Review of THE FROZEN RIVER by Ariel Lawhon

 3.5 Stars

This historical novel is set in Hallowell, Maine, between November 26, 1789 and April 30, 1790.

Martha Ballard, 54, married to Ephraim, is the mother to six surviving children. She is a midwife who also takes on the role of amateur sleuth when a murder occurs in their small community. Rebecca Foster was raped by two men, Joshua Burgess and Colonel Joseph North. Burgess’ body is found in the river, though Martha’s examination leads her to conclude he was beaten and hanged before his body was dumped in the river. Did North kill Burgess, the only witness to their crime, or did Rebecca’s husband exact revenge or was someone else the murderer? There are complications to the case: North is a judge in the local court, North controls the Ballard family’s lease on their property, Rebecca is pregnant as a result of the rape, and Martha’s oldest son Cyrus was seen fighting with Burgess the night of his death.

In some respects this book is a murder mystery. There is however, not a lot of suspense and the pace is slow. The book does highlight the lack of women’s rights and the injustices they faced. If a woman had a child out of wedlock, she was fined and ostracized by the community; the man went unpunished and, even if named as the father, faced no obligation to provide for the child. Men are never found guilty of sexual assault unless there is a witness to the attack. Martha points out that during one court date, “’The jury acquitted ever man tried of rape . . . But they fined a woman into poverty for spreading lies.’”

Martha is certainly a feminist. My problem is not with her attitude towards the poor treatment women receive but to the accuracy of such a portrayal. Martha’s views are those of a modern woman, not those of someone living in the late eighteenth century. There is also the issue of the number of children born out of wedlock; it’s almost an epidemic. Attitudes to sex outside marriage were censorious, and the consequences for women harsh yet in this novel extra-marital sex is almost a norm: there’s Lucy (Martha’s eldest daughter) and May Kimble and Sarah White and Sally Pierce and her four sisters, and those are just the ones that are specifically identified.

Martha is a problematic character for another reason. She is strong, independent, capable, and intelligent, yet I found her difficult to like. She comes across as self-righteous and condescending. She believes she knows best and looks down on anyone who disagrees with her. She’s quick to judge others like the wives of Colonel North and Dr. Page, viewing them as guilty by association. Of many men she is dismissive, but her husband is a paragon.

Indeed Martha and Ephraim’s relationship seems over-the-top. He’s the perfect husband who supports his wife in every way and has done so for the 35 years of their marriage. Their sex life seems like that of a modern couple; when first married, Ephraim restrained himself for weeks, but now they have sexual encounters in various settings. The sex talk doesn’t fit the time period. Would a man in the 1700s really say something like, “I wouldn’t mind if you hardened my shaft tonight”?

The novel is longer than it needed to be. There are some elements that seem superfluous. For instance, the scenes with the fox are unnecessary. And how many times must we be told that women are the ones who choose a man? There are a lot of secondary characters to keep track of. What is needed however is some character development. North is a caricature of a villain; he possesses no redeeming qualities. And Dr. Page is another cliché: a vengeful misogynist.

The book is entertaining, but its literary quality is not exceptional, and I’m not convinced of its historical accuracy.