Unsheltered

Every time I start reading a book I love I find myself slowing down, setting the book down in the middle of a chapter, rereading a page or two, going back and reading an earlier chapter again—-doing anything, in short, in order to prolong the experience, to avoid the inevitable last page.

That's how I felt about Unsheltered.

There is so much to admire about this book. The structure of the novel is brilliantly constructed. Kingsolver tells two stories, one in present day, and one just after the Civil War, both set in the same location. In both stories, the people living in the house find that at the same time their lives are collapsing around them, their house is also collapsing. Both sets of characters live in times in which rational thought, scientific thought, faces off against thought weakly supported yet widely believed, and both sets of characters struggle to stand on scientific high ground. The characters are deeply human, with both great strengths and great flaws. The dialogue between characters is snappy and clever, full of thoughtfulness. But the book is even more than just brilliant structure, fascinating characters, and snappy dialogue; it's a book that leaves its readers thinking about the big ideas in life, thinking about relationships where two people are unevenly yoked, thinking about how a ne'er-do-well child can sometimes show strength of character greater than the shining star child, thinking about the importance of struggle in life, thinking about so many things....A fabulous book that everyone who feels the deep dismay about the world so common today among thoughtful people needs to read.

This is one of those novels that I wanted to read again as soon as I finished. It takes a back-and-forth approach in plot from the late 1800's to modern day, both families on the same plot of land. The characters in the past plot are based on real individuals. One of the subplots from the 1800's section is about the first trial in which the insanity defense was used. I heard about the case on the podcast “The Thread” that dedicates an entire season tracing the insanity defense in our history. So fascinating and so fun to realize the connection! Oh, and some cool references to Greek mythology in the “present” plot. I LOVED this book.

I consider myself a Kingsolver fan, but this is by far my least favorite of her books. It has a jumble of intentions, I think. It is anti-Trump and pro-science, which is to be expected and admired, but even more heavy-handed than usual. There are two stories here that connect loosely, one a contemporary account of a family living in a ramshackle house in New Jersey just as Trump is being elected and another family living on the same street in the late 19th Century when the Darwin controversy is still raging.

3.5 stars. This book was a mixed bag for me. I enjoyed the writing and dual timelines. The comparison between what was occurring in the past and present was interesting to me. At the same time, the characters seemed one dimensional and there wasn't much nuance when it came to their views on social and political issues. It is worth the read if you are a fan of Barbara Kingsolver and like literary fiction. Otherwise, you might not find this to be a compelling novel.

HELL YEAH I love Barbara Kingsolver and I loved this book! I loved both stories–the present-day one as well as its historical counterpart. I loved these characters. I love how timely it is.

(I saw some negative reviews calling this “preachy” and you know what, it is, and I say PREACH BARBARA, TAKE ME TO CHURCHHH)

DNF at 75%. I think I read enough of this that I can reasonably discuss its themes with my book club. (My only question is - does anything ever come of the historical society with that damn falling-down house?)

So here's the thing: I make it a point of not arguing with people on the internet. In fact, I really hate arguing on the internet, or seeing others argue with each other on the internet. (It's why I'm not really on Facebook anymore, outside of a select few groups.) This book — in both story lines — feels a lot like arguing on the internet. There's a parallelism here: with the arguments people have (within the pages of this book and online), there's no room for nuance. No one is looking to learn anything, they're just looking to yell the loudest, convinced their viewpoint is the only right one. And that's exactly what I try to avoid. So I reached the point in the book where I got tired of listening to people argue. It took a while! I tried!

I enjoyed the non-arguing parts of the stories, mostly. I liked Mary and Thatcher's conversations and trips to look at plants and bugs, which surprised me because I don't really care about plants or bugs. I felt like Willa really needed to set some boundaries with her kids, and it was really shitty that Zeke had basically no interest in raising his baby, but I don't need to like the characters to like a book.

Content warnings for the parts I got to: miscarriage, suicide, racism, professors having affairs with their students (hi, professor's wife here).