Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

What we're reading

Find your new favourite book or recommend one on our Book forum.

We need to talk about Kevin

31 replies

maggiethecat · 11/11/2009 23:57

Read it recently and was captivated by Shriver's style and the very disturbing subject matter.

I did not guess the ending although it all added up in hindsight. Did anyone suss it well before the end?

OP posts:
mice · 12/11/2009 00:00

I actually thought the ending was quite obvious from fairly early on - sorry!
My husband didn't though.
I thought it was a really good book but I know many people don't like it - all personal choice I suppose.

scottishmummy · 12/11/2009 00:10

thought the twist ending was obvious.hated this book

Poledra · 12/11/2009 00:17

Saw the twist coming but was still hooked into watching how it all came out. I don't think I'd actually go as far as to say I liked the book - both of the main protagonists were fairly unpleasant/selfish people - but it was an absorbing read.

maggiethecat · 12/11/2009 12:09

I thought the honesty of Eva's letters was brutal. I could actually identify with some of what she wrote though would be horrified to actually speak some of it.

OP posts:
themildmanneredjanitor · 12/11/2009 12:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ShowOfHands · 12/11/2009 12:15

It was contrived, obvious, psychologically inaccurate drivel.

It often surprises me that people couldn't see it coming.

maggiethecat · 12/11/2009 12:32

contrived, inaccurate?

OP posts:
Francasaysrelax · 12/11/2009 12:34

Yes, I guessed the ending from the very beginning. But I really enjoyed reading WNTTAK. There are lots of things to discuss about!

Bleatblurt · 12/11/2009 12:40

I HATED this. I skipped the middle and had about 3 years break from the bits I did read. It just went on and on and on.

If she'd posted on MN that mother would have been flamed!

I hated all the characters and would have been quite happy for Kevin to kill his mother too, if only to stop the book much sooner.

maggiethecat · 12/11/2009 12:44

Janitor, I hardly think she is alone in her lack of warmth and love toward her child.

OP posts:
themildmanneredjanitor · 12/11/2009 12:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Sparks · 12/11/2009 12:53

I don't think it was meant to be realistic. I am sure it was meant to be controversial and sell well.

I think Lionel Shriver is a very good writer, but I didn't get on with the book.

Bleatblurt · 12/11/2009 12:56

She used too many Big Words.

ShowOfHands · 12/11/2009 13:33

Contrived and inaccurate?

Yes, it was a very poor character study. It set up from its inception a dichotomy between nature/nurture, delusion/clear sight, good/bad and the characters were so polarised within this that it lacked any realism whatsoever. So Kevin was born evil and his sister utterly innocent. As inaccurately as I think Kevin was portrayed, his sister is worse, designed to be everything he isn't ie meek, mild, the victim. The mother is clear sighted and perceptive to her son's evil ways, the father deluded and unseeing. They couldn't be any less rigidly characterised if they were in a Christmas panto.

I didn't think it raised many questions but it certainly answered a few. Namely, Lionel Shriver neither likes nor understands children and SOH doesn't like reading books that are so bloody obvious and insistent in thematic content.

BitOfFun · 12/11/2009 13:36

Er, I quite liked it...but I am clearly a dullard . I made the HUGE mistake of reading another of her books, about a woman who has an affair with a snooker player. It was drivel.

NicknameTaken · 12/11/2009 13:42

I liked it and didn't guess the final twist (I almost never do, somehow). I have to disagree with Show - the mother is a classic unreliable narrator. Yes, she sees one child as evil and one as good, but it's set up so that the reader should be questioning her view.

Francasaysrelax · 12/11/2009 13:51

I don't really think that the book is the manifesto of Shriver's feelings towards children.
You don't need to be a mother to write a book about a mother/family/conventions etc, imho.

ShowOfHands · 12/11/2009 14:06

Nope, you don't need to be a mother to write a book about being a mother/family etc. But you need to understand that your self-confessed intense dislike of children colours the way in which you write them.

I have never read anything written by Shriver that isn't dripping with her own opinions and agenda. Which is alright if you like her opinions. Which I don't.

thesecondcoming · 12/11/2009 14:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

pagwatch · 12/11/2009 14:18

I just found it incredibly hard to read. There was nothing in it except relentless cruelty and misery and i found it upsetting.
And I am not normally like that about fiction.
Just gratuitous.

Francasaysrelax · 12/11/2009 14:19

I see. Her other books didn't appeal to me either.
I really didn't read the novel as a universal dislike for children.

busybutterfly · 12/11/2009 20:48

I thought this was one of the best books I have read and I recommended it highly to all my friends.
Hope they don't think it's drivel

PyrotechnicToadstool · 12/11/2009 21:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

fannybanjo · 12/11/2009 21:11

I have read this and do you know what, I can't even remember the ending! In my defence I do read a lot of books.

Unfortunately some children are born "evil". It is human nature.

spicybingowings · 12/11/2009 21:11

Irritating, horrible book - hated it! My mum recommended it to me, said how much she'd enjoyed reading it, so I was very disappointed!

Swipe left for the next trending thread