I’ve been thinking about this question a lot since I finished Chris Bohjalian’s The Double Bind. He’s the guy who wrote the book, Midwives, which I haven’t read but which people keep recommending to my sister (because she’s in the process of becoming a midwife.) I had put the book on my “to read” list after it was featured as a Powell’s Bookstore Daily Dose. The description was intriguing—a homeless man’s photos suck a young social worker into a more complicated mystery—involving identity and reality.
However, as I started to read, the book left me curiously cold. I never really connected with the main character—not because she wasn’t likable and interesting but because the author never really put me in her head in any useful way. I felt like I was reading a cliff notes version of the actual story. I almost stopped reading a number of times—especially because I have a tantalizing pile of books “to be read” sitting on my shelf. However, I must have a deep-seated need not to be seen as a “quitter” because I kept slogging away.
When I finished the novel, I wondered why I had bothered. I won’t give any plot points away, but I literally wanted to throw the book against the wall. (However, it was a library book so I refrained.) The basic plot of the book has so much potential as a literary (literate) thriller but the execution was . . . bah!! In the hands of writers like Laura Lippman, Dennis Lehane, or Harlen Coben, this story could have worked and worked well. If you’re going to write a “thriller,” you have to work to make it suspenseful and complexly structured (dare I say, “thrilling”) and “point of view” is important. Bohjalian gives us multiple viewpoints but they don’t enhance the story much (and they end up making the reader feel cheated . . . or at least this reader.)
My advice is to skip this book and go read Laura Lippman’s What the Dead Know or Shutter Island by Dennis Lehane.
So, what makes you all stop reading? Or, do you slog through no matter how dismal or unenjoyable a book is? Is that the literary equivalent of eating something because it’s supposed to be good for you? I don’t know. Sometimes I start reading a book but lose interest only to pick the book up later and really enjoy it. This is different, though. How bad does a book have to get for you to stop?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting question, and one I find comes up regularly in my book clubs, especially when it's a controversial selection.
Personally, I will stop reading a book if it doesn't grab me, or more often, if it is just too violent, creepy or disturbing. For example, the publisher where I work published a memoir that included a significant amount of abuse and violence. I just couldn't tolerate it. Call me wimpy, pathetic, Pollyanna, whatever, but life can be complicated and stressful enough (last week's bridge disaster case in point) that I just don't need to read about it too. Maybe reading for me is an escape. It's not that I never read difficult material, it's that I'm selective.
Here's a more practical reason.... I often only get to read for 15-30 minutes before bed. Or 2 minutes, depending on the day. If it is a difficult, complicated or disturbing book, I just can't do it! I fall asleep!
For many years, I was bothered by the fact that I hadn't read many of the "Great Books". Every once in a while, I'd buy one or check it out of the library, only to drop it after a short time - and feel guilty.
Over the past few years - must be my middle age - I've realized that life is too short. I'll never read all the Great Books - let alone all the dumb ones. Now, I drop a book quickly if it doesn't grab me. With non-fiction I sometimes skip around, rather than read the whole thing through.
Borrowing books from the library helps me drop them quicker since I have no money invested in them.
Post a Comment