“The ultimate psychological thriller.”
“Shortlisted for Richard and Judy Search for a bestseller competition”
“If you liked the Girl on the Train, you’ll love The Widow.”
Before I started reading it, I wanted to like The Widow, there’s a little bit of a buzz about it in the industry, and I love it when a book becomes a huge success, but regular readers will know that likening something to The Girl on the Train is not going to massively enthuse me.
On a side note, it’s really irritating when people say things like “2016’s Girl on the Train”
For a start Girl on the Train was not 2015’s anything, it stood on it’s own merit.
Secondly, nobody remembers what 2014’s Gone Girl was (mostly because Gone Girl was still selling).
Thirdly, you’re only setting the readers up for disappointment. Either they hated Girl on the Train and so won’t buy this, or they loved it – and this doesn’t love up to it.
I was disappointed by Girl on The Train (she kept getting off the train, for one) and so with some trepidation I sat down to begin The Widow.
We’ll start with the positives… mostly because there are some.
It was a total page-turner which pushes the reader on, right to the end.
Kate, the reporter, is a very well drawn character and the scenes involving her and the photographer are the most realistic of the whole book. Not surprising considering the previous occupation of the author (clue: it rhymes with preporter).
Despite being set across several years, and jumping about in time in no discernible pattern, the book actually flows quite well. The time jumps are not jarring as they easily could have been – and often are in other books.
There are other positives, but they involve the resolution of the plot and so I’m not going to go into too much detail on those.
Onto the negatives, and in truth, it’s not negatives plural, there’s one thing wrong with this book.
The writing is lazy.
Jean and Glen, the couple at the heart of the story, are written as if they’re in their late fifties, sixties – but the writer for absolutely no reason has insisted on putting them in their thirties. Every time their young age is referenced, it shatters the illusion, the image that has formed in the mind.
The writing is spot on… for an older couple. And there is no benefit to pretending they’re young.
This is the biggest problem with the writing, but there are various other things that don’t quite work.
For example, our police officer gains a new colleague during the book named Zara, she is classed as thirty five, and then the writer suggests she is named such as her parents were probably fans of the Royal Family.
That’ll be Zara Phillips they’re referencing who isn’t even thirty five now, let alone in 2008 when that particular scene was set.
It took me ten seconds on the internet to work out the maths of that, but once again, it was a moment that took me out of the book, because it didn’t seem quite right.
And once again, there was no need for it. She could have just been called Zara with no further reference as to why and the book would have carried on fine.
There are lots of little things like this throughout and it’s so disappointing because this could have been a really good book.
Ultimately, it’s ok. It’s annoying when you read it, but you do want to read it, and you do want to find out what happened. It’s a great read for passing some time on a plane, or by a pool, and by that measure it will sell really well, but you probably won’t remember it a week later.