Member Review
Review by
Jan B, Reviewer
The synopsis describes this book as “laugh out loud funny” and recommended for fans of Where’d You Go Bernadette and The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel.
A female chemist in the ‘50s? Great! Count me in.
BUT….I obviously read a different book.
- this book should be shelved in the fantasy section. Seriously. It’s fantasy. Which is fine, but if I had known I would have skipped it. The switch between fantastical elements and serious ones gave me whiplash.
- Funny? Within a few pages a woman is called a c*** twice, a brutal rape is described in detail, and there’s a suicide due to homophobia. Yeah, hilarious 🙄
- I’m over quirky characters who behave as if they are on the spectrum but it’s never described as such. Why can’t we have a woman who is a brilliant chemist but isn’t naive, socially awkward and clueless? Except when she’s not, usually in time to deliver another monologue.
- the MC’s daughter is a genius who knew the periodic table as a preschooler and reads the Sound and the Fury at age 8. Of course she does 🙄
- Elizabeth’s views and actions were not consistent with the times. It’s as if a woman from 2022 time traveled back to the 1950s and then lectured everyone with lengthy monologues on social issues and women’s rights. I don’t need a lecture and I don’t need to be repeatedly hit over the head on relevant social issues. This book needed more showing, less telling.
- the message is a good one. A woman ahead of her time in STEM who must fight the status quo in a male dominated world. But I think the message would have been stronger and more authentic if it had been more realistic. There’s a lot of exaggeration and preposterous situations to drive a point home, which is not my favorite storytelling technique.
- all the men, with one exception, were ugly and hateful misogynists. I’m weary of male-bashing in fiction.
- Did I need to read details of a man who masturbates and flings pubic hairs across the room, leaving behind his sticky porn magazines for his wife to clean up? No I did not 🤮
- Atheism vs Faith. The author mentions multiple times that this is a free country and we have a right to our beliefs. I 100% agree. I’m no bible thumping extremist, but it’s offensive when religion or people of faith are portrayed only in derogatory terms, such as faith is “a simpleton’s recipe for prayers and beads” and a funeral service was “boring verse and preposterous prayers”. A minister muses that the problem with his job “was how many times he had to lie”. The ministers and priests were all abusers, liars, and godless greedy crooks, while people of faith were all violent protestors and/or morons. The message repeatedly driven home throughout the book, ad nauseam? Atheism = good People of faith = bad.
Believe me, if the author had portrayed atheists as all bad I would find it equally as offensive. Why is intolerance of beliefs/religion the last acceptable prejudice?
- I’m weary of the argument of science vs religion. My goodness, sure there are extremists who deny science but the majority of people and religions do not believe they are mutually exclusive and there are plenty of religious scientists. Sigh….
- Anachronisms. Subsidized child care in Sweden wasn’t enacted until 1975, although the MC refers to it in 1960. And was defunding the police a thing in the early 1950s? I think not.
- certainly women have been, and are, discriminated against. I’m not denying that bias occurs but the exaggeration and preposterous events in the story hinders the message. Also, I have a science degree. I took many college courses in STEM. I worked in a male dominated work culture. Granted, it wasn’t in the ‘50s but the professors and colleagues were from that era and I saw no misogyny. The vast majority were respectful and supportive. In fact, our son is in a STEM profession and his company bends over backwards for women, out of fear of accusations of discrimination.
Also, we are given information at the end that suggests there was a reason Elizabeth wasn’t accepted in the doctoral program, that had nothing to do with her gender. This confused me?! What was the message? 🤷🏻♀️
No book is without merit. The positives:
- I am not usually a fan of anthropomorphism but I loved the dog, Six-Thirty. By far he was my favorite character. And yay, he survives! 😍
- the cooking show was cute
* I received a digital copy for review via NetGalley. All opinions are my own </I>
A female chemist in the ‘50s? Great! Count me in.
BUT….I obviously read a different book.
- this book should be shelved in the fantasy section. Seriously. It’s fantasy. Which is fine, but if I had known I would have skipped it. The switch between fantastical elements and serious ones gave me whiplash.
- Funny? Within a few pages a woman is called a c*** twice, a brutal rape is described in detail, and there’s a suicide due to homophobia. Yeah, hilarious 🙄
- I’m over quirky characters who behave as if they are on the spectrum but it’s never described as such. Why can’t we have a woman who is a brilliant chemist but isn’t naive, socially awkward and clueless? Except when she’s not, usually in time to deliver another monologue.
- the MC’s daughter is a genius who knew the periodic table as a preschooler and reads the Sound and the Fury at age 8. Of course she does 🙄
- Elizabeth’s views and actions were not consistent with the times. It’s as if a woman from 2022 time traveled back to the 1950s and then lectured everyone with lengthy monologues on social issues and women’s rights. I don’t need a lecture and I don’t need to be repeatedly hit over the head on relevant social issues. This book needed more showing, less telling.
- the message is a good one. A woman ahead of her time in STEM who must fight the status quo in a male dominated world. But I think the message would have been stronger and more authentic if it had been more realistic. There’s a lot of exaggeration and preposterous situations to drive a point home, which is not my favorite storytelling technique.
- all the men, with one exception, were ugly and hateful misogynists. I’m weary of male-bashing in fiction.
- Did I need to read details of a man who masturbates and flings pubic hairs across the room, leaving behind his sticky porn magazines for his wife to clean up? No I did not 🤮
- Atheism vs Faith. The author mentions multiple times that this is a free country and we have a right to our beliefs. I 100% agree. I’m no bible thumping extremist, but it’s offensive when religion or people of faith are portrayed only in derogatory terms, such as faith is “a simpleton’s recipe for prayers and beads” and a funeral service was “boring verse and preposterous prayers”. A minister muses that the problem with his job “was how many times he had to lie”. The ministers and priests were all abusers, liars, and godless greedy crooks, while people of faith were all violent protestors and/or morons. The message repeatedly driven home throughout the book, ad nauseam? Atheism = good People of faith = bad.
Believe me, if the author had portrayed atheists as all bad I would find it equally as offensive. Why is intolerance of beliefs/religion the last acceptable prejudice?
- I’m weary of the argument of science vs religion. My goodness, sure there are extremists who deny science but the majority of people and religions do not believe they are mutually exclusive and there are plenty of religious scientists. Sigh….
- Anachronisms. Subsidized child care in Sweden wasn’t enacted until 1975, although the MC refers to it in 1960. And was defunding the police a thing in the early 1950s? I think not.
- certainly women have been, and are, discriminated against. I’m not denying that bias occurs but the exaggeration and preposterous events in the story hinders the message. Also, I have a science degree. I took many college courses in STEM. I worked in a male dominated work culture. Granted, it wasn’t in the ‘50s but the professors and colleagues were from that era and I saw no misogyny. The vast majority were respectful and supportive. In fact, our son is in a STEM profession and his company bends over backwards for women, out of fear of accusations of discrimination.
Also, we are given information at the end that suggests there was a reason Elizabeth wasn’t accepted in the doctoral program, that had nothing to do with her gender. This confused me?! What was the message? 🤷🏻♀️
No book is without merit. The positives:
- I am not usually a fan of anthropomorphism but I loved the dog, Six-Thirty. By far he was my favorite character. And yay, he survives! 😍
- the cooking show was cute
* I received a digital copy for review via NetGalley. All opinions are my own </I>
*This page contains affiliate links, so we may earn a small commission when you make a purchase through links on our site at no additional cost to you.
