1 star for Star.
Starts speedy and relatively strong - gives one promise for a simple but heartfelt story of accomplishment and a love that's meant to be. One isn't asking for realism - it's Danielle Steel, we know it's fantasy.
I was intrigued to read a standard love story, to make a change from my usual fare. I thought Steel would be a light, easy, and sensible read. It was easy only - too easy. This book is written for emotional retards - for people who want to read a novel done in the style of gossip column reportage. For example, a period of 5 years in this novel can be summarised in one page. I noticed this at the start, but it continued throughout the novel. It caused the story to lack depth, especially towards the end when the stakes were highest and one needed more information about the characters.
Ultimately - this is formulaic, exploitative fiction for the donut-reader. The donut-reader being the person who consumes literature that contains the comparative nutritional value of the donut. Over-sweet, addictive, and valueless regarding betterment of self. In the way that a donut raises one's insulin without satiating you, this novel keeps a person reading whilst providing absolutely zero value. If the word "very" were sugar, this book could make you diabetic.
Steel tackles huge, titillating themes. She has to, doesn't she? We want our donuts packed with jam and synthetic pistachio cream. The donut-reader wants their novels full of scandal, sex, love, and stuff like incest and crime. For incest and crime one could read Faulkner, but Steel is writing for people with particular digestion. The Steel-consumer cannot handle Faulker, in the way that a kebab-addicted person refuses a stem of broccoli. They don't like to chew it and can't get it down.
Steel's super fast paced "style" (because it's not style, it's formula - and a bad one at that) keeps you going. Once I was 100 pages in I knew I had to go on, just to experience the degradation which began to be impossible to ignore after page 50. The pathos was astonishing. Over-used and pathetic: young girl afflicted with ethereal beauty, cast out after death of father (borderline incestuous description there, Ms. Steel, thanks babe), raped by drunk brother-in-law ... Let's stop here. This particular sexual assault was rather offensive. I've read probably too much sexual assault in literature and it has to be said there are right and wrong ways of tackling this. Steel does it wrong. For her it seems rape has to be described in a Hollywood-violent way. As in, the horror is stated but ... not evoked. I got nothing from this violent, brutal attack on the protagonist. The reaction of the victim became hardly real as events unfolded further. It's like Steel got away with skimming the topic as much as possible whilst trying to make us feel pity. Like a news report. I would rather Steel were bland and cool, like Joan Didion, so that her choice of subject matter would hit us harder. But, alas, Steel is writing for the donut-reader. The donut-reader does not want to actually be made to feel deeper emotions. The donut-reader wants a stream of scandalous information, evoking ankle-deep emotions which rise and fall with the speed of the passing years per paragraph. Let me just say that of the literary assaults I've read, the ones that fare better are those that use suggestion. If Steel wants to champion female victims of assault she needs to learn what assault is. I'm not convinced she knows.
How many buttons needed to be pressed in this book? We had rape, crazy deep love, death, WW2, the Korean War, Hollywood casting couch scandal, insane beauty plus insane talent plus insane morality. ("perfect" protagonists are boring and should be killed and replaced with interesting protagonists). Steel made Crystal Wyatt a half-intelligent, half-strong woman with seeming perfection at everything she does. Her decision making is retarded. Yes, that's the word. Her apparent love for Spencer Hill (I really had my doubts) results in a series of affairs with him during the existence of their illegitimate son (GIFT OF GOD Zebadiah - Christ, yet the child doesn't deserve a father according to super perfect mama Crystal). So Crystal is an expert secret keeper after having her life returned to her by Spencer, after a very touch-and-go murder trial. OF COURSE there's murder. The Hollywood agent who grooms and enslaves her is shot dead and she's accused of it. Quite funny actually, and a great segway into my next major problem with this book.
The slimy agent Ernie had the makings of a good villain, but we lost his characterisation too quick. It seems all the good character creation was used up on Elizabeth Barclay (the only character resembling a character, in my opinion).
Steel offended me with Ernie. Simply because she bothered to highlight a serious topic (grooming) and used it to exploit the reader by way of a sex scene with him. Steel probably wanted the reader to understand how a young woman can be groomed and made sexually dependent on a terrible man - a deserving topic, and she did well by explaining what was happening to Crystal within this dangerous dynamic. Yet, Steel decided to use this opportunity to titillate her female reader, exploiting them in the same way that Ernie exploits Crystal. Because this is exploitative fiction, not meant for thinking but consumption only. And how else to get female readers reading than by exposing them to porn? Therefore, all the deep and perfect love between Crystal and Spencer is left with only hints of sex ("they made love all night"). Whereas pseudo-rapist Ernie gets full on cunnilingus descriptions and we are informed of his perfect physique. All I learnt about Spencer is that he is "handsome" and has dark hair.
Steel, it's all very clear what you're doing. I've read my fair share of chick-lit and a lot of it is great. Philippa Gregory, Sarah Winman, Gail Honeyman, Sheri S. Tepper (that's the sci-fi chicklit), Clare Chambers - to name but a few of the talented ones. Literature aimed at women does not mean void of literary aptitude. It doesn't have to mean that.
I think Steel is a decent writer. But maybe she has a contract that makes certain demands that she is willing to meet - at the expense of something amounting to storytelling. Therefore the dictionary is thrown in the trash, leaving us with very boring descriptions of very stupid things made to seem very interesting and important to very malnourished readers.
My version of Steel's Star: "They drove to Lake Tahoe, and E. wore Chanel. S. wore a suit from Macy's that he bought four years ago when he first saw C.'s purple eyes. Whilst C. stayed in Los Angeles and won five Oscars in two years and felt very good about her life that had been SO HARD. And S. dreamt of her during every Christmas he spent in Palm Springs, and every Easter in Washington in the Georgetown duplex that E. had decorated. It was very nice, but he missed C."
It ends with this apparently insane love only becoming verified because Spencer gave up his illustrious career and sham marriage because JFK got shot. No, seriously, that's literally it. He only goes back to her (discovering his secret child - and is totally fine with the massive lie) after he realises the golden political future - described as "Camelot Days" - is gone with the memory of the Kennedys.
Steel ensnares her donut fans with all the usual trendy views. JFK good, McCarthyism bad. Fame good, Hollywood bad. America good, internment of Japanese bad. Children good, truth bad. It's all just too easy and boring and very very predictable.
Despite the cool and restrained cover, and the fact that Steel is prolific and successful, I can't see the appeal. It could have been good and sweet, but instead it was bad and I think harmful. I just feel she plays on the emotions and expectations of Americans, using pathos to drive bloated plots without offering anything valuable in return other than a "happy" ending. I didn't find it happy at all.