I have reservations about this debut novel. It's based on an interesting topic: that from Victorian times, different types of flowers have been able to communicate emotional messages from the giver to the recipient. (For example, honeysuckle for devotion, asters for patience, and red roses for love.)
And, The Language of Flowers deals with a societal problem that I don't know about: how foster children are just emancipated into society at large when they reach their 18th birthdays. So, it was good to read something quite different.
But, the novel was told in alternating chapters, first when main character Victoria is 9 years old and loved by a foster mother, and then when she is 18 and trying to make it on her own. I thought it was somewhat difficult to keep the two time periods and the character's relationships separate, possibly because I skimmed some of the middle when I thought it became too long.
I also found characters less than empathetic, until I got near the end and realized I was rooting for Victoria to make connecting relationships as an adult. But, somehow the book as a whole wasn't as good as the premise made me expect it would be.
I think I may be wrong about this one, and that people are going to latch onto it. Amazon readers and reviewers rave: "enchanting," "unexpectedly beautiful," "captivating," "couldn't put it down," "deeply human," "compelling," "poignant," "first class," "powerfully engaging."
OK, I've convinced myself I'd better take a second look at this one. Flower-lovers will probably be suckers for this title, but I'll be eager to hear what the rest of you think, if you decide to give Language of Flowers a try.
Comments