I don’t think I can recommend this book but I want to because I think it would spark some very interesting conversation. Unfortunately… it isn’t actually very good. For one, the writing is not very strong. You could play a drinking game with how often the words “bet” and “facts” are used, a lame (repetitive and boring) attempt to remind you that the characters are black. For another: it’s kind of shallow?

I think I’m inflating the rating. It’s more like 2.5 stars. This is a hard one for me. It’s a fantasy. Like romance-novel-level fantasy. It even has a HEA. On the one hand, I like stories where adult relationships (especially ones that involve actual sexual activity instead of the weird chaste crap you often get with YA and classics/older books) are complex. I also like books that allow their characters to seek out and claim happiness despite what others may think. And in this books, the consequences are fairly low stakes. It’s all about reputation. There might be some emotional damage but it’s the type that a well-adjusted adult should be able to cope with, especially since, as mentioned, there’s very little other damage. No one’s life is ruined. They’re just forced to face their expectations and, more importantly, their assumptions about what others owe them. So far, that all sounds pretty good right? So why three stars?

I don’t like when authors use the art world to add depth to their work. It’s become a trope. No. It’s a fucking gimmick. I get excited every time I see it. I like art. I like art theory. I like thinking about the interplay of capitalism and creative pursuits. But the more I see it come up in literature, the less I think anyone else is actually doing anything with it. They bring it up. They start a conversation. And then they do nothing with it. I’m starting to think it’s because any published author is automatically complicit in the morally questionable aspects of the art world. The privilege their access to it affords them. And THAT is vaguely explored in this book. There are two lines that stood out to me in the book:

P.151/278 “Was this all it took? To just be around the right people and they threw money at you?”

P199/278 “You’d be amazed how many things become simple once you throw enough money at them.”

And thats the fantasy of the book. Even more than the romance element. Except it isn’t a fantasy. That is how the art world works. You get in, and then magically the things that plagued your life - the difficulties of basic survival - are suddenly gone. For you at least. For the artist who gets a museum show. For the writer who gets a book deal. But not for the thousands of others who dream of those miracles for themselves. Who will never get it. But it’s a fantasy that sometimes happens in the real world. That makes it different. It is, for a small number of people, attainable.

So whatever this book thinks it might have to say about grief and romance and love…. It doesn’t really say anything. It also doesn’t say anything about privilege. It allows it’s characters to be happy, and ignores that such happiness isn’t available to everyone. And so, in the end, despite some moments that almost felt profound, it is incredibly shallow.

But I agree with the basic argument made. People deserve to be happy. They deserve to make the choices that make them happy, even if it might cause pain (not physical) to someone else. At least I think I do. That’s where I could see interesting conversations happening around this book. The characters make controversial decisions. They expect others to accept and adapt to those decisions. I think they are right to do so, but I could see where someone else would they are being selfish and inconsiderate. That could be an interesting conversation. And it’s an easy enough read. It’s just not a GOOD read. That’s where I find myself unsure how to rate it, or if I am willing to recommend it. If you like romance novels but are wanting something a little more literary, I guess it’s a good option. That’s the best I can say for it.