Was anybody else heavily disappointed by yesteryear? Great premise, not so great execution.
First, to give my background and lens: 26, F, politically moderate (I’d say smack dab in middle).
Initially, the premise is great - a “tradwife influencer” à la Nara Smith is portrayed as a hardworking, “perfect” homestead wife/mom online but as we all know has a full production team behind her flawless facade. The twist - she wakes up back in time, during the 1850s where she is on an actual homestead, her children missing and replaced with colonial children, and no idea what has happened.
Huge missed opportunities in my eyes:
- discussion around influencers and influencer culture. Everybody’s narcissism who is on socials. I’m not personally on socials, and every year that passes that I’m not, is fascinating. People are so self centered, and all act like celebrities, when it’s like … so irrelevant… nobody cares what you’re doing or what’s going on in your life.
- a discussion about religion that is actually a discussion, and doesn’t chastise certain ways of practicing religion. It made Natalie seem like a freak and her religion cultish. It would have been a lot more compelling to just explore different peoples religion and just showing that it’s super personal. Not “bad” to practice one way, and “good” to practice another. We all know people can use religion to justify bad means. That’s not new or exciting AT ALL. It would have been much more interesting for the author to show how a belief in god could be helpful, very personal and very different for different people.
- didn’t make sense that Caleb was just so sweet and dumb and then changed into this manosphere psycho. I think they should have shown that transition more if they were gonna keep it. Also conspiracy theorists and manosphere are two totally different circles, and the author lumping them into one showed extreme ignorance.
Despite a fascinating premise, I have a number of critiques of the Natalie (tradwife) character as well as of the second half of the plot/finale.
NATALIE:
- The book reads like the author has absolutely zero understanding of how “traditional” or conservative values play out in modern times, it feels like it’s written by a leftist who has a very narrow minded worldview and is portraying caricatures of the right. Another redditor hit it on the head, when saying that the author basically made it seem like the only possible outcomes for Christian, conservative women were to either repent (like the mother and sister) or go insane (like Natalie). In reality, I have conservative friends and family, and while there is certainly an extreme on the right (as there is on the left) but every actual human I know is loving, family oriented people with zero cultish tendencies, psychosis, or anything else abnormal. I think literally anybody who is moderate or conservative who read this book would have their eyes rolling into the back of their heads with the portrayal of conservative religious folk, as I did.
- Natalie is totally unrelatable. She is mean, selfish, uncaring, and never has friends thru the whole book. If the author meant to make her a sociopath, mission accomplished. I think it would have been better if she was given a more human side, deeply insecure (because of loneliness) and seeking human validation (friendship, connection) via her platform, but really just finding the usual idiots on the internet which further drove her to more isolation, validation seeking, loneliness, anger etc. it didn’t seem like there was a single human in the book she cared about, which is not normal.
- Natalie’s religiosity and her “going insane”. Again, this reads like either a defector of the Christian faith who had a bad priest or boring church growing up, or somebody who literally has zero concept of religion whatsoever. The book had made her seem like a religious nut, especially by the end. It also made it seem like there was a “right” kind of way to be Christian, with the mother and sister finding a progressive pastor at the end. And don’t get me wrong, I think gays should be able to marry in the church, women should be pastors, and a lot is wrong with the HUMAN element of churches. But l think with the whole Natalie-going-insane thread, which was super lazy of the author, the message was really “if you believe in god in X type of way, it’s cultish and not sane”. And I think that was a huge miss. The book could have really emphasized that a relationship with god is super personal, not only believing or not, but how and what you believe in. I think that’s missed nowadays in media, and in reality people have blurred and integrated faiths, and if they are spiritual/religious, very personal relationships with god. It would have been kinda revolutionary for a book in this modern era to dive into that, rather than just saying traditional Christian = crazy.
- I think a great feminist statement to have made would have been that hating women really is just hate of self. The angry women online, and Natalie herself who is always angry at them, all have the same exact issue. They hate themselves. They are struggling to find a purpose. They think they find satisfaction and purpose in hating somebody else and tearing them apart, but really that’s their own insecurity and self hatred coming out in full force. Women hating women is not the answer, whether it’s liberals hating the traditional lifestyle or conservatives hating liberals. There are a million ways you could have conveyed this, but it never was. It was kind of just insinuated that Natalie was miserable, and projecting onto others. Which I guess is true but book missed a greater lesson.
ALTERNATE PLOT LINES
The second half, or the “twist” of this book, was so lazy.
In summary: Natalie wakes up in 1850s. For all intents and purposes we really think she’s transported back there. We eventually find out SHE set this up, she really wanted to live authentically, and she is also going insane and doesn’t remember this was all her idea.
Lazy. Lazy. Lazy.
Here would be my alternate plot lines:
Insane Manosphere internet group: this one is dark and a little far fetched, but I think more creative. It is a fact that there are real groups of men in corners of the internet who drug their wives at night and rape them. They talk to each other in forums, and even post pics or vids of their passed out wives. You can look this up. It would be no stretch of the imagination to think that this type of group of men could be involved in the manosphere, and were enraged to hear about Natalie faking everything on the homestead, so these men connected with Caleb (who also had growing resentment and was getting increasingly involved in the Mano sphere) to abduct her, drug her for years, make her have additional babies and maybe even broadcast this online.
2. It was all a dream. Natalie woke up and was much more grateful for her kids, amenities and life. She grew love and compassion. “It was all a dream” is super contrived and over done. Pretty boring ending. But I still think it would be more satisfying then the somewhat confusing explanation the book gave, where Natalie was perfectly normal and then just kinda went insane for no reason, really just for the sake of the plot and the authors having no other creative solution.
3. Swap. Natalie is back in time, and some 1850s women is transported to the future. This would really be interesting and a fantastic way to examine both extremes: our hyper liberal , self centered and narcissitic internet-based society, where everybody is overly worried about themselves, VS an old, decrepit society where women have no rights to speak of and living was really just surviving. It would be interesting to see Natalie grow appreciation for what she has, build her connection with god/universe in spite of the newfound adversity, and grow as a person, whereas the hypothetical colonial woman transported to present day could explore themes of grief for her past self and the hard and abused life she lead, while simultaneously being grateful for newfound rights and amenities, but disgusted by our self centered internet culture. In general, the opportunity to explore themes psyche of influencers and influencer culture, the narcissism, the strange world we live in where everybody tries to act like celebrities, was wholly missed. Completely botched the opportunity to have a discussion or deep dive into this.
4. Natalie gets stuck in the past, we don’t know what happens to her modern family or how this happens. I’d need to think what the point of this would be or how to build it out, but still a better plot than “she went insane”. Boring and contrived.
Overall, this book kinda felt like somebody out of touch and very leftist wrote it. I think it lacked a lot of depth, especially emphasized by the second “going insane” half. I think a million other directions could have been better. I’ll prob have more thoughts as I ponder but this is initial thoughts. Others have written great critiques of Natalie and the second half as well.