Amy’s answer to “Ok it seems pretty clear that Kevin poured the Drano into his sister's eye, but at our book club la…” > Likes and Comments
17 likes · Like
I just finished this book and completely agree with you. I couldn't believe as I was reading that Kevin was lead to be the antagonist, when all along I believed it to be the mother. Thanks for your review.
I don't agree with you on this one. I have a completely different view of the book, sorry. And of course, accusing Eva of everything is a bit too much. It's always easy to blame the mother of everything that happens in the world instead of just looking at the reality as it really is.
Yes, Eva is not the perfect mother. She never really wanted that child to begin with, and of course he felt it. He felt it probably the first time when she was pregnant from him and soon after his birth, he felt the absence of bonding with his mother. For me, that's what the book is about, the absence of a innate attachment between the son and the mother. An attachment that is not normal, not optimal, but that has been build over the years as the two learn to know each other and learn to see themselves through the other.
You cannot say that "children don't think that way" and then accuse the mother. Nowhere in the novel, Eva thinks clearly that her son did the things she suspects him of doing. She always doubt it. And that's what the author wanted to provoke, a doubt in the mind of the reader as it is in the mind of Eva, as she tries to understand why her son killed people in the school.
You can think that Eva is a liar or her perception of reality is false, but it's the only one we have. So let's not pretend that she has Mauchensen syndrome by proxy or whatever else and that she caused Kevin to be ill or that she caused her daughter to be needy. That was never written in the book, that's making up a new book!
Kevin was not a nice kid, after all, he end up killing people, remember? He did even plan his shooting years in advance. You can't just say that kid don't think that way, the book is a fiction. Lionel Shriver can build any character she wants! The author never wrote down that Kevin is evil. There is no such thing in the book. You can try to put diagnosis on him, but that was never the point of the book anyways.
I love that ambiguity and trying to find an answer if he did it or not is not useful. we can debate on that for years.
Her sister was maybe not retarded, maybe she was just naive or even just a regular child. We will never know. The only thing we can say is that she was not as smart as Kevin and was much more emotional than her brother. We will never know if he did it or even what happened there. The only thing we know is that after the incident, he was never worried about his sister recovery. He just plenty ignored her as he didn't care at all about her.
How do you explain real school serial killers then? Because I think the book was meant to examine that subject and what kind of child would do that. I don't agree with your analysis at all.
I don't think that the behaviour of Eva lead to his voilence. He's just a psychopat. He was born with just you are born with adhd and autism and so on. Who blames the mother is someone that is not a mother her/himself.
I have three children and I can tell you that children are born with elements of their personality already there. My daughter and my two son's personalities are so different you wouldn't know they were related and I have been the same mother to all of them. When you have kids you are amazed at how much personality is inborn. And how resilient they are. Eva not liking her son is not enough to make him a psychopath. He seems to have been missing stuff at birth.
YES you're the only one i've seen who gets it 🫶
Oh Amy, you don't have children, do you? Children aren't blank slates; they come with hundreds of character traits that are mixture from all who came before. He was not born with foetal alcohol syndrome (do your research) and he rejected her from the start. They didn't bond but there were some indications of post-natal depression. I disagree strongly with all your opinions on this one.
This isn't even slightly accurate, did you even pay attention? She never drank with Kevin's pregnancy. She drank some with Celia. Kevin abused and injured people. He exhibited signs of being a clinical narcissist if not a psychopath with limited capacity for empathy. Normal children cannot commit murder and torture, lady. Eva may not have been s great mother, but when you have a clinical psychopath it's a bit hard to get into the motherhood thing. In no way shape or form does the book imply Eva made Celia anxious. Though I'm sure being abused by her brother contributed.
The general consensus in psychology is that psychopaths are born
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Jen
(new)
Jun 01, 2017 09:09AM
I just finished this book and completely agree with you. I couldn't believe as I was reading that Kevin was lead to be the antagonist, when all along I believed it to be the mother. Thanks for your review.
reply
|
flag
I don't agree with you on this one. I have a completely different view of the book, sorry. And of course, accusing Eva of everything is a bit too much. It's always easy to blame the mother of everything that happens in the world instead of just looking at the reality as it really is. Yes, Eva is not the perfect mother. She never really wanted that child to begin with, and of course he felt it. He felt it probably the first time when she was pregnant from him and soon after his birth, he felt the absence of bonding with his mother. For me, that's what the book is about, the absence of a innate attachment between the son and the mother. An attachment that is not normal, not optimal, but that has been build over the years as the two learn to know each other and learn to see themselves through the other.
You cannot say that "children don't think that way" and then accuse the mother. Nowhere in the novel, Eva thinks clearly that her son did the things she suspects him of doing. She always doubt it. And that's what the author wanted to provoke, a doubt in the mind of the reader as it is in the mind of Eva, as she tries to understand why her son killed people in the school.
You can think that Eva is a liar or her perception of reality is false, but it's the only one we have. So let's not pretend that she has Mauchensen syndrome by proxy or whatever else and that she caused Kevin to be ill or that she caused her daughter to be needy. That was never written in the book, that's making up a new book!
Kevin was not a nice kid, after all, he end up killing people, remember? He did even plan his shooting years in advance. You can't just say that kid don't think that way, the book is a fiction. Lionel Shriver can build any character she wants! The author never wrote down that Kevin is evil. There is no such thing in the book. You can try to put diagnosis on him, but that was never the point of the book anyways.
I love that ambiguity and trying to find an answer if he did it or not is not useful. we can debate on that for years.
Her sister was maybe not retarded, maybe she was just naive or even just a regular child. We will never know. The only thing we can say is that she was not as smart as Kevin and was much more emotional than her brother. We will never know if he did it or even what happened there. The only thing we know is that after the incident, he was never worried about his sister recovery. He just plenty ignored her as he didn't care at all about her.
How do you explain real school serial killers then? Because I think the book was meant to examine that subject and what kind of child would do that. I don't agree with your analysis at all.
I don't think that the behaviour of Eva lead to his voilence. He's just a psychopat. He was born with just you are born with adhd and autism and so on. Who blames the mother is someone that is not a mother her/himself.
I have three children and I can tell you that children are born with elements of their personality already there. My daughter and my two son's personalities are so different you wouldn't know they were related and I have been the same mother to all of them. When you have kids you are amazed at how much personality is inborn. And how resilient they are. Eva not liking her son is not enough to make him a psychopath. He seems to have been missing stuff at birth.
YES you're the only one i've seen who gets it 🫶
Oh Amy, you don't have children, do you? Children aren't blank slates; they come with hundreds of character traits that are mixture from all who came before. He was not born with foetal alcohol syndrome (do your research) and he rejected her from the start. They didn't bond but there were some indications of post-natal depression. I disagree strongly with all your opinions on this one.
This isn't even slightly accurate, did you even pay attention? She never drank with Kevin's pregnancy. She drank some with Celia. Kevin abused and injured people. He exhibited signs of being a clinical narcissist if not a psychopath with limited capacity for empathy. Normal children cannot commit murder and torture, lady. Eva may not have been s great mother, but when you have a clinical psychopath it's a bit hard to get into the motherhood thing. In no way shape or form does the book imply Eva made Celia anxious. Though I'm sure being abused by her brother contributed.
The general consensus in psychology is that psychopaths are born
