both unmarried. But even unmarried, men will still interact with women and children and these principles can be applied in whatever situation we find ourselves in.

I also really appreciated his emphasis at the end of forgiveness and redemption. Some may read the book and think they’ve missed the boat on all of these principles, but it’s never too late and God’s mercy and forgiveness is abundant. None of us will perfectly carry out God’s design for us, but with the Spirit’s help, he will continually refine us until we are at home with Him.


I would definitely recommend this book for both men and women, but especially men, because ‘toxic’ is not the only way to describe masculinity, and God’s design and plan for men is important and essential. Women and children need men who desire to step into the role of sacrificial, servant leader who will protect and stand up for what is right and good with both zeal and compassion. I believe this book will set men on the right trajectory to that end.



Further Reading

The Problem of Porn by Vaughan Roberts (Fuller did not broach the topic of pornography in-depth but acknowledged its significance in the topic of masculinity. Culture’s view towards porn is troubling to say the least. This short book addresses it more directly)

Raising Confident Kids in a Confusing World by Ed Drew (this is a great resource for parents in how to talk to your kids about gender, friendships, sex, and marriage)

The War Against Boys by Christina Hoff Sommers (this is an informative secular book with some overlap in Fuller’s book talking about the differences between girls and boys and how ideas and policies meant to help girls are mostly just hurting boys)

Mama Bear Apologetics Guide to Sexuality: Empowering Your Kids to Understand and Live Out God’s Design
by Hillary Morgan Ferrer (this is a pretty comprehensive book about all things related to sexuality that is a really practical guide for parents in knowing how to talk to your kids about this stuff)

What God Has to Say about Our Bodies by Sam Allberry (this book talks about bodies and why they matter which is relevant to the gender discussion; there is also further discussion on gender roles in our culture and gender identity; would be especially helpful for men who feel like they don’t ‘fit’ in the box of ‘man’)

Men and Women in the Church by Kevin DeYoung (if you would like a short book that looks further into the controversial Bible passages about men and women’s roles in the church, this book is it. If you want a longer version, read Tim Keller’s Evangelical Feminism)

Eve in Exile and the Restoration of Femininity by Rebekah Merkle (if you would like to see a book on femininity in today’s culture, this may be a good option for you- if you’re looking for something blunt and straightforward.)

Gentle and Lowly by Dane Ortlund (for anyone who just feels like a failure and needs some hope and encouragement)


**Received a copy via The Good Book Company in exchange for an honest review**

This follows book nine, What She Found. While it can be read as a stand alone novel, I think it would at least be best to read 9 and 10 in order because this book handles a lot of residuals from What She Found and I think some of it may lose its punch if you aren’t aware of the background.

What Tracy found in the last book was corruption in high places and leaders taking drug money. The investigative reporter looking into several cases then, including that one, went missing. Some things were left a little ‘unresolved.’

So now, in One Last Kill, Tracy is investigating the cold case of a serial killer that may have some connection to the other cases the investigative reporter was researching back then. Anita Childress, from book 9, is a returning character.

Not only is Tracy battling the normal challenges of a cold case, she’s also got some enemies in high places that don’t want her to succeed and is assigned a partner she can’t stand. Can she track down a killer without putting herself or her family in danger?


The title is significant because even though Tracy is looking into a ‘cold’ case, she runs the risk that opening the case back up may trigger the killer to kill again. The killer may have gone dormant because they died or went to jail for some other reason, but they may have been trying to send a message. With the return of publicity, it may be too enticing to send another message and make one last kill.


I actually didn’t like this one quite as much as other ones in the series. This one had more profanity in it for one thing. The last book had 20 s-words and this one jumped up to 60 for some reason.

I also don’t know if I liked the whole ending. I know some people like an ending that is a little open-ended, but I tend to prefer open and shut and full resolution. This one left Tracy with a hard decision and I partially disagree with her choice.

SLIGHT SPOILER ALERT!!

....

...

..


A line at the end says, “She’d do as Mrs. Edwards had done. Tracy would swallow the truth, to protect her family.” I don’t find this believable for Tracy’s character. She’s always trusted that exposing the truth is the best thing to do and that she could handle any backfire from it.

I get that her family would be in danger because of the people involved, but I think she has enough evidence that would destroy them— plus any harm they might try to cause wouldn’t lessen the damage done by the evidence so I don’t know if they would try it. If Mr. Edwards hadn’t killed his wife by now, I don’t think he plans to.

Not to mention, swallowing the truth does more than supposedly protect her family and friends, it also puts others at risk and in harm’s way.

I think Dugoni plans to continue this series, so I guess we will see if this decision comes back to bite her or if she will finally have the courage to go after the big players and have others to support her in it.

...


...


..

SPOILER OVER!!


A couple random comments:

- I was happy to see that “The Gazebo Dan Built”— the Costco find— made an appearance in this book as well.

- The phrases “graft and corruption” and “chewing nails” were a bit overused. The first one stuck out to me because it’s such a specific and unusual phrasing to continue using.

- A lot of DNA testing is done in this book and there is talk about how long that process actually takes. So I decided to look it up because it just doesn’t seem like it would take much to do DNA testing and solve all these crimes. And unfortunately I didn’t find many definitive answers. It varies by state (because of backlog) and it depends on the type of crime and the amount of evidence to be processed. There are a lot of hoops they have to jump through in terms of cleaning and documenting to make sure nothing is tampered with or compromised. Plus extra analysis to confirm findings and make sure everything is done properly.

- I enjoyed Tracy’s comeback to her captain when he told her he was her superior: “You’re my captain. You’re far from my superior.” Not super respectful of authority, but it was a good line…


Although the profanity increased a bit, I would still recommend this series. Tracy Crosswhite is a character that I always enjoy following around. She’s got grit, smarts, and a good sense of humor.



**Received an ARC via NetGalley**

[Content Advisory: 1 f-words, 60 s-words, 13 b-words; rape is discussed as a crime but not described in story form]

“Fifty-eight years. That’s how long it had taken Claudia to find her way back home... But then she had to ask herself: where was home?”


Take the Long Way Home is a historical fiction/romance/coming-of-age story.

I read this book because I was intrigued by the title and the idea of a book spanning so much history through the eyes of one black woman.

Unfortunately, the book was highly sexual— not always in an erotic way— and after getting 25% of the way through I decided to just skim the rest. Because of that, I think my relationship with the history of racism hit different than it probably would have had I not been so frustrated with the sexual content.

I don’t care to read the biography of Claudia’s sex life. If Alers had written a book that focused on four impactful events over the course of Claudia’s life that corresponded to historical events instead of four impactful men, I probably would have been more interested.


[Several reviewers who received an advanced reader’s copy gave a bad review of the book because it didn’t include the last several chapters. My version was missing those as well, but I contacted someone who gave me the updated copy. My review is based on knowledge of the completed book. It was nice to have the last bits and epilogue to know how it ended up, but it also contained a few more sex scenes so it didn’t really redeem itself in the end.]


The Long Way Home

Although the book was not my cup of tea, I can appreciate a good title. That’s what brought me to this book in the first place.

The long way home at the beginning of the book was the literal path Claudia took after school where she encountered a boy who would essentially change the course of her life drastically and put her on the trajectory to become the successful and cultured woman she became, to meet the people she met, etc.

The long way home in the more abstract sense was her return to the US and a discussion on what her home really is. After losing most of her family, what was her home? She takes a hiatus from the US, a place of so much racism and heartache for Claudia, and her grandchildren is what ultimately brings her back.


Plot Summary

The book begins with our main character, Claudia Patterson, as an 83-year-old woman visiting her daughter in the U.S. and remembering how she had vowed never to return because “she’d believed the country of her birth had continually betrayed her race.”

But after Obama became president she had hope that her country had turned a corner.

As she arrives to the U.S. she reunites with Ashley Booth, a previous lover, and then begins reminiscing about the four men in her life that had a huge impact on her. Thus begins the flashback parts of the book divided according to man:

Denny Clark- 1952, Freedom, Mississippi

When Claudia is just 12 she comes across a white boy barely alive after being beaten and whipped. Her grandma and she secretly nurse him back to health. But Denny falls in love with Claudia (more like lust) and causes some problems for Claudia emotionally and physically.

“She’d just learned a hard lesson at an early age. She couldn’t trust White people.”


Robert Moore- 1958, Hampton University, Virginia and Freedom, Mississippi

After the events with Denny, Claudia is schooled by her aunt in another town, becomes fluent in several languages, and attends Hampton where she meets Robert and they get married. He is black and schools to be a lawyer fighting for civil rights through legislation. Claudia becomes an activist, but her role in signing up black voters puts a target on them and Robert pays the price.

“I know that violence begets violence, and, Claudia, I don’t want to be filled with so much hatred that I become like them.”


Ashley Booth- 1968, New York City

Still grieving the death of her husband, she meets Ashley, nicknamed the ‘Black Prince of Wall Street.’ With both parents being doctors, he has been part of the black elite in New York and introduces Claudia to that world and corporate connections. But Ashley has vowed never to marry and his lack of commitment to Claudia in their relationship pushes her to accept an international banking job based in Rome.

“Ashley Booth was the epitome of sartorial splendor from his barbered hair to the shine on his shoes.”

“Ashley couldn’t love me, Yvonne, because he is in love with himself.”


Giancarlo Fortenza- 1969, Paris and Rome

Claudia originally met Giancarlo when she was 18 and on a summer trip to Paris with her aunts as a graduation gift. They run into each other again in Rome when she moves there for work. Ashley was given an ultimatum and now Claudia is moving on to Giancarlo. She marries Giancarlo and is able to start a family and grow old together.

“She’d never been attracted to White men, but Claudia realized she would make an exception when it came to Giancarlo.”


Sexual Content

I usually just put this in a content advisory at the end of my reviews but because it was a major factor in my opinion of the book I’m giving it more space.

This book is either talking about racism and discrimination against black people or it’s talking about Claudia’s sex life. Those are pretty much the only two things.

As I mentioned, it’s not really written erotically most of the time. It’s not meant to be a spicy flowery romance book (except maybe a little bit?… I don’t know.) But in a lot of spots it’s more written matter-of-factly or clinically.

Her first period is described in detail. Her first sexual feelings are described. Private body parts are named anatomically a dozen times. The word ‘erection’ is used a dozen times. (I have a digital copy so I can search, I’m not sitting there tallying while I’m reading.)

It just felt like every character is concerned with sex: when they lost their virginity, being a mistress, wondering whether they should sleep together, actually sleeping together, taking the pill, etc.


I know my beliefs about sex being between a man and woman within the commitment of marriage are probably not the majority. I know many of you will disagree with me here, but there is more to life than sex. (And plenty more books to read than ones about sex).

This book, as it’s trying to portray sexual freedom, actually exposes a lot of the burdens, griefs, and consequences of ‘sexual freedom’

We are told: “Getting a girl pregnant before graduating had become Robert’s greatest fear—” Simple, Robert, don’t have sex until you’re married. It’s 100% in your control. Your greatest fear is now overcome. Live in fear no longer.

Claudia says: “I do think of myself as a modern woman, because I’m willing to engage in premarital sex, but I draw the line when it comes to shacking up with a man.” Willing to engage. That wording already shows a problem. Women feel like they must have sex early because they need to be as sexually free as men. How else will they find a man to stick around? And having sex with no strings attached? Not a thing. There’s always strings. Most of them probably emotional. We’re told that sex is meaningless, just a form of pleasure. That’s a lie. Sex always means something. Not ‘shacking up’ solves some problems but creates others.

When her intentionally unmarried, ‘sexually free’, aunt arrives in one of the scenes and is helped with her luggage by a married man whom she rode on the train with, we are reminded about her aunt’s “ethereal beauty” and: “no doubt the long-time married grandfather enjoyed every minute of sitting across from her during the long train ride from Paris to Rome.” Because even if people ARE happily married, even for years, they’re definitely having sexual thoughts of every attractive woman they are around and wish they had the sexual freedom to do something about it. Can’t married men be happily married and committed men without wandering eyes and wistful ponderings? Can’t they just ride a train and be helpful?!

Alers does write Claudia’s character to be a woman who desires to be married and have children so there’s not a completely anti-marriage thread in this book.

I just got so tired of all the talk and thoughts of sex or sexualized things. It didn’t feel like a nice historical fiction love story. It read like a tawdry feminist flyer.

I know when I read a book with romance that it’s most likely not going to fully align with my convictions (which is why I tend to avoid the romance genre altogether) and I can handle some of that, but it was just too overwhelming in this book to get past. And honestly, I think men will feel uncomfortable reading a lot of it.


Historical Context and Racism

I think following a black woman from the 50s to the present was an effective way to show the compounding effect that racism can have for many people.

She grows up with the Jim Crow laws. She lives through the death of Emmett Till. She lives through the Civil Rights movement headed by Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. and all the protests. She lives through the assassinations of JFK and King. It gave me a little different way of looking at racism for folks who have lived through all of that— one thing after another.

In some instances, it was hard to read this book as a white person. I felt myself getting defensive about some remarks and I had to check myself and see if it was legitimate or if I was taking a feeling had during a specific historical context and internalizing it as a widespread feeling today.

For example, in the chapters that take place in the 50s during the Jim Crow laws, the dialogue she has with her family and other black people is very anti-white. Saying they don’t trust white people, they don’t want to interact with white people, etc. These thoughts make more sense in the historical context of what they were experiencing between white people and black people generally speaking. But I can’t then say of today- see, black people hate white people.

Alers includes this interaction which was good, although I’m not sure if Claudia said no because she was only thinking of white people in Paris or if she thought there were good white people in the US too.

“Do you hate White people?” His question gave Claudia pause when she recalled those she’d met in Paris. “No. Not all White people are bad just like not all Black folks are bad.”

There were some things I wasn’t sure how to feel about. Here are a couple:

“she was ashamed of her White blood.”

“There was so much more she wanted and needed to know about the events that were deliberately excluded from textbooks— events that were certain to make the white race not only uncomfortable but also guilty that they had been complicit in the atrocities perpetrated by their brethren.”

This last part is what gives me the most pause. This is exemplary of Critical Race Theory. It says that all white people are guilty and should apologize for things other white people have done. But that is a problem. White people who are actually committing the crimes and saying the racist things is one thing. Those who stand by and do nothing in the presence of violence also have something they need to wrestle with, but years later and location removed, you can’t assign guilt to people who were not involved. I hate the way black people were treated and the racism that was and sometimes still is prevalent in our country. I’m more than sorry that any of it happened, but I am not at fault for it and an entire race or gender should not have to stand up and admit guilt for actions taken by other people.


Then there is this problematic, very feminist, statement Claudia makes:

“I’ve lived long enough to know that men regardless of their color or race will stick together to keep a woman regardless of her race in a subordinate position.”

That’s just not true, obviously. Even though Claudia wants to get married, the general vibe of this book is pretty negative towards males. And they’re basically all womanizers.

The only oppression happening to women in the United States today is sexual and goes hand-in-hand with the ‘sexual freedom’ everyone thinks they want.

All that to say, Claudia’s character went through a lot in her life. She says this about what has driven her to leave the US and become an activist:

“What I am is a fierce Black sister willing to cross an ocean to get what she has been denied in the country of her birth. And I’m tired, Ashley. Tired of watching the news and holding my breath because I’m waiting to hear about another assassination.”

“I have a right to be cynical, Giancarlo. I was exiled from my hometown at twelve, denied a position with a white bank because of my color; my life was threatened by a White man belonging to a terrorist group because of my voter registration activity, and warned by my Black boss to stop signing up people to vote because he feared his bank would be bombed.”

And you can’t really blame her.


Other Randos

Full disclosure: the version I was reading was an early copy of the book so things may have changed before it was actually published but there were also some writing things that distracted and frustrated me.

There were a lot of spelling and grammar errors. I believe these will be fixed. But there were also weird section breaks. There would be a character asking a question and then there’s space and a section break and then the text just continues right where it left off. I’m not sure the point of those.


There are a lot of deaths in this book, which is fine, but the way Alers writes them is so abrupt. Just out of nowhere in two sentences someone is dead and we kind of move on. There is no warning or lead up. And some of these are really important relationships to Claudia. Even her own husband’s death is like a paragraph.


There is some swearing but not as much as it could have been, but also there were a lot of n-words. They’re used in the context of the 50s when that’s how people would talk, but as a reader, I didn’t like having to read them.

It must have been difficult for Alers to write those sections. I wonder if we could still understand the emotion and gravity of the situations if she had opted to leave the n-words out? I don’t know. But familiarity takes the punch out of words and I wonder if it would have been better to write that someone used a slur instead of actually writing it out every time?


I liked the addition of a discussion guide at the end of the book with questions that can be used if you were to choose this for a book club.


Recommendation

This book had potential, but I don’t think I would recommend it to many people. The biography of Claudia’s sex life is not a good enough plot line.

There’s probably some historical value to reading it, but not enough for me to put up with the other stuff.


**Received an ARC via NetGalley**

[Content Advisory: 12 f-words, 26 s-words, 22 n-words; forms of the word sex is used 40 times- see also sexual content section above; rape]

I’ll begin my review with a disclaimer and context for my thoughts on this book: I am not a Royal Family junkie. I don’t keep up with their news. I didn’t watch any of the royal weddings. I visited London but didn’t care to wait in line to see the crowned jewels. I have a natural curiosity and am intrigued by the concept of a royal family in modern day and what that looks like, how they live, what they do, etc.  so I’ve watched some of The Crown on Netflix. But I’m pretty ignorant of RF news.

I didn’t follow the Harry and Meghan drama. Thinking back when it was all happening, I think I had a negative opinion of them, but I couldn’t really tell you why. I think I thought they left the family because they thought members of the family were racist and that’s it. I didn’t look into it; I didn’t know details; and I was a bit tired of everyone being called a racist for every little thing so I think I assumed they were taking major offense at a minor infraction. 

I decided to read this book because I had just gotten to the Princess Diana part of The Crown and I wondered if Harry would talk about his mom. I also figured I could learn more about Harry and Meghan’s exodus right from the horse’s mouth. 

While the book was not really riveting or endearing to me, and I’ll explain more on that, I am glad I read it. 

It’s basically a hate letter to the press slash processing of his grief over his mom’s death with some biographical information on Harry’s military career, his drug and alcohol use, and series of girlfriends. And yes, the last bit of it does give more insight on the Harry/Meghan drama. 

I think some people will like reading the book, and some won’t. There is some value in reading it just to get Harry’s side of things, but it does get a little boring. 

Just as Harry is surrounded by controversy and opinions, so is his book. I read many reviews of the book and there seemed to be some similar criticisms. 

So let’s get into all the things!

One more disclaimer: I’m not going to add this throughout the review, but much of my opinions are based on the assumption that Harry is telling the truth, but I can’t begin every sentence with ‘If what Harry says is true’ so we will just assume that caveat. 

I felt enraged reading this book in terms of the press. I am pro-freedom-of-the-press because I think it’s important to have a way for citizens to get unbiased and true information that the government may want to hide. But ‘unbiased’ and ‘true’ appear to be values the press no longer abides by. The media seems to have a sense of entitlement to a story and believe the laws don’t apply to them if they are chasing a story—supposedly the truth. 

The most egregious act of the press in Harry’s life is the death of his mom which was a car accident suspected to be caused by paparazzi chasing her through a tunnel. And not only did they most likely cause the crash, but instead of helping they stood by snapping pictures.  

Being part of the Royal Family and in the public eye, it is inevitable that you will have to deal with the press. Celebrities everywhere understand that to be famous means to give up some of their privacy. But it is evident that the press crosses lines when they print lies, when they trespass, when they bribe, etc. 

I don’t know how you can actually regulate this in an appropriate way, but why can’t the press just leave people alone unless there’s something citizens actually need to know about?! Sure, if there is illegal business going on, figure it out. But whether or not Meghan made Kate cry about bridesmaids dresses or what grades Harry got in school, really does not matter. Why would we need to have drama stirred up about that? It’s stupid. 

Most of the ‘stories’ the press pursue about the Royal Family seem stupid. Who cares? 

And that’s the theme throughout Harry’s book. Time and time again he exposes actions and words printed by the paparazzi that were out of line and libelous. Yet there was no recourse. When they were confronted: “They. Did. Not. Care.”

And I feel his frustration. 

“The press show no shame.” he says. And it’s true.

He battles the press his whole life. It builds and builds and builds. And it comes to a head when his wife Meghan is caught in the crosshairs. His family may have made a few comments here and there where you’d say- ‘Yeah, you can’t say that.’ but most of the racism seemed to stem from the press and people at large. And comments on the RF Facebook page. 

Where his family goes the most wrong is not standing up for the truth, not standing up for Harry or his wife. Not defending Meghan or correcting them when they got things wrong. They didn’t even remove the offensive comments from their page (at least at the time Harry was writing). Their motto is apparently, “Don’t complain, don’t explain.” 

And even though William and Charles were allowed to sue the press at various times, Harry was told he could not take that recourse. 

He saw the terrible things Meghan had to endure and felt trapped in a place where they couldn’t do or say anything about it. 

I can see how the compounding of a variety of things over time led Harry to be done. It wasn’t an abrupt decision. It wasn’t rash. It was made in desperation. He tried to resolve it privately by requesting to have a season of time away from Britain each year as part of his ‘employment’ with the Crown and a way to escape the press. 

There was a Five Option discussion that was had- 1 being nothing really changes and we just try to ignore the tabloids, 5 being renouncing the Crown and losing his title, security, and financial stipend, and then the other options somewhere in between. 

But according to Harry, there was not much discussion— if it wasn’t Option 1, it was 5. 

I’m with Harry that somehow there has to be enforceable boundaries for the press and accountability for what they write. There has to be something more than just ‘Sorry, you’re famous, you have to deal with it.’ Sharing his address when he’s on vacation should have ramifications. Releasing information about his whereabouts while he’s serving in a war should have ramifications. Printing straight out lies should have ramifications.

Because I felt the desperation Harry writes about and because I care so much about truth and protecting even the concept of truth, reading this book made my blood boil too. In that sense, it was not pleasant to read and I was ready for a change of book by the end where I could relax. 

Another main component of this book is his recollections of his mom and the fierce grief he still holds from her death. She died when he was 12. But he never got to process his grief. He references the very British way of not showing emotion (this was portrayed in The Crown as well). He talks about the lack of physical comfort he received from his father. 

It didn’t take long from him to get labeled as the naughty one compared to his older brother. 

“Naughty became the tide I swam against, the headwind I flew against, the daily expectation I could never hope to shake. I didn’t want to be naughty. I wanted to be noble.”

His use of drugs and alcohol stem from his failure to cope with his feelings and having no one to talk to or confide in. 

He eventually sees several different therapists and finds one that helps him sort it all out. So there is a thread of mental health and sharing how getting outside help was vital to his well-being. 

I still think that the way he talks about drugs and alcohol is a bit flippant and I’m tired of reading about celebrities when most of their stories involve substances controlled or otherwise. Even if you aren’t an addict by definition, drugs and alcohol really taint your life and your relationships. They are not merely a form of recreation. I didn’t feel like he really condemned their use to the degree with which I would want them to be. 

As for his mom, the globally loved Princess Di…

… I’m not sure the book delivers much on that. There are a few stories he tells and some published stories that he corrects or denies, but if you’re reading this book to read more about her, you’ll probably be disappointed. After all, he has less than 12 years of memories and he was a kid. He can only tell us so much. 

But he does reveal that he gained access to some of the police files on her death and saw some photos that were pretty traumatic. 

He talks about how, as a kid, he told himself that his mom had just disappeared. She didn’t really die. He never had any closure and he was convinced she just went into hiding because of the paparazzi and she would come back to them. But then he struggled with the thought that she wouldn’t knowingly put them through that pain. Maybe she really did die.

Much of his life thus far has been coming to terms with her loss and how he coped (or didn’t cope) with that loss. 

The PTSD from that loss resurfaced when it seemed like his wife, Meghan, was getting hounded by the press just like his mom was. He could see history repeating itself and that wasn’t an option for him. He would do whatever it took to protect his family. 

Prince Harry spent several years in the military in different roles. During this time was the War on Afghanistan following 9/11. Personally, I found these chapters mostly dull. I wasn’t super interested in training methods/exercises, aircraft, and mission protocols. 

But for some reviewers, these chapters really offended them. At one point Harry mentions that he killed 25 people. He also mentions that in war you can’t really view the enemy as humans. Many reviewers perceive this as callous and horrifying. 

But the truth of the matter is, war is horrifying. The morality of that particular war and the decision by Bush to send troops can be up for debate, sure, but when a soldier is in war, I am not going to fault them for having to change their mentality in order to do their job. 

I think it’s pretty safe to say that Harry was not targeting civilians. He was referencing other soldiers who were at war with him. The nature of war is two armies fighting each other. It’s not a good thing. People die on both sides. 

If my country is going to send soldiers to fight to protect my country, I would like soldiers fighting who can complete the mission, who are willing to destroy the evil that threatens my family. And that mentality does not automatically mean the soldier fighting doesn’t care about humanity or that they enjoy killing people or do their job flippantly. That is a leap that is unfair to make and it seems like a lot of reviewers have made it when it comes to Harry. 

Harry appears to have also done a lot in terms of caring for and helping veterans, which is an honorable thing. To me that shows his view of humanity more than the fact that he knows his ‘kill count’— which, by the way, is an aggressive phrasing and not what Harry used to talk about it.

I would also point out that speaking about war is a hard thing. Maybe he worded things in a way that could have been better, but unless you have been in action, I wouldn’t criticize his transparency and honesty in revealing to us how he felt when he was serving. 

Reading those chapters did not give me a sense of irreverence on his part in what he was doing. I think he felt the weight and the burden of war and of lives at stake. There is no good outcome of war. It’s not the nature of it so I don’t know what people want from him.

We can debate the merits and ethics of war, but let’s not criticize soldiers fighting in a war for killing. Especially if we haven’t served in the military ourselves. 

I read a BBC article that said: “Responding to the prince's comments [in his book], a senior Taliban leader Anas Haqqani tweeted: "Mr Harry! The ones you killed were not chess pieces, they were humans; they had families who were waiting for their return...” 

It’s pretty rich coming from a Taliban leader after they attacked the WTC killing thousands of civilians to try to guilt trip Harry about what he said. I won’t be aligning my moral compass with a Taliban leader, but suit yourself. 

I also think it’s insane that the press continued to release information about Harry’s military deployments, etc when they knew he was a big target for the Taliban. And the Taliban vocalized it, it wasn’t just a precaution to keep his location under wraps. The press put not only Harry at risk but every other soldier around him. How is that okay?

The thing about this book is that it is just Harry’s side. I’m not here to defend every word and chapter. I don’t know if he’s telling the truth. I have no way to really fact-check the things that matter. 

But if I have the choice between what Harry says happened and what The Telegraph says happened…. I’m probably going to believe Harry. 

Of course, there are some things that can be checked and reviewers are quick to point them out. 

For example, Harry says he got an Xbox in 1997 but it hadn’t been released yet. 

Or he said Meghan wore jeans and a black sweater to their first date but she says it was a blue dress. 

Or he said he was at Eton when he found out his grandma died, but he was actually elsewhere. 

I mean, wow. The nerve. C’mon Harry. You messed up the facts about your Xbox, how can we believe anything else you’ve written?!?

Those are not the things I care about fact-checking, but I can’t seem to sift through the trivial rants to get to the things I do care about, so I’m just going to have to believe Harry but hold it lightly until more evidence comes to light one way or the other. 

I know there’s got to be things missing from his version that would shed more light on the situation. I’m sure he portrays himself in certain arguments with his family members in a more positive light than he probably was. I’m not reading the book with rose-colored glasses, but from the brief research I did, I could not find any major discrepancies that have been ‘debunked’ or the Crown deeming worthy to correct. Feel free to inform me if you know of something, but only if it’s a legitimate and trustworthy source.  

Then we get to the reviewers who just can’t stand him. He lived a privileged life and now he’s complaining and airing all the family laundry to the world. He’s throwing his brother and dad under the bus. They just can’t even with him.

Well, here’s the thing. ‘Privileged’ people can have feelings too. They are allowed to have struggles.  The Royal Family removed his security abruptly (while his family was receiving threats and hateful messages) and his money was taken away. I think he’s allowed to be upset and worried about that. 

I think it’s reasonable for him to feel that way without being attacked for it. As he writes, he was never allowed to have a very independent life. His employment was for the Crown in exchange for them paying for all of his needs. It is expensive to hire security— which, like it or not, he needed— so it’s rational for him to be hurt that his family would do that to his family knowing the danger they could be in. 

Yes, this book is a way to make money. Yes, his interview with Oprah and the show they did, and all that, is a way to make money. But I can’t really blame him for coming up with ways to provide for his family. Plus, it was finally an opportunity for him to have a voice when before he was silenced left and right. 

I would want a chance to tell the world the truth too. 

Is it right for him to expose his own family? I don’t know. Maybe he shared too many personal details, especially in regards to his brother and Kate. Maybe it won’t bring the reconciliation he hopes for. But it seems like his family did a lot to push him into a place where this felt like his only option. 

I think a lot of the people who are annoyed that Harry is ‘complaining’ just don’t like people who are ‘privileged.’ Which I don’t even know what that means anymore. But it’s not like Harry was complaining that he was only served roasted duck as a child instead of hot dogs and Mac and cheese. People who live in big houses and have a lot of money are still people. Their lives look different than ours. But that doesn’t disqualify them from experiencing pain or going through hardship. 

I hardly think Harry’s qualms with the Royal Family would be classified as whining from what I know. 

Should the Royal Family even be a thing anymore? Harry says yes. He says it only costs the taxpayers the price of “a pint a year.” (which is a lot less than I thought if I’m understanding what a pint is…) He makes a good point that the RF brings a lot of tourism and revenue to the country. They do a lot of charitable work. Those are good things that benefit a lot of people.

A royal family still seems weird to me when there is a Prime Minister and Parliament, etc. I don’t think I would miss it if it got dissolved but I also can’t picture a way to safely dissolve it. Security, property allotment, loss of employment, etc. Seems a mess. 

But ‘royalty’ is a weird concept to me. 

I think ‘Spare’ was a good title for the book and really sets the tone for him telling his story and struggle with his grief and his purpose. William, the oldest, was the Heir. 

“The Heir and the Spare… I was the shadow, the support, the Plan B. I was brought into the world in case something happened to Willy. I was summoned to provide backup, distraction, diversion, and, if necessary, a spare part. Kidney, perhaps… This was all made explicitly clear to me from the start of life’s journey and regularly reinforced thereafter.”

It would be hard as a kid, born into a family like that, and told he’s the backup. His older brother was the focus and the first protected. 

This difference in responsibility and expectation eventually widened the disconnect between him and William. 

This is one of those instances when you really question the purpose of a Royal Family. The burden it places on kids, the expectation set for life that they never asked for and maybe never wanted. I feel sorry for people in that family and understand Harry’s existential struggle. 

Starburst used to be called Opal Fruits and was sold in the UK with a black currant flavor. And apparently these were made a little different than Starburst are now today and it’s a big deal.

I really didn’t need to know that he stuck his head in a carcass or “I went to the North Pole and now my South Pole is on the fritz.”

He uses shorthand for the paparazzi— paps— and as a verb form— papped— and I had a bit of a mental problem with this abbreviation because it’s the same abbreviation for pap smears and that’s a whole different vibe. 

He claims to shop at TK Maxx (TJ Maxx for Americans). I don’t know  how frugal he actually his with money, but I think it was interesting for him to make sure to talk about his shopping and in the next breath point out his dad’s Audi whenever he told of story of them driving. 

Combine that with his experiences in Africa and I think he portrayed his view of money in a particular way that may or may not be accurate.

I’m pretty positive I have to be wrong on this, but I couldn’t not pronounce the name of his friend, Euge, like the way Trump says ‘huge’.

Okay, so the story about the Tabasco and the pudding? He never tells the rest of the story and I’m a bit miffed about that. I want to know what happened. 

The book is not really formatted by chapters but by continuous ‘sections’ or some may call vignettes. There are no page breaks. Sometimes I liked this formatting when I was reading, but other times it made it hard to find a good stopping point. 

This was a long review because when I finished reading it and reading other reviews I felt compelled to share my own opinions about it all. Turns out I had a lot to say. 

Obviously if you’re obsessed with the Royal Family, you’ll want to read this. 

If you could care less about the RF, you may want to pass. It wasn’t super exciting and earth-shattering and may just make you mad about stuff. 

If you’re somewhere in between, like I probably am, it may be an interesting read and give some more context to the headlines we see. It seems fair to consider what Harry has to say instead of letting the media or the highly curated Crown staff to have the last word. 

I’m still not Harry’s biggest fan but at least I’m more informed about his story. 

“If you’re weary and don’t know how you can keep going, I pray this book will give you vision, encouragement, and hope. No matter how tough life gets, if you can see the shore and draw your strength from Christ you’ll make it.”

“No other religion, no other philosophy promises new bodies, hearts, and minds. Only in the Gospel of Christ do hurting people find such incredible hope.” — Joni Eraekson Tada


This is a very comprehensive book on the topic of Heaven. (I’m capitalizing it throughout because I don’t know how to determine when not to.) Just like Randy Alcorn’s book, Happiness, it is long and probably best read as a reference book rather than read cover to cover.

With lots of Scripture references and quotes from C.S. Lewis’ fiction and non-fiction writings, Alcorn has compiled this book to show us all the amazing adventure that is yet to come.


Heaven (and Hell) is something we should all think about. Based on the current death rates, 150,000 people die every day and go to one or the other.

If you believe that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, died for your sins and you’ve accepted His forgiveness, grace, and mercy, you’ll be headed to Heaven.

Which is pretty amazing.

Right?

Unless maybe you feel like Heaven will be boring... Aren’t we just going to be spirits floating around singing with angels and that’s pretty much it?

Maybe if that’s what you think Heaven will be, you feel like you’d rather live life on the edge and try your luck with the other ‘less shiny’ option.



Whatever you think about Heaven, my guess is you probably haven’t thought about it enough. I didn’t realize I hadn’t until I read this book. I grew up in the church and reading this I realized how many questions I never asked, how many answers I never sought, and how exciting and beautiful Heaven will actually be.

“I believe there’s one central explanation for why so many of God’s children have such a vague, negative, and uninspired view of Heaven: the work of Satan.”

“As long as the resurrected universe remains either undesirable or unimaginable, Satan succeeds in sabotaging our love for Heaven.”

Isn’t that true? Satan doesn’t want us to want Heaven. And since we’re a people of tangibility, it’s hard for us to combat the lies— some lies we’ve even heard in our own churches— about what Heaven will be like.

I can’t list them all, but here are a few questions the book answers:

- Can you know you’re going to Heaven?
 - Why is resurrection so important?
 - How will we worship God?
 - Will we actually rule with Christ?
 - Will there be space and time?
 - Will we be ourselves?
 - What will our daily lives look like?
 - Will there be marriage, families, and friendships?
 - Will animals inhabit the new earth?
 - Will there be arts, entertainment, and sports?
 - Will Heaven ever be boring?


One of the main things Alcorn defends is the physicality of Heaven.

He coined the term Christoplatonism as the idea of Heaven being only spiritual, not physical. This theology has elements of Plato’s philosophy—‘soma sema’ (a body, a tomb)— which says our ultimate destiny is to be free of our body.

Alcorn lays out Scripture after Scripture throughout the whole book showing us that the Bible describes a physical Heaven— a place— where we will dwell in resurrected, physical bodies. This is the foundation of determining other things about Heaven like what we will do and how we will interact.


While the book is primarily about Heaven, there is a chapter on Hell which I think is important because it’s part of the Gospel. It’s why we worship Christ and why Jesus died on the cross. Hell is what we are saved from.

“By denying the endlessness of Hell, we minimize Christ’s work on the cross. Why? Because we lower the stakes of redemption.”

As Alcorn explores all the questions people have about Heaven, he often looks back at Eden, the original paradise, as to what Heaven may look like. What was Eden like before the Fall? There were animals, beautiful gardens, food to eat, work to do, land to cultivate, the presence of God, physical bodies, etc. So it makes sense that Heaven will be like that too.

The Earth is God’s creation. He’s not going to abandon it. He’s going to restore and resurrect it. Just like we will be restored. The New Heavens and the New Earth. Everything we love about Earth, all the good without any of the bad! Our bodies without some of the limitations we have now.

“Redemption will forever destroy the devil’s work by removing its hold on creation, and reversing its consequences. It is Satan’s desire to destroy the world. God’s intent is not to destroy the world but to deliver it from destruction. His plan is to redeem this fallen world, which he designed for greatness.”



I thought this quote was interesting:

“It’s hard for us to think accurately about the New Earth because we’re so accustomed to speaking of Heaven as the opposite of Earth.”

I think this is true. We are told so often that this is not our home and that we were made for something more and that the earth is cursed and shrouded in sin, etc, that we can’t picture Earth redeemed, we just picture Heaven as the antithesis to where we are now.

But God put eternity in our hearts, and our desire to explore nature, to commune with friends, to discover, learn, laugh, eat… those are all foreshadowing of what is to come. Those are all good things— why wouldn’t they be in Heaven?

When we hear that we will worship God in Heaven, we tend to picture just standing in rows like church for all of eternity, but why do we think that? Aren’t we worshiping God when we praise him for the things he created? He created our five senses so why wouldn’t we have music for our ears, flavors for our tongues, vistas for the eyes, the smell of flowers or bread, fields to run or dance in? Things that make us think of the Creator and give glory to Him!

If we really think about what we think about Heaven, we realize that we think Heaven is a place where things are taken away instead of a place where things are magnified and given in full!

“What we love about this life are the things that resonate with the life we were made for. The things we love are not merely the best this life has to offer— they are previews of the greater life to come.”



Another thing that was a bit of a lightbulb moment for me was when he talked about missed opportunities. I think as a people we have a big case of FOMO. That’s partly why we don’t like to think about death. We don’t like to think of incomplete lives. Things we would miss. Memories we wouldn’t make. Achievements we wouldn’t accomplish. And it makes us sad and so we avoid thinking about it. Live in the moment, do as much as you can with the time you have.

But what if Heaven is the land of missed opportunities? What if we have endless time and resources to do what we want to do, to try what we haven’t yet experienced, to make even better and more vivid memories?

“The lack of an eternal perspective sets us up not only for discouragement but also for sin. We tell ourselves, ‘If I don’t experience an intimate relationship now, I never will.’ Or ‘If I don’t have the means to go there, I never will.’ Then we feel desperate, tempted to take shortcuts to get what we want (what we think we want). We’re tempted toward fornication, dishonesty, or theft. Or we live in regret, greed, and envy. But if we understand that we’ll actually live in a new heavens and New Earth, a new universe full of new opportunities, then we can forgo certain pleasures and experiences now, knowing we can enjoy them later.”

It’s a freeing thought. We can live without the anxiety and tension of ‘fitting everything in’ or living the perfect life. Because whatever we miss, we will actually get, tenfold and better, in Heaven. As a mom, it lightens my heart a little because I want every minute with my kids to count. Which isn’t bad, but it shifts my perspective from, ‘make the most of these precious few minutes’ to ‘enjoy these minutes and anticipate the millions more to come.’

It’s not hard then to feel the urgency in sharing the Gospel with our loved ones. Don’t we want them to know the path to life eternal? Not eternal boredom, but eternal LIFE, vivacious, adventurous, beautiful, life with the Creator of all of it? As a mom, my ultimate desire for my children is not for them to go to college, get a good job, have kids, or be happy, while all of those are good things… no, my ultimate desire is for them to know the Lord and for them to be on the path to life eternal.



It’s quite mind-blowing to really ponder what is to come when we broaden our perspective. To think about diverse cultures, nations with rulers, all of humanity, the New Jerusalem, working, etc, it is so hard to imagine all of that, but also exciting to think about having it without it being tainted by sin.

That we will have desires but none that will go unfulfilled. That our view of other people will be pure. That we might see all the galaxies that God has created. That our memories will be better than ever. That we will have endless stories to hear and knowledge to learn. That we can disagree with people in Heaven. That we won’t automatically become the best at everything.



I’m not sure I followed everything he was saying about the temporary Heaven and the eternal Heaven (where we go if we were to die today vs where we will go when Jesus returns). I’ve never really thought about those places being different before, but what he says makes sense.

There is a short section on the end times and amillennialism, post-, and pre, but it’s not long and though he presents his own belief, he is not dogmatic about it.


As happy a topic as Heaven is, there is also some hard truths we will have to consider. Especially in thinking about our loved ones that may not be in Heaven with us.

I thought this quote especially was hard to consider but rings true,

“What we loved in those who died without Christ was God’s beauty we once saw in them. When God forever withdraws from them, I think they’ll no longer bear his image and no longer reflect his beauty. Although they will be the same people, without God they’ll be stripped of all the qualities we loved. Therefore, paradoxically in a sense they will not be the people we loved…I cannot prove biblically what I’ve just stated, but I think it rings true, even if the thought is horrifying.”


There are some parts where he is speculating and I’m not sure I agree with him. But he is always quick to let us know when he is speculating and never claims to have all the answers. He knows when he gets to Heaven he’ll realize the parts of the book he got wrong, so he writes with both joyful anticipation and humility. 



As I mentioned before, I would not recommend reading this front to back unless you are just really interested in studying this topic in depth. It’s quite repetitive from chapter to chapter and it felt really long to read that way. I found myself less and less inclined to pick it back up and keep reading. 

I don’t think he necessarily wrote it to be read cover to cover, but to have on hand when a question comes up. To reference certain topics, to use the Scripture or topic index in the back. That’s the sweet spot for this book. There are a lot of good snippets and things to ponder in this book and is probably best to digest and discuss in small pieces. 

For example, I’m having a lunch with a friend to think about what books will be in Heaven and what kinds of books people will write in Heaven. Will there be thrillers and murder mysteries? 



‘Heaven’ is a book that will spur your imagination. It kinda reminded me of Ted Dekker’s book The Slumber of Christianity because our minds have become numb or dulled to thoughts of Heaven as if we are in an earthly slumber. But when we wake up and think about all the possibilities and the good that Heaven will have, it livens us and makes us yearn for that place. A place filled with the person of God who is the source of all that is good and right and beautiful. 

Whether you feel bored by the thought of Heaven, you’re already itching to get there, or you’re somewhere in between, read this book and rediscover God, because much of our view of Heaven tells us how we view the One who dwells there. 

Realize the Heaven you’ve ‘settled’ for and replace it with the adventures that await!