It was one of those books I could tell was objectively good but just wasn't my jam, mostly because I'm not a huge historical fiction fan. The characters had great chemistry, the stakes were consistently high, and the twist at the end was simply exquisite, but it took me until like 15-20% through the book to really get into it, which is a me issue. I probably would've dropped it if I hadn't bought a copy that was sitting in my Audible library taunting me. All that to say, if you read the description and you're interested and you actually do like historical fiction (unlike me), you'll probably love it.

"They will call you hysterical no matter how much dignity you have." This novel is historical fiction, but also so much of it was full of actual facts from a real case, so it felt familiar to me as someone who has read about the original case. I really liked that the killer was never named in this book, he has never deemed worthy of being treated as a person who has a name in the eyes of Pamela and Tina. I felt that the time setting was exemplified well with the constant sexism and misogyny present throughout the book, which I found to be very aggravating😡. It's hard to know exactly how realistic this is, but my gut says that it was quite realistic for 1978, and I think it was meant to enrage the contemporary reader. I think it was meant to show how there were expectations for Pamela despite her situation and devastating emotional state. There were judgments made about all of the characters: Ruth was a victim-- why, what did she do (victim blaming)? Pamela was a young female witness, could her perspective be trusted as evidence? It seems like the authorities were quick to dismiss or disparage her. The Defendant was male and well spoken and some thought good looking, so he was afforded many privileges and leeway despite the murder charges against him. I loved seeing Pamela's strength of character and sense of justice, her desire to help out her sorority sisters and do what was best for her dead best friend's memory. I found Ruth's point of view tough to read for a lot of pages, but it was nice to see her grow into herself and discover more about who she is and start her own life. I loved that this book shows the complex inner thoughts and feelings of both of our main two female characters, and especially Pamela who was also a victim in her own way. I liked that this focused more on characters we don't hear a ton about, neither an obsession with the perpetrator nor a glorification of angelic dead victims. One element that we see is how Tina has to behave and hold herself a certain way when she is working on getting her therapy education and is doing a demonstration in a room full of men. Then we see how Pamela must manage the emotions of everyone but especially the men around her instead of being the one taken care of. This really hit home for me and was quite impactful to read. The reporter Carl sucked, Ruth's life was pretty depressing. I felt that when the time jumped forward to more current years with Pamela that this was a relatively weaker plot line. I saw some complaints in the reviews that this book mixed true facts with fiction and that the whole thing would have worked better had it been all fiction, so as to not dismiss any true actual real life victims, but also to be something new and different for people who are already know the case. Some reviewers also felt that the time jumps and perspective jumps were too confusing. I also saw some commentary about how though the author discusses all of the media glorifying or constantly rehashing the real life killer, her critique was that this is not good, and her book focuses more on the victims over the killer. However some point out that essentially this book is still more media that is contributing to the overall oeuvre on this killer? 🤔 I like this quote that I read in a review: "Because the story truly is about the young women here who are the bright ones, finally recognizing their own worth and intelligence. But it's also a story about male incompetence; men wanting The Defendant to be smart to mask their own mistakes... Or to use as a stepping stone to his own fame and glory."

This book is long, but I thought that the pacing and plotting were done well, just as I would start to tire of the current depressing event, something new would happen and keep me engaged. I found the book to be quite descriptive and atmospheric, I could see how good the times were at the start when there was rain and prosperity and I got a good sense of the town and Elsa's biological family. Then the absolutely vivid descriptions of the dust storms and how life was on the farm during the drought, with centipedes on the walls and animals being full of dirt was visceral and evocative. Then later descriptions of the camp and the absolute level of poverty the family was stuck living in and the cycles that they couldn't break out of-- intense. I was less enamored with the characters. Though I could see how they did have growth over the course of the book, I just found Loreda's constant anger and injustice to be very grating, and Elsa's constant self -loathing and constant comments of "I'm not brave or pretty" to be oblivious and obnoxious. Maybe had the book been structured to have Elsa's journal entries throughout could have made her character arc more poignant? Rafe was obviously an idiot, I was honestly surprised he lasted as long as he did. Jack was obviously the love interest, but he didn't get enough page time. I understand that one of the messages of the book is that the poor migrants were good honest hard-working people who just needed a chance to succeed, but to absolutely vilify and make evil caricatures out of all of the local California people was a bit heavy-handed. I think a little bit of realistic fear of the other human beings who are also at the end of their rope and suffering and struggling, while all are in an unfamiliar location with minimal to no safety around them-- this could have upped the stakes or tension even further. (like neither Elsa nor Loreda ever were scared for their physical safety, or worried about theft of their meager material belongings??) I was surprised to have the latter chunk of the book turn to workers rights and strikes, it makes sense I just wasn't realizing the book was heading that way. I admit to not seeing the ending coming, and instead of being a dramatic tearjerker for me honestly this just knocked off a star from my rating and made me mad. Overall I think the vivid time and place and survival feelings will stay with me but not these specific characters. (Julia Whelan narration was great though!) When reading through some reviews, I saw a couple of comments that discussed how the characters felt a bit flat or were archetypes and I agree with that. I have not read The Grapes of Wrath but apparently the plot is extremely similar? I saw other reviews that talk about how this is just a series of never-ending trials and tribulations = exhausting. The author was emotionally manipulative, which mostly didn't affect me, I had dry eyes throughout this book. I also saw some critiques that this novel had too much 'telling' and not enough 'showing', which I am not really sure how I feel about that. At the end of my audiobook there was also an interview with the author, who stated 'I needed a way for my characters have interpersonal conflict so I just decided to make Loreda a teenage girl to fight with her mother.' Well I felt like Loreda was just a whiny bitch throughout the whole thing, I wanted to smack her.