Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.38 AVERAGE
3.38 AVERAGE
I've written a review for The Star newspaper, so I won't say too much here right now, except that I did want to like this book, and feel quite puzzled at what all the hype is about. A disappointing, clumsily-written book.
Update: My review (below) was finally published on 17th Oct, nearly three months after I submitted it. The delay was requested by the book's iMalaysian distributor.
************
IMAGINE a world in which people’s memories go no further back than two days? Considering that I rarely remember what I’ve had for breakfast let alone what happened two days ago, this is not a scenario that sounds particularly unique to me.
But jokes aside, I approached Felicia Yap’s novel, Yesterday, with great anticipation because of the hoopla surrounding its acquisition: eight agents fought to represent Yap; the bidding war over her manuscript culminated in Headline Publishing Group paying a six-figures sum for it; and, as of December 2016, translation rights to the book had been sold to 11 countries. No wonder Newsweek predicted that Yesterday would be a 2017 “literary event” – naturally, I looked forward to reading it.
Sadly, I found the book disappointing.
In Yesterday, the world is inhabited by Monos (they remember yesterday) and Duos (they remember yesterday and the day before yesterday). Duos are considered superior to Monos, and mixed marriages are rare, but Mark Evans, a Cambridge-educated Duo and successful novelist and wannabe Conservative MP, is married to Claire, a Mono who was a waitress when she first met him.
We learn, right off the bat, that Mark and Claire’s union is far from successful, but it disintegrates totally following the discovery of a body in the River Cam, not far from the couple’s home. It appears that the corpse is of one Sophia Ayling. Subsequently, we learn that she is Mark’s mistress. This fact is revealed in Sophia’s iDiary, a device (created by Steve Jobs, the Duo CEO of Apple) into which everyone in that world is legally obliged to record the details of their lives.
Monos and Duos lose their long-term memory at 18 and 23 respectively. This loss is caused by a surge in the levels of a protein that inhibits memory. Without long-term memory, daily diary entries are the only way people are able to keep track of their lives. Studying the details of your life diligently will transfer the information permanently into your brain, but studies show that a maximum of only 70% of the information in their diaries may be retained by an individual. And what happens when people record lies about themselves?
I’m assuming that what you know about yourself before you lose your long-term memory is permanent. I’m assuming that Duos remember what they learn to earn their university degrees. Also, what did people do before the advent of written language; or before education was widely available; or, indeed, before information could be stored in microchips? How did this civilisation advance, technologically, at the same rate as ours despite having such a handicap? What are things like outside the UK depicted in this book?
It’s a sketchy world that Mark, Claire and Sophia live in, one that Yap is obviously not that interested in building.
She certainly doesn’t address the above questions and many more that I feel would occur to any thoughtful and perceptive reader. The only question that interests the author is the one she has mentioned, in at least two high profile interviews, as being the basis of her book: “How do you solve a murder when you can only remember yesterday?”
The thing is, when you’re solving a murder, you wouldn’t rely on your memory anyway, no matter how good it is.
Instead, you’d do whatever is required, same as if your memory wasn’t restricted to the day before: ask the relevant questions, read the clues correctly, make the right connections between everything, and, through it all, make copious and detailed notes.
Detective Chief Inspector Hans Richardson, a Mono masquerading as a Duo, does all of the above, and I think the story would have worked better if it had been told solely from his perspective. Instead, the entire first-person, present-tense, (unreliable) narrative switches from Claire to Mark to the Detective to Sophia and back again, with, as the story progresses, barely a difference in the four voices. There are also the characters’ diary entries and newspaper clippings (to provide some sorely lacking information about this alternate world in which they live).
The first quarter of the book is a quick read, but the style gets repetitive and boring after that, and the wooden, cliché-ridden and unlikely dialogue and over-writing doesn’t help. A couple of examples:
“‘Someone murdered Miss Ayling,’ he says with a growl, his face inches away from mine. ‘I sense it in my bones, even though my deputy thinks it was suicide.’”
“‘But the writing was on the wall,’ I say, unable to stop my voice from choking. ‘The facts were there from day one, Em. Mark’s not to be trusted.’”
Worst of all is how unappealing Yap’s characters are. They are predictable stereotypes: philandering rake of a husband; sniveling, downtrodden wife; hardboiled detective; sexy femme fatale. We don’t get close to any of them; never understand their motives and thought processes. Oh, we are told why they do this and that, but it’s like reading a comic with stick figure characters – all too basic and shallow to feel real.
Who killed Sophia Ayling? I didn’t care. Was Mark and Claire’s marriage doomed? Why would that interest me? Would DCI Richardson’s Mono status be revealed? I felt zero concern. I had to force myself to continue to the end, and I was quite shocked by what was finally revealed, including what was supposedly the big, shocking twist, because of how hokey and unlikely it all was. I really was reminded of the totally bonkers and extreme plots cooked up by my creative writing students who are under 10.
Six figures? If I were Headline, I’d ask for my money back.
Update: My review (below) was finally published on 17th Oct, nearly three months after I submitted it. The delay was requested by the book's iMalaysian distributor.
************
IMAGINE a world in which people’s memories go no further back than two days? Considering that I rarely remember what I’ve had for breakfast let alone what happened two days ago, this is not a scenario that sounds particularly unique to me.
But jokes aside, I approached Felicia Yap’s novel, Yesterday, with great anticipation because of the hoopla surrounding its acquisition: eight agents fought to represent Yap; the bidding war over her manuscript culminated in Headline Publishing Group paying a six-figures sum for it; and, as of December 2016, translation rights to the book had been sold to 11 countries. No wonder Newsweek predicted that Yesterday would be a 2017 “literary event” – naturally, I looked forward to reading it.
Sadly, I found the book disappointing.
In Yesterday, the world is inhabited by Monos (they remember yesterday) and Duos (they remember yesterday and the day before yesterday). Duos are considered superior to Monos, and mixed marriages are rare, but Mark Evans, a Cambridge-educated Duo and successful novelist and wannabe Conservative MP, is married to Claire, a Mono who was a waitress when she first met him.
We learn, right off the bat, that Mark and Claire’s union is far from successful, but it disintegrates totally following the discovery of a body in the River Cam, not far from the couple’s home. It appears that the corpse is of one Sophia Ayling. Subsequently, we learn that she is Mark’s mistress. This fact is revealed in Sophia’s iDiary, a device (created by Steve Jobs, the Duo CEO of Apple) into which everyone in that world is legally obliged to record the details of their lives.
Monos and Duos lose their long-term memory at 18 and 23 respectively. This loss is caused by a surge in the levels of a protein that inhibits memory. Without long-term memory, daily diary entries are the only way people are able to keep track of their lives. Studying the details of your life diligently will transfer the information permanently into your brain, but studies show that a maximum of only 70% of the information in their diaries may be retained by an individual. And what happens when people record lies about themselves?
I’m assuming that what you know about yourself before you lose your long-term memory is permanent. I’m assuming that Duos remember what they learn to earn their university degrees. Also, what did people do before the advent of written language; or before education was widely available; or, indeed, before information could be stored in microchips? How did this civilisation advance, technologically, at the same rate as ours despite having such a handicap? What are things like outside the UK depicted in this book?
It’s a sketchy world that Mark, Claire and Sophia live in, one that Yap is obviously not that interested in building.
She certainly doesn’t address the above questions and many more that I feel would occur to any thoughtful and perceptive reader. The only question that interests the author is the one she has mentioned, in at least two high profile interviews, as being the basis of her book: “How do you solve a murder when you can only remember yesterday?”
The thing is, when you’re solving a murder, you wouldn’t rely on your memory anyway, no matter how good it is.
Instead, you’d do whatever is required, same as if your memory wasn’t restricted to the day before: ask the relevant questions, read the clues correctly, make the right connections between everything, and, through it all, make copious and detailed notes.
Detective Chief Inspector Hans Richardson, a Mono masquerading as a Duo, does all of the above, and I think the story would have worked better if it had been told solely from his perspective. Instead, the entire first-person, present-tense, (unreliable) narrative switches from Claire to Mark to the Detective to Sophia and back again, with, as the story progresses, barely a difference in the four voices. There are also the characters’ diary entries and newspaper clippings (to provide some sorely lacking information about this alternate world in which they live).
The first quarter of the book is a quick read, but the style gets repetitive and boring after that, and the wooden, cliché-ridden and unlikely dialogue and over-writing doesn’t help. A couple of examples:
“‘Someone murdered Miss Ayling,’ he says with a growl, his face inches away from mine. ‘I sense it in my bones, even though my deputy thinks it was suicide.’”
“‘But the writing was on the wall,’ I say, unable to stop my voice from choking. ‘The facts were there from day one, Em. Mark’s not to be trusted.’”
Worst of all is how unappealing Yap’s characters are. They are predictable stereotypes: philandering rake of a husband; sniveling, downtrodden wife; hardboiled detective; sexy femme fatale. We don’t get close to any of them; never understand their motives and thought processes. Oh, we are told why they do this and that, but it’s like reading a comic with stick figure characters – all too basic and shallow to feel real.
Who killed Sophia Ayling? I didn’t care. Was Mark and Claire’s marriage doomed? Why would that interest me? Would DCI Richardson’s Mono status be revealed? I felt zero concern. I had to force myself to continue to the end, and I was quite shocked by what was finally revealed, including what was supposedly the big, shocking twist, because of how hokey and unlikely it all was. I really was reminded of the totally bonkers and extreme plots cooked up by my creative writing students who are under 10.
Six figures? If I were Headline, I’d ask for my money back.
I received a copy of this via NetGalley in exchange for my honest opinion.
I loved this thriller as the plot is very unique and kept me gripped throughout.
The idea of Nono's and Duo's was intriguing, and a great metaphor for how minorities get treated in real life. The language used to disparage Nono's is often reminiscent of that used to describe people of colour, LGBT people etc. and is an interesting way of highlighting the issues in society.
The story is told from the point of view of four different characters, including the victim. It's difficult knowing who to trust due to their unreliable memories.
A great thriller with an even greater look at discrimination in society.
I loved this thriller as the plot is very unique and kept me gripped throughout.
The idea of Nono's and Duo's was intriguing, and a great metaphor for how minorities get treated in real life. The language used to disparage Nono's is often reminiscent of that used to describe people of colour, LGBT people etc. and is an interesting way of highlighting the issues in society.
The story is told from the point of view of four different characters, including the victim. It's difficult knowing who to trust due to their unreliable memories.
A great thriller with an even greater look at discrimination in society.
Sophia is unique. Rather than being a “normal” Mono or Duo, she can remember everything; her entire past and everything that happens to her every day. And in plenty of sordid detail. We quickly learn that Sophia is out for revenge. And being the only person who can remember everything in her past, it seems Sophia has an advantage over everyone else. But she is also dead. And her lover, author Mark Henry Evans, is the chief suspect. With Detective Hans Richardson investigating the case, he turns to Sophia’s iDiary. He quickly writes it off as deluded, fictional, crazy nonsense. But he keeps reading and wondering “what if?”... desperate to solve the crime before the end of the day, Detective Richardson follows the only lead he has to try and uncover the truth of Sophia’s murder.
I’m so torn with this book. The concept is just strange and I struggled to get onboard with it. I couldn’t understand how it would work and having read the whole book, I’m still not sure I understand. There’s a few holes in the concept in my opinion. For example, what is it that resets the clock? Midnight like Cinderella?! Or when the person goes to sleep? Why would memory affect society’s class?
On the other hand, there is something so enjoyably perverse about reading other people’s diaries that at times I couldn’t put the book down! Of course the key to this book is the truth and how much of the truth people allow themselves to remember and admit to themselves. The book starts to twist and turn as we find out the different character accounts and at times it is hard to keep up with the plot as a whole.
Yesterday is a different and interesting concept but one that I’m not sure fully works. It’s interestingly scandalous but feels a little flat.
Thank you to Felicia Yap, NetGalley and the publisher for the advanced copy in exchange for an honest review.
I’m so torn with this book. The concept is just strange and I struggled to get onboard with it. I couldn’t understand how it would work and having read the whole book, I’m still not sure I understand. There’s a few holes in the concept in my opinion. For example, what is it that resets the clock? Midnight like Cinderella?! Or when the person goes to sleep? Why would memory affect society’s class?
On the other hand, there is something so enjoyably perverse about reading other people’s diaries that at times I couldn’t put the book down! Of course the key to this book is the truth and how much of the truth people allow themselves to remember and admit to themselves. The book starts to twist and turn as we find out the different character accounts and at times it is hard to keep up with the plot as a whole.
Yesterday is a different and interesting concept but one that I’m not sure fully works. It’s interestingly scandalous but feels a little flat.
Thank you to Felicia Yap, NetGalley and the publisher for the advanced copy in exchange for an honest review.
Sophia is unique. Rather than being a “normal” Mono or Duo, she can remember everything; her entire past and everything that happens to her every day. And in plenty of sordid detail. We quickly learn that Sophia is out for revenge. And being the only person who can remember everything in her past, it seems Sophia has an advantage over everyone else. But she is also dead. And her lover, author Mark Henry Evans, is the chief suspect. With Detective Hans Richardson investigating the case, he turns to Sophia’s iDiary. He quickly writes it off as deluded, fictional, crazy nonsense. But he keeps reading and wondering “what if?”... desperate to solve the crime before the end of the day, Detective Richardson follows the only lead he has to try and uncover the truth of Sophia’s murder.
I’m so torn with this book. The concept is just strange and I struggled to get onboard with it. I couldn’t understand how it would work and having read the whole book, I’m still not sure I understand. There’s a few holes in the concept in my opinion. For example, what is it that resets the clock? Midnight like Cinderella?! Or when the person goes to sleep? Why would memory affect society’s class?
On the other hand, there is something so enjoyably perverse about reading other people’s diaries that at times I couldn’t put the book down! Of course the key to this book is the truth and how much of the truth people allow themselves to remember and admit to themselves. The book starts to twist and turn as we find out the different character accounts and at times it is hard to keep up with the plot as a whole.
Yesterday is a different and interesting concept but one that I’m not sure fully works. It’s interestingly scandalous but feels a little flat.
Thank you to Felicia Yap, NetGalley and the publisher for the advanced copy in exchange for an honest review.
I’m so torn with this book. The concept is just strange and I struggled to get onboard with it. I couldn’t understand how it would work and having read the whole book, I’m still not sure I understand. There’s a few holes in the concept in my opinion. For example, what is it that resets the clock? Midnight like Cinderella?! Or when the person goes to sleep? Why would memory affect society’s class?
On the other hand, there is something so enjoyably perverse about reading other people’s diaries that at times I couldn’t put the book down! Of course the key to this book is the truth and how much of the truth people allow themselves to remember and admit to themselves. The book starts to twist and turn as we find out the different character accounts and at times it is hard to keep up with the plot as a whole.
Yesterday is a different and interesting concept but one that I’m not sure fully works. It’s interestingly scandalous but feels a little flat.
Thank you to Felicia Yap, NetGalley and the publisher for the advanced copy in exchange for an honest review.
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Diverse cast of characters:
No
The premise was really eye-catching. A murder mystery in a world where people only remember 24-48 hours of their life! I remember holding this book in my hands, wondering if most of my day’s salary would be worth this—after all, this was such a high concept. Unfortunately, what I was most looking forward to—the world building of this unique concept—practically did not exist. Almost everything is the same as reality, except for the memory hook, which the characters get around by writing in their diaries. Unless, of course, they randomly remembered things to push the plot, with no rhyme or reason on why these memories are suddenly remembered when the premise is that they! dont! retain! memories! Then there’s also the obvious scenario of tampering with diaries, writing different things (because literally no one is going to hold you liable esp if people can’t see you writing anyway), and characters not documenting their own days. Also, why bother writing when they can literally take videos of the day or take pictures throughout and just have a memory log via photos? Writing is time consuming, surely photos of daily life would both be easier logistically and would be great for memory keeping especially accompanied with a caption here and there? Steve Jobs wouldn't have been the billionaire he is just for an electronic diary, that should've gone to Becky Higgins' Project Life! Also, because everything was heavily based on diaries/the written word, how did their world evolve to have the same forensics, technology, as the real world when their scientists would have to reread and study the same (and a growing amount) of data every few days? Did that mean scientists retain more facts than other Duos? If so, wouldn’t a career in science be the ideal, instead of being a novelist?
The novel revolves around four characters: Mark, Claire, Sophia, and Hans. Mark and Claire are a married mono-duo pair, Sophia is the dead woman, and Hans is the lead investigator in her death. Because of the memory gimmick, of course none of their POVs can be trusted. I enjoyed the writing in the differences in voice and tone for each POV—Sophia being unhinged really came through, Hans’ insecurities and wariness in his chapters, Mark being your typical gross and powerful man, and Claire who is just trying.
This story has one of the most convoluted twists I’ve seen in a while. The author put in a lot of effort into attempting to surprise the reader, even if the execution of the crime is extremely unbelievable (you really have to suspend a LOT of disbelief to believe the events that took place that fateful night) and the results that should’ve been science based were lacking, but it passes because the investigator, with his own insecurities and secrets, did a very good but imperfect job because he was in a rush to solve the case (again, how did forensics and tech evolve so much that results are gotten in just one day?).
The ending ends on a more hopeful and romantic note than what a murder novel would. I have mixed feelings because I just really found Mark unlikeable—from his decisions at the start as a young man, to his choices of making decisions based on what he alone thought was best, to how he continues to look and treat Claire as less than, even as he thinks/says he loves her, with the realization at the end—he only acknowledges Claire as the talented person she is when she wins an award that he was never able to—which was four years after the murder and many, MANY years after their marriage. It’s definitely not a relationship I’d think of as romantic. But I do love how Claire and Hans persevere and work hard against the stereotypes set against them, and their respective career paths ending up where they did made my heart happy.
Overall, it was okay. I liked the differences in POV because they WERE different and I loved that I couldn’t trust anyone (even though the crime execution dampened my enjoyment in the end). I did not love the random memories conveniently appearing and the lack of world building, when the premise of the novel hinges on this very hook of 24-48 hour memory.
The novel revolves around four characters: Mark, Claire, Sophia, and Hans. Mark and Claire are a married mono-duo pair, Sophia is the dead woman, and Hans is the lead investigator in her death. Because of the memory gimmick, of course none of their POVs can be trusted. I enjoyed the writing in the differences in voice and tone for each POV—Sophia being unhinged really came through, Hans’ insecurities and wariness in his chapters, Mark being your typical gross and powerful man, and Claire who is just trying.
This story has one of the most convoluted twists I’ve seen in a while. The author put in a lot of effort into attempting to surprise the reader, even if the execution of the crime is extremely unbelievable (you really have to suspend a LOT of disbelief to believe the events that took place that fateful night) and the results that should’ve been science based were lacking, but it passes because the investigator, with his own insecurities and secrets, did a very good but imperfect job because he was in a rush to solve the case (again, how did forensics and tech evolve so much that results are gotten in just one day?).
The ending ends on a more hopeful and romantic note than what a murder novel would.
Overall, it was okay. I liked the differences in POV because they WERE different and I loved that I couldn’t trust anyone (even though the crime execution dampened my enjoyment in the end). I did not love the random memories conveniently appearing and the lack of world building, when the premise of the novel hinges on this very hook of 24-48 hour memory.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Child death
I have a certain fondness for alternate reality stories. At least the ones that find a sweet spot of familiarity and strangeness, which Yap manages well with this murder mystery. The difference we have here is that people basically can't move memories from their short-term memory into their long term memory, so when they go to bed they write in their diary and when they wake up they learn the day before until they can remember these relevant facts. It's a simple angle but works well because it's used to split the world into monos and duos - two social classes derived from how many days they can recall. The similarities are clever too; Apple sell an iDiary for example. Just enough of an anchor to the reality we know to help us understand the differences presented.
That memory issue leads to a big factor of the storyline. When a murder occurs the detective wants to solve the case in one day. The more time passes the more chance the killer will have forgotten.
The narrative jumps around slightly, both in perspective and timing. We see events unfolding through the eyes of four different characters, each telling their story from their own perspective. It's a style that could easily be gimmicky but here it helps keep the mystery alive and the story fresh. Of course part of the mystery also comes from the strange memories that the characters have. They check their diaries for facts, to see what happened everywhere from a couple of days ago to a couple of decades ago. This memory recall allows for some very effective reveals to keep the plot twisting - it gives characters a credibility when something surfaces.
The book is well written. The characters are relatable despite being so different to the world we know. The early chapters flow quickly and easily into each other, although things do slow slightly as the conclusion bubbles to the surface. But, by then you're hooked and it's not as if they struggle, they just don't have quite the same pace they start with.
A clever angle that adds a fresh twist to the genre. Grab a copy and ready your diary - you'll want to remember this one.
That memory issue leads to a big factor of the storyline. When a murder occurs the detective wants to solve the case in one day. The more time passes the more chance the killer will have forgotten.
The narrative jumps around slightly, both in perspective and timing. We see events unfolding through the eyes of four different characters, each telling their story from their own perspective. It's a style that could easily be gimmicky but here it helps keep the mystery alive and the story fresh. Of course part of the mystery also comes from the strange memories that the characters have. They check their diaries for facts, to see what happened everywhere from a couple of days ago to a couple of decades ago. This memory recall allows for some very effective reveals to keep the plot twisting - it gives characters a credibility when something surfaces.
The book is well written. The characters are relatable despite being so different to the world we know. The early chapters flow quickly and easily into each other, although things do slow slightly as the conclusion bubbles to the surface. But, by then you're hooked and it's not as if they struggle, they just don't have quite the same pace they start with.
A clever angle that adds a fresh twist to the genre. Grab a copy and ready your diary - you'll want to remember this one.
i had very high expactations because of the setting in kind of a "parallel present".
i'm sorry it didn't work out for me though i liked the critical aspects concerning racial-differences.
i'm sorry it didn't work out for me though i liked the critical aspects concerning racial-differences.
How do you solve a crime in a world where no one remembers more than 48 hours of their past? That is the high-concept premise of Yap's novel. As a concept, it is certainly thought-provoking. I found myself wondering how much of one's time would be spent memorizing "facts" about one's own life, how easy it would be to lie to oneself, how easy it would be for someone to hack the whole system, and what it would be like to know your own life experience the way we know facts learned in history class. It also made me wonder about the mechanics of things like literary prizes and PhDs in a world where you could not remember what you had read two days before or what you had learned in class the previous week.
So thought-provoking, yes. But, unfortunately, not well executed. The prose is trite and full of cliches, almost to the point of being cartoonish at times. And, without giving too much away, some of the consequences of the memory premise did not hold up logically.
I admit, however, that the end surprised me, which ultimately is what you want in a mystery novel. Definitely had mixed feelings about this one.
So thought-provoking, yes. But, unfortunately, not well executed. The prose is trite and full of cliches, almost to the point of being cartoonish at times. And, without giving too much away, some of the consequences of the memory premise did not hold up logically.
I admit, however, that the end surprised me, which ultimately is what you want in a mystery novel. Definitely had mixed feelings about this one.
The turns in this..... felt like an even more twisted gone girl but albeit draggy at times. Story only picks up in the middle part and I knew what was coming.. but still surprised at the magnitude of what’s happening.
Claire, a Mono who has only one day’s worth of memory, and her husband Mark, a Duo who has two, are a shining example of a new vision of tolerance and equality in a world where mixed marriages are frown upon.
Until Mark’s beautiful mistress turns up dead, and he becomes the prime suspect in her murder. When both the investigator’s and the suspect’s memories are constantly erased—how can anyone learn the truth?
Yesterday is set in an alternate reality where society is divided by everyone’s ability to retain new memories. Monos, whose memories reset every day, are the majority, while the elite Duos, who retain two days of memories, look down on them. Everyone gets by with the use of personal diaries, where they store every minute fact about their lives. Claire and Mark have been in a rare mixed marriage for 20 years, but not everything is as idyllic as novelist-turned-politician Mark wants the world to believe. And the facts in Claire’s diary might not be as real as she believes they are.
The premise reminded me a lot of Memento, which I absolutely love, and so I was really looking forward to reading Yap’s debut. I’m sad to say that I was rather disappointed with the whole thing, though.
I found the world building to be severely lacking. Yesterday is set in an parallel universe of sorts, where the only real difference to ours is people’s lack of long term memory. I was surprised at how very similar our worlds were; I find it hard to believe a society with such an impairment would have developed exactly the same, and at the exact same rate, as ours. It felt like Yap hardly put any effort into developing the world her characters inhabit. In fact, the more I read the more I was sure that the memory thing was nothing more than a gimmick.
I found the characters unlikable, and I never felt invested in their stories. I didn’t care about Sophia or her revenge plans, I didn’t care about Mark and Claire’s relationship, and I didn’t care about the detective and his secrets.
Despite taking place in a span of 24 hours, the action moves along sluggishly, the plot twists are predictable, and the whole thing felt repetitive and tedious. The ending was convoluted and unbelievable, brought on by perfect coincidences rather than clever actions. It was my favourite part, though, because it meant it was over and I could finally move on to something else.
If you find the premise interesting, by all means give it a shot, but keep your expectations low to avoid disappointment.
Check out The Bookworm Mummy for more reviews!
*I received this ARC free from Netgalley, in exchange for an honest review*
Until Mark’s beautiful mistress turns up dead, and he becomes the prime suspect in her murder. When both the investigator’s and the suspect’s memories are constantly erased—how can anyone learn the truth?
Yesterday is set in an alternate reality where society is divided by everyone’s ability to retain new memories. Monos, whose memories reset every day, are the majority, while the elite Duos, who retain two days of memories, look down on them. Everyone gets by with the use of personal diaries, where they store every minute fact about their lives. Claire and Mark have been in a rare mixed marriage for 20 years, but not everything is as idyllic as novelist-turned-politician Mark wants the world to believe. And the facts in Claire’s diary might not be as real as she believes they are.
The premise reminded me a lot of Memento, which I absolutely love, and so I was really looking forward to reading Yap’s debut. I’m sad to say that I was rather disappointed with the whole thing, though.
I found the world building to be severely lacking. Yesterday is set in an parallel universe of sorts, where the only real difference to ours is people’s lack of long term memory. I was surprised at how very similar our worlds were; I find it hard to believe a society with such an impairment would have developed exactly the same, and at the exact same rate, as ours. It felt like Yap hardly put any effort into developing the world her characters inhabit. In fact, the more I read the more I was sure that the memory thing was nothing more than a gimmick.
I found the characters unlikable, and I never felt invested in their stories. I didn’t care about Sophia or her revenge plans, I didn’t care about Mark and Claire’s relationship, and I didn’t care about the detective and his secrets.
Despite taking place in a span of 24 hours, the action moves along sluggishly, the plot twists are predictable, and the whole thing felt repetitive and tedious. The ending was convoluted and unbelievable, brought on by perfect coincidences rather than clever actions. It was my favourite part, though, because it meant it was over and I could finally move on to something else.
If you find the premise interesting, by all means give it a shot, but keep your expectations low to avoid disappointment.
Check out The Bookworm Mummy for more reviews!
*I received this ARC free from Netgalley, in exchange for an honest review*