An interesting and fast read with a dark mystery that was entertaining to watch unravel.

Tarot, art history, intrigue! And a love letter to NYC (The Cloisters is a really museum.) The art and divinity bits were fascinating, the relationships well done, and the murdery bits unnecessary and not that believable. There was so much juiciness here that the plot didn't need the extra layer. Super fun. And now I want to go to The Cloisters. 

Slow, not much happened until the last three hours of the audiobook. Wasn’t a huge fan of the narrator. I thought the characters were boring and predictable. Leo was kinda interesting and I wanted to hear more about him but everyone else felt lifeless. I finished this book because I liked learning about tarot and it was an Audible credit so I wanted to make it worth it. If this had been a print book, I wouldn’t have finished it. I feel half satisfied with the ending. 

 

This was an ALC from Libro.fm, which is what had me picking it up so quickly, if I'm being honest. But also, after I read that it was tarot cards and divination...that had me fully interested in seeing what it was all about more deeply. Because I have a weird soft spot for books with that kind of focus. Samantha Shannon's Bone Season series an obvious fav, and Steifvater's The Raven Cycle is also great. I even love when it shows up in supporting roles, like in H.E. Edgmon's The Fae Keeper, or when it is other forms of divination, like astrology in Written in the Stars or the variety of weirder things (like haruspex) in my absolute fav This is How You Lose the Time War. So anyways, the point is, I was interested in this story. 

 

Ann Stilwell leaves her small town in Washington state for a summer internship with the Met in NYC, only to discover that there's been a mix-up and she is now going to be working at the Cloisters, a gothic Renaissance museum and garden. Either way, she gets to stay in the city, so she jumps in. Within days, she is pulled into a small group of mysterious and passionate researchers: the curator, Patrick, and his assistant, Rachel, as well as the gardener, Leo. Patrick is convinced that there is more truth to tarot than we've previously believed, and that finding (up until now) hidden histories of tarot decks/readings will unlock the secrets of actual future-telling. Ann may or may not believe quite that much, but she is all too happy to leave her own troubled past behind and jump on board with some of the more questionable research choices the Cloisters employees are making. And as her personal and professional life with this small group of friends/coworkers gets ever more tangled, and the manipulations and secrets at work seem more and more oppressive, Ann finds herself in some really untenable positions. 

 

My first impressions as I began reading this were definitely...iffy. The "woe is me/I’m hard done by" vibe from Ann that hits hard and fast at the beginning (not rich, not pretty, not useful or special) was not my favorite. Like, it was just really extreme. Now, as the story went, I could see how that feeling of inadequacy played into how she was so easily drawn into nefarious-ish things, and further in, how she justifies some of her choices and actions. So within the context of the story, I settled into it a little bit. And I generally do like an unlikable narrator, but this one grated extra on me for some reason. So if that's a "thing" for you too, be aware. 

 

The creepy "something is off" feelings that unfolded throughout this novel, that are really a cornerstone of dark academia and gothic lit, are strong here. The vibes of the arcane and mysterious, the classic mix of desire, power, work/pursuit, and the occult/mysterious, are all over and (I felt) more or less pulled off well. Hayes smoothly writes tension into the descriptions of many normal everyday events and interactions, adding a high level of intensity and eeriness. In particular, the relationship between Ann and Rachel, as it developed had that unhealthy aspirational kind of aura, where Ann kind of was in love with and wanted to be Rachel at the same time, while Rachel sort of uncomfortably took Ann under her wing and "mentored" her in a way that isolated her from everything else. If you have read Tangerine or Magic for Liars, there were some very similar qualities. Their combined personalities and outlooks - the danger of wanting to believe something too badly, seeing suspiciousness everywhere, high level access/finances/entitlement, emotional instability (working through grief), *so much* ambition - really had me on the edge of my seat waiting for the other shoe to drop. 

 

And drop it did! Interestingly, while some parts of the drop I did suspect or anticipate, other parts were a surprise. There were quite a few twists and reveals at the end, way more than I had expected. It explained a lot of things, and did really add some nice depth to the exploration of the primary push and pull theme: needing to believe in faith because the alternative can drive you crazy versus still retaining some level of power over your choices and future. I can see why Ann (and Rachel too, really) had constructed a belief in the hand of fate the way they had. And I kind of liked the low key (and sometimes high key) ruthlessness and mercilessness they showed. Although for some reasons that I cannot fully explain, I just didn't think that this book was as good as it could have been (or maybe as good as I was hoping it would be), there were a lot of really solid writing and thematic aspects throughout. I don't know, perhaps it just felt a little too formulaic for what it was supposed to be? 

 

I have to end by saying that, even though my overall feelings about this book were more lukewarm than I would have hoped, the tarot and divination aspects were spot on and I loved all of that. The focus on "unpopular" Renaissance art and artists, and the way that was used to delve into the history of tarot, both as a game and as it became something more, as well as an introduction to a number of other popular (and somewhat creepy) divination methods of that time period, was fascinating. In addition, the combination of divination and fate and religious/belief, how they tied together and how historically people could justify believing in both, was really interesting. The way this too was connected with the philosophical discussions of fate and choice that Ann, Rachel, Patrick and Leo all grapple with (and manipulate) in the present day was really well done. 

 

“Wasn’t that, after all, why we had become academics and researchers in the first place? To discover art as a practice, not just as an artifact?” 

 

“We are, you see, both masters of our fate and at the mercy of the Moirai--the three Fates who weave our futures and cut them short. And while I still believe we can control the little things in life, those small decisions that add up to the everyday, I think, perhaps, the overall shape of our life is not ours to decide.” 

Apparently, Walla Walla is a real city, not just a thing Jason Derulo sings. 

This book feels like a first draft. A combination of NINTH HOUSE and THE SECRET HISTORY on a very tight budget, and it doesn't make any sense. 

Ann has the main character syndrome, she knows several languages, she is unique, the only student of a department, and she is so unfortunate. 

If she was a specialist in Early Renaissance, she could've easily applied to a PhD. programme in Europe, more affordable than the US, with all the scholarships and grants and not a problem for someone who knows 7 languages? (How is that even possible) And she could've studied it "on site." 
She is annoying as someone about 23-24? Really immature and an unreliable narrator. And the usage of memorising details. New rooms? She memorise them. New surroundings? She absorbs every detail. Why would you specify this on paper? 

The writing style was way too simple for this type of work. 
The addiction of American authors for that flawed first point of view is getting out of control and is really getting on my nerves. 
Also the drop of some foreign words to create the illusion of a more pretentious work. 
But Ann...(who names their kid like that?) I've never been so annoyed with a character. Trying  to downplay herself, to hide, while she is a planner, an opportunist that made a place for herself. 

Rachel is the stereotypical American. It makes me laugh. The ideal young rich American that everybody loves put in this story just to make the differences more striking and to make Ann more relatable? lovable? who knows.

Everyone in this book has a dirty secret or more, and the moral compass is inexistent, with a spark of corruption and abuse. Ambitious people trying to make a name, dark academia core. It's twisted and cheap, getting away with murder. A Teen drama, Riverdale, but in a fancy museum. 

Can the actual Cloisteres Museum sue the book for defamation? 

This is an excellent read, interesting & compelling in equal measures. It has the dark academia aesthetic running through it like a seam of crystal, the subject matter is fascinating, & the descriptive writing is a joy. 
The comparison with ‘The Secret History’ isn’t one I would agree with except on a superficial level, & I think it’s one that this book doesn’t need. I would compare it more to Tara Burton’s ‘Social Creature’, the drive to succeed in a discipline, a place & an arena that favours the monied & established is the engine of the story. Ann feels her disadvantages, her average background which she has fought to distinguish herself in, her grief & guilt, & those are what influence her decisions. Rachel is the effortlessly beautiful, clever & monied woman, who the story draws out with exquisite tension to reveal in more detail, her beliefs & actions in sharp relief. 
Very enjoyable, a great education in the history of the tarot, & a good read. I look forward to what the author gives us next.