‘The Love That Split the World’ by Emily Henry book review

Razorbill, an imprint of Penguin Books, released Emily Henry’s debut novel, The Love That Split the World, on Jan. 26. While the love story within is beautiful, the science behind the novel’s time travel is convoluted and confusing.

Natalie is an adopted Native American teenager living with her very white suburban family. She has episodes of speaking to an old woman she calls “Grandmother” who doesn’t exist to anyone but her. After several years without contact, Grandmother suddenly appears to her and warns her that she has “three months to save him.” With no details to go on except the name of a dream scholar and the boy, Beau, who exists between worlds, she’s hopelessly lost. As she falls in love, things start to fall into place. Will she sacrifice herself to save someone she loves?

This book has incredible depth. It mixes time travel with alternate universes and Native American folktales. Natalie and Beau are remarkable characters with realistic teenage personalities. Young adult readers will relate to their coming-of-age romance. Grandmother is intelligent and otherworldly and we feel her importance to the story and to Natalie’s self-confidence.

However, the science behind the story pulls it down like quicksand. The more you struggle to understand it, the more you drown. It seemed incredibly heavy and unnecessarily complex. I wanted to love this book. It had so much going for it, but it left me puzzled. I like a book that makes you think, but when it confuses you and tangles you up, it’s a step too far.

While I loved the characters, the folklore and the ending of this novel, I won’t pick it up again. Perhaps a second reading would clarify the mystery, but perhaps it would only leave me muddled and frustrated like the first time through. I consider myself a smart reader, but it felt like I was back in AP Calculus trying to figure out fractals. I just couldn’t wrap my head around it. If you’re looking for a unique time-bending romance, give it a try. Maybe your logic works better than mine.