I'm putting my hands in the shape of a hand heart, but because this is a podcast, you can't see it, but you can probably imagine it. Woosh. That's not yet. Yeah. The whoosh comes later.

Hello listeners and welcome to this week's episode of Books I Make My Husband Read. I'm your host Kristy, and this is my co-host, my husband Jon, whom I make read all the books. Hello, hello, hello, hello. This week we're going to be discussing The Frozen River by Ariel Lawhon. It is a historical fiction novel set in 1789 in Hallowell, Maine. The story follows the life of Martha Ballard, a 54-year-old midwife who, for all intents and purposes, is an unlikely heroine.

But the story is also full of mystery, scandal, and a glimpse of life into the 1700s when women were expected to be seen but not heard. But before we get into that, we once again want to thank our listeners for giving this new podcast a try.

Yes, absolutely. We keep getting really great feedback and support from all of you. So thank you to everyone who keeps emailing us and DM'ing us on our Instagram account and just letting us know what you think. It really helps us shape this podcast as we continue to improve. And we've gotten some new reviews lately too, which has been awesome. One of those reads, “this podcast is like catching up with friends on our latest read. So fun. Can't wait for the upcoming episode.” Big heart emoji. Yes.

For reals, as Kristy mentioned last week, based on some other listener feedback, we wanted to share the upcoming books at the beginning of each episode and on our Instagram page. So the next book we're gonna be doing is Just for the Summer by Abby Jimenez. The next book is called The Measure by Nikki Erlick.

We were on the train on our way to New York City and I was sitting next to you while you were listening to the (Just for the Summer) book. And you were laughing a lot. I was. It is quite funny. The banter is hilarious I'm sure all of our lady listeners will be interested in hearing your opinion on our first rom-com, winky winky. Yes, no pressure there whatsoever And all the gentlemen also want to hear your thoughts on it too, because let's be real, there are those out there who love it. They just want to pretend that they don't. Very true. It's like the Eras Tour. It's like once you watch it you get it. Yeah.

Also, wherever you're currently listening to this, whether that's Apple Podcasts, or Spotify or Amazon music, wherever you are currently, please give us a follow and rate us or leave us a review. Whatever your little heart desires. It helps us get discovered and we just, love reading what everyone thinks of the show so far.

You can also send us an email at booksimakemyhusbandread@gmail.com with any thoughts. And if you happen to include your mailing address in said email, we'll send you a little swag. We sent some swag out last week and someone got it this weekend and they said that it was pretty awesome. So everybody wants it. Let's be real. So get your hands on some swag and don't forget to follow us on Instagram too.

All right, so let's transition to this week's episode of...fact -checking ourselves! This is turning out to be kind of a fun little segment for us. I actually have an insertion point for this. While it's not exactly a fact check. I would like to apologize to our listeners for the poor audio quality of our previous episode. It was really faint and quiet and we, that was some of the feedback we got and just want you to know that like your time is really valuable, and I wouldn't want to listen to something that isn't of good audio quality. So this is our promise to you that moving forward, that shall not happen again.

Even though I didn't have any facts I needed to check, we did get a listener question that I wanted to answer. Right on. What's that? So we had someone email us and they asked if there is ever a time when I don't finish a book. DNF as they call it. That's a great question. No, I read every single book. The end. That's not true. I think that you are going to buy books that are not always going to make sense in your life to read at a certain moment in time. So for instance, there is a book that is on my nightstand right now. I am probably a quarter of the way done with it and I'm really interested in reading it, but for whatever reason, it just is not captivating me right now. And I'm just letting it sit there until I'm ready to pick it up again and I'll probably start from the beginning and that'll be okay. I would say that, for me to not finish a book is rare. I don't have a lot that I have just given up on, but I also have a completion problem, so that's a me and not a person problem Got to finish what you start. Yeah, so sorry for that ambiguous answer listener, but that is the, that's the truth. That's the facts. Nothing but the facts.

Should we get on with the show? Let's do it. Ta -da -da. As a reminder, this episode will contain spoilers from this book, but not just yet. We will be sure to give you enough time to exit said podcast without any spoilers, and we'll give you a heads up. So to kick off the show as we do, we're going to start with a little summary of the book.

Yes, so The Frozen River is the book we're talking about today. It is a historical fiction novel of a real 18th century midwife named Martha Ballard. If you look her up, you will find her. The book opens up in 1789 in the town of Hallowell, Maine, and there's a dead body floating in the frozen Kennebec River. As a midwife, Martha is summoned to the local tavern to examine the body and provide a cause of death.

During this time, midwives didn't just deliver babies, they were more of generalists, I'd say, in the medical profession. So they performed minor surgeries, they tended to wounds, which included examining the dead and determining a cause of death, which is why she's called to examine this body. I also think it's funny that you said they're examining a body at a tavern. Well, and they say in this, the tavern serves as a lot of different things. So it's the place where they're examining the body, it's also a tavern-restaurant. And then they hold court there one day too. It's the town municipal building. Yeah. No kidding.

And unlike most women during this time period, Martha Ballard can read and write. She keeps a day book or a diary and she uses this to record every birth, every death, every crime, town gossip, everything going on in her small community. Months prior to the discovery of the body, Martha had actually documented the details of an alleged rape committed by two of the town's most respected gentlemen. One is a town judge and the other is the man found in the river. Martha determines that the cause of death is murder based on the severe bruising and condition of the body it's in when it's pulled from the ice. However, a new town doctor appears, a young white dude fresh out of medical school, undermining Martha's findings and declares the death an accident.

A Harvard graduate (as he says many times). Yes. This forces Martha to start her own investigation. Yes. And so the story unfolds over the next six months as a trial for the alleged rape nears and Martha continues to pursue the truth of what happened and her diary actually ends up in the center of the town scandals and implicates those closest to her. Indeed it does.

So I think that's a pretty good summary. Now anything beyond this point is going to contain spoilers. So if you have not read the book or you do not like spoilers. Or you don't care and you don't want to read the book and you just want to listen to us because this podcast is awesome. Then yes, if any of those things are true, then you can stay on.

Let's talk about why we rated the book. Let's do it. I do also want to say, because we talked about this earlier today and because you mentioned it about what we're rating the books and I'm likely not going to recommend or make you read a book per the title that isn't a four or five in my opinion. So I think by default, a lot of the things, a lot of the books we're going to talk about are going to be fours or fives for us. Yeah, that's fair. Okay. What did you give this book?

You want me to go first? Oh, you want me to go first? I think you went first last time, so I can go first this time. Yeah, I think so, too. Go ahead. I gave it a five. Shocking. I read it twice and I just loved it both times. I really appreciated the book's narrator, Martha Ballard.

So many novels feature heroines who are young, they're in their twenties or thirties, they're starting their lives off. And here we have a main character who's 54-years-old. She's not a voice that we usually hear from in books. And at this point in her life, she's been married 35 years and she's given birth to nine children. So she just has this unique perspective that she brings to the book or that the author brings to the book for Martha.

And beyond the story itself, I just thought it was so beautifully written. This was actually my first novel by Ariel Lawhon. She has several historical fiction novels. So if you read this one and enjoy the writing, I would encourage you to check the others out. I will be as well. I can say with certainty that I'm definitely excited to read more from her.

Okay. I gave it four stars. Again, how dare you? Yes, I know. That's two weeks in a row now. I agree. The book was well written. The main characters were likable. I really enjoyed the dialogue and interactions between Martha and her husband Ephraim, but I felt it was also somewhat predictable and generally underwhelming in certain points. Like when the fox came up, I knew that fox would play a role. They named a tool in the garage “Revenge,” I'm like, well, that's definitely going to come up later on in the book. You don't name your tools? The three that I own?

And like there was all this buildup to the trial and her investigation and the trial itself just felt really underwhelming. I thought there'd be more suspense. I thought there'd be more dialogue in that. I also didn't really feel like I was in the world of the 1700s for me personally. I have a question for you about that. So short of a few obvious things, meaning like they rode horses everywhere. I mean, we're not riding horses everywhere now. Right. I know. But like to me, it didn't pull me into that world with great clarity. It honestly felt like you could have almost plucked it out and put it in like the 1980s instead of the 1780s and the story would have had, could have been the same. I strongly disagree with that statement. That's great. That's why we have this podcast, so we can talk about things.

I mean, how do you reconcile a woman, you know, we're going to talk about this, but a woman couldn't even speak in court without her husband or father. So I don't think that it could be stuck in the 1980s. I definitely think there were things that made it period-specific. Yeah. And I didn't say that there weren't, just said, I didn't feel like, just didn't get a full sense that I was in the seventeen hundreds. Okay. All right. Well, I guess we're going to move on.

All right. So much of this novel focuses on the legal process surrounding Rebecca Foster's assault and Martha's testimony. Rebecca Foster, is the woman who accuses the two gentlemen of rape that we talked about earlier. I guess what surprised you most about 18th century judicial processes? Honestly, not a lot. What?! What?! I know. I know. Just like hear me out. It's like it just didn't feel that much different than today. You had powerful people protecting other powerful people. The judge was the most popular person and the small town people brought their petty little issues to sue their neighbor for. And I just didn't feel, besides like them having it in a tavern and the judge was later in the book wearing wigs and stuff, like, I don't know. I just didn't strike me. Like this was just another one of those moments for me where I just wasn't pulled into that time period. Okay. Well, as I said, during that time period, women actually couldn't speak in court without their husband or father present. So for me, I was like, yep, that makes sense for that time period – horrifying – but checks out, That definitely is different. Yeah, for sure.

I mean, I hear you on some of the things you're saying, but there are a lot of things, like the town of Hallowell actually doesn't even have a true judge who's a lawyer. You don't even have to be a lawyer to be a judge. Right. He's just like the dude. And so they talk about that. I mean, there is no due process. You can throw everything you know about that out the window. Yeah. And they just stand up in court and accuse people of things.

And then it's like, you're guilty. And that was it. There's no trial. There's no investigation. No, but those are also petty crimes that you're referring to. And that's again, I'll use my but that's still not how our legal justice system works now. I agree with you. Because you seem like you don't. I think our lawyer friends are going to come at us again on this episode. Or not. Or not. They don't care. I'm calling you out, lawyer friends. You know who you are.

Alright, so next question. The Ballards are an incredibly close-knit family. Did you have a favorite character among Martha and Ephraim's brood or was there a relationship between Martha and one of her children and their suitors that you were particularly cheering for? Not specifically, no. I did find myself feeling a bit for Cyrus. He, I believe, was the youngest. He's actually the oldest. He was the oldest of siblings. But he was mute. And I imagine it's magnified even exponentially at that time period too, with a challenge like that. So I felt for him in the book, but you could still through the writing, see his character and like the kind of person that he was. And so I found myself feeling for him a little empathy for him.

But honestly, I think my favorite might be Ephraim. Husband Ephraim, not son Ephraim? Correct. He was just kind of a stoic rock for Martha through the whole book. And like a level-headed sounding board for her, challenged her in ways that really only a spouse can, but also supported her in ways that were maybe felt like less traditional for that time period. Yeah. I don't know. I just found myself like rooting for him. I was really glad he didn't die. I thought for a hot minute during the middle of the book that he wasn't going to come back for his second quest. Yeah. I remember you saying that. I was like, no, I couldn't say anything, but I definitely saw some of you in Ephraim when I was reading it as well.

But I really liked, speaking of the relationships that I was rooting for. I was really rooting for Dolly and Barnabas. I really liked Barnabas' character. I liked him too. Maybe because his name is Barnabas and I think that's hilarious. But he was also described as sinewy and I don't think that's what I think of when I think of Barnabas. But I just thought he was a really stand up character.

And he falls for Dolly and then he has to arrest her brother. Yeah. Awkward. Yeah, I know. I just liked his character. Remind me of Tommy Lee Jones when he's arresting someone, and the guy's like, I'm innocent. He's like, I don't care because his job is not to decide that. His job is just to bring him in. And it just reminded me of Barnabas. He's like, I really actually think that you're innocent, but I have a job to do. So I just thought that was a good moral compass that he had.

That was from... Shit... The Fugitive. Are you sure? Yeah, because they're standing in the little tunnel, and Harrison Ford, before he jumps off the waterfall thing and his hands are up, he's like, I didn't kill my wife. And he's like, I don't care. Okay. All right. Pop culture reference. Yeah. So that's Barnabas.

Back to the time period, Martha and her daughters do spend a lot of time during the novel immersed in everyday household labor such as making candles and baking bread, weaving. They make quilts. In one scene, as I mentioned, they're killing, plucking, and cooking chickens, which completely solidified me again that I would not have made it very far in this time period. But were there any daily tasks or chores that were normal back then that you think you'd be interested in giving a try?

I think, maybe, maybe woodworking? And I believe that was Ephraim's profession. They owned a mill. So they own a mill. Yeah but there's just something like creative and still making something, which is what I do in modern-day version of me, even today. Like I wonder sometimes if I would ever make a switch from creating things digitally to creating real tangible things. So I think maybe a profession like that would, would suit me for that time period. What about you?

I think it'd be interesting. The candle making. I think that when they were describing it and how they did it, and I know it's probably very different than if we were to make candles now, but I thought that sounded interesting. I think everything else did not. I would not be caught dead killing or plucking chickens. I can barely cook the raw meat that I get from Whole Foods. Nice.

One scene that I particularly liked was when Martha says the townspeople dislike her. So this was a scene that I can see you saying this to me and me saying people don't like me And not like, "Oh my god, people don't like me." But just being very self-aware that I am NOT everyone’s... Favorite cup of tea. Yeah, I'm an acquired taste and I'm okay with that. But Ephraim disagrees with the statement that Martha makes and he says they respect you, perhaps occasionally fear you but it's not the same thing.

So when is it better to be honest than it is to be well-liked? I don't know that you can bifurcate those into a black and white stance like that. I don't think it's one or the other. I think in order to become respected, there's a sense of you having to be honest with people in order to gain or earn that respect anyways. so, but you do it in a way that whatever truth you're dishing out lands in a safe, soft place for the person receiving it, which is what tends to build and garner that respect as opposed to landing harshly and people getting defensive or anything like that. So I think there's a delicate dance between the two. I don't know that you can have really one without the other.

I think that's fair. When I thought about this question, I thought of a quote that I think I'm going to get wrong. But the sentiment is, if you're worried about being liked over being respected, then you'll have neither. So the idea that you really have to go for the respect first and then people are going to decide if they like you or not following that and that's okay. Not everyone should like everybody else. It's just impossible. Like we all have our different experiences and we're not made to be liked by everybody.

All right. So if The Frozen River was adapted into a movie or television series, who would you cast in the leading roles? Okay, so this one took me a little bit to think about. I actually had to do a little research of my own for it. But I think I've got some good candidates. I think two possibilities for Martha could be Frances McDormand or Robin Wright. Oh my gosh, Robin Wright is such a good choice. Right? What about Cate Blanchett? I thought about her too. I think maybe it's just me, but like, I just, I have her pegged for certain things and I just don't know. I mean, but she's usually, plays some like real bad asses and I think Martha is a total badass. So yeah, that's fair. I like both of those options.

For Ephraim, I actually thought that Russell Crowe could be a good Ephraim. Today's version of Russell Crowe or like a Liev Schreiber possibly could also be like a good role or visual for that sort of like hard working kind of gritty but like a quiet confidence to them as well. I think he could pull it off. So this was a fun exercise. I feel like we should do this in every episode. So those would be my picks.

Who would you pick for Ephraim? I'm having a hard time because mine are so good. Yours are so good. But while Martha describes Ephraim, we don't hear about what he looks like or anything like that. But what about Sean Bean? Or Ewan McGregor? I don't see Ewan McGregor. Sean Bean is a great pick though. I could see him. He's got a little grit to him and I think he could play that well.

All right. Is there any other? Who would we cast as Judge North? And we haven't talked about Judge North yet, but Judge North is the judge that is accused of rape and ends up being a total… I don't want to say asshole because that's not that doesn't reach the bar of how terrible he is. He is deplorable human. He is. Deplorable. Great word. I only had one person. I didn't dig too far. I only really focused on Martha and Ephraim's characters, but I had Sam Rockwell. Poor Sam Rockwell! I know he's not deplorable but there's just something about his looking like his demeanor I feel that could pull that character off.

I don't know. I don't think I have a better one but it would have - I think actually there are plenty of actors that are okay with playing parts where you know someone has to be the bad guy. But I also wonder if this is someone you cast that isn't anybody yet because they’re like, I'm not playing that guy. Okay, but those, yeah, those are fun.

A lot of books focus on the beginning of love stories, but in this book, we get another side of love. Martha and Ephraim have been married 35 years at this point in their lives, which is kind of remarkable considering the average lifespan at this point in America is around 40 years old. Martha herself also lost three children in a matter of three weeks and we hear about this in the book actually. So she loses these three children in 1769 due to the diphtheria epidemic. But what did you think was so special about their love story that is different than the new love we traditionally see in romance novels?

I think when a couple goes through trauma together, there's usually two paths. They either it breaks them apart or brings them closer together. And I think in Martha and Ephraim's case, it truly brought them closer together. I think he, this is part of what I liked about his character when they were describing that time in their life, as one can imagine as a mother that she was really devastated. And he kind of helped her see through the cloud of possibilities of what could still be moving them away from that place, for example, and starting anew.

But specifically when they decide to move and she says they've buried their kids there and she said, we can't leave our girls here and they take the headstones. Right? Yep. Yep. Exactly. So there are time, it's a time tested, you know, relationship in a time period where humans were generally tested in a lot of different ways. And they sort of had this unspoken understanding, a way of communicating without really communicating that can only come with mutual respect and trust with one another. And they never lost the sort of spark or flame that got them started in the first place.

Yeah. I mean, when you're first dating someone, it's exciting, it's new, it's unicorns and rainbows, and you have stars in your eyes. And when you've been with someone for a long time, 35 years is a very long time. I mean, there's this other kind of love that evolves when you spend that much time with someone that isn't, you know, big sweeping gestures and it's in those little moments. And we see some of those little moments in the book. I just really enjoyed a different type of love story. And this isn't, I mean, this book is not about a love story, but there is certainly a love story in it if you look for it between the two of them and their care for one another and how they respect each other and challenge each other and support each other. So I liked hearing about it and I just think we don't get that in a lot of books that are out there right now. Yeah, I agree with that.

So as I mentioned, I like Martha's character a lot and there was a couple scenes I actually want to talk about. And not only did I like her character a lot, I saw myself a lot in Martha's character, which maybe is why I like the book so much.

So there's one particular scene where she describes Lydia North. Now, Lydia North is the wife of Joseph North, who we mentioned and Joseph North is the one accused of rape. So Lydia has these debilitating migraines and she comes to Martha for some type of tonic. Martha says that she and Lydia have never been like close friends, despite them being neighbors for many years. And she said, she thinks what bothers her about Lydia is that she is a weak woman, timid, and she describes her as, "Milk toast with no metal in her spine." Ouch. Martha says she likes her friends to be interesting and to have some vim and vigor. I completely relate to this and I think that my closest of friends have vim and vigor to them and I find it funny because I imagine during this time that actually there's more women like Lydia North than there are like Martha Ballard. Yeah for sure.

So I just felt, I don't know, I felt really connected to Martha. And was wondering if there was any characters that you felt connected to. Hmm, not to that extent or to that depth that you probably related to Martha. but as I kind of answered an earlier question, I think Ephraim, if I, if I were to pick anyone and it'd probably be him, I saw some of his traits or characteristics in me, just kind of that calming presence when things might get chaotic. I feel like I have that trait. I didn't find myself relating deeply to any of these characters to that extent. That's fair. I did actually, so I totally figured you would be, you could see yourself in Martha. But I also actually think there's a little bit of Barnabas in you too. Let's talk about Martha.

Hang with me here. Like he, he just, he has a North star and he, believes in it. He is a little bit of a rule follower, which I think you lean towards. but he's willing to do the hard things and not just because he has to, or cause he's told to, he's doing it because it's his job, but he's also doing it in a way that's, he still questions whether it's legitimate or he's still questioning the process and that sort of thing. So if you were in a service role like that, you're doing this thing because he like believes in the system. Yeah, there it is. That's what I'm trying to say. He wants to follow the rules because he thinks that the only way to really get justice is to make sure the rules are followed. Right. But at the same time, still questions like, are those the right rules to be following? Yeah. Yep. So anyway, so Martha and Barnabas. Yep.

So on the same lines, we're still talking about Martha. There's another scene where Lydia comes to her for some more tonic for those migraines. And Martha actually refuses her because Lydia has just lied in court. We aren't sure if she lies outright or she's simply stating what she believes to be the truth. Because she says in court that her husband was in bed the whole night that this alleged rape happened and therefore he couldn't have been guilty.

But Martha's pissed about this, so she scolds Lydia and she accuses her of lying and she turns her away. And Ephraim, her husband, is present for this whole interaction and then he essentially scolds her and Martha can't believe that Ephraim would have wanted her to make the tonic for Lydia since she thinks she lied in court. And that means then Joseph North doesn't face justice for what he did to Rebecca. And Ephraim says, "I did not take you for the kind of woman who punished the innocent for the sins of the guilty." Oh snap.

And I could totally see myself saying, there is no way, no way I am going to make this tonic for this hussy. There's no way I'm going to make this tonic for this woman. And I would have turned her away too. And then would you have scolded me? Careful what you say. Yeah, that whole scene, as with so many things, they're often not black and white. I can totally understand why she would want to turn her away and those feelings that drove her to say that. But I do not agree with her actions. I would have said what Ephraim said. Really? Yes. And my reason is she allowed her personal emotions to interfere with the medical practice. And I believe there are earlier parts in the book where she really prided herself on as someone who could separate those two things, the emotions from the work that she was doing.

But Ephraim is not saying you're a medical professional, you need to prioritize that over your personal feelings about Lydia. He is saying to her, she's not the one you're mad at, which I think are two different things. Yeah, they're two different things. I think if he would have said, you're a medical professional, you should still do this for this person because you do have to put your personal feelings aside. However, I don't think that’s his point or the author's, you know, point in saying this. I think I would have 100% acted like Martha acted. I think so too. Although Martha later in the book rectifies this and does go and take takes the atomic to Lydia. I don't know if I would. Just being honest.

All right, earlier in the book, Martha says, memory is a wicked thing that warps and twists, but paper and ink receive the truth without emotion and they read it back without partiality. We've already mentioned that she keeps a day book, which is extremely rare for this period of time. This reminded me of a recent trip that we took to Monticello, which is the home of Thomas Jefferson. And there we learned that Jefferson and his wife corresponded by letters throughout the relationship. Yet when she dies, he actually burned all of her letters. So we have no record or thoughts of her life from her point of view during this time. So maybe this isn't a question necessarily, but it just made me think how many women during this period may have been educated, but then also had a large impact in history. But yeah, we don't have their recorded voices. Yeah.

The guide did mention during that tour that it was common for that period as a way of protecting the privacy of the dead, I think, or so it was claimed. But you'd actually mentioned in episode one of our brilliant podcast that history is only as good or as accurate as the historians who write it. And history is often written by men. So I totally do agree that I'm sure there are plenty of others, other moments, other people, women in particular, who probably had an impact on history that we'll never know about because it was never documented in any meaningful way. That's a great point. Of course you'd say that. You said it. Yeah, but you brought it full circle and that, you know, really sealed it for me. Thank you for bringing me in that point. Of course.

Alright, so Martha's final confrontation with Joseph North has, we'll say, some lasting consequences. Do you think that justice was done and what about in regards to Rebecca's assault and Burgess's killing? Do you think you would have made the same choice as Martha? Well, the author touches on kind of this point about justice in the authors note at the end of the book. And she makes a point that you can never undo the horrificness that was done to Rebecca, but there is some comfort in knowing that he could never hurt someone else again.

And, so for those of you who are listening who have not read the book, there is a scene where Joseph North comes to Martha Ballard's home. Her husband is not there. She's tired. She shows up in her like workshop and Joseph North is there to confront her and threatens to rape her, which is probably why he shows up and is his plan. And she grabs Revenge. And she does a little “whack whack” in his nether regions. So he will never hurt another woman.

Yep and clearly justice wasn't going to be done through the traditional judicial process as we talked about earlier. Right. Cause he's already acquitted of that other crime. Right. I mean, one could even argue for Martha that it was self-defense if you want to go down that rabbit hole again. I don't want to sit here and sound like I am advocating for taking law into your own hands, so to speak. It was the 80s. If you got that Bluey reference, we can be best friends. Yes.

What's your take on the justice part? So I didn't plan on saying this, but when I read quotes from books that I really like, I will text them to myself. And I was reading a book yesterday and the quote was, "The difference between justice and revenge comes down to who's telling the story." And it feels so salient in this because, How timely. I know, right? Because from Martha's point of view, justice is done. She has removed the problem, and he will never hurt another woman. But if we heard the story from Joseph North's point of view, he would say that she did it as revenge. With Revenge, which is ironic.

So at the end of the book, there's a pretty thorough author's note, which if you've read this and you skipped it, you should absolutely go back and re-read it or read it. Yeah, I went back before this episode and made sure to listen to it as well. The author's note just, gives you more insight. It talks about the actual diary entries of Martha, what is true, what is a little bit fictionalized. For the most part, the story itself.

Obviously she cannot know the conversations that people had so that is completely fictionalized but a lot of the diary entries are mostly true. There's a couple that she added to and then she also changes the time frame. So she wanted the entire story to fit within this six month ish period. So she had to change when some things happened in real life in order to include them in the story and to make this cohesive story but it is still a lot that is true. Right. And I just, I just really appreciated hearing from the different type of character. And I also, I do like historical fiction, but a lot of historical fiction is set around World War II and some of those novels are great, but I think this is a time period that was fun to read about and different than some of the other novels that are out there.

Would you recommend this book? I'm going to assume I know your answer to this question, but would you recommend this book to your fellow book friends? I mean, if you like historical fiction, I would recommend it to you. If you appreciate, I think, a character driven book, I would recommend it to you. If you're looking for a super big thriller, I wouldn't recommend that, but I would recommend this to someone looking for that type of book. I don't think I would ever say don't read it, but I don't know that would go out of my way to sell it really hard to others unless I like you said I knew that that's a genre that they were just really interested in.

Alright. Well if we don't have any final thoughts then we want to remind everyone that the next two books in our lineup are Just for the Summer by Abby Jimenez and The Measure by Nikki Erlick. Erlick? Erlick? I think I don't remember how I said it earlier. I'm not sure either. So forgive us Nikki. And as Jon mentioned at the top of the show don't forget that a great way to support our show is by leaving us a review and rating us on Apple Podcasts. And if you don't want to rate us, but you have a question or feedback on the show, you can email us at booksimakemyhusbandread@gmail.com we would love to hear from you.

I guess that's it. Indeed it is. Another episode in the books. Check. See what I did there? In the books. I missed it. Do it again.

All right, listeners, thank you for tuning in and who knows, maybe this one will be the one your husband reads. Maybe. Bye bye.

‍