Little Fires Everywhere

Little Fires Everywhere
By: Celeste Ng

Oofta. A very popular book, but this was a distressing read for me.

It probably didn’t help that I had recently watched an equally distressing episode of Bull with a similarly difficult custody case with the added element of race. Custody cases are usually complex and hardly ever win/win situations, especially in adoptions, so my distress isn’t necessarily from what the author chose the outcome of the case to be, that I believe it to be “wrong.” I did have an opinion but I could see both sides. My distress in this book was more with how the author portrayed the situation or particular characters. So you might love it, you might not; matter of personal preference. Based on other reviews, I might be in the minority here.

It is obvious the author is not afraid of controversy, covering topics like adoption, child custody, race, abortion, surrogacy, parenting, and socioeconomic differences all in one story. So this review will probably be all over the place in representation of my thoughts and feelings!

The book starts with the Richardson’s house burning down and the family suspecting the youngest, ‘troublesome,’ seemingly missing child, Izzy, was responsible. So I thought the story would be centered around that event and finding Izzy, etc. But that didn’t come back up until the very, very end. And really the story was more about the Richardson’s tenant, Mia, and Mrs. Richardson, than Izzy, though her and the other characters have their moments.

There is a lot of focus on Mia and I felt the author painted her as the ‘hero’ of the story, almost saint-like. She was the stereotypical free-spirit artist who was not ‘bound’ by social boxes of expectation but lived a nomadic lifestyle, doing whatever it took to be able to focus on and create her super profound and brilliant art that ‘unenlightened’ people just didn’t understand. I’m an art major, and maybe I just chose the wrong field and don’t have the true artist spirit, but I find this character tired and annoying. She is depicted as if she is the only person willing to think for herself or push against the status quo. That she is on a whole new level of enlightenment and all the other characters would do well to be more like her and glean from her infinite wisdom. That any choice she makes or has made was right and pure. And that’s just bogus. Of course she’s not the opposite of all of that, but she sure isn’t the blueprint for all that is good.

And because of the author’s depiction of Mia and because Mia clearly chose a side to her friend’s custody battle (even instigating it), it leads one to believe the author was writing from a biased opinion.

In contrast to Mia, the adopting mother was portrayed as a rich, white, ignorant, and basically subconsciously racist woman who was only adopting out of selfishness and the desire for a ‘perfect’ home in her ‘perfect’ neighborhood. I found this off-putting. Of all the people the author could have chosen to represent this mother, she chose this on purpose, and I believe, to make a statement, one of which rubs me the wrong way. While she did touch on the mother’s anguish of experiencing many miscarriages and the struggle to get pregnant unsuccessfully and the previous adoptions that fell through, the dialogue the author chose to use during the trial at the end was far from compassionate and understanding. I realize there are really people out there like this, but I found it in bad taste that she would choose to write this story the way she did.

Here’s the gist: The McCullough’s have tried for years and years to have a baby, naturally and through adoption. And nothing has worked. Finally they are almost finished adopting an American-Chinese baby when Mia realizes it’s the baby her friend, Bebe, left at a fire station a year ago because she did not have the means to care for her. So Mia lets her know. Well now Bebe has a waitressing job and decides she wants her daughter back. She believes the McCullough’s have no right to adopt her baby. The author even writes Izzy to constantly refer to the McCullough’s and her lawyer dad who is representing them- ‘baby-stealers.’ Like I said, no easy answer by any means, but this is a far cry from baby-stealing.

And what’s played up is the idea of race and culture. The trial dialogue that is presented when Mrs. McCullough is on the stand is basically- ‘What do you plan to do to teach the baby about her birth culture?... Wait, you’re saying that you don’t speak any dialect of Chinese, you have no Asian dolls, no books about Asian characters, and you think just feeding her Chinese food and buying her a panda stuffed animal and take her on a rich person’s tour of China will be enough?? You are an unfit mother!!!’ Everything else they can provide for her and the fact that they’ve already had her for months and love her and have cared for her after she was malnourished and left on the steps is thrown out the window. I totally understand that there is value in knowing your birth culture but if that is what gives you worth and identity as a person, then there are a lot of people out there that will never live fulfilled lives. Can a custody case really come down to who can teach the baby the most about her birth culture, especially in the first few months of life? Obviously the birth mother is still her biological mother who loves the baby as well, so it’s not an open and shut case about who should mother the child, I was just disappointed with the way the author chose to write about it and the characters.

Add to that the way the author ended the book and it’s hard not to see a particular narrative the author was trying to persuade readers to believe.

Another comment on the writing of the book- I didn’t like the voice of the narrator, constantly giving background info on a character that the character whose POV you were reading from would have no knowledge of like ‘[insert three chapters describing Mia’s past] of course Mrs. Richardson would only find out part of this’ or talking about irrelevant future information like ‘Mia wouldn’t know this yet but two years from now she would look back and think...’ That voice mixed with a variety of POVs throughout the book was a little obnoxious.

Probably an excessively long review but I cannot be more concise with my feelings at the moment.

The controversial topics and situations will challenge your thinking, depending on your worldview, and will cause a variety of feelings. And honestly I don’t mind being challenged to to think about why I have the opinions I do, I think that’s healthy and important, but I felt this author did a little too much hand-holding and persuasion in her writing and character portrayal for me to feel good about any of it right now.

Knowing how popular this book is, I was a little surprised by what I read, but I guess, as always, you will have to decide for yourself whether it’s a ride worth taking.