Scan barcode
shelleydavis's review against another edition
3.0
While the story line was decent, I think the author had the characters ramble on unnecessarily- I felt like they never really got to the point but talked themselves in circles. The jumping back and forth between different generations was a bit confusing especially with all of the Evelyn’s. Also I was curious that the oldest brother never comes up- like ever...... did none of the other characters realize he existed?? I also felt like there was a lot unsaid about Moss and Reg’s relationship. Overall it was a really long winded story for an okay plot that had the potential to really take you back in time.
stace_a's review
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
deanab's review against another edition
3.0
I really wanted to love this book. The story sounded very compelling and like something I would absolutely enjoy. But the first 200 pages just drug on and on. I had read a few reviews at about page 100 that encouraged readers to stick with it so I did. After page 200, the story did really start to grab me and I didn’t want to put it down. But then it felt a bit rushed. I also feel like I found a mistake. On page 292, it shows Moss’ death on August 22, 1959 but then mentioned that the party on the night he died is on August 25, 1959 and The Guest Book was signed by Len on August 25. I kept going back to check the dates.
sharonrhh's review
mysterious
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
jessehersh's review
3.0
While this book holds beautiful writing, there are parts that still feel underdeveloped. the family secret isn’t revealed until the last few pages at which point the reader is left wondering, along with the present day protagonist, does any of it matter at all?
kiminindy's review
5.0
Just excellent! The first section (roughly 50ish pages) is somewhat of a slog...confusing and disjointed but once past that....oh my....this is a real page turner and tear jerker at the end. I loved The Postmistress and this one didn't disappoint either. Very relevant also to what is going on in our society today.
ndbeyer's review
3.0
I struggled with this book- it seemed to take a long time to get to the explanation of all the build-up and history in this family. Still had some questions when I was done with the book.
ginny17's review
4.0
*I received an ARC of this book prior to publication.
What I thought was going to be a family saga was so much more. Here we deal with morality. Are things black and white, or is there a gray area? How broad would that gray area reach? There we deal with tradition and the benefits of holding tight versus letting go. This book made me really think about what sort of role one has in the evils of the world by choosing to ignore the reality around them. I really enjoy books that make me think well beyond their pages, and this one certainly accomplished that. 4.5 stars.
What I thought was going to be a family saga was so much more. Here we deal with morality. Are things black and white, or is there a gray area? How broad would that gray area reach? There we deal with tradition and the benefits of holding tight versus letting go. This book made me really think about what sort of role one has in the evils of the world by choosing to ignore the reality around them. I really enjoy books that make me think well beyond their pages, and this one certainly accomplished that. 4.5 stars.
ajb24's review
1.0
*I'll note that I got this in a mystery bag from the library and kept it because it sounded decently interesting. It took me forever to get going with this book and then I ended up speed-hate-reading my way through 3/4 of it yesterday xD
I stand by the assessment I made of this book when I started it: you could remove 25% of the writing and the story would be the same.
***
It's been...many days since I finished this (I've really been putting off this review lol). I think I'll start with this context: I took notes during my speed-read (and I never take notes for fiction books) because this book was so long and I was so irritated, I needed to keep a record of what exactly was bothering me.
*mini update: I'm writing this a month post-read, so my feelings have dimmed quite a bit...I'll try to be as diplomatic as I can with my criticisms.
And look, I see what the author was trying to do, what type of themes she was trying to convey about memory and history and all that. But I didn't care for how it was executed. I generally found the most compelling part of the story to be the "middle" generation, which follows the kids of Kitty and Ogden Milton: Moss, Joan, and Evelyn. And in a way I wish the story had only focused on that, because with Reg and Len there, they contributed the most interesting perspectives and nuanced discussions. But the themes Blake wants to explore means that the story has to be multi-generational.
I'm struggling with how to explain what was so...uninspiring about the scope of the story. So, we have this rich white family, like a Rockefeller-type, where they maintain and build onto their fortune in the 1930s. A prototypical American upper-class "powerful" family. And this book is about reckoning with unsavory aspects of the family history, which can be boiled down to this being a story about white guilt, in multiple forms.
Now, this is where I wonder if perhaps the author didn't feel comfortable focusing her whole novel on characters who come from marginalized groups. Because through Reg and Len and a few other side characters, she has all the "right" perspectives - they offer points of view that address/ make clear the inequalities that exist in American society. It is clearly a contemporaneously-written novel, but I don't mean this in a bad way. It's just to point out that the novel is socially-aware in a way that fiction written in the actual past is not. And I think we need more of this type of historical fiction! But to me The Guest Book doesn't bring anything particularly special to the "socially-conscious historical fiction" genre, and this is largely because it still centers the story of a privileged, white family. And this is where I hypothesize that writing from the perspective of whiteness was easier for Blake than writing a whole story from Reg's perspective, for example. I can't necessarily fault her for trying, because whichever perspective she chose, there was going to be criticism.
So, like, there was a valid attempt to write something "progressive." Buuuut, now we get to the part where I just don't like the writing style. My main thoughts are that it's too vague and trying too hard to be poetic.
Here's one quote I highlighted [Moss had just invited Reg to come to "the Island" (the vacation house in Maine they own), and Moss was firmly in a "I don't see race/everything is fine" mentality, and Reg wants to show him that he's wrong] Reg thinks:
The last three sentences really grate my nerves because like, what are you talking about!?
"moving toward him was his future, or his fate" - what do you mean, moving toward him?? like, getting involved in his life? Why is it fate?
"it didn't matter" - what doesn't matter??? why doesn't it matter?
"he was helpless in the face of it." - in the face of WHAT aahhhh!!! In the face of his attraction to Moss..?????
If it's his attraction to Moss...boyyy, I have thoughts.
See, I was so ready to be indignant that this novel is writing a more "accurate" depiction of history, but there were no queer characters (and in New York! Pleaseeeee
I stand by the assessment I made of this book when I started it: you could remove 25% of the writing and the story would be the same.
***
It's been...many days since I finished this (I've really been putting off this review lol). I think I'll start with this context: I took notes during my speed-read (and I never take notes for fiction books) because this book was so long and I was so irritated, I needed to keep a record of what exactly was bothering me.
*mini update: I'm writing this a month post-read, so my feelings have dimmed quite a bit...I'll try to be as diplomatic as I can with my criticisms.
And look, I see what the author was trying to do, what type of themes she was trying to convey about memory and history and all that. But I didn't care for how it was executed. I generally found the most compelling part of the story to be the "middle" generation, which follows the kids of Kitty and Ogden Milton: Moss, Joan, and Evelyn. And in a way I wish the story had only focused on that, because with Reg and Len there, they contributed the most interesting perspectives and nuanced discussions. But the themes Blake wants to explore means that the story has to be multi-generational.
I'm struggling with how to explain what was so...uninspiring about the scope of the story. So, we have this rich white family, like a Rockefeller-type, where they maintain and build onto their fortune in the 1930s. A prototypical American upper-class "powerful" family. And this book is about reckoning with unsavory aspects of the family history, which can be boiled down to this being a story about white guilt, in multiple forms.
Now, this is where I wonder if perhaps the author didn't feel comfortable focusing her whole novel on characters who come from marginalized groups. Because through Reg and Len and a few other side characters, she has all the "right" perspectives - they offer points of view that address/ make clear the inequalities that exist in American society. It is clearly a contemporaneously-written novel, but I don't mean this in a bad way. It's just to point out that the novel is socially-aware in a way that fiction written in the actual past is not. And I think we need more of this type of historical fiction! But to me The Guest Book doesn't bring anything particularly special to the "socially-conscious historical fiction" genre, and this is largely because it still centers the story of a privileged, white family. And this is where I hypothesize that writing from the perspective of whiteness was easier for Blake than writing a whole story from Reg's perspective, for example. I can't necessarily fault her for trying, because whichever perspective she chose, there was going to be criticism.
So, like, there was a valid attempt to write something "progressive." Buuuut, now we get to the part where I just don't like the writing style. My main thoughts are that it's too vague and trying too hard to be poetic.
Here's one quote I highlighted [Moss had just invited Reg to come to "the Island" (the vacation house in Maine they own), and Moss was firmly in a "I don't see race/everything is fine" mentality, and Reg wants to show him that he's wrong] Reg thinks:
And as much as Reg wanted to believe in the ideas that Moss believed, he wanted to prove him wrong. Once and for all, to have men like Moss see that this dream of America was impossible until everyone saw what the black man saw. He wanted Moss to see. Moss stirred in him a helpless curiosity, and moving toward him was his future, or his fate. It didn't matter, Reg realized now with a kind of fear. He was helpless in the face of it. (p. 250)
The last three sentences really grate my nerves because like, what are you talking about!?
"moving toward him was his future, or his fate" - what do you mean, moving toward him?? like, getting involved in his life? Why is it fate?
"it didn't matter" - what doesn't matter??? why doesn't it matter?
"he was helpless in the face of it." - in the face of WHAT aahhhh!!! In the face of his attraction to Moss..?????
If it's his attraction to Moss...boyyy, I have thoughts.
See, I was so ready to be indignant that this novel is writing a more "accurate" depiction of history, but there were no queer characters (and in New York! Pleaseeeee