Life After Life A Novel

Mesmerizing, I couldn't put it down and felt heavily invested in Ursula's endless loop of lives.

My all-time favorite!!

** spoiler alert ** **This review contains a lot of spoilers! You are forewarned!** I realize two stars seem harsh. I will admit I didn't loathe this book the way I have other books that I rated two stars. This just was not the book for me. Although I generally dislike non-chronological storied, I was intrigued by the concept of Life After Life. It sounded unique enough to warrant reading. A girl who is repeated born and dies in different ways only to end up right back at her moment of birth. Reincarnation? Parallel universes? The unseen and complex consequences of each choice we make in life? I was ready to ignore the plug on the front cover from Gillian Flynn and devour this! But the reality was far from what I’d hoped for. I haven’t read anything else by Kate Atkinson. She seems like a talented writer, and this was certainly an ambitious project. Alas, the end result was less than satisfying. At first I was going to give it three stars, but the more I thought about it the more aggravated I felt. Most books seem better once they've marinated in my mind a bit. That is why I usually wait a day or so to write reviews. But the more I think about Life After Life the more exasperated I feel. Part of the issue might have had to do with how many war books I've ended up reading so far this year and most of them have been about World War II. As a coincidence of previously selected books, book club selections, and the timing of library holds, I've ended up with a clump of war related books. In particular, I just read All the Light We Cannot See which I greatly enjoyed. While very different in many ways, they are both set around World War II and told in non-chronological order. They are also both billed as “magical realism.” Although, I don’t think that Life After Life really qualified as magical realism. That would have required a realistic explanation for Ursula’s continual repetition. But other than some vague ruminating by her psychologist regarding different religious philosophy there is no explanation at all. More on that later. Both books were almost identical in length. Whereas I couldn't put All the Light We Cannot See down, Life After Life dragged on and on. I found myself groaning every time I picked it back up. I read it in eight says, a little bit every day, but it felt like I spent three weeks on it. That lack of enthusiasm is a large reason this only got two stars from me. I can’t give a higher rating to something that felt like such a chore to finish. Reading through some other reviews, one of the main complaints I saw was the repetitiveness of the multiple lives. This didn't bother me that much though. Overall, Atkinson did do a good job of keeping the story clear even though you have to cycle through the same segments and events multiple times. There were definitely times when I was bored with the repetition, but what I REALLY did not like the writing style, particularly the in-paragraph dialogue. I don’t think I have ever read a book with such frustrating dialogue. It was all thrown piecemeal into paragraphs. Some of it was written out in actual quotes. Some of it was just paraphrased. Some of it was random dialogue that had previously occurred at some unknown time. But it was all usually lumped together into run-on paragraphs that were very hard to follow. Here is an example: The “happy couple” as Mrs. Glover referred to them without any hint of congratulation, were catching the train up to London to take part in the victory celebrations. Bridget was giddy with excitement. “Sure now you don’t want to come with us, Mrs. Glover? I’ll bet there’ll be some high jinks to be hand.” Mrs. Glover rolled her eyes like a discontented cow. She was “avoiding crowds” on account of the influenza epidemic. She had a nephew who had dropped dead in the street, perfectly healthy at breakfast and “dead by noon.” Sylvie said they mustn't be scared of the influenza. “Life must go on,” she said. And another example: “I don’t know,” Ursula said. “I know nothing.” The woman laughed and said, “Oh, I feel the same way, believe me,” and Ursula thought that perhaps this was someone she would like as a friend but then a women behind them said, “Get a move on, love,” and the sable-furred woman hefted her buckets, as strapping as a Land Girl, and said, “Well, must be off, cheerio.” It felt so scatterbrained. The author is clearly very intelligent, but that darned dialogue was like being told a story by a absentminded person who keeps forgetting to tell you things or adds in details that didn’t need to be in there. Bits of the dialogue are also spread across multiple versions of Ursula’s different lives so that you have to piece things together and not in a fun way. In a frustrating, what-the-hell-is-going-on way. To be fair, if Atkinson had written all of that dialogue out, this book probably would have been an additional two-hundred pages. As it was, it felt colossal. There were some weird descriptions particularly in the beginning such as, “The buzzing of a thousand bees in the tiny curled pearl of an ear.” The whole “Pearl of an ear” thing was mentioned multiple times. I really didn’t understand the analogy. There were also a lot of Highbrow references. Bits of dialogue in French, German, and Latin. References to classical literature. References to historical culture. Apparently even the character of Admiral Crighton was some outward reference? I feel a twinge of guilt complaining about this since I also frequently complain about how dumbed down mainstream literature is. But we are fickle beings. It is possible I only like cleverness when it is a type of cleverness that I understand. I like when there are hidden vignettes and layers that allow you to dig deeper and understand more about the symbolism and message of a book. This felt more like looking at a very abstract painting and trying to figure out what the heck it is supposed to be while everyone around me gushes about what a masterpiece of art it is. Or, to borrow the analogy that the book used, it was a palimpsest (yeah, I had to look it up too) written over so many times that I had no idea what it was trying to say. I do find it hard to believe that all the people cooing over this book comprehended all those references either. Not to discredit those people… But c’mon! How can you truly appreciate something when you have to glance past copious sections in other languages or (no-doubt) witty references that go over most heads? Clearly the book is meant to be clever. But if that cleverness is lost on so many people, how effect is it really? I will give Atkinson many props for her astounding historical detail. She knows her stuff. The minute details of the era were what I liked best about this book. She displayed the differing emotions and viewpoints of the day very well. Every possible public opinion was (almost annoyingly) neatly displayed. But the historical detail was not enough when compared with the tedious writing, flat characters, and almost nonexistent plot. This was another hyped-up popular book that ended up being supremely disappointing. (Why does this seem to happen to me the most often with historical fiction?? Why? Is it because I like historical fiction so much and therefore judge it more harshly?) Ah, back to the flat characters. This is primarily a character-driven novel. Which might have been more enjoyable if I had liked any other the characters in any significant way. But my interest was never more than a passing curiosity. Certainly, I was horrified about the rape and murder. I was moved by the dark descriptions of London being bombed. But Ursula was far more frustrating than she was endearing! I liked her less and less with each reincarnation. As a child, she was a little quirky, but that was mainly due to her frequent déjà vu. But no distinct personality is ever shown through. The oddball look into a child’s psyche vaguely reminded me of A High Wind in Jamaica. But though Ursula gradually survives longer and longer, her personality never develops. Maybe her soul was weary from so many lives. Maybe her personality comes back weaker each reincarnation. She was at times as washed out and boring as dirty dish water. At other times, the strongest emotion she evoked in me was frustration at her petulance, apathy, and triteness. I was also frustrated by her continual bad choices in men and tendency towards having affairs. Don’t give me any blather about how many people had affairs in that time period due to the eminence of death. If I recall correctly, every single choice she makes in men ends up being terrible. It’s exhausting. None of the other many characters were bright enough to make up for that. In a novel that is primarily character driven, that is a fatal flaw. In addition to the flat, dreary characters, there was no real plot. Ursula lives until some mistake leads to her death. The next time, she makes a different choice which leads to some other horrible, depressing death. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Comparisons to Groundhog’s Day and The Butterfly Effect seem inevitable. But unlike those, Ursula is primarily unaware of her repetitive cycling through of lives. She gets moments of déjà vu or unexplained terror, but she is largely ignorant what is happening. So her weak character makes bad decision after bad decision. This lack of personal growth was what really bothered me more than the repetitions themselves. I wouldn’t have minded going over the same territory if anything had led to something remotely satisfactory. But no. It seems she was cursed to live the same life over and over always ending in a depressing death. Like a doomed Sisyphus rolling the same stone up the same hill for eternity. Each small decision led invariably to suffering and not just due to the inevitable war. The prime example of this (big spoiler here, folks) is when one kiss leads to her being raped, left pregnant, getting an abortion, being disowned by her mother, becoming an alcoholic, and marrying an abusive man who eventually beat her to death. Oh, and the neighbor girl is also raped and murdered because of that kiss. Cheery, right? So much responsibility to put on one teenager’s shoulders. Well, in mythology Ursula was a martyr, wasn’t she? But when I really lost interest was when she started going to Germany. Of course, “What if Hitler didn’t live?” is a popular topic for alternate realities. But the absurdity of her going to Germany and immediately making her way to Eva Braun and Adolf Hitler felt so gimmicky. It also crossed from well-placed historical detail to encroaching on real people’s lives which always makes me uncomfortable. The book suddenly went from a family-centric story to Ursula suddenly being aware of her repeated lives and planning her whole life to assassinate Hitler. But that story line falls flat as well. Her shooting of Hitler is at the very beginning and almost at the end, but both times she is immediately killed and reborn, so it’s pointless. Nothing is explained. Not why or how she is in the loop. Not what really happened or even how it ends. There are also possible alternate paths that are never followed through with. Mainly the secret service agent in the Tube who gives her his card and offers her a job. There is also the woman at the well whom she feels she could be friends with. What about the serial killer with the limp? Clearly not every possibility could have been fit into the book, but some of the less eventful lives could perhaps have been replaced with one or two of these realities? And there is one major curve ball: Sylvie. It is hinted throughout the book, but towards the end it spells out that Sylvie is living out the same sort of loop. Which would account for some things such as Sylvie saving Ursula’s life a few times. I remember thinking towards the beginning (when you are looping over her birth so many times) that those early outcomes were all arrived at by forces or decisions outside of Ursula’s control. Clearly the newborn wasn’t saving her own life. Sylvie’s sole goal seems to be to save Teddy - undoubtedly her favorite child. I’m guessing that Teddy’s survival is dependent upon Ursula living. She does give them matching names and refers to them as “her two little bears.” The butterfly effect makes time loops and alternate realities complicated enough; but when you have more than one person messing with things, it gets infinitely complicated. Towards the end of the book, there is one version where Teddy survives, and mysteriously he mouths the words “Thank you” to Ursula. So is he aware too? Is everyone in the same loop but only some people manage to change their outcome? But it doesn’t end with that version. It keeps looping. And then for some inexplicable reason it loops back to the midwife. The one who never, ever makes it to the Todd’s home in any of the stories included. So what the heck does that mean??? If she had ever made it to the Todd's home would the story have been completely different? Was she somehow important? Clearly. But I have no idea why. I’m completely stumped. And to wrap up this ridiculously long review, I will express my suspicion that the many lives of Ursula Todd were not put in the order they occurred. The main reason being that after she commits suicide she mentions feeling that something had broken. I don’t think the end of her loop was caused by her finally “getting it right” as I was hoping and expecting. No, the end of the loop seems to be her taking her own life. And remember that Sylvie committed suicide as well. And after that point, her portion of the story does not seem to vary. So what is the freaking point?!? The more I think about it, the less sense this book makes. Sorry for the ridiculously long review! This review fulfills the "Book by a Female Author" category of the Popsugar reading challenge. http://www.popsugar.com/love/Reading-...

Dizzying and a bit like having deja view, but absolutely stunning. It's one of those books that will leave you thinking, "How did she do that?"

Like being hit by a train.

Slowly paced, was hard to complete, didn't seem to have a good payoff.

while reading it i couldn t decide if i liked it or not. now that it is over i realized that i loved it all along. maybe it is the shades of Atonement and Virginia Woolf's settings, maybe it is the excellent writing. frustrating at times and with some plot holes (and that puzzling ending!) but mostly a great novel.

It had moments of potential and I did enjoy reading a fair amount of this book, but ultimately I felt like nothing ever paid off in a satisfying way.

A difficult concept pretty well executed, but prevented me from getting attached to any character(s), making it a bit overlong for me. I wanted to know what happened and found some variations compelling, but i respond the most to theme and character, and this was on the lighter side of those fronts.

I enjoyed this book, although it felt drawn out at times. Overall, I really liked the idea. It felt really original to me. I also thought the prose was wonderful. However, this book never really "sucked me in" and I had to make myself keep going back to it. Though I did enjoy it when I read it, it took some work. It also could be a bit confusing sometimes. I also felt like some plot elements weren't necessary. Despite really liking it, for these reasons I give it 4 stars.

A literate Groundhog Day but oh so much more.

Found it very hard to get going initially as the early chapters were very triggering as a mother of young children. But it was a great concept and I enjoyed it once I got into it properly. 3.5 stars.

Ursula Todd wird im Winter 1910 während eines Schneesturms geboren und stirbt während der Geburt. Sie wird während eines Schneesturm im Winter 1910 geboren und stirbt nicht während der Geburt. Was wäre wenn – das ist die zentrale Frage in diesem Roman. Ursula ist ein besonderes Kind. Immer wieder erhält sie die Möglichkeit, von vorne anzufangen, andere Entscheidungen zu treffen, Situationen einfach so oft und lange zu durchleben, bis sie erträglich sind. Die komplette Review findet ihr hier: http://bingereader.org/2014/04/29/lif...

If I have gotten anything from this book it is foremost a headache. The intricate layering of time and places and characters has got me seriously thinking about the outcome of the book. I am confused about the end chapter with Mrs Haddock but I think I am resolving it to fixed time places and I think I have reached a point where I am accepting what I think is the ending. My only real criticism for an otherwise outstanding read is that possibly the Hitler/Eva storyline is a little weak and perhaps went no where without consequence. There were also a few story lines I would have liked resolved however, with a book with this level intricacy (and length) I can understand leaving out a few storylines (I mean look at JK and Harry Potter: there was seven books and so many stories were left not wrapped up). As a whole, this book has soared to land in my top ten books, and I dont say this often but I think I will definitely re-read it soon in the future to see what other sneaky Easter eggs I missed the first time round. I will be recommending this book for years to come!!

Although I've given the book a four, 3.5 would be my preference. The concept is original, Ursula is unique, but there is a lack of cohesiveness that left me cold. I understand that Atkinson wanted to project a discordant narrative, and for me it was almost like watching old family slides with a projector aimed at the wall, but sometimes the slides blurred into short videos and then back to a b&w slide and so many pictures that sometimes I forgot who was who, or if I did recognize someone, I couldn't remember his or her significance or context. Perhaps the story needs more distillation or perhaps I need to find a quiet cottage with a solid fire, no distractions, and lots of coffee to get a better grasp of a promising story.

Armed with all the information of the universe can you change the future? How many times must life be lived to get it just perfect. If you change this one thing - will that thing then spin wildly out of control? And what indeed is "perfect"? Is it merely getting the sweetest kiss on your 16th birthday, or stopping a war all together? Is it the prevention of a murder, or circumnavigating a rape? Life after life after life. Juggling the knowledge, if it is indeed knowledge, and not just madness, and deciding what to do with it. Breathtaking book. Pick it up this minute.

it was… fine? some parts I found engrossing, others were a slog to get through. not sure how I feel about some of the general messaging surrounding the power of fate and the consequences that occur in life big build up for little emotional catharsis.. but that was likely intentional. why did the ending to this book feel like a back door pilot to whatever the sequel is about

*3.5 Kate Atkinson's writing style is so effortless that it is surprisingly easy to read one of her books within a couple of hours. However, even though the readability was at a 10 for me the plot line neither bored me nor excited me therefore not allowing me to mark it any higher than a 3.5. Although the ideas behind the plot were very intriguing and nothing like anything I had read before I felt no massive emotions throughout the novel. Overall, what I would say is this book also has commentary on many of women's issues from the 1910s to the 1940s, and however infuriating and angering some of this was to read, I, unfortunately, held no real attachments to the characters within this novel. I do however want to pick up another of Kate Atkinson's books to see if I could have that connection with maybe another plot line.

Kate Atkinson's writing style is so effortless that it is surprisingly easy to read one of her books within a couple of hours. However, even though the readability was at a 10 for me the plot line neither bored me nor excited me therefore not allowing me to mark it any higher than a 3.5. Although the ideas behind the plot were very intriguing and nothing like anything I had read before I felt no massive emotions throughout the novel. Overall, what I would say is this book also has commentary on many of women's issues from the 1910s to the 1940s, and however infuriating and angering some of this was to read, I, unfortunately, held no real attachments to the characters within this novel. I do however want to pick up another of Kate Atkinson's books to see if I could have that connection with maybe another plot line.

Well, this was much better than I thought it'd be. A great story with an amazingly developed plot, great characters, and even though the pace it's a bit slow the story is still engaging and sometimes even witty, never boring. In a nutshell, a lovely, moving and beautiful book. I enjoyed it a lot.

This was a riveting read from start to finish, and such a unique idea! I wasn't sure how the author was going to handle the perils of 're-writing history', but I was amazed at how it changed my experience of the book. No longer was the main character sacred, in terms of expecting them to survive, or at least to have a noble death. Now we knew she would die, and die again, and each time would be different. The way the author subtly unfolded the overarching stories was enhanced by this device, and I thought the character development of Ursula's loved ones was masterful. My only niggle was that the parts set in Germany were a little difficult for me to get through. I felt Hitler's presence was a little jarring, and pulled me out of the novel somewhat - possibly not what was intended. And I couldn't quite fathom the point of that whole plotline, except that it involves ideas that I think we've all pondered - What would I do if I lived in Nazi Germany? What would I do if I met Hitler? Would I change it if I could? Interesting, but it almost felt like another little novel stuffed inside this one, and I could have done without it. That aside, I still gave this 5 stars because I couldn't tear myself away, and it impacted me emotionally several times. I wholeheartedly recommend it.

Ursula Todd is born in the midst of a blizzard in 1910, not once, but many times, during the course of her life - living only to die and be born again, repeatedly, traveling many paths until she lives the life she was meant to live. Kate Atkinson's writing is superb, and lyrical enough that it carried me through to the end of this book. The plot, however, left me floundering for weeks, trying desperately to claw my way to the end of this depressing tale. While the premise - reincarnation and destiny - is interesting, the execution left me frustrated. The early chapters of the book are very short, as Ursula is born, dies, and is reborn again with rapid succession. With each successive life, she lives longer (in most cases) and is developed more and more as a character. The choppy format of the early chapters make it difficult to get attached to Ursula, but as she lives longer, it becomes more and more apparent that she lives a sad, depressing life. In addition, as a result of her continued rebirth, it's difficult to become attached to her, or to feel any real regret or sadness at her passing. Also strange is that, as often as you meet them throughout Ursula's life, her siblings never really become fully realized characters. As they move in and out of her life, these siblings play important roles in the paths she follows, yet they remain rather one-dimensional, as though Atkinson couldn't be bothered to spend the time on them. The book was also a bit too meandering in its plot. Lives that led no where interesting or important wandered on for far too long, while lives that seemed to be leading somewhere ended abruptly, only to pick up again to follow another pointless path. Perhaps this was Atkinson's exploration of the capricious nature of fate, but it made for some rough reading. About 100 pages of this novel could have been trimmed and it would only have improved the quality. Forty of those hundred pages should have been the last forty of the book - the last few "lives" lived by Ursula were confusing and unnecessary to the novel. All in all, the writing was exactly what you'd expect from Atkinson (wonderful), but the story itself was confusing, lifeless, and somewhat empty. A hundred fewer pages, a different ending, and more fully fleshed-out secondary characters would have resulted in a 4 star book for me. (I received a review copy from the publisher in exchange for a review.)

I have no words to describe it

Yet another book that I just couldn't get into. The title and synopsis intrigued me and I had high hopes but sadly I barely made it a quarter of the way in. It had plenty of wit to it but I feel like this book was largely overhyped. To me it seemed like a reimagined Groundhog Day and I just couldn't get into it.