Scan barcode
A review by acrosstheskyinstars
The Savage Instinct by Marjorie DeLuca
2.0
This book had majorly similar vibes to another book I reviewed, After Alice Fell by Kim Taylor Blakemore. You can read my review of that book here. Both of these books are set in the late 1800s. Both main characters have some elements of unreliable narrating. Both main characters have niche professor husbands who are concerned with status and are ultimately betrayed by their husband’s colleagues. (That last similarity was a bit much for me.)
This book tells the story of Clara, locked away in an asylum after a tragic combination of miscarriage and stillbirth, now free to integrate back into society and join her husband in a new city as he begins climbing the ranks of the college he works at. However, all is not as it seems. He much prefers a wife who is obedient and socially acceptable than one that is mentally well. It’s obvious from the start that he doesn’t have Clara’s best interests at heart. One of the ways in which Clara is supposed to acclimate to her new life is through charity work. She begins to visit the local prison where she meets Mary Ann Cotton, a serial killer who targeted mainly her husbands and children via poison. Clara is instantly intrigued by Mary Ann and sees her as a fellow woman who has been scorned and rejected by society and let down by the men in her life. However, there is more to Mary Ann than Clara can see, and Mary Ann is always one step ahead.
Based on a real-life person, Mary Ann is probably the most intriguing story element. The audience is left uncertain of whether Mary Ann really did poison her family because virtually all of the evidence against her is circumstantial. Personally speaking, my view is that she did it based on the evidence presented in the book. However, the reader cannot be sure as Clara is unsure.
I did not end up liking this book. My biggest problem is that a lot of the characters and interactions in this book felt painfully one-dimensional. Clara’s husband undergoes somewhat of a flanderization throughout the book. He starts out seeming well-meaning though he misses the mark. He ends the book being outlandishly cartoonish and wholely unbelievable. (The same can be said of the reverend character). The doctors in this book are also cartoonishly evil, trying to imprison Clara based on fabricated evidence that she is insane. Furthermore, many of the conversations between Clara and Mary Ann are painfully one-dimensional as well, though this time focused on sexism.
I wish the book had stuck to more believable characterization for individual characters and interactions. Ultimately, the way many of these issues were handled was so ham-fisted as to detract from the important message. Many of the scenes between Clara and her husband (and the ever-present reverend) essentially read as follows:
“Henry, I’d be more happy here if I were allowed any modicum of personal freedom. I feel a bit stifled.”
“You women folk take advantage of man’s good nature! Harumph harumph Bah Humbug! I’ll be sure to send you back to the asylum unless you perform your wifely duties, take care of the house, and submit to me–your caring and god-given husband.”
*The reverend chimes in* “You women folk need to learn your place and keep your diseased lady uteruses from wandering around your body and disadvantaging your husband.”
*End Scene*
I really think the book would have worked so much better if the husband was made less cartoonishly evil and leaned more into him being justifiably sexist for the time. For example, the plot could have remained largely the same had the tension come from of the looming threat of Clara’s commitment at the hands of her husband, who thought that it was genuinely best for her based on the science of the time. Medicine is still sexist today! Plenty of Victorian medicine was sexist then too. This would have portrayed the main message of the book (Sexism!) more subtly, which I think would have made the message more relatable and realistic.
Overall, this book wasn’t a bad book. It just appears to be surface-level critique of sexism masquerading as a deeper message. I’d recommend After Alice Fell instead. I think that book handled the themes better. The suspense also worked better in that book than in this one. There were several points in this book that made me unpleasantly tense. I found myself growing increasingly frustrated by every chance Clara had to escape her situation, particularly when she would inevitably screw it up instead. Ultimately, Clara doesn’t even save herself. Without giving away the ending, the plot is resolved by a deus ex machina event.
I wanted to like this book, but found myself increasingly frustrated by the plot and how the message was handled. If Victorian sexism interests you, and it’s not a topic you’re familiar with, this book might be for you. If you’re intrigued by the “woman in an asylum” aspect and ambiguous storytelling, check out After Alice Fell instead.
This book tells the story of Clara, locked away in an asylum after a tragic combination of miscarriage and stillbirth, now free to integrate back into society and join her husband in a new city as he begins climbing the ranks of the college he works at. However, all is not as it seems. He much prefers a wife who is obedient and socially acceptable than one that is mentally well. It’s obvious from the start that he doesn’t have Clara’s best interests at heart. One of the ways in which Clara is supposed to acclimate to her new life is through charity work. She begins to visit the local prison where she meets Mary Ann Cotton, a serial killer who targeted mainly her husbands and children via poison. Clara is instantly intrigued by Mary Ann and sees her as a fellow woman who has been scorned and rejected by society and let down by the men in her life. However, there is more to Mary Ann than Clara can see, and Mary Ann is always one step ahead.
Based on a real-life person, Mary Ann is probably the most intriguing story element. The audience is left uncertain of whether Mary Ann really did poison her family because virtually all of the evidence against her is circumstantial. Personally speaking, my view is that she did it based on the evidence presented in the book. However, the reader cannot be sure as Clara is unsure.
I did not end up liking this book. My biggest problem is that a lot of the characters and interactions in this book felt painfully one-dimensional. Clara’s husband undergoes somewhat of a flanderization throughout the book. He starts out seeming well-meaning though he misses the mark. He ends the book being outlandishly cartoonish and wholely unbelievable. (The same can be said of the reverend character). The doctors in this book are also cartoonishly evil, trying to imprison Clara based on fabricated evidence that she is insane. Furthermore, many of the conversations between Clara and Mary Ann are painfully one-dimensional as well, though this time focused on sexism.
I wish the book had stuck to more believable characterization for individual characters and interactions. Ultimately, the way many of these issues were handled was so ham-fisted as to detract from the important message. Many of the scenes between Clara and her husband (and the ever-present reverend) essentially read as follows:
“Henry, I’d be more happy here if I were allowed any modicum of personal freedom. I feel a bit stifled.”
“You women folk take advantage of man’s good nature! Harumph harumph Bah Humbug! I’ll be sure to send you back to the asylum unless you perform your wifely duties, take care of the house, and submit to me–your caring and god-given husband.”
*The reverend chimes in* “You women folk need to learn your place and keep your diseased lady uteruses from wandering around your body and disadvantaging your husband.”
*End Scene*
I really think the book would have worked so much better if the husband was made less cartoonishly evil and leaned more into him being justifiably sexist for the time. For example, the plot could have remained largely the same had the tension come from of the looming threat of Clara’s commitment at the hands of her husband, who thought that it was genuinely best for her based on the science of the time. Medicine is still sexist today! Plenty of Victorian medicine was sexist then too. This would have portrayed the main message of the book (Sexism!) more subtly, which I think would have made the message more relatable and realistic.
Overall, this book wasn’t a bad book. It just appears to be surface-level critique of sexism masquerading as a deeper message. I’d recommend After Alice Fell instead. I think that book handled the themes better. The suspense also worked better in that book than in this one. There were several points in this book that made me unpleasantly tense. I found myself growing increasingly frustrated by every chance Clara had to escape her situation, particularly when she would inevitably screw it up instead. Ultimately, Clara doesn’t even save herself. Without giving away the ending, the plot is resolved by a deus ex machina event.
I wanted to like this book, but found myself increasingly frustrated by the plot and how the message was handled. If Victorian sexism interests you, and it’s not a topic you’re familiar with, this book might be for you. If you’re intrigued by the “woman in an asylum” aspect and ambiguous storytelling, check out After Alice Fell instead.