You know how I said I'm working on my paper? Well, I wouldn't be me if I were not procrastinating.
I woke up this morning thinking about a book I read a few years ago.
This one. I did not like this book, and in a fit of rage and not wanting to read about the Fourth Amendment, I wrote something about it. I'm gonna post it here because I feel like it.
I read this book a few years ago. I had made the mistake of confessing my love of trashy “historical” romance novels to a group of friends from church. A few of them immediately insisted I read Francine Rivers’ most famous book. I stupidly thought that since the book was “Christian,” it would not be as sugary and junky as my guilty pleasures. In the interest of full disclosure, I’ll admit it: I love Philippa Gregory’s Tudor novels. It’s sickening, but some people eat chocolate; I read trashy romances that purport to be historical. It’s unhealthy, and I know I should limit myself, but we all have our vices. Every time I read one of those amazingly overwrought, inaccurate bound books of empty calories, my teeth hurt and my stomach feels warm and sick. I get embarrassed, like I need to conceal the evidence and stick the candy in the cupboard behind the fridge and hope I forget about it. I was hoping that this Christian novel would provide that silly, fluffy, romance storyline, but not make me feel so bloated and gross. I was wrong. “Redeeming Love” is so much worse. It’s disguised as a retelling of Hosea and Gomez from the Old Testament, but set in the Gold Rush Days in the wild west. It sounds interesting, but Rivers molests the true message of the Biblical story and turns it into a “romance” between a “soiled dove” and a “man of God.” You’re supposed to find this compelling and believe that this is just like how God pursues us and wants us to love Him.
I read through a number of reviews, and apparently I am the only one who thinks Michael Hosea should be locked up. First, he abducts “Angel,” the woman who was sold into prostitution as a child and who has been living her life the only way she knows. To me, Angel is a victim of slavery and abuse, stuck in a terrible situation and has no control over her own life. To Francine Rivers and Michael Hosea, however, she is a big old sinner in need of salvation for her wicked ways. To compound this insanity, Michael Hosea hears the voice of God telling him to marry this woman and make her his wife. So Michael does the only reasonable thing, which is carry an unconscious woman away, have a minister proclaim them married, despite the fact that Angel can no way consent to this, and then falsely imprison her on his ranch, where she begrudgingly performs manual labor and “takes care” of Michael. Unsurprisingly, Angel decides she’s had enough and determines that her old life was better than living with this crazy person who thinks God is talking to him, and she leaves. But she needs a ride, and the person who gives her a lift demands sex as payment. Other readers apparently believe this means Angel is a whore and a slut, but to me, it was her only way out of yet another life she didn’t choose.
The story drags on and on and becomes repetitive. Angel leaves, Michael goes and gets her. Angel leaves again and Michael goes and gets her. I know the story of Hosea and Gomez, so the novel dragged on. The entire time, Michael insists on calling Angel “Sarah,” just like the controlling, manipulative nightmare of a man he is. Because, see, Angel isn’t good enough for him. To him, “Angel” is a dirty prostitute, and he needs a good, clean woman. So he just decides to change her identity. I wanted to hit Michael Hosea approximately every 5 pages. I felt so bad for Angel the entire time. She clearly wanted Michael to just leave her alone and to be her own person. I know the story, so I know that this is supposed to be about God’s love and unending pursuit, but Michael is so unlikeable and Angel has such a sad tale that it just doesn’t work.
Finally, Angel ends up in a gold rush town, befriends a kind family who takes care of her, and begins to have her own independent life, where men don’t use her for sex, where she isn’t a slave to the whims and finances of others, and where she is a person who deserves respect. At this point, I was so happy for Angel. She finally seemed to have what she deserved in life! I wanted her to put this whole “Michael’s wife” thing behind her and move on and use her experiences to help others in need. But that’s not what Francine wants for her protagonist. Instead, Angel returns to Michael, deciding she can fully submit to him and love him now. At this point, I gritted my teeth and decided just to plow through to reach the end of the book.
This book is not any more intellectually or spiritually stimulating as my conniving, manipulative, adulterous Tudors. It’s actually more insulting. It beats its readers over their heads reminding us that “God loves you!” and tries to force us to like Michael Hosea by justifying everything he does. It talks down to the reader in short, choppy sentences and the old “fade to black” doctrine every scene that ends with sexy times. It wants us to pity Angel by giving her a tragic, dark past, but at the same time, demands that we judge her for having sex for money. It attempts to solicit interest in its terribly one-dimensional characters. Worst of all, the ending takes the clichéd and easy way out: Angel, who apparently could not have a child due to her previous lifestyle, is suddenly and miraculously pregnant! She can finally give her husband a son (hopefully, because girls are so emotional and difficult, oh those silly, whorish girls!). This comes after a discussion with Miriam, and woman I liked up until she declared that being a wife and having children is the most important thing for a woman. WHAT? How about seeking God’s will for your own life, and living a life pleasing to Christ? No. Get married and knocked up, girls. That’s your job. So of course, at the end, Angel has to be pregnant so she can be a true woman and perform her womanly duties.
When I read the last period on the last page, I roared and threw that book across the room. I will never feel guilty reading my campy, trashy historical romances ever again.
At this point, I would like to discuss some concerns raised by other readers. First, yes, this book has some very dark and disturbing scenes. Is it porn? No. Porn is about sexual arousal; the scenes in this book are true things that happen every day, and they’re the only way poor Francine can give her protagonist any interest or make her readers feel sympathy for her. The scenes are not designed to titillate. They’re designed to nauseate and evoke emotion for the victim of sexual violence. If you’re giving this book to your daughter to read and this is a concern for you, sure, read it. But don’t think just because it’s sexual it’s pornographic. Also, you have a bit of ostrich syndrome if you think you can just pretend this doesn’t happen if you don’t read about it. Children and women are still sold into slavery every day. Sticking your head in the sand doesn’t make it not true.
Second, other writers have explained it, but this story is not like Hosea and Gomez. Michael marries a woman who is not Christian, which is outside God’s law in the Old Testament. But in the actual story, both Gomez and Hosea were Jewish, so God was not telling Hosea anything contrary to the law.
Thirdly, I have a huge problem with how many Christian women, and apparently Christian churches are encouraging this book. Michael Hosea’s actions are cruel and criminal, yet he is supposed to be a man of God doing God’s will. Really? God wanted him to abduct an unconscious woman and keep her away from other people on his ranch in the middle of nowhere? Putting aside the fact that a man who says he hears God’s voice would be a lunatic in this day and age, I have a seriously hard time believing that Michael is doing God’s will by kidnapping a woman and marrying her against her will. (When he asks her to marry him, she is in and out of consciousness and mumbles something like, “Sure” before passing out again. Does this sound like a woman consenting to marriage?) Then, in this sham of a marriage, I’m supposed to believe that God condones their sexual intimacy? Try again, Francine.
It’s one thing for a secular romance novel to possess this level of behavior, but I truly expected more from something that purports to be Christian.
The end.
I forgot I wanted to also address the readers who seemed to think that Ms. Rivers conveyed a true marriage. I just wanted to point out that while I am not married, I hope that if I do get married, it will be to someone I love and who loves me back, not someone to abducts me and uses me as slave labor. I also hope that if I am in a marriage, I have had the opportunity to give my full consent.
That's all. Really. I spent an hour ranting about a dumb book. Amazon tried to tell me I should be between about 75 to 300 words. My review weighs in at a little more than 1500 words. I know, I need help.
