Laura's Shadow (Doors to the Past) Allison Pittman. 2022. [August] 256 pages. [Source: Review copy]
First sentence from the prologue: The schoolhouse was nothing more than a shack, with sunlight and drifting snow blowing through the spaces between the thin, rough-cut slats.
Laura's Shadow, the newest novel by Allison Pittman, has dual timelines: 1891 and 1974. One story (the 1974 story) focuses on Trixie Gowan, a young cartoonist (and an ad writer), her cartoon "Lost Laura" may be on its way to becoming syndicated. It is about a "prairie girl" living in the big city. The other story focuses on Mariah Patterson, a devoted sister who's about to face a major personal challenge when she gives her heart (and body) away to the super dashing yet elusive "Cap" Garland.
The premise of this one is that Trixie's great grandmother (the 104 still very much living great-grandmother, GG Mariah) was one of Miss Ingalls' pupils. She was renamed Martha in These Happy Golden Years. And Mariah did NOT like how Laura Ingalls Wilder wrote about her teaching days. For as long as Trixie can remember, Mariah has hated Laura Ingalls Wilder. But is there more to this story than just how the pupils were depicted? Now that Mariah is dying (in 1974), she's trusting one woman--her great-grand-daughter, Trixie, with her closely held secret... She's not ready to reveal all to her daughter-in-law, Eugenie, or her granddaughter, Alma, just her great-grand-daughter, Trixie.
Dual timelines, dual narrators, alternating chapters. Usually I hate, hate, hate this technique. But in this case, it worked for me. I actually was enjoying BOTH timelines equally.
I loved Trixie going back to her family home in De Smet, South Dakota, and spending time with her great-grandmother. I loved Trixie's romance. I loved the family dynamics. I almost wanted *more* of the family dynamics. We *really* get to know two of the four generations. But I would have loved to see more of how Eugenie and Alma fit into the family's legacy. Another thing I loved was all the culture/music references. Pittman does a great job with bringing to life the 1974 setting. I especially love that the book ends with the whole family (minus one) watching the premiere of the television show Little House on the Prairie.
I was enjoying Mariah's narrative...until I wasn't. I would say for 80% of her chapters I was like THIS IS SO GOOD. Mariah is 100% fictional. If there was a Charles and Martha (I can't remember if These Happy Golden Years gave them a last name) in history, they faded out of the records quickly. Perhaps they were composite characters. Maybe first and last names were changed. Because they are record-less, Pittman has taken full liberties with their characters, their stories. "Cap" Garland (Oscar Garland) is NOT fictional. He was a real person. There are real facts and details actually known about him. (Including HOW and WHEN he died.)
For better or worse, I made the mistake of looking up Oscar "Cap" Garland about halfway through the book. It changed how I experienced the rest of the novel. On the one hand, I think it prepared me. On the other hand, I knew what was coming. For the faint of heart, I do recommend knowing before you get to the END.
Side tangent: This is definitely published by a Christian publisher--Barbour--BUT I feel that 99.99% of this one could have been published by a secular publisher for a secular audience. Other than the fact that the 1891 characters go to church (mostly) every week, there's not one iota of this one that makes it Christian. This could be seen by readers as GREAT news or horrible news. On the one hand, there are hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of readers who wouldn't touch Christian fiction with a ten foot pole. They may have an interest in the subject--Laura Ingalls Wilder's friends and family (we see Pa Ingalls playing his fiddle at a couple of community events), but no interest in reading a "Christian" book...ever. On the other hand, Christian readers who actually read Christian fiction on purpose and know that Barbour is a Christian publisher who specializes in feel-good Christian romances, may be confused by the lack of Christian content or any actual moral. (Again the lack of a moral may be hooray!!! for some readers.)
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
A
L
E
R
T
SPOILERS PAST THIS POINT
I hated the liberties Pittman took with "Cap" Garland. She may have been in love with him since she was a girl reading the "yellow" books (aka Little House books), but that isn't a good enough excuse, in my humble opinion, to make him an immoral cad. It was like she was using her love for him as an excuse to write a "steamy" scene in a historical book.
Quote from "The Wanderer"
Oh well, I'm the type of guy
Who will never settle down
Where pretty girls are
Well, you know that I'm around
I kiss 'em and I love 'em
'Cause to me they're all the same
I hug 'em and I squeeze 'em
They don't even know my name
Quote from "Baby Don't Get Hooked On Me"
Girl, don't let your life
Get tangled up with mine
'Cause I'll just leave you
I can't take no clingin' vine
Baby, baby, don't get hooked on me
Baby, baby don't get hooked on me
'Cause I'll just use you then I'll set you free
Baby, baby don't get hooked on me
Quote from "Angel of the Morning"
There'll be no strings to bind your hands
Not if my love can't bind your heart.
And there's no need to take a stand
For it was I who chose to start.
I think even with the turn that this one took--and it was a choice, to be sure--I think with a couple hundred more pages it could have been redeemed. Cap Garland may have met his end--dramatically and 100% true to life, but, it wouldn't have had to be end for Mariah's story. Again, a choice on Pittman's part. Personally, I would have loved to see Mariah's story REDEEMED by a second chance and a discovery of what love actually means (as opposed to lusty-lust and puppy love). We've had plenty of stories of women finding love again after disappointment or heartbreak or whatnot.
© Becky Laney of
Operation Actually Read Bible
