Review: After Anne

There's not much worse for a reader than picking up a book you end up not liking. I’ve gotten way better over the years of not finishing books that aren’t thrilling me and actually DNF-ed one the same week I was reading After Anne. Perhaps that’s part of why I kept reading Logan Steiner’s book. To put down two books in a row? Ugh, no fun. The other part was I just kept hoping the book would get better. And, I admit, I wanted to see how Steiner would end the novel. All in all - I should not have let my love of Anne of Green Gables and Lucy Maud Montgomery blind me and I shouldn’t have read this book.

Here’s the description:

As a young woman, Maud had dreams bigger than the whole of Prince Edward Island. Her exuberant spirit had always drawn frowns from her grandmother and their neighbors, but she knew she was meant to create, to capture and share the way she saw the world. And the young girl in Maud’s mind became more and more persistent: Here is my story, she said. Here is how my name should be spelled—Anne with an “e.”
But the day Maud writes the first lines of Anne of Green Gables, she gets a visit from the handsome new minister in town, and soon faces a decision: forge her own path as a spinster authoress, or live as a rural minister’s wife, an existence she once likened to “a respectable form of slavery.” The choice she makes alters the course of her life.
With a husband whose religious mania threatens their health and happiness at every turn, the secret darkness that Maud herself holds inside threatens to break through the persona she shows to the world, driving an ever-widening wedge between her public face and private self, and putting her on a path towards a heartbreaking end.

It shouldn’t be a surprise that I love Anne of Green Gables. It’s kind of cliche for a Canadian reader to adore the series but adore it I do. When I was asked to review a fictionalized story about the author and it was compared to Jennifer Robson's novels, well, how was a girl to say no? First of all, Steiner does not even come close to Robson. Second, I think this book was just too fictionalized. I know I wasn’t reading a real biography but something rubbed me very much the wrong way when I learned a large chunk of the book (which seemed to be pulled from/inspired by real journal entries from Maud) was totally and completely made up.

I’ve tried to really think about why I was uncomfortable with the way Steiner approached Maud’s life. There was a tiny part of me that didn’t love that it was an American author taking on a Canadian legend. I figured that was a little bit…ridiculous, not to mention unfair, so I worked to set that aside. But I really didn’t like how she opened the novel - with Maud’s son being called to her house after her death and him realizing it was very likely a suicide. Now, I knew that Maud had had her challenges with her own mental health, as did her husband. But I didn’t know her granddaughter had stated in 2008 that Maud had died by suicide. Though that's still up for some debate - no autopsy was performed and other family members seem to think it could have been an accident. Was I just assuming that this book would be as light and lovely as most of Maud’s own books were? Probably. Was I opposed to having a less than ideal truth be exposed about one of my favourite authors? No, not necessarily. I really do appreciate the honesty as we, as a society, need to be less focused on putting on a sunshine and rainbows front when in public. I’m glad to have learned more but I’ve already gone looking for more accurate resources than this novel because I don’t trust the fictionalized version. I must admit that maybe I was a little sad to have to read that Maud was driven to end her own life - I don’t wish that upon anyone, and especially not the creator of one of the most beloved heroines in literature.

The subject matter should have been a win for me and, as I’ve tried to outline above, it was not. So how about the writing? Well. That wasn’t great either. The novel takes place over a number of years and Steiner did not write in a linear manner. I actually have no idea how many time periods were mentioned and I did not enjoy all the time jumping. It was far too confusing and not done well.

Another reviewer on Goodreads mentioned that one should just read Maud’s own journals instead of this novel and I would have to agree. I think Logan Steiner’s heart was in the right place - at least I hope it was - but After Anne was a major miss for me. Hopefully her next novel is better but I’m not sure if I’ll be picking it up.

*An egalley of this novel was provided by the publisher, William Morrow (HarperCollins) via NetGalley in exchange for review consideration. All opinions are honest and my own.*