I received an ARC courtesy of the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
(TW: homophobia)
Apologies if you see this twice. I tried to mark it as having spoilers and Goodreads just deleted it entirely!?
***
Back in pre-pandemic times I used to occasionally go to a nearby Starbucks to work when I wanted to get out of the house. This Starbucks bordered on a super-rich area of town. So, it was always filled with super-rich people gabbing over their coffee and made for the most entertaining eavesdropping. I’d overhear elaborate stories about so-and-so selling their vacation home, and so-and-so downsizing their family estate, and so-and-so having an affair with so-and-so’s husband, and the daughter of so-and-so being taken with the son of so-and-so, “which is such a shame, because he’s gay.” Ouch. And not okay.
And this is exactly the tenor of this book, down to the casual and likely unintentional homophobia? This is a story that most readers have described as cozy and gentle. And I get where that’s coming from: this is a book about the relationships between a deceased man’s family, former circle of friends, and his secret lover which aims for low-drama domestic coziness. As a result of the events in this book, the deceased man’s daughter winds up living happily-ever-after at his former house in the countryside. His former friends talk incessantly amongst each other about how to downsize or laterally move amongst their many properties. His secret lover, and this seems like the most British thing ever, is constantly being recognized from a show she presented for the BBC called Cakes and Ales. There’s many slice-of -life descriptions of people running into each other at the local pub, having coffee together, day-drinking (an unreasonable amount of mid-day wine is consumed), gossiping, making very strange excuses for cheating (apparently cheating is something that just sometimes…happens?! And everyone’s cool with it when it’s their longtime friends doing it, especially if the guy’s marriage is known to be bad!? Can’t say I agree, but all right). There’s also a lot of wandering around the titular Garden House looking for clues about the deceased man’s love-affair, using decoded text messages on his phone as clues.
All that is mostly frothy and fun and cozy. But the homophobia?!
Okay, let’s go through what it consists of. There are three queer characters in this book and none of them are handled that sensitively. The first is Christian, the hero Will’s best friend. Will’s got a long history with this guy. They’ve gone through pilot training together. They live together as roommates. They are frequently pilot and co-pilot on commercial flights. Will, to piss off his annoying stepmom, once invited Christian to a family holiday dinner where they both wore pink shirts and trolled everyone into believing they were both gay.
Inviting your queer friend into a queerphobic environment to troll your family members is just not a kind thing to do to that friend? For the sake of argument, let’s say Christian was in on it, and he fully consented to trolling Will’s family for a laugh, knowing the probable outcome, that he would be “hated” by the homophobic family members, as the text says he is. But it doesn’t end there. The main outcome is that as a result, everyone in the family now believes Will is gay, though he’s never said anything about his sexual identity. And the way this is conveyed in the heroine’s thoughts! El’s evidence for Will’s queerness, besides this family holiday trolling, is that Will has a Kylie CD in his car which he tells her is Christian’s (I don’t know what 27-year-old is playing CDs in their car in the year 2021, but we’ll roll with it) and he also buys some pottery for Christian at the market. They are obviously together, she concludes, and Christian’s love language is handmade pottery and Kylie CDs.
El has this massive crush on the Will, but repeatedly thinks about what a “waste” and a “pity” it is that he’s gay?! His being presumed gay forms the main impediment to their relationship, and it’s somehow more of a barrier than the fact that these two are stepbrother and sister. That’s right, they’re technically siblings.
This is not okay. I mean, the “technically they’re siblings” thing is jarring but that’s not the thing here. The narrative makes it clear that they were adults at the time their parents married and never lived together as siblings and it’s uncomfortable for everyone, but whatever. The queerphobia is what’s not okay. Saying it’s a “waste” for someone to be queer implies that hetero relationships are better than queer ones, and that a man’s life is inferior if he isn’t settling down with a woman. That’s a toxic way to think about queer people. It would be fine for the heroine to struggle with his presumed identity in the face of her attraction: for example, internally expressing envy of the lucky man he gets to be with. But it’s not all right for her to put down his identity in the way she does as lesser than a straight identity. And look, I know the audience here is likely older people, and that casually including three queer characters in a fairly conservative book aimed at older people still indicates a cultural shift unimaginable 20 years ago. But if your grandma is reading this book thinking it’s okay to call queer people “a waste” and “a pity….” I just think it’s evident we can collectively do better, for the sake of all our moms and grandmas who want to read about queer side-characters in their women’s fic.
There’s another gay bestie in this plot. The Cakes and Ale presenter Julia, the mystery lover of the deceased man, has a friend named Dave. Who is in this book to validate Julia’s former relationship by putting down his own past relationship and his own struggles. When Julia confesses to Dave that she had a longtime relationship with a divorced man who has recently died, and her existence is unknown by his surviving family, Dave is extremely sympathetic. Julia remarks that Dave’s had his struggles as well – his former partner left him. Dave says that it was ‘different’: “Phil and I were like an ongoing sitcom. Everyone knew about it. They were taking bets on how long we’d last.” This hits on some cruel cliches about queer relationships being inherently unstable and unserious. Later, Dave de-centers himself again to validate Julia’s tragedy, saying “I’ve been feeling pretty low and sorry for myself, and now I know what you’ve been going through for these last few weeks I’m quite ashamed of myself.” Julia does tell Dave to feel his feelings. But there’s no need for the narration to use Dave’s breakup to emphasise that Julia’s heartbreak is more valid than his own emotional pain. Combined with the previous sentiments about queerness being a “shame” and a “pity,” it amounts to using queer characters to validate the greater legitimacy of straight ones.
And finally, Issey is a lesbian who keeps running into this side-character named Plum, whose lesbianism is treated as straight-up villainy. Plum and Issey went to school together and Issey is, like, literally obsessed with Plum, stalking her around town and coercing her into sinister, uh, coffee dates. We know she’s a lesbian because she has an ex she’s told Plum was named “George” but was actually named “Georgina.” So, she’s not out to Plum. Other characters think of her as a “loose canon” out to cause trouble for Plum, simply because she looks animated and happy around Plum, which is just bizarre. Those lesbians, with their friendliness and their arm-twisting you into going out for coffee- how can anyone trust them, am I right?!
Plum, in a moment of alcohol-induced weakness (I mean, the volume of day-drinking in this novel; it’s understandable), has confessed to Issey that she had a one-night stand with Martin before his marriage ended, the same man who went on to develop a relationship with Julia. Issey fantasizes that she’s going to use this knowledge to ostracize Plum from her friends by dropping a “Plum had an affair with Martin” truth bomb on them, so she can drive them away from Plum and become her closest friend. This plot is resolved by another character, Kate, confronting Issey privately in a bathroom. Kate, who already knows about Plum’s affair with Martin, threatens to out Issey’s suspected attraction to Plum, which causes Issey to flee in shame. She is never seen again on the page. So Issey’s supposedly terrible for seeming to be attracted to Plum, and contemplating telling the truth about Plum, when Plum’s the one who cheated on her husband with a married man.
Just for the record: outing closeted characters: not kind or good. This is homophobic. Using a character’s sexuality as a threat that endangers another character? Also homophobic. The long and the short of it: Don’t write a one-note lesbian villain in a cozy women’s fic whose purpose is to obsessively worm her way into another character’s life, making her queerness threatening to straight characters.
Issey also thinks it’s highly stupid that Plum is actually named Victoria yet goes by Plum. Reader, is she wrong?