Anatomy of "Anatomy: a love story"

 

While I was reading it, it didn’t seem that bad. Then I sat down to think about it and it did. It seemed to be written solely for the purpose of being entertaining and igniting pity. It definitely didn’t succeed.

The “social commentaries” didn’t add anything new, and seemed to evoke pity and outrage and nothing else. 

            The social pressures on women and the misogyny in the book are so much stronger than ANY other historical literature I have ever experienced, and all the men (excluding the mc’s love interest) were misogynistic villains. There was soooooo much opportunity to dive into why and how that sexism was instilled, or use the mc to fight those terrible stereotypes and social norms cleverly, but it’s potential died. 

The only attempt Hazel (mc) made to pave the way for any woman interested in medicine, was making a deal with Dr. Beechman III, the founder of the Anatomist Society of Scotland and basically the only teacher available to people outside of a university, that if she passed the physicians’ exam completely on her own, he would accept women as students in the future. However, after studying for months, she decided to chase a mystery into a situation she obviously wouldn’t be able to do anything about, instead of taking the exam (Btw what she uncovers was supposed to be surprising but it's not). So, although Hazel was definitely a feminist, she missed her only opportunity to do something that could definitely give women a chance to be legitimate physicians. I guess Hazel did do something significantly feminist, it just wasn’t as powerful as it could’ve been. 

The author poorly emphasized how poorly the poor were treated. She talked about how they were barely paid, worked and lived and died in perilous conditions, and were forgotten. Hazel’s poor love interest, did nothing, and apparently could do nothing, to stand up for his oppressed community. However, I will give this book the best chance it has, by stating that possibly, the author was trying to argue that it is completely irrational to punish people for committing crimes that were necessary for their survival because of systemic conditions. Either way, whether or not you think these conflicts were void of substance in the book, is kind of irrelevant since nothing was actually done to try and resolve them. 

The plot was ass(uredly boring, slow, and unrealistic). The book even included the supernatural, and I just thought it was kind of pointless and cheapened the book for no reason. 

Once the relevant “plot twist” (the twist was that it was a bad twist) was over, a character revealed that he had devised a potion of immortality to ….. Live? I don’t know, I don’t see why that was important for his character, it certainly didn’t give me an understanding of him. I think the whole point of it was to give Hazel a way to save her “love” from being framed and hanged. (honestly, if you’re gonna ignite outrage for the poor, you’d do better to kill your poor character mercilessly). 

Which brings me to the romance element. It was definitely supposed to add to the quality of the book, but alas it did not. It was always sappy and unrealistic. Ok ok, that’s a little harsh. Once, at the end of the book, some long time after Hazel gives her love interest the immortality potion before his execution, he sends her a one-sentence “letter” to make sure she knows he is alive instead of letting her get closure assuming that he died. Aaanndd there's no explanation. The only hint we get is him saying “there is no hell worse than a world in which I see you grow old and lose you and then be forced to live another day”, when Hazel gives him the potion. like ok maybe he just wanted to separate himself from her so he wouldn’t be as heartbroken later… but how can someone who cared that much about Hazel not even stop by to see her. 

Also, it feels like a whole chunk of the plot went missing. Did Hazel find some effective cure or treatment for the Roman fever? Was she a recognized physician who broke through her social prison? Did she marry that horrifying sleazebag? Did the criminal ever get stopped? And although the answer is probably no, did Hazel and her love interest keep talking or ever meet again? I guess the author lost track of their plot, which is really evident in the fact that the book did not have a main problem. 

p.s. I seriously cannot stand looking at the cover. I always have to put it face down on the table, revealing the really cringey and poorly written gushing reviews of very unknown authors (except Neil Gaiman). Makes me wonder if you can get paid to recommend a book. Anyway, should I read the sequel?

-Sophia