Nature Book Group discussion

**Spoiler Alert**
We were a small group of six (with extra comments from some who couldn't come) and everyone thought that it was a very well written, gripping novel and an excellent follow on to The Brother Gardeners. Most of us liked the Dickensian style of narrative - always the hook at the end of a chapter to draw you into the next - and the cast of distinctive, slightly larger than life characters. But others thought that it was rather cliched.

We were not sure what to make of Ambrose - was he a homosexual who couldn't own up to his own nature, or was he genuinely not interested in the physical but craved spiritual congress? We also puzzled over the title of the book, as the idea didn't seem central to the book's theme.

Another cause for unease was her use of Robin Wall Kimmerer's work on mosses, some of which seemed to have been lifted almost word for word from Gathering Moss. However, Kate found a post https://www.elizabethgilbert.com/me-a... which suggests that she had the author's blessing. We thought that the integration with historical figures worked well, particularly Alfred Russel Wallace, whose unconventionality fitted well with the rest of the cast. There was some frustration that Alma hadn't published her book, despite its impossibility, but that speaks to the strength of character Gilbert had created!

On the choice of title, could she be riffing on the idea that we can learn from and be helped by everyone's and everything's unique nature, which we ignore at our and their peril?