We need to talk about Kevin

Let me start by saying this was a hard read. While many books can be described as 'unputdownable', this is much more in the 'unpickupable' category, so much so that it took me about four years of picking it up, reading one or two of Eva's letters and then putting it down for several months until I felt in the mood to tackle another. What Shriver has done here is very clever. We start out some years after Thursday, so from the outset the reader kind of thinks they've already been spoilered, that the book is progressing toward a blow-by-blow account of that day and some sort of resolution and/or reconciliation with Franklin. And it does, but (for me at least) Shriver so carefully tunes the language of Eva's letters that it implied that Franklin had left Eva and taken Celia with him. As a result, when the lights go up at the book's climax...let's just say that's a literary moment that will stay with me for the rest of my days.

As this was a complex book dealing with a number of very powerful themes, so I felt compelled to see what other readers were saying about it on Goodreads. I was surprised to see so many accusing Shriver of glorifying school shootings, of taking advantage of the spate of them in the preceding years to sell the book. I don't see that at all - both Eva and Kevin are openly scornful and scathing of all the real-life massacres referenced during the book and if anything, they are held up for the reader to see them in all their sordid, squalid detail in the light of day. No, no glorification here and I suspect those reviewers are probably the kind of people who routinely say "now is not the time to talk about gun control" after each new school shooting.

The other theme raised in the reviews is, unsurprisingly, nature vs. nurture as that appears to be the book's central pillar. Was Kevin born bad or did he become bad because of Eva's parenting (Franklin very often gets a pass in these reviews, I notice)? I'm struck by the suspicion that my take on the book's events while reading it now, as a parent in my mid-40s, would probably contrast quite starkly with what I might have felt had I read it when it was published, when I was in my mid-20s and childless. Back then, raising a child appeared so much more straighforward, the decisions about how best to do it so clear cut, than the reality proved to be. Looking back on the entire book, with all my years of experience in life, child raising and even a bit of time working in mental health, my view of events is this:

Kevin did develop, or was born with, one or more profound psychiatric disorders. Eva was a reluctant mother, only really having Kevin out of duty and fear of losing Franklin, whom she loved very deeply (for reasons that evade me, to be entirely honest). Motherhood did not come naturally to her and she struggled to bond with Kevin, but Kevin was also clearly resistant to being bonded with from a very early age. Eva certainly puts a lot of effort into being a good parent but as Kevin grows, it increasingly appears that he both craves her love whilst wanting to test her limits and push her away. I feel this duality lies at the heart of everything Kevin does. He cynically cultivates Franklin's affection, but he places no value on it because it is too easily given and ultimately superficial - Kevin presents Franklin with the false version of himself that he knows Franklin wants to see, and Mr Plastic buys it. Eva's feelings toward him are often very negative indeed but he knows that in spite of them, or perhaps because of them, that her underlying love is genuine. Ultimately, whether Kevin's psychiatric issues are innate or caused by his upbringing is a moot point because either way, it's quite obvious from his actions that something is wrong but whenever Eva brings it up, Franklin basically gaslights her about it. Why he does so is perhaps the more interesting question. Does he buy Kevin's good sport act so completely that he truly believes Eva is overreacting? Or on some level does he just not want to believe that there could be anything wrong with his child? I have known so many parents screw up their children by doing the latter, including my own. And maybe that's why I've come away with the book with these particular views?