Lincoln's Dreams

I have a few issues with this book. I enjoyed it but it is probably my least favorite Willis.

Things she did right:

The historical research, as always, was top notch. The Civil War scenes felt real and immediate and personal. Of all of the characters in the novel, it was Robert E Lee that resonated with me the most. And Traveller, of course.

The book is well written and has a fascinating semblance of action despite the presence of the usual Willis running-back-and-forth business and the usual ships passing in the night Willis mis-communications. I've come to expect those things in her novels and enjoy them for the way they circle toward a goal in a way that makes yo think they may never get there.

The book within the book was used cleverly, as were the research passages that started each chapter.

Things that didn't work for me this time around:

1) A number of the characters felt a little thin to me. Annie was a little too waifish and too willing to be cared for by whichever man happened to step into the creepy father-husband role. Either her entire personality has been subsumed by her dreams or she didn't have much of one to begin with. Jeff's and Broun's and Richard's motivations and obsessions -regarding Annie and otherwise - were a little too circular and convenient.

2) A little too much of the novel occurred via answering machine message.

3) In real life, the man who sold Robert E. Lee his horse Traveller was named Broun. If Jeff were really doing all this Civil War research for his own boss Broun, he should have been bowled over by this coincidence - or at least acknowledged it. I'm sure it's just Willis's tip o'the hat, but it feels a little obvious to me.

It leads to my big pet peeve: horse details done wrong. Willis obviously did meticulous historical research. I'm sure she had beta readers checking her facts and her timelines for accuracy. So how did she let so many mistakes into the two pages of modern horse vet interaction?

There's a scene with a large animal vet examining a lame horse. He walks the horse to determine the source of lameness, then ties it securely by the bridle in order to brush dirt off her hoof with a knife.

Connie Willis, champion of historical settings, gets numerous things wrong in a single scene.

1) It seems unlikely that the vet would use a knife instead of a hoof pick, since they are in his own barn and presumably he would have the tools of the trade handy. That's kind of like a chef, in her own kitchen, choosing to cut an orange with a spoon. It'll work, but there are better tools.

2) He puts his hand on the sole of each foot, presumably to feel for heat/infection, but he doesn't clean the hoof out until a page or two later. If he's feeling for infection as he says, he should probably be putting his hand on the actual hoof, not the layer of shavings and muck described a moment later. The first thing you would do in looking for a source of mysterious lameness is clean the friggin' hooves.

3) It's pretty hard for a vet to determine a source of lameness while walking a horse himself "parading her in a slow circle." Way easier to have somebody else do the walking (and preferably trotting) so that he can stand away and see how clean the gait is, if a particular hoof is being favored, if the horse is bobbing her head at a particular point in the stride (an indication of pain). He had at least two extra people there to do this for him, but didn't ask either.

4) Most egregious: he ties her securely by the bridle? Willis probably meant by the reins, not the bridle, for starters, though that isn't any better. You don't tie a horse by the bridle (or the reins) because it is dangerous and painful. If the mare moves to the end of her range of motion she'll be jabbed in the mouth by the bit. Unfair punishment, and possibly a cause of panic and further injury. You use a leadrope attached to a halter and tie with a quick-release knot, or cross-tie directly to the halter. Not the bridle, not the reins.

For me this is frustrating just because it causes me to doubt the accuracy of other aspects of the book. As in any novel with a lot of historical details, my belief in the story demands trust in the writer. I began to doubt here, since I know how easily the details in these two pages could have been checked. I'm still a huge fan of her writing, but I'm going to have to write this one off as an early, minor work.