May book - The Wives of Los Alamos

I have now finished reading the book, which I was grateful to receive, but didn't enjoy. The use of the collective accounts meant that it was less involving - interesting as social history, but it didn't draw me in, as an individual's account might have done.
I wondered when I began reading the book if the format might change as the story progressed. When it didn't, I found myself skipping a lot of the accounts of daily life as they were often no more than lists and remained impersonal even though names were attached to some 'individuals'.
Obviously a great deal of research went into it, but I felt that if it had focused on a few people only, it could have been harder hitting. Was the author's device a means of avoiding such character development?

Well spotted! I remember reading that but forgotten that the King was on the throne then.

Incase anyone wonders what I was on about in my previous message - it was a response to someone who noted they toasted the queen but in fact we had a king during the war.

I have finished the book. I found it easy to read but as others have mentioned the style didn't particularly appeal. However, I did think it was very effective for the subject matter and left me with a better understanding of what it must have been like for the wives than if it had been based on a small group of wives. I did feel there was a sort of rhythm to the writing.

Did Tara Shea talk to women who had been there or did she base her novel on written accounts?

I have now finished the book and like my namesake milli I found the collective accounts frustrating. I wanted to know more about the poor woman who had had a still birth and then given birth successfully, more about the break up of a marriage, more about the sad families whose brothers were "repatriated" as they say these days. etc.etc.

As I said in my previous message, my overall feeling was one of depression, and not because it was the Atom Bomb - oddly enough I began to feel happier toward the end of the book when all that became clear. I think it was the style, although as EatEndGranny said it was easy to read.
I hope the author is not hurt by these negative remarks.

I really enjoyed this book - unlike anything I have read before. I would like to ask the author what inspired to use this unusual style and was it easier or harder to write this way than regular prose?

I found this a very interesting and entertaining read. I knew virtually nothing about the 2 years the USA invested in this science project in the desert. I found the Los Alamos visitor's web site and discovered a short video filmed in the 50's of the town, and saw the bath tub houses, water tower and apartments that the families got to know so well.
Like Lowslung has previously asked, I would be interested to know if the author found and interviewed many of the families that lived there in the last years of the war.

I enjoyed reading the book, the style of writing made it compulsive - I found myself reading quickly and with very few pauses. The third person plural did however make it less personal and emotional, I would like to ask the author if this was a desired effect. Did the inspiration for the writing style come from any other literary source?

That should say first person plural, not third !

I've recommended this very different book to my Book Group so will be interested to hear their views when we meet in June.

I found it quite refreshing, atmospheric and very descriptive. I can't help but feel that the author must have had some family member with experience or has done intense research to enable her to find the believable voice which she has so cleverly done in this book. Can she tell us if that was the case?

Well I am still plodding my way through this book and feeling very virtuous with a new Stephen King and a half-read Dean Koontz lurking on my bookshelves. The book is oddly fascinating and at last it seems something is happening in that there has been a trial explosion, but it is not gripping enough to leave my bedside table as a "must see what happens next" book. A lot of thought and research has obviously gone into this account but I am left wondering why it was written. Was the author one of these wives? Is writing it in some way cathartic? And why do the military still have checkpoints on the roads around Los Alamos?

I received my copy - thank you. I am finding this quite a difficult read - definately out of my comfort zone - mind you - I always appreciate the opportunity to read something that I would not otherwise select. A very distinct style of writing - a bit frustrating as I feel that I never get the chance to really get to know any individual character. I will press on and come back later when I have finished the book.

Thank you for my copy of The Wives of Los Alamos. Like numberplease I am also grateful to Gransnet for introducing me to books and authors that I may not have chosen for myself.

When I first started reading The Wives of Los Alamos I found the style of writing strange but very quickly adapted to it. Because each chapter deals with a particular theme and then within that theme each section has a separate identity, I felt that it would have been very interesting to write it.

I would like to ask TaraShea how she tackled this style of writing? For example ... having established the initial planning for the book, were you able to jot down each memory and anecdote separately as the ideas came to you then jiggle them about until they seemed in the right place, adding more as it came into your head?

Also - how much of the book was based on previous interviews with the real wives of Los Alamos? Very interesting to read on this thread that morag89 could relate to the military family aspect of the book. I shall certainly be looking out for the books mentioned in your acknowledgements.

All the best with your PhD, TaraShea. It's hard work but very rewarding.

Thank you very much for my copy of The Wives of Los Alamos, which I look forward to reading.

I loved this book, and found it very thought-provoking. The use of the first person plural was so effective in summoning up the actions and thoughts of a diverse group of people, I'm surprised I haven't come across this style before. I also loved the Linotype Garamond Three!

My question for the author would be:
Near the end of the book, you quote Robert Oppenheimer ending his speech to the Los Alamos community by saying "A day may come when men and women will curse the name Los Alamos". Do you have a personal view on this? Do you feel that finishing "the project" was immoral or a necessary evil?

Thank you again, Ms Nesbit and Gransnet, for an engrossing read.

I read the first chapter and assumed that the use of the first person plural would end there - but looked on and was amazed to see it continued right through. I didn't think I would last through it, but I did and loved it!! Well done Nesbit: not an easy thing to do I am sure. I look forward to your next book. What are you working on now - apart from the little matter of a PhD?!?

Thank you for my copy. I am half way through. I didn't think I would like the style of writing but am glad to say I am enjoying it and its not disjointed as I thought it would be. Confess not a subject I knew much about before.

I have just finished reading this novel and loved the size of the book and the way it was set out in short chapters and clearly cut paragraphs.
As in common with some of the reviewers here, I found the style unique and not always easy to comprehend the meaning. However, it did suit the theme well.
I am intrigued to learn what prompted the author to adopt the theme and the style. Will this be replicated in her next book.
Thank you for introducing me to an unknown theme and such a distinctive written style.

Thanks for my copy. It looks really good and I have just started reading it.

Thank you for my copy. I haven't finished it yet but like others have not read a book with a similar style. I'd like to know how the novelist actually wrote it, by dealing with one character at a time? I shall tell the Book Group I belong to about it.

This is the first book I have read written in first person plural and I don't quite know what to think of it. I haven't finished the whole book yet but I'm finding it hard to bond with or even remember anyone in the book. I understand that the way it is written gives more emphasis on how bewildered everyone was but still it didn't involve me with the characters. I did find the story very interesting but more in the shape of a history memoir than a fiction story. Like most people here I want to ask the author why first person plural? I wanted to know each individual story of the woman and also the locals who came to clean and care for children.

I found the book very compelling, perhaps because of the Greek chorus-like effect of the second person plural narration. I do agree with others here that it depersonalises the women to some extent. We are so used to stories that single out a few individuals to identify with that when an author refuses to do this, it's easy to feel distanced. I occasionally found myself trying to find characters who stood out in the group, and some did, but the author wasn't writing that sort of book.
It roasted feeling self-consciously like a creative writing exercise, but it was brilliantly sustained and the material was fascinating, so overall I really enjoyed reading it and I'm grateful to Gransnet for giving me the chance.
Also very impressed that this forum can provide people who know about Los Alamos! What a clever lot.
I'd love to know whether Tara Shea Nesbit had to stop herself reverting to more individualised story-telling as she was going along.

Sorry! Typo! It should say 'it risked' above, not 'it roasted'!

I also really enjoyed the book - but the style was not new to me. I ready The Buddha In The Attic last year and it's written in the same style (as is the other book by that author whose name currently escapes me)

I would like to ask the author if she had read these (or other books using the style) and also I would like to know more about what happened to these families after the book ends so where can i find out more?

A Great read, very thought -provoking. I found the writing style a bit difficult to get to grips with initially but got used to it as the book went on.
There were quite a lot of things that I didn't know before in here, about the families etc, must have been a difficult time for them.

I have never read a book written in this style before and found it harder to get 'in to' than I am used to but it was well worth the effort.

Thanks for my book! I was looking forward to this as it seemed totally different and I love variety! I'm still not quite sure what I thought of it though. I thought the writing style was really interesting, and it was consistently well maintained throughout the book. It was a good way to get across alot of detail about the finer points of life from many different perspectives and an interesting way to read something quite informative. However I felt that because I didn't really engage with specific characters it lacked the grip that a normal novel would have and so I just sort of drifted along dipping into it every now and then and didn't find it as satisfying to read. But then again it was more readable than many other 'factual' type books. The jurys still out on this one!