I'm left feeling confused. Tony seems like a person who just coasts through life and does everything the easy way, but then he comes across as this huge asshole in his later life when he must deal with Veronica.
What was the point of this story? Something about memory and corroboration, yes. Did Tony forget that he wrote that douche-y letter to Adrian and Veronica until it came back to haunt him? Because prior to that, he didn't let on that he ever did anything so negative.
Toward the end, I was more compelled to read than I was at any other point in the book because I was interested in the "mystery" that unfolded. Yet, what was the message there? Adrian had an affair with Veronica's mother - this was scandalous but what did it reveal about Tony?
All these complaints aside, I do feel like this book is "deep" and that I am maybe missing out on a bigger picture here. In other words, I don't exactly regret reading this book....Somebody help me out?
I think the issue with a first person narrative is that you don't always get the clearest picture of the character. Tony could be telling us whatever he wants to about who he is, and omit all the dirty details, like that letter. He said he wrote a letter to them, but who wouldn't remember the general tone of something like that, if not the content? He reminds me of Grace from the Lifeboat in this sense - we are forced to trust to protagonist even if we haven't been given any real reason to.
Veronica made no sense to me. How did two men fall for such a strange, cold, complicated woman? When she and Tony reconnected, I wasn't rooting for either of them, just curious about what was going to unfold. Tony's constant needling and e-mailing...why? Wouldn't you want to just leave it alone?
I was most engaged at the end, because I wanted to find out what happened, but I don't get the relevance to Tony either. I think it was an interesting book, but for a book about one man's life and memory, I didn't understand either at the end. Maybe the point is that to live your life complacently means that you aren't in control of the past and things will happen to you that remind or teach you that you have to be present and in touch with yourself? I'm not really sure... :)
I liked this book and found it thought provoking, but I'm excited about reading a book with a more clear plot and storyline.
I had a hard time getting through this book because for me, it was slow and dull at times and I really didn't connect with any of the characters. Towards the end, it did get a bit more interesting but only because I wanted to know how it was going to end. I also felt the ending didn't explain much and left me wanting more.
This book was painful for me. I couldn't connect to anyone - Tony seemed whiny in the beginning, and then annoying towards the end. Veronica was far to bitchy, and Adrian died way too early.
And, how is Tony exactly suppose "to get it" about Adrian's love child?
I had mixed feelings about the whole thing. I think the following passage really sums up the book: “How often do we tell our own life story? How often do we adjust, embellish, make sly cuts? And the longer life goes on, the fewer are those around to challenge our account, to remind us that our life is not our life, merely the story we have told about our life. Told to others, but mainly to ourselves.”
I'm recalling a phrase from high school English class - "the unreliable narrator". I feel like once you understand that's what Tony is, the rest of the book seems to make more sense. The entire first part is his recollection of his youth, of how his relationship with Veronica transpired, of what happened to his friendships, his marriage, his relationship with his daughter.
In first part he seems "peaceable", and even likable, if not all that interesting, but I guess the point is that he really isn't that person at all, or at least he is but mixed with shades of grey. You read the letter he wrote to Veronica and Adrian and realize he was human after all. I think we'd all like to believe the best about ourselves and how we've treated others in the past, but our memories are often false.
It took me a minute to understand what had happened after the big reveal at the end. I still don't really know how I feel about the story as a whole. I think I need to sit with it a few more days. At least I felt it was well written and a somewhat accurate (if not dark) examination of how we view our own interpersonal relationships.
I finished this book last night. I had to re-read Tony's conversation with Terry and the subsequent "big reveal" several times to make sense of it. I felt a bit stupid because when Tony referenced Adrian(Sr.) weird equation (a+a+b) and the whole business of "The Mother" and Veronica asking Jack if he'd do... well I'm just not sure that the story I was reading really built up to this scandalous ending. I agree with Jhani, When I first read the contents of Tony's letter I thought it was a forgery, in some plot by Veronica. It seemed very strange to me that Tony did not recall his cruelness, and ill wishes...At the same time I am not clear as to why Veronica's mother left the diary to Tony. Was it so that she could let him know the impact of his letter (as Veronica and Adrian perceived it?)I also found myself increasingly annoyed by Veronica's erratic almost psychotic presentation and behavior---and MORE annoyed that tony harassed her really to suit his own needs. Driving to that city to have dinner at that pub week after week is a very unstable thing to do.
Back to Veronica: I can see how what happened with her mother and Adrian would be devastating, but holding Tony responsible seems curious. Seems to be in contrast with the books theme/message of the role of philosophy (as a personal belief system and a topic) and memory recall.... What I mean is that regardless of Tony's letter, couldn't we assume that Adrian, Veronica, & Veronica's mother all made decisions and choices based on their moral drives? Isn't it possible that Tony's "epiphany" about how his letter caused this chain of events, just him choosing to incert himself in this situation, making it about him. It's possible that with a narrator like Tony the true "point" is buried.
Whatever, I've lost myself. I wonder if I will need to revisit this book down the road. Reading reviews on Goodreads offers better insight into this author and this book...I liked the book, but I wonder if it was all a bit too high brow.
I agree with Natasha's question about Tony needing to "get it" regarding Adrian's baby. Was he just supposed to get that Adrian had an affair with Veronica's mother?
8 comments:
I'm left feeling confused. Tony seems like a person who just coasts through life and does everything the easy way, but then he comes across as this huge asshole in his later life when he must deal with Veronica.
What was the point of this story? Something about memory and corroboration, yes. Did Tony forget that he wrote that douche-y letter to Adrian and Veronica until it came back to haunt him? Because prior to that, he didn't let on that he ever did anything so negative.
Toward the end, I was more compelled to read than I was at any other point in the book because I was interested in the "mystery" that unfolded. Yet, what was the message there? Adrian had an affair with Veronica's mother - this was scandalous but what did it reveal about Tony?
All these complaints aside, I do feel like this book is "deep" and that I am maybe missing out on a bigger picture here. In other words, I don't exactly regret reading this book....Somebody help me out?
I think the issue with a first person narrative is that you don't always get the clearest picture of the character. Tony could be telling us whatever he wants to about who he is, and omit all the dirty details, like that letter. He said he wrote a letter to them, but who wouldn't remember the general tone of something like that, if not the content? He reminds me of Grace from the Lifeboat in this sense - we are forced to trust to protagonist even if we haven't been given any real reason to.
Veronica made no sense to me. How did two men fall for such a strange, cold, complicated woman? When she and Tony reconnected, I wasn't rooting for either of them, just curious about what was going to unfold. Tony's constant needling and e-mailing...why? Wouldn't you want to just leave it alone?
I was most engaged at the end, because I wanted to find out what happened, but I don't get the relevance to Tony either. I think it was an interesting book, but for a book about one man's life and memory, I didn't understand either at the end. Maybe the point is that to live your life complacently means that you aren't in control of the past and things will happen to you that remind or teach you that you have to be present and in touch with yourself? I'm not really sure... :)
I liked this book and found it thought provoking, but I'm excited about reading a book with a more clear plot and storyline.
I had a hard time getting through this book because for me, it was slow and dull at times and I really didn't connect with any of the characters. Towards the end, it did get a bit more interesting but only because I wanted to know how it was going to end. I also felt the ending didn't explain much and left me wanting more.
This book was painful for me. I couldn't connect to anyone - Tony seemed whiny in the beginning, and then annoying towards the end. Veronica was far to bitchy, and Adrian died way too early.
And, how is Tony exactly suppose "to get it" about Adrian's love child?
I had mixed feelings about the whole thing. I think the following passage really sums up the book: “How often do we tell our own life story? How often do we adjust, embellish, make sly cuts? And the longer life goes on, the fewer are those around to challenge our account, to remind us that our life is not our life, merely the story we have told about our life. Told to others, but mainly to ourselves.”
I'm recalling a phrase from high school English class - "the unreliable narrator". I feel like once you understand that's what Tony is, the rest of the book seems to make more sense. The entire first part is his recollection of his youth, of how his relationship with Veronica transpired, of what happened to his friendships, his marriage, his relationship with his daughter.
In first part he seems "peaceable", and even likable, if not all that interesting, but I guess the point is that he really isn't that person at all, or at least he is but mixed with shades of grey. You read the letter he wrote to Veronica and Adrian and realize he was human after all. I think we'd all like to believe the best about ourselves and how we've treated others in the past, but our memories are often false.
It took me a minute to understand what had happened after the big reveal at the end. I still don't really know how I feel about the story as a whole. I think I need to sit with it a few more days. At least I felt it was well written and a somewhat accurate (if not dark) examination of how we view our own interpersonal relationships.
I finished this book last night. I had to re-read Tony's conversation with Terry and the subsequent "big reveal" several times to make sense of it. I felt a bit stupid because when Tony referenced Adrian(Sr.) weird equation (a+a+b) and the whole business of "The Mother" and Veronica asking Jack if he'd do... well I'm just not sure that the story I was reading really built up to this scandalous ending. I agree with Jhani, When I first read the contents of Tony's letter I thought it was a forgery, in some plot by Veronica. It seemed very strange to me that Tony did not recall his cruelness, and ill wishes...At the same time I am not clear as to why Veronica's mother left the diary to Tony. Was it so that she could let him know the impact of his letter (as Veronica and Adrian perceived it?)I also found myself increasingly annoyed by Veronica's erratic almost psychotic presentation and behavior---and MORE annoyed that tony harassed her really to suit his own needs. Driving to that city to have dinner at that pub week after week is a very unstable thing to do.
Back to Veronica: I can see how what happened with her mother and Adrian would be devastating, but holding Tony responsible seems curious. Seems to be in contrast with the books theme/message of the role of philosophy (as a personal belief system and a topic) and memory recall.... What I mean is that regardless of Tony's letter, couldn't we assume that Adrian, Veronica, & Veronica's mother all made decisions and choices based on their moral drives? Isn't it possible that Tony's "epiphany" about how his letter caused this chain of events, just him choosing to incert himself in this situation, making it about him. It's possible that with a narrator like Tony the true "point" is buried.
Whatever, I've lost myself. I wonder if I will need to revisit this book down the road. Reading reviews on Goodreads offers better insight into this author and this book...I liked the book, but I wonder if it was all a bit too high brow.
I agree with Natasha's question about Tony needing to "get it" regarding Adrian's baby. Was he just supposed to get that Adrian had an affair with Veronica's mother?
@Jhani I completely agree. Like WHY would Tony magically just understand that?
Post a Comment