To read, or not to read - that had been the question after seeing a lot of mixed reviews about this book. But I decided it was time and it did not leave me disappointed. Hamnet turned out to become one of the books I enjoyed reading most this year.

As for the writing, I loved O'Farrell's hyper-descriptive style. Yes, a lot of sentences are chock-full of details and yes, everything is described in a multitude of ways. Sometimes it feels like reading through a microscope. I can understand not everyone is a fan of this, but I enjoyed it from start to finish.

As for the dual timeline (the build-up to the tragedy and the roots of the present), it makes the grief and loss hit all the harder. It really adds to the story and while reading about the past you wonder what will be happening next in the present and vice versa.

As for the characters, I want to mention Agnes and "the Latin tutor". FMC Agnes is very likeable. She is a highly skilled herbalist with a deep connection with nature; a fierce protector of her family and does not care much about toeing the line. But, sometimes it feels like O'Farrell took the liberty of giving Agnes a 21st century attitude. She is often too modern and feels anachronistic at times. It pulls you out of the 16th century and makes Agnes a little too perfect. But on the other hand, it makes her relatable and gives her a voice. This isn't a history lesson after all, so O'Farrell taking this creative liberty is fine by me. Wasn't Shakespeare 'guilty' of anachronisms himself in his plays? A nice nod to that and to the emotional and theatrical aspect getting priority over historical facts. MMC "Latin tutor" goes by many descriptions (husband, father, tutor, ...). O'Farrell not once mentions him by name. The reasoning behind this seems to be that Agnes and the children should be in the spotlight, without Shakespeare overshadowing their story. In my opinion, the story wouldn't have changed all that much if a William now and then had been used.

Highly recommended for readers who enjoy hyper-descriptive writing, who love reading historical fiction, but won't get bothered by artistic liberties taken by the author.

Een interessant boek voor iedereen die meer wil weten over rugpijn, de oorzaken ervan en mogelijke oplossingen. De lay-out is erg aantrekkelijk. Geen doorlopende en droge tekst, maar een afwisseling van theorie, weetjes en getuigenissen. Verbeeck vergelijkt de rug/nek met een emmer, waarbij verschillende triggers een glaasje water toevoegen tot de emmer overloopt. Het wordt zo ook visueel voorgesteld in het boek, waardoor het makkelijk te volgen en tastbaar wordt. Je gebruikt zelf de hoofdstukken die voor jou van toepassing zijn en door eerst een checklist af te gaan leer je ook welke van toepassing zijn. Het enige puntje van kritiek is dat het boek soms aanvoelt als reclame voor de chiropraxie. Op zich niks mis mee, maar de achterflap geeft andere verwachtingen.

Invisible Women promises to change the way the reader looks at the world. Criado-Perez has delivered on this promise. We are all (un)aware, in varying levels, that we live in a world created by and for men. But the extent of it and its consequences are really earthshattering. Having all this information packed together on 400ish pages really confronts the reader. It is an eye-opener that evokes a whole range of emotions (anger, disbelief, desperation, hope, empowerment, ...). Criado-Perez has done a great amount of research and each chapter is chockfull of information, numbers and the mention of the lack of both on the subject. It sometimes feels like an information overload, but mostly the author finds a way to keep the reader engaged. The book got published in 2019 and the data used often is much older, so I wonder how the data has evolved in the past years. The book could probably use an update soon.