As one might expect, this book is a lot more adult than Little Women. The jury's still out on how I feel about that. Part of me (childishly) loves that Marmee and Mr. March as depicted in Little Women are wonderful and basically flawless. That myth is entirely dispelled in March. Honestly I know it's unrealistic for the Marches to be perfect, but reading Brooks's take on what they went through was just sad. I thought the writing was very good and the issues addressed were important. There was a focus on slavery and abolition, and northern and southern opinion on those issues. It was very apparent that many northerners weren't strong abolitionists, nor even particularly wanted to eradicate slavery or deal with the issues surrounding newly freed slaves. As a staunch abolitionist trying to do his part, Mr. March's idealism was largely shattered due to the things he experienced.

In addition to the present story of Mr. March during the first year of the war, we learn about his and Marmee's pasts through flashbacks. The first part of the book is told through letters Mr. March wrote to Marmee and the girls, in contrast to full disclosure of what he was going through. He also reflects on past events. The details Brooks provided certainly fit within the framework of Little Women, and Mr. March's story is entirely plausible. I think that it's a good story, but I doubt I will read Little Women the same way again. Perhaps I would have fewer reservations if this story was presented on its own, rather than the tale of Mr. March. I kind of feel like a little piece of my childhood has been taken away. That may sound negative, but I don't mean it to dissuade anyone from reading this book or imply that it's not a good book.