This novel promised a charming romance centered around a unique “meet-cute” scenario involving mistaken identity due to a dog walker’s error. While the premise, the delightful canine characters, and moments of witty banter held promise, the execution faltered, particularly in its portrayal of an autistic character and its handling of mental health themes. This review delves into what worked, what didn’t, and why the story ultimately missed the mark for a heartwarming romantic comedy.
The Canine Stars and a Creative Premise
The undeniable stars of this book are the dogs, Hazel and Baxter. Their scenes are a consistent highlight, providing much-needed charm and humor. The author clearly has a soft spot for dogs, and this affection shines through, making their presence a significant draw. The core concept – a dog walker accidentally swapping pets, leading to a connection between the owners – is exceptionally strong. It offers a fresh and engaging foundation for a romance, brimming with potential for exploring how two distinct personalities might be brought together through their beloved pets. This unique setup suggests fertile ground for exploring themes of responsibility, unexpected connections, and the delightful chaos that pets can bring into our lives.
Pacing and Character Development Issues
Despite the promising premise, the pacing of the romantic development between the protagonists, Carly and Max, is notably slow. It takes a considerable amount of time before they genuinely begin to interact and build a connection. For a romantic comedy, the romance itself barely enters the picture in the first half of the book, which is a significant drawback. While their banter has its moments, the limited “hang out” time leaves the reader yearning for more substantive interaction between them.
A Troubling Portrayal of an Autistic Character
The most significant issue lies with the character of Jamie, Max’s autistic brother. While the inclusion of an autistic adult character is commendable, the portrayal is deeply disappointing and problematic. Jamie is largely relegated to being a plot device, existing primarily to make Max appear empathetic and caring. The narrative frames Max’s assistance to Jamie as a burden and a sacrifice, particularly a trip to Chicago. Instead of focusing on Jamie’s experience and potential challenges, the story centers on Max’s perceived difficulties as a caregiver. The text highlights Max’s frustration when he has to stay in with Jamie, viewing it as a missed opportunity for a night out, rather than considering Jamie’s need to recharge after a day of travel and a new environment.
Furthermore, the language used to describe Jamie’s autism, such as “profoundly autistic,” raises concerns. This phrasing suggests a hierarchy of autistic experiences, which is insensitive. Max, who is presented as a neuroscientist, should exhibit a greater understanding and nuanced perspective on autism. The narrative’s reliance on outdated and potentially ableist language and perspectives undermines the credibility of the characters and the story’s message. The author’s apparent lack of research into the autistic community is evident, leading to a portrayal that feels more informed by stereotypes and external perceptions rather than genuine understanding.
Dated Perspectives on Mental Health and Ableism
The book also exhibits dated perspectives on mental health and disability. References to “Sex and the City” and the “disease model” of mental health contribute to a sense that the story is out of touch with contemporary understanding. The casual dismissal of Jamie’s need for downtime and Max’s subsequent concealment of his brother’s “sensory meltdown” out of embarrassment, rather than respect for privacy, is particularly concerning. This suggests a lack of awareness regarding the importance of supporting neurodivergent individuals and respecting their needs.
Similarly, the depiction of a young fashion designer experiencing depression is handled with a lack of empathy. Carly’s comments about his unproductiveness and financial implications further highlight an insensitive and judgmental attitude towards mental health struggles.
Conclusion: A Missed Opportunity
Ultimately, this novel was a missed opportunity. It began with a charming premise and lovable canine characters but failed to deliver a satisfying romance due to slow pacing and, more critically, a harmful and underdeveloped portrayal of its autistic character and insensitive handling of mental health. The author’s apparent reliance on potentially biased sources for her portrayal of autism, rather than consulting autistic adults directly, has resulted in a narrative that comes across as ableist. Readers seeking a lighthearted, easy read about dogs and romance may find themselves disappointed by the story’s problematic elements and lack of genuine warmth and sensitivity. For a more accurate and empathetic understanding of autism and mental health, further research and consultation with the autistic community would be highly beneficial.
