To Paradise

shitting myself that i have a copy so soon after release date. i cannot wait to be destroyed :)

Three books linked thematically (companionship, identity, family, happiness) plus some shared motifs (mostly character and place names), but otherwise quite different in genre and structure. I really enjoyed the third book, a dystopian novel set in NY after a series of devastating pandemics. I like Yanagihara's prose; something about it holds my attention very well.

4.5 rounded up

My brain is still processing, post-shock of finishing a Yanagihara book is strong XD rtc

The book is set across three different eras - the first I found the most interesting, with it being an alternate history late 1800s America where gay marriage is legal (and people even do arranged marriages for it). We then jump 100 years forward to a Hawaiian living in America. It gets a bit confusing here because the main character's names are reused (which made me think this was going to be like Cloud Atlas?) but they're not actually connected in some tangible way, although storywise they are sort of similar. Then we jump forward another 100 years for a dystopian, pandemic-ridden America where gay marriage is now banned in an attempt to increase the population. Honestly you could have just turned one of these eras into it's own book and I probably would have preferred it more!

A common theme across all 3 stories is the uselessness of at least one of the characters in each due to their passivity. Which I visit makes for some frustrating reading. And then I finished the book and it's like, well what was the point? But maybe that's what you get with Yanagihara books. A bunch of people suffering.

This book surprised me!

Based on another book by this author, I was nervous to read a 700+ page book from them.

This is a three book compilation following different timelines. At first, it was super confusing, but I went along for the ride and it was pretty good.

The first book wasn't great. It wasn't bad, but not my favorite. The second book was definitely better, but the standout was book three. I was captivated and loved the alternating timelines. It was definitely worth it to get to the end but I wish that cliffhanger was resolved... you can't win them all I guess.

Overall, this was a decent read. I paired it with the audiobook which made it more bearable. That definitely played a part in my rating.

Would I recommend? Probably not because it was wayyy too long. Save yourself the time.

Three stories each a century apart, tied together by themes of family, loyalty, belonging, nationhood and desire. I am a bit conflicted about how to feel about it, as Yanagihara's writing and storytelling is so skilled. But it felt like she was holding back on us, probably not wanting this to be another tearjerker like her predecessor. But the potential for grandeur was there, it was just more toned down, more clinical, more a very detailed drawing of constellations of ideas and emotions and personae, instead of the big emotions themselves. And still, very memorable (besides the majority of the second story, which turned into quite a slog I have to say). The triptych of stories tied together across time very much reminded me of [b:The Actual Star 56304414 The Actual Star Monica Byrne https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1618279333l/56304414.SX50.jpg 86058464] .

So good, so fascinating. This is the kind of book they'll be teaching in high school 50 years from now. Assuming there are still high schools. And books.

Precise rating: 4.5 ⭐

How lucky I am to have been able to start the year with such a life-changing novel!

Heel anders dan ik gewend ben om te lezen, maar bijzonder geschreven. De zinnen lopen vloeiend. Mijn verwachtingen waren hoger aangezien het eerdere werk met meer emotie was geschreven en dus veel meer impact heeft op dat vlak.

I reviewed this book for the blog Nerds of a Feather:
http://www.nerds-feather.com/2022/02/microreview-to-paradise-by-hanya.html

First, a synopsis:

There are three distinct books, each taking place 100 years apart: 1894, 1994, and 2094. The majority of the action happens in New York City – at least, a reimagined version of what it could be, or would be, in and alternate history (or real future, who tf knows).

In the first book, a young man of dynastic wealth lives in New York, which is the capital of the Free States, which have seceded from both The Colonies (what we know of as the South) and The West (CA, WA, OR, and uncharted territory). In the Free States, citizens are encouraged to marry regardless of sex, and homosexual relationships are just as common (and often, practical and loveless) as hetero ones. The young man, David, falls in love, and has to choose between continuing to live a sheltered life under the protection of his grandfather, or risk it all for the man he loves.

In the second book, a young paralegal with ties to Hawaiian royalty in New York is dating the partner at this firm that is twice his age in the height of the AIDS epidemic. He has all but considered his father dead when he receives a letter from him at an emotionally vulnerable time that exposes a fascinating and painful family history.

In the third book, regular pandemics and global warming have turned New York into an authoritarian nightmare that a young neurodiverse woman is forced to navigate on her own following the death of her grandfather.

Next, my feelings:

I predict this is going to be a divisive book; either you love it, or you DNF (it is not for the faint of heart!). I loved it.

After each book, I had to pause and contemplate what I just read – both to relive the joy of having read it, but also to unpack the complex ties and more nuanced plot points, and their significance. Each book is so consuming, that while the memories of the past book echo in silky vestiges throughout, I was afraid I would forget the prior book as I became enveloped in the world of the subsequent story.

The second part of Book 2 lost me a little (in that I think it was about twice as long as it needed to be) and it took a while to work into Book 3, I think because of the narrator and the stark scene of near-apocalyptic New York – but it paid off to stick with it, because Book 3 comes back to hit hard at the end. Book 1 still comes out as my favorite, though, and I'm so impressed with the author's ability to write so convincingly like a late-19th century writer would.

It's so tempting to believe that each of these stories are in the same world, and are maybe even part of the same story – but that's not a clean interpretation. This book resists clear connections and clean interpretations, and I LOVE IT. This is major book-club fodder for lit nerds.

Each book deals with powerful themes that transcend 300 years: how radicalization is born; our most passionate attempts to protect the ones we love, and the pain that comes with realizing it is impossible to do so; and, of course, our unending quest for paradise.

To Paradise is a hopeless book. It doesn't start like this, it's not immediately noticeable, starting as a story of love, but as it progresses the cracks begin to show and you almost become resigned to the dissipitation of what people were dreaming of at the start– never outright depression, more so a resignation, a feeling of helpfulness, of being stuck, of making mistakes but this seeming like an inevitability.

This is essentially a collection of two connected novellas and one novel.

In the first one, we explore what I was initially expecting to be an alternate history novel handling the topic of slavery, but instead turned out to be an exploration of independence (as a person and a people), infatuation and insecurity. It's a tragic tale at heart, deliberately unsatisfying, would make for an interesting standalone story. The world is barely explored and served solely as background for the characters, which is what the story is very much focused on.

The hinted paradise feels palatable, somewhat uncertain, but well within reach.

The second part is where we start getting to the real meat. A deftly woven story of (broken) cultural identity, an almost epistolary novella from the perspective by one who is invisible to the people around him, a dark story told in a nuanced way.

The paradise feels like an near impossibility, out of grasp, a dwindling chance.

The third part... This one felt the most like The People in the Trees to me, an escalation of depression, emotionally overwhelming, as we slowly unravel the truth of a society slowly becoming more and more dystopic, in a world ravaged by constant pandemics, where the internet has practically been banned because of its danger– where conspiracy theorists are rampant, marriages are mandatory, and most people are broken.

No paradise to be found here. Instead, the concept of paradise is a cruel joke, an obvious unfeasability, a bitter unreality.

This was not as much as a tearjerker as The People in The Trees, which I'm thankful for. Her melodramatic tendencies, reminiscent of Guy Gavriel Kay, always felt a bit juvenile to me. I haven't read A Little Life yet but from what I've heard it's much the same. To Paradise is not that, I was hoping, feeling like the maturation of Yanagihara as an author, less focused on the emotional. Unfortunately, by the third part, it feels like tortureporn again.