...
Show More
I read this because a family member remembers it fondly from youth.
I knew it wasn’t my genre, but man. I am about to post so many spoilers in this so I can air all of my grievances.
I knew when they introduced a dog that it was going to die. The author seemed to construct every scene with that damn dog like he was giddily hurrying to get to describe its brutal strangulation. And for what?? Not even a particularly effective impact on the plot.
The psychotic child in this book has some kind of godlike omnipotence to be able to precisely and accurately guess everyone else’s thoughts and motivations and actions. So many of her plans only work because the author wants them to.
I hated Teri and Phyllis (I know I was supposed to) but then I got no satisfying conclusion to them, nor ever truly understood their motivations outside of “I want to live in this house and be wealthy.” Hello??
And is the ending meant to imply that Phyllis is the reason Teri is fucked up? Is she somehow cursing these babies?
The ghost device is under utilized and nearly nonsensical. Would have been better if she just actually WAS a split personality.
Does every scene that makes a character puke HAVE to be described as their “gorge” rising?
Does every character have the memory and reason and empathy of a gold fish?
Does being present for a car crash make you guilty of it?
This man has no idea how to describe fashion but attempts to do so often. The dialogue is so unlike how any real people actually speak to each other.
I don’t like this writing style. I don’t like this genre. It only gets 2 stars because I know someone who loves it and because there are moments here and there where psychological/emotional abuse feels resonant in a correct way.
But having just read Mommie Dearest, it’s like John Saul took his favorite parts of the Crawford story and weaved them into this one.
Ugh.
I knew it wasn’t my genre, but man. I am about to post so many spoilers in this so I can air all of my grievances.
I knew when they introduced a dog that it was going to die. The author seemed to construct every scene with that damn dog like he was giddily hurrying to get to describe its brutal strangulation. And for what?? Not even a particularly effective impact on the plot.
The psychotic child in this book has some kind of godlike omnipotence to be able to precisely and accurately guess everyone else’s thoughts and motivations and actions. So many of her plans only work because the author wants them to.
I hated Teri and Phyllis (I know I was supposed to) but then I got no satisfying conclusion to them, nor ever truly understood their motivations outside of “I want to live in this house and be wealthy.” Hello??
And is the ending meant to imply that Phyllis is the reason Teri is fucked up? Is she somehow cursing these babies?
The ghost device is under utilized and nearly nonsensical. Would have been better if she just actually WAS a split personality.
Does every scene that makes a character puke HAVE to be described as their “gorge” rising?
Does every character have the memory and reason and empathy of a gold fish?
Does being present for a car crash make you guilty of it?
This man has no idea how to describe fashion but attempts to do so often. The dialogue is so unlike how any real people actually speak to each other.
I don’t like this writing style. I don’t like this genre. It only gets 2 stars because I know someone who loves it and because there are moments here and there where psychological/emotional abuse feels resonant in a correct way.
But having just read Mommie Dearest, it’s like John Saul took his favorite parts of the Crawford story and weaved them into this one.
Ugh.