DISUK Book Club -Too Close to Home, Linwood Barclay

[Dimplenose]

Shall I add the next question?

 

[natalielongstaff]

Shall I add the next question?

yes please

 

[natalielongstaff]

I bought mine on offer in Tesco. (£3.75 I think.)

ive ordered it (3.86)

 

[Dimplenose]

"Do you completely trust Eva's version of events? More than once she admits that she was mistaken about something she had assumed that Kevin dis. Is she perhaps exaggerating her son's malignancy to make herself seem less blameworthy, or was she just the only party in this story who foresaw what he was capable of well in advance of Thursday?"

 

[jen_uk]

Part of me thinks that she was seeing things in Kevin that weren't really there, she disliked him before he as even born. On the other hand can an uncaring mother make someone do someting so awful??? What he did was so terrible that maybe that kind of evil has to be in someone to start with

 

[Dimplenose]

I felt that she was obsessed with Franklin rather than Kevin. She wanted to be his little girl and the centre of his universe whilst still following her career (although that seemed to be an obsession with proving she was not an agraphobic herself).

I don't think she exaggerated Kevin's malignancy rather she focussed on it to the exclusion of other parts of his character.

Did she foresee Thursday? I'm not sure that she did - or if she did it wasn't a strong enough conviction to prevent Kevin from not merely owning a crossbow but being allowed to use it unsupervised.

 

[joolz1910]

I don't think she was an uncaring mother - I think she cared for Kevin - I think she just didn't like him and felt guilty because of it.

The ending proves that she loves him. Despite what he has done to Franklin and Celia (not to mention Thursday) she still stands by him - surely that is unconditional love?

She is an unreliable narrator because she resents Kevin so much. I suppose if someone you knew did something horrific, you would dissect every 'evil' deed they ever did to look for evidence of innate evil. As it is written in retrospect, her first point of reference is what he did on that fateful day - every previous event is coloured by what he eventually did.

 

[Dimplenose]

. As it is written in retrospect, her first point of reference is what he did on that fateful day - every previous event is coloured by what he eventually did.

That's a very good point.

 

[dolphingirl47]

"Do you completely trust Eva's version of events? More than once she admits that she was mistaken about something she had assumed that Kevin dis. Is she perhaps exaggerating her son's malignancy to make herself seem less blameworthy, or was she just the only party in this story who foresaw what he was capable of well in advance of Thursday?"

I don't completely trust Eva's version of events. She is too involved in what is going on to be objective. However, I don't think that she painting Kevin in a worse light in order to make herself look better. I also don't think she had a clue that Thursday would happen. For what it is worth, I think that her account is accurate as far as she recalls it, but as she is involved in it, it will always be coloured by her experience rather than being an objective account.

Corinna

 

[Dimplenose]

"Do you think that Kevin was guilty of damaging his little sister's eye? If so, what evidence do you find for this assumption? Would it stand up in court?

 

[natalielongstaff]

"Do you think that Kevin was guilty of damaging his little sister's eye? If so, what evidence do you find for this assumption? Would it stand up in court?

i struggled with this one, i beleive he did it with all my being but we are not actually given conclusive proof ! in my mind he is indeed guilty of this but i can't prove it with the evidence we are given.

Celuia is a timid child and i think kevin had a hold over her so much that she would have done it if he told her too

 

[jen_uk]

"Do you think that Kevin was guilty of damaging his little sister's eye? If so, what evidence do you find for this assumption? Would it stand up in court?

I think he did do that, the way she described his behaviour after seems like he was happy it had happened.

 

[joolz1910]

Again, I think Eva is re-examining past events in light of what he eventually did. Many siblings cause accidents to happen to younger children - kids do get hurt. We are seeing this from Eva's perspective and she thinks Kevin is responsible for everything that goes wrong. It wouldn't hold up in court because there is no evidence that Kevin did it and Celia wouldn't have testified against him.

 

[Dimplenose]

Please be aware I've changed the order of the reading list in my first post. One of the books won't be available in paperback until July 23rd so I've moved it to September and shuffled everything up by a month.

 

[Dimplenose]

"Do you think that Kevin was guilty of damaging his little sister's eye? If so, what evidence do you find for this assumption? Would it stand up in court?

I think he was capable of doing it but I don't have any evidence. Eva was very insistant that she'd put the cleaning solution away - but a bit too insistant for me to believe that she actually did.

 

[Dimplenose]

"Franklin always looks on the bright side of parenthood, and interprets whatever Kevin gets up to in the most favourable light possible. Do you find this eagerness to forgive his own child a break sypathetic? Or is Franklin a fool?

 

[joolz1910]

I think Franklin's parenting is potentially as damaging as Eva's. He is too indulgent and as a result, Kevin has no respect for him whatsoever. I found Franklin quite frustrating when I read the book. He seemed to subtly undermine Eva at every turn. I realise he is trying to compensate for Eva and Shriver is representing Eva's antithesis but I found his cheery hair-ruffling approach grating. Both Eva and Franklin are trying to 'act' like good parents - neither of them seem to particularly like Kevin.

 

[Dimplenose]

I was very aware that this was written from Eva's viewpoint. It's so easy to accuse your partner of indulgence just because he doesn't treat your child in the same way that you do. Eva even went so far as to say that Kevin was playing at enjoying being with his dad and that it wasn't the "real Kevin" at all.

I felt that Eva was jealous of the attention that Kevin got from Franklin. There probably was a lot of truth in what Eva said, but the more I analyse the book the less I trust Eva's version of events.

I don't think Franklin was a fool but he must have been fed up with constantly coming home to reports of Kevin's wrong doing from Eva.

 

[jen_uk]

Was anyone else surprised that Eva told Kevin he could return home when he got out of prison? I don't have kids so I have never felt mothers love (although I do adore my Jack Russell ) but I can't imagine letting my child home if they did that, surely you could never feel safe again?

 

[joolz1910]

Was anyone else surprised that Eva told Kevin he could return home when he got out of prison? I don't have kids so I have never felt mothers love (although I do adore my Jack Russell ) but I can't imagine letting my child home if they did that, surely you could never feel safe again?

That is why I think she really loved him. Despite everything, she wanted him back - unconditional love. It really surprised me that Shriver has no children because she writes so convincingly as a mother - in a weird way.

I suppose his actions left Eva with nothing. It was either the ultimate punishment of her, or a guarantee that he would finally have her to himself.