Scan barcode
katrinky's review against another edition
4.0
beautiful, and the first person plural was poignant and clever. it felt insubstantial, once I was finished, but while I was reading I was completely engrossed. want to read lots more about the town.
gengray47's review against another edition
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
Ehh i was hoping for a lot more from this book. There wasn't much of a storyline, and the 'we' first person plural was at most time disjointed. Not a fave
weneed_mobrown's review against another edition
3.0
I was wanting to get this as an audiobook and now I realize why it isn't read aloud... it's written in first person plural??!?!? WHY??? Ok, I kind of liked it after it became almost unbearable but again, WHY?! - 3stars.
skigirl1689's review against another edition
2.0
I had high hopes for this book, but I was disappointed. I thought the author could have had a brilliant narrative, but with the impersonal first person, plural point of view, it just fell flat. It seemed to be just a retelling of facts, which didn't appeal to me, and not a novel.
gr8reader's review against another edition
4.0
Interesting style that I don't recall reading anything written this way before. Missed having specific characters to become invested in, yet the book kept me reading from start to finish.
2shainz's review against another edition
4.0
Read the original review—along with reviews of two other awesome, atmospheric reads—at Shaina Reads!
I'd never even heard of Nesbit's debut novel before I saw Shannon tweet about it. If memory serves, someone wanted a book written in first person plural, and (of course, because she's a veritable book recommendation machine) Shannon offered this one up.
This is the story of the wives of the scientists employed by the Los Alamos National Laboratory, home of the Manhattan Project (a research and development project that constructed the first nuclear weapons used in World War II). These families moved to the laboratory's compound in New Mexico, and the wives found themselves having to build a home in their parched, isolated environment. They were many people, and they were one:
While the narrative voice isn't for everyone, I think it perfectly captures the sense that these women, though different in many ways, were united in their displacement, their uncertainty, and their fear of the secrets their husbands had to keep. The dust and scorching heat of the New Mexican desert quietly heighten the omnipresent tension. This isn't a book bursting with plot, if that's your thing, but it is a heartbreaking portrait of the sacrifices women make during wartime. It also sent me down a Wikipedia rabbit hole lined with things like tube alloys, uranium-235 and the Trinity test.
History buffs and literary fiction fans alike will find enjoyment here, so long as the first person plural is something you can live with.
I'd never even heard of Nesbit's debut novel before I saw Shannon tweet about it. If memory serves, someone wanted a book written in first person plural, and (of course, because she's a veritable book recommendation machine) Shannon offered this one up.
This is the story of the wives of the scientists employed by the Los Alamos National Laboratory, home of the Manhattan Project (a research and development project that constructed the first nuclear weapons used in World War II). These families moved to the laboratory's compound in New Mexico, and the wives found themselves having to build a home in their parched, isolated environment. They were many people, and they were one:
"We arrived newlyweds, or with a seven-year itch, or still great friends, or no longer in love but trying to keep it together for our children, or for ourselves. Some of us always expected disaster and kept the shades drawn low, some of us were quietly skeptical, although no one could tell, and we were nicknamed Polly. Some of us thrived on gatherings, and we created dance nights and afternoon teas and bridge clubs. ... Like many moving toward an unknown future, we clung to the beliefs that had carried us this far—about people, the world, our husbands, the war—until that strategy could no longer assuage our fears." - pg. 17-18, The Wives of Los Alamos
While the narrative voice isn't for everyone, I think it perfectly captures the sense that these women, though different in many ways, were united in their displacement, their uncertainty, and their fear of the secrets their husbands had to keep. The dust and scorching heat of the New Mexican desert quietly heighten the omnipresent tension. This isn't a book bursting with plot, if that's your thing, but it is a heartbreaking portrait of the sacrifices women make during wartime. It also sent me down a Wikipedia rabbit hole lined with things like tube alloys, uranium-235 and the Trinity test.
History buffs and literary fiction fans alike will find enjoyment here, so long as the first person plural is something you can live with.
auntblh's review against another edition
3.0
It was interesting that this was written with "we" as the main character(s). I think that enabled the story to be told by/about multiple people at once.
erinkwed's review against another edition
3.0
This book tells the story of the Manhattan Project in a totally different and inventive way. It is told from the plural first person perspective of the scientist's wives. Transplanted to a completely unfamiliar town (not even knowing where they're going until they get there), unable to see their families or tell them where they are, the women form a community around their shared confusion. They don't see their husbands very much and they are civilian women living in a military/male world.
This book was pleasant and an interesting perspective, but the plural first person kept the novel from having any sort of plot. Instead, each chapter was a look at an aspect of their lives. There's chapters on trying to (and giving up on) keep "proper" dress, chapters on parenting alone, on socializing with the scientists, on working. These little glimpses into life in Los Alamos were interesting. However, there is never a story. The story is the project, but since the women are not actually involved in the project, there isn't much information about it.
I can't decide how I feel about The Wives of Los Alamos. I enjoyed reading it, but I didn't feel like I came away with anything when I finished. I feel like the story was more about life as a woman: having to follow your husband to a mysterious job, parent alone, adjust to life, and then at the end have to go back to your old life as if nothing changed. The setting didn't really matter that much, it could have been any military story, professor story, pioneer story - it didn't have to be the Manhattan Project. I think that was what I struggled with, that the setting and time period didn't really seem to have that much effect on the story. It seemed odd to set the story in such an interesting time and then not really do much with the specific setting.
A lot of people dislike the plural first person, but I thought it was well-done. Using it to illuminate their lives rather than to tell a plot heavy story allowed it to be used effectively and I think it worked well. It also underscores the sense of community and solidarity the women had. Not only does it bind them to each other, but it keeps the men and the women scientists separate, further emphasizing how the wives lived.
Overall a good, quick read but nothing too crazy especially if you're looking for a plot-heavy or character-heavy book.
More reviews at www.igothroughphases.wordpress.com
This book was pleasant and an interesting perspective, but the plural first person kept the novel from having any sort of plot. Instead, each chapter was a look at an aspect of their lives. There's chapters on trying to (and giving up on) keep "proper" dress, chapters on parenting alone, on socializing with the scientists, on working. These little glimpses into life in Los Alamos were interesting. However, there is never a story. The story is the project, but since the women are not actually involved in the project, there isn't much information about it.
I can't decide how I feel about The Wives of Los Alamos. I enjoyed reading it, but I didn't feel like I came away with anything when I finished. I feel like the story was more about life as a woman: having to follow your husband to a mysterious job, parent alone, adjust to life, and then at the end have to go back to your old life as if nothing changed. The setting didn't really matter that much, it could have been any military story, professor story, pioneer story - it didn't have to be the Manhattan Project. I think that was what I struggled with, that the setting and time period didn't really seem to have that much effect on the story. It seemed odd to set the story in such an interesting time and then not really do much with the specific setting.
A lot of people dislike the plural first person, but I thought it was well-done. Using it to illuminate their lives rather than to tell a plot heavy story allowed it to be used effectively and I think it worked well. It also underscores the sense of community and solidarity the women had. Not only does it bind them to each other, but it keeps the men and the women scientists separate, further emphasizing how the wives lived.
Overall a good, quick read but nothing too crazy especially if you're looking for a plot-heavy or character-heavy book.
More reviews at www.igothroughphases.wordpress.com
kdferrin's review against another edition
4.0
This book is written entirely in first person plural. I get the reasoning for this and I do think that it was impactful but at the same time it was also hard to feel any sort of connection to this amorphous “we”. It was a strange combination of touching and impersonal. I waffled back and forth between loving it and hating it but I found the subject matter really interesting so I was able to push through the times when the constant and shifting stream of “we” became tiresome.
lovesarahmae's review against another edition
3.0
TaraShea Nesbit takes on one of the most controversial communities of American history in her novel "The Wives of Los Alamos." The novel examines the lives of the women and children living in Los Alamos while their husbands work to create the atomic bomb during WWII. Written entirely from the perspective of the royal collective (the narrator is always "we," and never an individual), readers are given a grand and diverse view of daily life, but the novel misses the mark for emotionally engaging readers. Since there is no one character to latch onto (in fact there is much effort to obscure individual characters, only referencing the most famous of communities residents), the whole novel feels a little removed from the scene, almost as if it is meant to be read over a long slideshow at the road-side museum. If this book had been published in 1954, when rings of secrecy and shame still existed around the Manhattan Project I would understand the choice to keep things vague- but published in 2014, when most of these women have passed away- we miss the opportunity to grab hold of the few remaining first person voices and stories of this unique wartime experience. The women of Los Alamos lived in sub-par conditions to further science and history, and this novel tackles the mundane (how to flirt to get a steak, what address they used, etc), but lacks the personal stories that could really bring to life a long quieted narrative. In all- if you're looking for a quick read that brushes over the experience, "The Wives of Los Alamos" is worth your time, but if you are really searching for a personal narrative of women on the fringes of science, try Lily Koppel's "The Astronaut Wives Club."