Have you ever read a book that was so beautifully written, so emotionally gripping, and so painfully realistic that you were in tangible emotional pain after turning the final page?
Context:
Two men, born on the same day in very different circumstances, are fated to cross paths. One, William Kane, is the son of a wealthy banker. The other, Wladek, is born in a Polish forest and experiences the horrors of war first-hand before immigrating to America. Both men fight for a stake in the American dream--but at what cost?
My Thoughts:
Well, I'm an emotional wreck right now, so there's that.
I think I'm going to break it down by characters and themes, because there is a lot of ground to cover in this book. As always, plot destroying spoilers ahead.
Characters:
I started the book feeling exponentially more sympathetic to Wladek/Abel. Kid goes through some real shit. Frankly, I nearly had to put the book down when his sister was gang raped. The situations Abel finds himself in are horrifying, but treated with the care of an author who has done his history homework and has deep sympathies for injustices to human rights. I was rooting for Abel the whole time, desperate to see him succeed after being beaten, starved, imprisoned, and abused.
Kane on the other hand, I couldn't have cared less about. To me, he was a spoiled little boy, redeemable only by his sheer intelligence. I grew slightly more fond of him during the whole Henry Osborne gold digging fiasco with his mother, but mostly because I finally began to see him as a human instead of the Super Harvard Banking Prodigy.
And then Archer strikes an incredibly brilliant blow to the reader, and subtly yet definitively flips your sensibilities on their head. Abel's reaction against William in terms of Leroy's death was ridiculous. Knowing Abel's background, it's easy to see why he took the death so hard and needed someone to lash out at. However, letting his friend's death eat away at him and fuel an unfounded hatred for William made me start to dislike Abel. I never reached the point of truly disliking either character, but by the end of the novel I was much more firmly on William's side than Abel's. William only reacted to Abel the way he did because Abel came after him first. They became two petty children squabbling over pride and dollar signs, forgetting something they had both learned earlier in life: the importance of family and love.
Speaking of Harry Osborne, by the way, Archer is a master of secondary characters. When we are first introduced to Osborne, he seems like a one-off guy. He just waltzed in, destroyed William's mother's life, and left. For Archer to weave Osborne back into the story without it seeming forced or plot device-y was truly ingenious. He does this with many other minor characters, especially in the banks. The way they come and go feels realistic. There are certainly coincidences in these characters that link William and Abel, but they don't feel forced. I mean, even the part where Abel saves William on the battle field didn't feel horribly forced. It did feel a little deus ex machina, but it was written beautifully (yet also simply) enough that I was pretty okay with it.
The most obvious of those coincidental interactions (though by no means are these "secondary" characters) is Florentyna and Richard. I was truly impressed with how naturally Archer set up their meeting. He sets it up beforehand so the reader knows it's not weird for rich families to come into contact in New York; recall Abel waiting William's table before Abel comes into his money. This was also an era with fewer people. Anyway, it seemed plausible that Florentyna would be where she was and Richard where he was. Their romance felt true and honest. I will insert a small complaint that both father's enraged reaction to the marriage of their children and subsequent estrangement of those children felt a little too Rom & Jul. I totally understand William shutting Abel down (since Abel did refuse to hear him out years ago), but THESE ARE YOUR CHILDREN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT! Abel's only child and William's only son! I feel like even two people who hated each other as much as they did would begrudgingly attempt to reconcile based on how important these children were to them.
Overall though, I really loved the characters. Archer does a great job of having a realistically sized cast of characters without overloading the reader with names to remember (I'm looking at you, Robert Jordan). The reader can get into a rhythm of forgetting unimportant, one-off characters but remembering certain names (like Henry Osborne) when they're brought up later. That coupled with the authentic language and history of the novel makes the reader feel like they've taken a trip through time to the early to mid 1900s.
Themes, History, Writing Style, Etc
Speaking of the history, wow, does Archer know his stuff. He writes convincingly and knowledgeably about a HUGE span of time (1906-1967). So much history happens in that time!! I mean you've got two World Wars, the Great Depression, the Cold War, and all the wars and prisoner camps and stuff going on in Europe. It's amazing to watch Archer carefully place historic events in his characters lives (like William's father perishing on the Titanic), and again, it feels so realistic. It's like you're watching these historical events unfolding in real time as opposed to reading them from a history textbook or learning the facts cold. They feel relevant to the characters and to the reader.
I also have to throw out there that I love how simply Archer writes.
Side note: I keep feeling this need to compare him to Robert Jordan, and I think that's because though I love Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series, the things he failed at were performed masterfully by Archer.
Continuing on.
Archer has the ability to choose exactly the right words to deliver emotion, realism, and beautiful imagery in the simplest way possible. He never goes overboard with the dialogue and never dumps a sensory overload of scenery. He is always pushing the plot forward. You never feel like you're sitting in one place too long--though I will admit in some of the longer banking scenes, I kind of just wanted it to be over with. It came dangerously close to feeling like jargon-overload (a la "The Girl Who Played with Fire"), but never quite crossed that line. Archer knew when to back off.
Finally, I just want to discuss how much the ending broke my heart. I'm happy that William and Abel were able to more or less bury the hatchet, but it destroyed my soul that William died just before meeting his extended family. In those last few moments, you really saw William the way he used to be in his prime--after you were done being annoyed with him for being a spoiled child, but before he became a bitter old man consumed with hate and pride. It was done realistically, but also logically--remember my gripe from "Pictures of You," that I didn't get the why of things ending the way they did? Here, you got it. They both finally realized what was really important and shelved their hatred, but not before they broke each other entirely. I think it's good that they both "succeeded"--they destroyed each other's reputations and dreams (William's of retiring and his son taking over, Abel's of being the Ambassador to Poland) and realized how hollow those things felt--because they spent the years after Florentyna and Richard's elopement kindling hate instead of love. They (especially William, who I feel even worse for than Abel because it's not his damn fault this whole stupid feud started anyway--but perhaps it's justifiable because Abel deserves to live with that guilt?) missed out on watching their dearest children create a life together, and their grandchildren's formative years, and for what?
I was flying through the last 100 pages or so, not going to lie. The climax of the feud came suddenly and it came quickly. I was as astounded as Abel when he returned to accusations of bribery, and I think I gasped aloud when it was revealed that William's successor was the one who sold his 2% to Abel. Damn good story telling, Mr. Archer.
My Rating: 5/5
I truly loved this book. The few moments I pointed out that felt a little out of place weren't enough to detract from how much I enjoyed it. The characters are beautifully written and realistic; the history is seamlessly incorporated and thoroughly researched; the plot is exciting (Archer got me interested in bankers, for the love of God--that's impressive) and fast-paced...there's nothing to hate about this book. I recommend it highly.
