Whew. That was quite a read. I really don't know how to even discuss this book but this will probably be my longest review yet. I'll be discussing it with my Book Club in June and I honestly don't even know where to start with it when we delve into discussions. Here are a few of my scattered thoughts about this book:

1- Despite the fact that it's historical FICTION many parts of the book are written as "documents" which gives it's authenticity a very convincing feel. It made me want to verify and research things because they were presented in such a legitimate way (that's not necessarily a bad thing, to want to do further research I mean). I almost wish the author's notes at the end of the book reiterating the FICTION aspect of the story had been printed at the FRONT of the book. I had to constantly remind myself: fiction Fiction FICTION!!!! Of course many of the events, circumstances and people described in the book were real, but the bulk of the story was created by the author and it was a little hard while reading the book to remind myself that the story (and "documents") were author creations.

2- I'll probably read historical fiction novels with a lot more caution in the future. When reading others before this I've let myself get swallowed up in the story and trust that details are accurate. This one helped me realize that historical fictions are still just made up stories within the parameters of a real historical time or event. (And as the author pointed out in his notes at the end of the book, even history is tainted by perspective and the same event or circumstance can be described by two different people in completely different ways. So ultimately, it seems to me that with historical fictions, the author gets to pick and choose which perspective to take so you can't read a historical fiction novel as if it's a more entertaining substitute for a historical document.)

3- I appreciated the author's distinction between early Latter-Day Saints, the modern day "Firsts", and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as it is today.

4- I thought the book was really REALLY long with really small margins and really small font LOL. It was a long book. Some of it felt like work because it was so long.

5- I was extremely frustrated with the language used in the telling of the modern day story. It was the worst in the first few chapters of the modern day story, but it was peppered throughout the entire book whenever the modern story was being told. I thought it was unnecessary.

6- I didn't think the modern day story was very well told and the characters weren't very well developed. The relationship between Tom and Jordan was awkward and rushed and unrealistic. Johnny was almost just a caricature of a runaway boy. The resolution in the modern-day story was somewhat satisfying with a bit of a twist, but overall I didn't care for the modern-day story and didn't feel like it was nearly as well developed as the rest. And a few modern-day LDS references were off and that pulled me out of the story a bit.

7- There were some unique perspectives in the Ann Eliza time period story that I really liked. I appreciated reading various peoples' perspectives of polygamy, including (and particularly!) several men's personal stories. I thought that was an interesting touch. I would have liked to have read a story or two from women who actually loved and valued the practice of polygamy as an alternate view point to Ann Eliza's story. I thought there were some really touching parts of the Ann Eliza time period story and I liked the inclusion of some important historical events in the early LDS church (although they were somewhat glossed over because they weren't really the focus of the overall story). Since the bulk of the story was from Ann Eliza's perspective it's no shock that it's very critical of Brigham Young and the early church practices. Again, I would have really liked to read a few more positive perspectives, but it's pretty clear that the author had no intention of singing any praises of polygamy in his book.

8- This is totally a random remark, but something of note in my opinion. The author tried to depict how closed the early records and journals and such were kept by the LDS church, how difficult they were to obtain when trying to do research, etc. I thought it was interesting that even fictitiously, Gordon B Hinckley was the prophet used in the book to show a swing in a different direction as far as releasing information. He was known as a leader in our time who was very much an open book, very willing to talk to the media and very well-loved and respected for that. I liked that the author portrayed that :)

My final thought? I'm really REALLY glad to be done with this book. I just didn't enjoy it at all. I didn't feel like the modern day story and the Ann Eliza story paralleled well enough to go back and forth as companion stories, and in the end it just felt like two really long stories shoved together in one book cover. I could have done without the modern-day story altogether, as I didn't feel like the author spent nearly as much time researching and digging into that culture and that story as he did the Ann Eliza one and it came across that way in the writing and story-telling.