A sumptuous cover for an irredeemably brutal book.
I'm always leery when a marketing team compares the book they're promoting to books I love. It's kind of interesting to try to figure out what inspired the comparison. In some cases, it's spot on and I'm happy to add another book to the family ("A Thousand Nights meet Girls at the Kingfisher Club - you guys have a lot to talk about). In other cases, I sort of feel like they've missed the forest for the trees.*
You can probably tell by my rating which of those two scenarios we've ended up with. Here the "for fans of!" book is The Night Circus, which I felt mediocre about after I read it and then two months later realized I full-on loved it and read it four more times. The Lonely Hearts Hotel does indeed have plot parallels to the The Night Circus. Both are about two neglected children with innate creative talents stuck in a terrible situation (poverty versus a long-term magical duel, respectively). Both books have an inevitable romance, a love of live performances, and a confrontation between the male protagonist's past and current lovers over tarot cards (that latter one felt uncomfortably similar). That's pretty much where the comparisons end.
Lonely Hearts opens with a child rape and an assumed still-birth and resurrection via infant erection. That's in the first three pages. From there it stumbles on into more child rape, child abuse, animal abuse, sexual abuse, prostitution, graphic miscarriages, drug addiction - and by the time we'd gotten to a gratuitous dogfight, I'd had enough. (I know, it's weird that the dogfight was what did it for me. It felt like the literary equivalent of puppykicking. It's like in movies when the characters are sad and it's raining and it's condescendingly, embarrassingly on-the-nose - except in this case miniature poodles are getting their neck snapped while the female character who bet on the tiny female poodle is about to figuratively and emotionally have the same thing happen to her. Delightful.)
I tried to be openminded. Maybe some people loved The Night Circus because they just really love reading about the performing arts, in which case the comparison works and you might like Lonely Hearts. Or Glee. Or a whole variety of different things. But I suspect most Night Circus fans bought in because of the sumptuous imagery, delicious atmosphere, and slowburn, escapist romance. Lonely Hearts has performers falling in love, but it's soaked in sex, violence, and then more awful, depressing sex and violence. That's different than romance.
Even the romance in Lonely Hearts has super touching moments like the male hero kissing the female heroine on her c***. No, I'm not being crass. That's the word used. I guess I'm all for reclaiming language, but c*** is just a real mood ruiner. Imagine Darcy whispering that to Elizabeth. Imagine Romeo whispering that to Juliet (actually, he was a cocky teenager - I can see that). Saying that if you like The Night Circus you'll like Lonely Hearts is like saying, "If you liked Legally Blonde, you'll LOVE Cruel Intentions."Yeah, they both have Reese Witherspoon and Selma Blair and people falling in love and taking charge of their futures but...that's where it ends.
The kind of stuff you find in Lonely Hearts is usually cued by marketing language like "edgy" and "provocative." I wish they'd gone with that, because then, okay, I know what I'm getting into.
But.
Even if it weren't for the weird marketing fake-out, I still wouldn't have been on board. We definitely need more books about sexual abuse, miscarriage - even questions like, "how does a hard-as-nails, ambitious woman navigate her romantic relationships when she's attracted to power but knows she deserves levity and kindness?" That's an interesting question. But the book never becomes thoughtful about these things. The terrible stuff in this book is just terrible stuff - set-dressing to complicate a romance or reference the Depression. And that's not cool.
The writing was also tough. I'm a fan of figurative language, but this veers into purple territory. Here's a sample:
There was a chicken coop where little round eggs appeared as if by magic every morning. Tiny fragile moons that were necessary for survival. The children reached into the nests ever so carefully to retrieve the eggs without breaking their shells. With the sleeves of their sweaters pulled over their hands, their arms were like the trunks of elephants swallowing up peanuts. (7)
Man, I find the metaphors here super distracting. Eggs as moons? Moons are necessary for survival if you're hungry? And now we're talking about elephants? Huh? I like figurative language when it illuminates an idea or when it enhances the magic of a text. But, you can't strong-arm magic and whimsy into a book.
So. If you're going to write about serious stuff, choose a couple issues and really talk about them. Give these events the respect and nuance they deserve. And don't muddy a text with unnecessary or meaningless flourishes. And stop comparing books to The Night Circus to sell more books - unless you really mean it.
Thanks to First to Read for giving me an advance copy of the book. Sorry it wasn't my jam. Your design team is amazing. That cover is swoony.
*Sidenote: if another book gets compared to Game of Thrones, I'm going to scream. Like, which part of GOT? The many warring kingdoms? That's most of fantasy and historical fiction. The dragons? Same. The gritty realism that somehow only directs sexual violence at women? Because no thanks. Is it because they're impossibly long and take forever to come out? I'm already halfheartedly reading that one Brandon Sanderson series, so again: no thanks.