Trigger Warnings: parental figure/guardian abuse, confinement, period-typical racism. Review contains minor spoilers.
Shaun David Hutchinson's (We Are the Ants, The Apocalypse of Elena Mendoza) newest young adult novel Before We Disappear is a historical fantasy set in 1909 during the Seattle Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition. It follows two magicians' assistants: Jack, an orphan adopted by world-renowned illusionist the Enchantress, and Wilhelm, who is kept captive and forced to use his own magical talents by magician and thief Teddy Barnes. The two meet when their respective magicians become rivals for the stage at the Exposition, and they grow closer as Jack learns about Wilhelm's secret ability and the truth of his relationship with Teddy.
What really doomed me to finding this book mediocre were my expectations for Hutchinson. While I had never read his novels before, We Are the Ants has been on my to-read list for a long time, and from many reviewers and friends I had heard that Hutchinson's writing and storytelling was something extraordinary. It was why I was so excited to pick this book up this month, and why I ended up being so disappointed by the novel's mediocrity.
Mediocrity is truly the best word for it. The book is fine, I wish I had something stronger to feel about it, whether positive or negative, but there isn't much else there. While the setting and time period are unique and fun, the romance and characters are pretty typical across modern YA, and the writing style is nothing terribly different.
Guardian abuse is a big part of Before We Disappear, making much graver the otherwise light historical romp. Through the side characters Teddy Barnes and The Enchantress, Hutchinson depicts two different faces of guardian abuse. From a literary standpoint, I think the two dimensional villainy of both characters, but especially Teddy, ultimately takes away from the gravity of Hutchinson's depictions. The Enchantress' abuse towards Jack is narcissistic in nature, she is too self-obsessed to truly care for Jack or his adopted sister Lucia, and thus she abandons them until she needs them for her own gain. On the surface she appears to be a much better guardian than Teddy, but her neglect of Jack and Lucia is still substantial. Teddy, on the other hand, is abusive in a much more obvious way. He kidnapped Wilhelm as a child, chains Wilhelm to his bed, keeps him under close surveillance, and aggressively exploits Wilhelm's powers. However, I think that the flat characterization of both of these villains undermines the impact of their abuse towards our main characters. The Enchantress' self-obsession is so over the top that it becomes a cliche, and Teddy manages to be such a horrible person it is almost comical. These characterizations are lazy and unsubtle, and, worst of all, they come across as Hutchinson talking down to his audience, suggesting that the reader might not understand that these characters are abusive if they aren't evil in the most obvious senses of the word.
A common thread along Hutchinson's work is LGBT+ themes and characters. Before We Disappear is no exception. The central plot is focused on the romance between Wilhelm and Jack, with an additional romance between two female characters in the world of the Exposition. Magic throughout the novel is also used as a loose metaphor for queerness, which works in some cases and gets messy in others. In particular, Wilhelm's magic is paralleled with queerness, especially in the character of the abuse he faces at the hands of Teddy. Wilhelm is confined and exploited by his bigoted abuser for his magical ability, and it's only after meeting Jack that his magic is celebrated, and he finds a place where he can fit in. While in Wilhelm's case this metaphor is effective and clear, it starts to get muddled when the other magical –– or rather, illusionist –– characters are factored in. Is a magician like The Enchantress, in the context of the metaphor, utilizing queer aesthetics to succeed? Is she exploiting Jack's queerness/illusionist ability in the same way Teddy is exploiting Wilhelm's? If this is the case, why is Wilhelm the only true magical character in the novel? There is always the possibility that I'm reading too far into this, but I believe Hutchinson has something to say about queerness in this novel, and I wish it could have been said in a clearer way.
To conclude, I want to mention Hutchinson's author's note in the back of the book about the time period of the novel and the presence of queer characters in the early 20th century. Hutchinson addresses the somewhat historically inaccurate acceptance of queerness and queer characters throughout the novel, noting that his goal with this book was to explore queer joy in a setting and time that interested him. He also emphasized the fact that LGBT+ people have been around for much longer than modern misconceptions might assume. As both a queer person and a student of history, I admired Hutchinson for this acknowledgment of the ahistorical elements of his novel, and his insistence upon centering his story around queer joy despite the realities of queer existence at the time (which were, by the way, not as terrible as we might assume now). As a reader, I found this suited well the overall light tone of the novel, and allowed me to be invested in the queer relationships and the external factors in the narrative keeping them apart without the insertion of the larger, overarching factor of homophobia. Hutchinson's prioritization of diversity and joyful storylines is commendable, especially in the context of the ongoing discussion in the literary community about diversity in fantasy novels, particularly ones based on or in earlier time periods. While there is a substantial number of authors that don’t include diverse characters in their fantasy novels under the guise of “realism” (despite their stories being full of magic), Hutchinson makes purposeful steps in Before We Disappear to resist this narrative.
I would recommend Before We Disappear for fans of LGBT+ YA looking for a novel with a unique and interesting historical setting. Despite its dark themes, it has a very fun story that centers queer happiness and celebrates diversity. For those looking for a complex, deeper read, or something driven by unique and intricate characters, I might skip this one.
Comments