We need to talk about Kevin

[maggiethecat]

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?

Shriver managed to write a book that kicked off a lot of discussion whether we liked it or not. Some of the themes are age old but perhaps got the reader to revisit them.

I find it tiresome that such an intense dislike of an author can evoke such hostility about her book.

I enjoyed the book. I found that my sympathies constantly shifted between Eva and Kevin as the story went on, highlighting the extremely grey area of nature/nurture.

I didn't see the ending coming and was emotionally drained once I'd finished reading it.

I started reading this a few years ago and only managed the beginning because I found it so boring.
I picked it up again a few month ago and read it in a few days. I didn't foresee the twist ending. I thought it was well written and it made me cry.

Boring?! Certainly not boring . You could say other things about it...but boring?!

Interesting though how this book creates really strong reactions to those who read it. There have been many threads about it on MN- here and here and here and here (and I'm sure there are more). It's interesting, in all these threads there's always these very strong reactions, I wonder why it is.

I could see the ending coming, it didn't let it less sad though. In general I tend to like Lionel Shriver, I think she's a fair writer who tackles interesting topics. I really liked her 'post birthday world'...

I liked the book - I can't say I guessed the ending entirely (parts of) but even if I had I would still have wanted to read it unfold.

I kind of agree with SoH re the characterisation but then I put that down to the fact that Eva, like a lot of first person narrators, is an unreliable narrator (a bit like the elderly teacher in Notes on a Scandal). So it is she who views the world and her family as polarised between competing dichotomies (and in part becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of her own doom because of this) and even though she is very dislikeable I'm always quite fond of dislikeable narrators.

I haven't read any other Lionel Shriver to be able to comment on whether her narrators are cardboard cut-outs for her own agendas (any recommendations welcomed...I think I have one about tennis unread on my book shelves but it obviously hasn't lured me in yet so maybe there's a better one?)

But does it really matter if she is speaking to her own agenda (and how many writers dont?) if the book was a good read?