Anatomy: a (short) review

Title: Anatomy: A Love Story

Author: Dana Schwartz

Publisher: Wednesday Books

Pages: 352

My rating: ⭐⭐

Fabulous book cover, mediocre story — romance is very difficult to write without it feeling like the same chewed-up and regurgitated trope, but the ending (as much as it was rushed and underdeveloped) revived it as a book. At least, it made me want to pull out petals from an ox-eye daisy, and ask myself, did I like it? did I not? Not quite sure about that.

Hazel Sinnett is a girl from a wealthy family who lives in Edinburgh in the early 19th century, who wishes to learn human anatomy with an almost surreal obsession. Her character? Thnk Elizabeth Bennett meets Mulan meets Hermione Granger. Jack is a resurrection man. His job? Stealing bodies from graves to sell to the Royal Anatomist’s Society for dissection.

The two lovers weren’t that compatible, and character development felt extremely rushed, resulting in unrelatable and stocky characters. The way Hazel kept throwing temper tantrums, destroying all her specimens and tossing Dr. Beethleheem’s letter in the fire was a little too sudden. There were flashes of goriness, rotting flesh and corpses, and yes, inaccurate medical details (including the properties of hypothetical Ethereum, the “first” anesthetic), until the ending where Dana Schwartz reveals to you that it isn’t quite the historical fiction you imagined (and immortality exists, rendering any debate about medical accuracy irrelevant.)

Of course, it is a romance, so nobody can read it as a medical journal, but the plot fell flat for 3/4 of the book, with a half-expected, half-unexpected ending giving the reader only 3/4 closure. The story does show that science is power, power can be abused, corruption results, and that healthcare always needs to account for people more vulnerable who cannot advocate for themselves. OK Emilie, overanalyzing it. I can see this book appealing to a specific group of people. If I read it five years ago, I’d give it an extra star.