Fate Versus Timing in In the Likely Event

Defining the Thematic Claim

In In the Likely Event, Rebecca Yarros weaves a central tension between fate—the forces that keep throwing Nathaniel and Izzy together—and timing—the concrete, often painful reasons their relationship repeatedly fails to take root. The novel’s thematic claim is that meaningful love requires more than cosmic alignment; it demands that both partners arrive at the same readiness, make active choices, and stop waiting for the universe to conspire in their favor. Over a decade, the characters mistake serendipity for destiny, only to discover that fate can place them in the same room but cannot force them to stay.

Trace Across Three Plot Milestones

1. The Crash and First Separation (Chapters 1–3)

When Izzy and Nathaniel meet on a plane in 2011, the encounter feels predestined. He calms her terror during takeoff; moments later, the wing explodes and they survive together. This shared trauma forges an instant bond. Yet after the crash, the timing collapses. Nathaniel ships out to basic training while Izzy recovers with a concussion, and neither has a way to contact the other. The crash itself is a collision of fate—they are thrown together when their seats happen to be adjacent—but the aftermath forces them apart because of external schedules. The novel immediately establishes that being “meant to be” does not guarantee being “meant to be now.”

2. Serendipitous Reunions and Missed Windows (Chapters 10, 12, 20, 26)

Over the next decade, Nathaniel and Izzy keep finding each other through apparent coincidence. In Savannah (Chapter 10), they reunite at a bar during her bachelorette party and his pre‑deployment leave. They marvel at the serendipity—Izzy calls it serendipity directly—but Nathaniel is deploying, and she lives in DC. Again, the moment is charged yet impossible. In Chapter 12, they share a passionate day on Tybee Island, yet Nathaniel insists they cannot define the relationship because he is leaving. “Our timing is shit,” he admits. Later, in 2017 (Chapter 20), Nathaniel flies to Fiji expecting Izzy to meet him, but she never shows. Each reunion feels fated, yet each fails because one or both are emotionally or logistically unavailable.

The climax of this pattern occurs in Chapter 26, when Nathaniel proposes outside Izzy’s parents’ home. He declares, “We were supposed to end up together. It was just a matter of timing.” But Izzy refuses—not because she does not love him, but because he has shut her out of his life for years and she cannot build a future on a foundation of secrets and distance. Here the novel makes its sharpest contrast: fate has brought them to that doorstep, but poor timing and lack of mutual readiness turn the proposal into a shattering rejection.

3. The Kabul Reunion and Final Choice (Chapters 1–3, 32–33, Epilogue)

In the 2021 timeline, Nathaniel is assigned to protect a congressional aide in Kabul, only to discover the aide is Izzy. This is the most extreme example of fate’s orchestration: half a world away, their paths cross again. Yet the circumstances are dire—the Taliban is overrunning the country, Izzy is engaged to someone else (Jeremy), and she believes Nathaniel is dead. The narrative insists that even a fated reunion cannot erase the missing years. Izzy’s motivation for being in the north—she changed the itinerary to find her sister Serena—introduces her own agency, showing that she is not merely a passive recipient of fate.

The turning point comes in Chapter 33, when Izzy boards a flight to the Maldives, having quit her job and resolved to trust Nathaniel. He surprises her by switching flights, revealing he has left the military and entered therapy. They agree to “stop leaving their relationship to fate” and commit to a shared future. The epilogue, set five years later in Maine, depicts a stable domestic life. The final message is that the couple had to stop waiting for the universe to align and start actively choosing each other, through both difficult timing and deliberate action.

Character and Symbol Connections

Nathaniel and Izzy embody the fate‑timing conflict. Nathaniel repeatedly lets go because he believes he is not good enough or that waiting will protect Izzy. Izzy, in turn, interprets their chemistry as fate but grows frustrated with the undefined gray area. Their counterpoints—Jeremy Covington and Serena Astor—highlight what happens when timing is right. Jeremy is present, stable, and willing to propose; Serena is a sister whose rescue motivates Izzy to take risks. Neither is a villain, but both illustrate that love cannot survive on magnetism alone.

Symbols reinforce the theme. The engagement ring that Izzy wears when she reunites with Nathaniel in Kabul represents a choice made with good timing but without the right person. The iPod and music—especially “Northern Downpour” and the acoustic version of “This Is Gospel”—act as time capsules, preserving the memory of their connection across years of silence. The plane crash (Flight 826) is the original fated event, but it also introduces the danger of assuming survival guarantees a future together. Finally, the family farm in Maine, where the epilogue is set, symbolizes the domestic stability that was always out of reach when they relied on serendipity. It is a place they build together through deliberate choice, not accident.

Complexity and Contradiction

The novel does not simply dismiss fate. Many of its most romantic moments—the crash, the beach kisses, the Kabul confrontation—feel genuinely destined. The characters themselves repeatedly invoke fate: Izzy thinks “Fate. There was no other way to explain this” after their first kiss on Tybee. Nathaniel tells himself, “We were supposed to end up together. It was just a matter of timing.” These beliefs keep them hoping across years of separation. Yet Yarros complicates this by showing that relying on fate alone becomes an excuse for inaction. Nathaniel’s refusal to define the relationship, Izzy’s choice to date Jeremy, and their mutual silence during long gaps all stem from a passive faith that the universe will fix things. The story argues that fate can bring two people together, but only conscious, difficult choices—therapy, leaving the military, quitting a career—can keep them together.

Furthermore, the novel acknowledges that timing is not entirely within the characters’ control. Deployments, careers, and family obligations constrain their options. The deeper complexity is that the characters must learn to take responsibility for the choices they can make, rather than blaming bad timing for outcomes they could have influenced. Nathaniel’s decision to seek help for his PTSD (Chapter 32) is a crucial step: he stops hiding from Izzy and starts healing, which finally aligns their emotional readiness with their physical proximity.

Study Questions and Answers

1. How does the plane crash in Chapter 3 function as both a fated event and a timing obstacle?

Answer: The crash throws Nathaniel and Izzy together in a life‑altering moment that feels predestined—they sit next to each other by chance, survive together, and forge an instant bond. However, it immediately separates them because Nathaniel must report for basic training while Izzy is hospitalized, and neither can exchange contact information. The crash thus establishes fate as a force that brings them close but cannot override the logistical and military timetable that pulls them apart.

2. In Chapter 26, Nathaniel proposes by saying “We were supposed to end up together. It was just a matter of timing.” Why does Izzy reject him despite agreeing that they are meant to be?

Answer: Izzy rejects the proposal because she recognizes that their timing is still wrong. Nathaniel has kept her in the dark about his Special Forces selection, his emotional struggles, and his life. She tells him she cannot build a future on that lack of trust. The rejection shows that believing in fate is not enough; love requires transparency and mutual readiness. Even though they are fated, the timing of the proposal disrespects a decade of undefined distance.

3. What role does the symbol of the iPod play in the fate‑versus‑timing theme?

Answer: The iPod, which Nathaniel gives Izzy on crash day with a curated playlist, serves as a tangible memory of their connection across time. When they reunite later, she can still name every song, proving the permanence of their bond. Yet the iPod also highlights poor timing: it is a relic of a moment they could not sustain, and its songs become a bittersweet soundtrack to years of missed opportunities. It symbolizes that fate preserves the feeling of connection, but timing must be actively managed to turn that connection into a life.

4. How does the relationship between Izzy and Serena contrast with the fate‑timing dynamic between Izzy and Nathaniel?

Answer: Izzy’s relationship with Serena is built on family obligation and active choice—Izzy risks her safety to find Serena in the northern provinces of Afghanistan. This plotline shows that Izzy is capable of decisive action when she cares about someone. The contrast underscores that with Nathaniel, she often waits passively for fate to intervene, while with Serena, she does not. The novel suggests that love for a partner should inspire the same kind of deliberate effort, not just a reliance on serendipity.

5. In the epilogue, Nathaniel reflects that “work can wait.” How does this final scene resolve the fate‑versus‑timing tension?

Answer: The epilogue shows Nathaniel and Izzy in a peaceful domestic setting, having built a life in Maine. By prioritizing each other over work and external demands, they finally control their own timing. The final line emphasizes that they have achieved “forever,” not because fate forced it, but because they stopped leaving their relationship to chance. This resolution flips the earlier pattern: instead of colliding at bad moments, they now choose the moment together, turning fate into a foundation rather than an excuse.