I used to be pretty interested in reincarnation until I read some books containing "proof" of reincarnation and realised that the "proof" was shaky enough that a fourteen year old could see through it. I still think it's a cool concept, so I was excited to read Hindsight.
Sadly, I gave up at the 20% mark. The book opens with Eugenia arguing amongst her family as they're about to go to a rushed wedding. She's been picked to be a bridesmaid at her brother's wedding. Throughout this scene we're shown that Eugenia remembers her previous incarnations, and that the reincarnating is guided by the Blessed Virgin Mary, who seems only to want Eugenia to live a good solid Catholic life time after time. Eugenia complains about this for a bit.
Then she complains about some other stuff.
Then she complains about more stuff.
Then she complains about past stuff.
Then she complains about skinny women.
Then she complains and complains and complains and it never really lets up.
That's one of the reasons I gave up reading this. Eugenia is unpleasant, dull, and unreasonably petty. I could handle unpleasant, but not dull. The pettiness got on my nerves because she seems to go around hating everyone and whining about them constantly.
Some of the whining may be valid. Much of it is aimed at people who she knew in a previous life. From what I understand, her brother used to be her cousin, and people like that crop up randomly throughout her lives, their relationship to her changing often. Within the first few chapters the number of people she knew in her past lives expands rapidly as they all seem to pop up at the same time. A local professor, the bride, a student, a plumber who is somehow related to someone maybe? And a bloke called Stanley who it's immediately made blatantly obvious that he'll become the love interest even though he randomly felt up the professor (who he isn't dating) right in front of Eugenia within seconds of meeting her.
It's a LOT of characters to introduce in such a short time and it's made endlessly more confusing because we're not only introduced to who they are right now, but who they were in the past. This could be fine if it were done in a concrete way, but instead Eugenia's narrative is frustratingly vague about the whole thing. The blurb claims she "remembers all her past lives", but I think that may be an exaggeration--it's more like she has the possibility of having her past-life memory jogged. I think. It's pretty confusing because you'll be reading a conversation and then bam she has a mini flashback to a past life in a town called Oberholt, but the flashback is vague and Eugenia either doesn't understand them, or Tarquini writes her understanding poorly.
As a result, at 20% of the way through I have no idea what the heck is happening. There are three threads to this book as far as I can tell. The modern track, where Eugenia may or may not be dating Stanley (we only see one disastrous first date where she uses Stanley, but then he come crawling back for more for some reason?) and has a hate-on for everyone else. The Oberholt track, where most of the modern characters have past lives, most of which messed Eugenia's past life up. The Chaucer track, which may be fleshed out later, but at this point it's largely Eugenia (a Chaucer lecturer) talking about his stories and comparing the characters and plots to things that have happened in her Oberholt life, in the present, and maybe in a a past life where she met Chaucer?
It's pretty hard to summarise any of this because, as stated, I have no clue what's happening. The relationships in the modern period are confusing and lacking in motivation much of the time. Maybe the motivation is based on the past lives I'm confused about, because the Oberholt period is fuzzy and vague. I think Tarquini probably did a TON of research on something called the Thirty Years War, and set the Oberholt life during that, but then forgot that the majority of her readers will have no clue what the Thirty Years War is. Maybe it's slowly revealed through the book, but it's not good to leave the reader wondering why something is so significant to the protag. Does Eugenia actually remember and Tarquini's holding stuff back for "suspense", or does she only remember the confusing snippets and we're supposed to be confused? The Chaucer stuff just added to the confusion, because I haven't read Chaucer. I suspect there may be lots of clever little comparisons, but the trouble is that the text feels like it relies on the reader understanding their significance. That's ok for some academic text or something, but the tone of this book is basically popular women's fiction. I wasn't expecting to need a background in Middle English literature to understand it. The focus is on Eugenia's wild relationships with people, not on Chaucer, so again ... what.
I'll talk about tone a bit. This book is trying so hard to be funny. The way the words are put together, it's like string after string of joke. Unfortunately this gets really wearing because it's so simplistic and there's little variation and it's not actually funny. I do not get the feeling that Eugenia is a lover of Chaucer. She reads as being shallow, and frankly stupid. Many of the "jokes" are kind of revolting because they're women-hating-on-women-and-themselves nonsense. The whole thing is also trying so hard to be "snappy" that it felt disjointed and irritating, and really didn't help the "none of this makes sense" atmosphere.
Finally, I'm going to talk about plot structure. I'm 20% of the way through and I have no clue what this story is about. I think the "inciting event" of the book is that all these past life characters have popped up out of nowhere, and Eugenia needs to ... deal with that ... somehow? The blurb says she's trying to pick her next life and there's some evidence of that in the text, but really it's all lost in the vast swathes of confusion. At 1/5th of the way through the book, I really should have some kind of direction. I don't need plots spelled out to me, but if I can't find one when I'm specifically looking AND have the blurb to guide me? Not good.
I feel like this book has a really great idea hidden inside it. I even feel like the writing could work, if it was edited properly. Unfortunately, Tarquini wasn't able to draw that out herself (maybe use skilled beta readers next time?), and the "publisher" didn't either. I just did a spot of research on this "publisher" and discovered it's a "hybrid publisher" who has "the author, invest in [their] project upfront". Which clears everything up, really. It's a vanity publisher who did everything they could to help sell the book, but didn't really do anything to help improve the book. They didn't even proofread it properly, as I found an instance where they'd left "must of" instead of changing it to "must have". There were quite a few other errors too. It's a shame, but at least I know not to read books "published" by Sparkpress again.
I received a copy of this book for free from NetGalley in return for an honest review.