Having read his short fiction and novellas, I was fascinated to see what George Saunders would be able to accomplish via a novel. I am a devoted Saunders fan, and practically shove his work into the faces of all the bookish people in my life. I am very pleased that I was already familiar with Saunders' work before I tackled Lincoln in the Bardo. 
 Having already read much of Saunders' bibliography, I was aware that this was probably going to be one of the stranger novels I've ever read. I was definitely correct in that assumption. Lincoln in the Bardo is not an easy novel to read. It is not a book that feeds the reader all the bits and pieces that one needs to comprehend plot and character. I also guessed that this novel would be incredibly rewarding, in spite of, and even due to, its complexity. Saunders did not disappoint my assumptions. 
 Lincoln in the Bardo is set during the Civil War and revolves around the death of Willie Lincoln, Abraham Lincoln's son, who died at a young age. Most of the novel takes place in a graveyard where characters are trapped in a world in between life and death. This in-between-space is full of oddities and mysterious occurrences and characters who attempt to reconcile their lives on earth with their time in this place. 
 If the setting and concept isn't strange enough, then the method of story-telling definitely is. The books is told through multiple perspectives. Some chapters are told through the beautiful, lyrical, stream-of-consciousness-style perspectives of Willie and Abraham Lincoln. But three men trapped in the graveyard narrate much of the story via a structure similar to a screenplay. Saunders takes this dramatic structure, though, and pushes it to the extreme. He does not write any descriptions of the characters or setting, rather, he lets the characters tell the reader everything he thinks they need to know. These three characters describe each other, their surroundings, the events of the story, and the other characters around them. I found it very whimsical that at times these narrators even tell the reader what one of the other primary narrators just said. Saunders took this very familiar form and then pushed it to its limits and turned it in upon itself, allowing for the story to be delightfully complicated and an overall good time. 
 Overall, this story is a meditation on grief. It's a meditation on the lives of those left behind after the death of a loved one, and, in another extreme Saunders move, the remorse and pain felt by the dead. Since most of the characters we encounter are stuck in between life and death--a sort of morbid betrayal of ghosts, really--the story allowed me to ruminate on the idea that death does not necessarily indicate absolution or peace. 
 Overall, I found the story beautifully written and told. It is a novel that I will revisit again, because I believe that I still have much to learn from it. The only words of caution I have for anyone looking to pick up this book is that it may not be the best place to start with Saunders' work. I would advise almost anyone to dip their toes into his fabulist writing style via his short fiction before picking up this novel, as the style and themes may be a bit jarring to a reader unfamiliar with his previous work. 
 I received a free copy of this book via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.