I originally picked this Ann Patchett book as my follow-up to The Dutch House in part because it was her most read novel. But also because it seemed to be the most action-packed; reading the blurb felt like a thriller or heist movie. I mean, there’s a massive kidnapping of powerful people from all over the world by South American terrorists at a Japanese man’s birthday party featuring a famous American singer. But what it ended up being was a lot of ...sitting .....waiting .........and translating.

That’s probably my mistake for interpreting the description incorrectly. Patchett has a pretty distinct writing style and point of view that I should have picked up on earlier. Bel Canto isn’t plot-driven, it’s all about the interactions between individuals ensnared in each others lives as they deal with difficult circumstances. Her characters are rich and layered and I never tire of meeting a new one.

So if you’re looking for something fast-paced and suspenseful, this probably won’t be for you. Not to say this book is boring, it’s not, but that’s probably due to the writing. Patchett writes mundanity with such an elegant flair that you might not have even noticed you just read 20 pages about the vocal exercises involved with singing opera.

....Which was one of the bigger sticking points for me. I just don’t think opera is as big of a deal as, apparently, everyone in this novel thinks it is. Won’t go too deep into the specifics without a spoiler tag, but it’s just utterly bizarre and pushing believability that a group of 59, mostly men, half teenage boys who have never seen television before, would be so incredibly moved by an opera soprano that they crown her their unofficial princess. How is everyone proclaiming their love for her after, what, a week or less? I feel like Patchett may be one of those people who deeply appreciates opera and maybe she’s projecting a bit here, but every teenage or young guy I know would have zero interest in listening to that kind of music. I would sum it up with this:

Roxanne successfully negotiating with terrorists:


And sorry to keep using the spoiler tag, but I really don’t have any other option! This ending was a slow march to an expected fate, but one that you were actively hoping wouldn’t be the case. It makes sense, especially once I found out this was inspired loosely on the Japanese embassy hostage crisis of 1996 in Peru, so it couldn’t really end up any other way, could it? I wasn’t clear whether the captives ever acknowledged that they had Stockholm-Syndrome or if they kept the facade going, but maybe that was intentional. I did feel like killing Mr. Hosokawa and Carmen gave them a way out of dealing with the ramifications of their choices during those several months, once they were on the outside.

I also found Gen and Carmen’s relationship creepy. He is a fully grown man, and she’s a teenager half his age. He’s a hostage and she’s a child soldier who can’t read. This was just too fucked up to be actually romanticized.

In the two books of hers I’ve read, Patchett has a type of understated devastation that keeps looping around in my head. It’s hard to shake. And even when it’s difficult to say “I loved“ something so melancholic, I do deeply appreciate it.

Such a beautifully written book. I loved the exploration of what can be conveyed without a shared language and what becomes important when our normal lives are taken away. So much here about the joys of music, small pleasures and gratitude.

So beautiful. I have only one question: which of Ann Patchett books to read next?

This was one of the best books I have read so far this year. It made me want to press the book to my chest and sigh. Can I have her talent for descriptions? I want it. I'm jealous.

I have no idea why this book is so popular. Incredibly dry and dull. Couldn't even finish it.

I have read a few of this author's books now and I know what to expect. Perfect prose, well defined characters, a slow rambling story like a stroll in a beautiful park. And more often than not a difficult ending.

Bel Canto demonstrates all of those characteristics. Reading it was a real pleasure and the author did not put a foot wrong literary wise. All of the characters are well defined and by the end they become people you know and some like Gen you really want to meet.

Then there is the ending. Just for once I thought the author was going to get it right. It was traumatic yet expected and almost a relief when it arrived. Then she added an epilogue which was most definitely not required. It was just wrong. I can vaguely see what she was aiming for but it was still wrong.

Four stars for a beautiful book which would have been five if I could just mentally unsee that epilogue!

How did Patchett do this? A seemingly horrifying event turned into a mystical one. Where lines of good vs evil are blurred. Where time is suspended.

It's a birthday party gala in South America. The guest of honour, a powerful Japanese figurehead, almost didn't make it himself except for the soprano whose voice he adores. As the final note is sung, the lights go out and the guerrillas enter. The party is hijacked for political reasons but what transpires during the next few months are the unusual relationships that are forged by the beauty of a voice which unites both terrorists and hostages. Where for long moments during this siege, captivity is interrupted and they are a group of people witnessing a main attraction, living it day to day.

Patchett is an artist. She details a portrait in which I bear witness. I searched arias and operas to get a sense of the beauty and passion this music can evoke. I'm in awe and for that I'm rating it a 4⭐️. I am smitten now with you, Patchett, but, I reserve the final star for the ending I wasn't as smitten with.

This was another one of our favorite authors with our Library Book Discussion group. I am now bringing my review to Goodreads.

Did you know that this book was actually based on a true story?

Set in South America, readers find themselves in a large room filled with mostly affluent bureaucrats and CEO’s that are suddenly taken hostage by terrorists during a beautiful soprano opera performance by the book’s female lead, Roxanne Coss.

The story remains in that same setting, and the hostages are held captive for over 4 months. So what was intended to be just hours, turned into days and then months of standoff.

And... Patchett shows readers exactly how universal humanity is...

Our cares, our fears, our talents, our values, our love.

Where what once was terrorists vs hostages now blurs and becomes a giant group of humans, together.

Are we now seeing friendships forming? Maybe even romance?

Or…Are we experiencing Stockholm Syndrome? (feelings of trust or affection felt in many cases of kidnapping or hostage-taking by a victim toward a captor.)

Are the hostages learning to adjust to this new normal – finding ways to appreciate their spouses better?

And the terrorists – some were teenagers with minds and talents – being used in this heartless way – could we humanize them?

And then there is Roxanne Coss.

Her voice and her music touches everybody. There is something magical and lyrical about her voice that seems to calm everyone.

The beautiful, tender, lyrical language. The character development.

And then…What was the point of that epilogue? Everything was going so well until then. Is that really how you are going to end this? I’m not sure I could accept it.

I really, really enjoyed this book. I love her writing style and I loved the way the story flowed all the way until the end. It felt super abrupt - but I guess that's how life goes sometimes too. I loved the themes of adaptation, of love, of change, of escape (literally from the life you were living one moment before), and the push and pull between relationships. Oh and it totally made me want to go to an opera.

A book centered on love, music and kindness innate in humanity. This book is a well written story by a very descriptive author. The tension builds and the love deepens. A fun and fulfilling read. There is evil in the book and there would be no tension or reality without it. Reality, for me, is an essential element of even a novel.

I loved the characters and the writing but unfortunately, the story didn't convinve me. Too many things in the plot that I thought were either unnecessary (the love story between Gen and Carmen for example) or under-developped (the political goals of the rebels). And the epilogue was way too 'Hollywood' for my taste.
2.5*

I was only 3 when Patty Hearst showed up on TV toting a semi automatic weapon looking bewildered and stylish in a ¾ length leather belted coat. Do I remember this? Hell no, I was three, but later… you know when I was like eight or nine and I would think it was so cool that she was brainwashed---what an interesting word--- and I’d have Barbie kidnap Skipper and force her to drop her frumpy ways and really live the lie…, I mean life. Sorry.

So, what does that have to do with this? Well, I guess you could say that I was intrigued with the whole idea of Stockholm Syndrome way before I knew it had a name. Just imagine becoming emotionally attached to people that held you hostage. Isn’t that a bit fucked up? Duh. (As my 4 year old would say)

So, Bel Canto, while the characters and events are mostly fictionalized, was based on an actual hostage situation in Peru in 1996. Where 72 people men were held up in the Japanese Ambassador’s home for 126 days. I must have been living under a rock, because I do not remember this… you think that something like this would have stuck, you know? I’m sure I was too wrapped up in my glee that Judge Judy was now being syndicated. Whoo.

Can you imagine living with terrorists for 4 and ½ months? My god, I can’t imagine that the same level of fear is maintained. I would think that you would start to develop a relationship with these kids (yes, they were basically children) and start to feel that this is what your life has become. And so it goes in Bel Canto , these characters, hostages and terrorists are introduced systematically throughout the beginning of the ordeal and Patchett does a good job of fleshing them out and getting us attached. To a point. I think that this is one of those books where your opinion of it will vary depending on where you are in your life. I can see this book leaving different impressions on someone who maybe has just found new love and someone who is jaded by relationships. Moreover, I think that this could determine just how much you liked this book. I’ve teetered between 2, 3 and 4 starts in just the few days since I’ve finished it.

This is most definitely a chick lit book. You’ve got the Soprano who has men falling at her feet (almost literally) every time she belts one out, you’ve got the young idealists who, of course, are beautiful and destined for a tragic outcome… and you’ve got the older, more elegant group of men, pining for love lost and all that. Something for every taste, I suppose.

The appeal of a good book is how long and hard it stays with you. When I finished this, I was eager to share the story with my friends and family but as the days wore on, the shine was lost and I started to see the faults and the hackneyed plot. I miss the first day when I was caught up in the story and lamenting the outcome.

Why can’t it always be like that?