"Four female Ghostbusters?! The feminists are taking over!"
*coughs*
Good news first: The setting is lovely. Truly, lovely. And deftly evoked: just enough detail, but not too much. The attitudes of debate and discussion in the book, problematic though I found most of them, at least provided a stimulating intellectual atmosphere that does challenge the reader to think. So that's good. And the end is probably the best part -- peaceful, pulsing, and (finally) possessing some subtlety. (The resolution is not spelled out for you in black and white; rather, it is written in such a way as leaves little doubt, but is just vague enough to be aesthetically satisfying.)
So I have stated what I liked, and now I can move on to what I disliked. And thank goodness because BOY-HOWDY THESE CHARACTERS & AGENDAS THO.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
(To begin with, we encounter our protagonist, Miss Prudencia Prim.) I know my name is not exactly the pinnacle of authorial subtlety, but please, no jumping to conclusions as to my character. If there's one thing I hate (other than insensitivity, homeschooling, faith, marriage, and probably a couple other things), it's jumping to conclusions as to a person's character based upon first impressions.
(Next, we have the community of San Ireneo de Arnois.) We, the people of San Ireneo, are possessed of a rare intellectual, sociological, and philosophical Enlightenment that gives us the ability to view the modern world for the morally degenerative and cerebrally challenged cesspool that it is. Nice to meet you. (Also: We're better than you and that opinion you have -- any of your opinions will do -- is Wrong. Just so you know.)
[And finally, we're blessed by the man himself. (The Man in the Wing Chair, to be precise.)] You know that guy who sits at the table with the sign, "I will argue with anybody about anything"? That's me. (But, secure in the knowledge of the absolute correctness of all of my ideas, I will debate you amiably and indulgently because aren't you deluded peasants cute.) You will never learn my actual name, but know that in addition to possessing flawless rhetoric to which everyone's arguments must inevitably bow; the beneficence of hyper-Classically educating a small group of children; concrete and elevated opinions on literature (I am an undisputed authority on the subject); and an impressive if not incredibly pragmatic fluency in multiple dead languages, I am also Charming™ . I will absolutely cause My Dear Prudencia to fall head-over-heels for me. (Every woman, you will come to learn, is attracted to someone who takes it upon himself to inform her of the utter, objective inaccuracy of every single one of her opinions.) (And she will for sure Come to Her Senses and realize that She Is Wrong about everything and I Am Right about everything. Because, love.)
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Are you getting the picture? It's just . . . *hides face in hands* Y'all, I wasn't even really rooting for Prudencia to get out of her atheism/agnosticism/whatever it was and come to God because I was too distracted by how awful all the "enlightened" characters (the characters who at least acknowledged the possibility of God and the validity of faith in him) were.
This book has reinforced for me the identity of one of my least favorite (if not my absolute least favorite) fictional archetypes: the characters so immovably sure of themselves and ALLLLL their opinions that they possess those most sickening of characteristics: self-satisfaction, self-righteousness, and superiority complexes. Y'all, I can adore cocky, boastful, but inwardly conflicted characters like Han Solo and Killian Jones all day long, but when you present me with a character who literally never questions whether they're wrong . . . that's a surefire way to earn my dislike.
Leaving that issue aside . . . some of the positions espoused are Troubling. Gender issues are a big topic of debate in this story, and . . . wow. Let's continue to perpetuate the idea that feminism is ringing the death knell of Reason & Order & All Sense of Morality, why don't we?
[E.g.: One of the ladies points to the following statement of G.K. Chesterton's as a valid criticism of the fight for "women's rights": "Ten thousand women marched through the streets of London saying, 'We will not be dictated to,' and then went off to become stenographers." Now, is that a clever use of irony? Sure, but as an actual argument concerning the topic at hand, it falls flat on its face, because there's such discrepancy between the dictation to which women's rights refers and the dictation encountered in a job situation that it's ridiculous to attempt to equate the two.]
Honestly, much of the book gives the impression of an author who really just wanted to sit down and rant about her feelings On Life. Which is fine, and valid, and who am I to judge; but her feelings on Life -- and especially her manner of expressing them -- do not jive incredibly well with mine.
Basically, again, it boils down to this: I found the characters and the attitudes very problematic, though I will freely concede the charm of the setting and the fact that the book is able to keep one's interest and make one think.
Thank you and have a nice day.
{P.S. Oh, and the statements in this book regarding Little Women and Mr. Darcy?? DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED.}