Nicole Cenkova
asked:
I know this is a stupid question, but I keep re-reading the ending and I still don't get it?! Can someone please explain...
To answer questions about
A House at the Bottom of a Lake,
please sign up.
K.C. Kissig
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Ash Clare Hutch
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Philip
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Allison
I feel like the house is a metaphor for obsessiveness and addiction (not drug addiction or anything like that, just addiction). This obsessiveness towards something mysterious in love/relationship became the only thing that pushes them together (do they really love each other? Or do they only love the house?). So the ending could be interpreted in two ways:
1. a happy ending. The house didn't want them to be separated. These two teenagers were so lovely together, and the house wanted them to still taste the sweetness of love. So it showed them signs in the real world, giving them another opportunity to be together again.
2. a horrible ending. They Were Trapped. It was actually the best for them to move on, but the house didn't want them to. The house wanted them to be tied together forever, to feel the pain and the darkness of obsession, and so it made them see the house in the "real world". Could others see the house? Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. The point is now they could never move on.
1. a happy ending. The house didn't want them to be separated. These two teenagers were so lovely together, and the house wanted them to still taste the sweetness of love. So it showed them signs in the real world, giving them another opportunity to be together again.
2. a horrible ending. They Were Trapped. It was actually the best for them to move on, but the house didn't want them to. The house wanted them to be tied together forever, to feel the pain and the darkness of obsession, and so it made them see the house in the "real world". Could others see the house? Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. The point is now they could never move on.
Malik Broberg
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Petit-Chocobo
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Amelia
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Lou
Not stupid at all. I'm sorta lost too!
Misha
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Cordélia Leite
That is not a stupid question at all. It's ok to not understand things sometimes and to make questions, it's how we learn! And many books and works of art are really open to many interpretations.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more