ippym's review against another edition
3.0
This was a page turner with multiple points of view. I'm not sure how to identify the genre - it's a blend of contemporary fiction, thriller, court drama, social, economic, and political commentary, and a harsh examination of relationships. I liked that the author progressed the story with the different viewpoints (instead of rehashing one event). He also revisited dialogue from previous chapters which afforded the reader a different perspective on important scenes, which I thought was clever and worked well. On top of all that, the theme of ambiguity was consistent throughout. This is an impressive piece of work in structure and content alone.
What I didn't like was the use of obtuse language (hagiography, stultifying, ignominy etc.) and the preachiness of socioeconomic and political views - while I agree with the points the author makes, I felt he was constantly finding new ways to shove it down the reader's throats. I think a more subtle approach would have been more impactful. I also thought the ending was a bit odd and not very realistic, but overall enjoyed the book.
What I didn't like was the use of obtuse language (hagiography, stultifying, ignominy etc.) and the preachiness of socioeconomic and political views - while I agree with the points the author makes, I felt he was constantly finding new ways to shove it down the reader's throats. I think a more subtle approach would have been more impactful. I also thought the ending was a bit odd and not very realistic, but overall enjoyed the book.
thedisquietedpen's review against another edition
4.0
This was good, but for some reason it wasn't as good as the first time I read it, back in 2009.
cassie_tee's review against another edition
2.0
Not my cup of tea. I didn’t enjoy the style of writing and found it a bit depressing. I couldn’t finish it
iamnaomifaye's review against another edition
dark
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
patricia63's review against another edition
4.0
Told from the perspective of seven people over 600 pages. It was a good book overall but definitely could have been shorter.
jeshiltner's review against another edition
4.0
Great story of several unintentionally entwined lives. Challenging read.
justinebt2114's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
stacyculler's review against another edition
3.0
Didn’t hate it, didn’t love it. Definitely didn’t like all of the loose ends.
For example: they never really tell what happens to Joe’s mother, or Roger, and most especially, why do we not ever get to know what happens to Sam?
I could never figure out what was supposed to be so appealing about Simon... he seemed like a colossal arrogant self-absorbed jerk at best, and a manipulative, controlling stalker at worst.
I couldn’t figure out what made Anna such the prize, either.
Angela/Angelique had the most compelling story, and then she disappears for so much of the narrative, while we get more than we can stand of Mitch who really had no reason to be in the story at all, and also too much of Rachel, who is similarly extraneous. I felt like these were just thrown it because he needed seven types for the title.
I felt like I should be getting some deeper meaning, with the comparisons to Empson’s book of the same title, but really this is all just too high up in the academic realms of philosophy and overwrought psychology for me to make heads or tails of any of it.
Interested to read other reviews to see if they give me better perspective.
For example: they never really tell what happens to Joe’s mother, or Roger, and most especially, why do we not ever get to know what happens to Sam?
I could never figure out what was supposed to be so appealing about Simon... he seemed like a colossal arrogant self-absorbed jerk at best, and a manipulative, controlling stalker at worst.
I couldn’t figure out what made Anna such the prize, either.
Angela/Angelique had the most compelling story, and then she disappears for so much of the narrative, while we get more than we can stand of Mitch who really had no reason to be in the story at all, and also too much of Rachel, who is similarly extraneous. I felt like these were just thrown it because he needed seven types for the title.
I felt like I should be getting some deeper meaning, with the comparisons to Empson’s book of the same title, but really this is all just too high up in the academic realms of philosophy and overwrought psychology for me to make heads or tails of any of it.
Interested to read other reviews to see if they give me better perspective.
kirstiecat's review against another edition
5.0
This story is really engrossing and has to do with how one event is seen from seven different angles. Even when it is slightly redundant though, it is different in the way that each perspective perceives the event (written from alternating first person points of view) And of, course, each time we read about the incident through the eyes of someone else, our view is changed and we realize as the reader, we are removed from any state of mind considering objectivity. It's quite experimental in this way though not in terms of the actual writing style. Very difficult to put down until the end...