![We Need to Talk About Kevin by Shriver, Lionel. (Harper Perennial,2006) [Paperback]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51VQe7rnpQL._SY445_SX342_.jpg)
This is the third fiction book I've read hoping it will answer the question of why teenagers apparently snap and murder their classmates. Jodi Picoult's "19 Minutes" and Cara Hoffman's "So Much Pretty," both fell disappointingly short for me. Perhaps these two books were simply telling stories but I was hoping they would reveal more. The author of "We Need to Talk About Kevin," I believe, does not attempt to answer the question per se but to provide a list of plausible who-is-to-blame options in order of their likelihood: 1) The child was simply born evil, 2) The child is the product of a disfunctional family and especially a cold mother, 3) The media encourages mass murders by providing fame, audience, and competition to future murderers, and 4) Violent video games and the general inability of society to shield a child from bad influence. The reader's own preferences and personal prejudices will lead them to the explanation they find most plausible. I will note that there are a few possible explanations that the author takes off the table in order to narrow the focus and probably enhance the believability of the story: 1) Kevin is not bullied and 2) He does not use a gun for his crime. The fact that he does not use a gun is portrayed as a very systematic choice because Kevin does not want his crime to be over-shadowed by a gun control debate. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Most readers will agree that one of the first 2 options will provide the who-is-to-blame answer in this story, and this is of course the age-old nature vs. nurture debate. Within the first page, I couldn't stand the narrator, Kevin's mother. This almost stopped me from continuing, as the first 100 or so pages are nothing but snotty, pretentious drivel. Eva hates her fellow human beings, looks down on everyone, makes absolutely horrid observations about even her ex-husband who she claims to still love, and uses words that are too big and sentences that are too long. It's so over-the-top that I assumed this was a device. The only other conclusion would be that the author is also a pretentious snob but I do not think this is the case.
Just because you don't care for her, you can't discount her observations. As the reader, you have to attempt to sort out the facts from her interpretation of the facts. For example, Kevin didn't talk until he was 3. When he did start speaking, he spoke in full sentences. Regardless of the interpretation as to why (was he a perfectionist? was he devious? was he withholding?) the point is he knew how to do something that he didn't let on to. Kevin forced his mother to change his diapers until he was 6! And yes, his intentions are clear as day to me though perhaps others may interpret it differently. Kevin won't give people what they want. He sneaks in eating so that he is not hungry at mealtime. Everything his mother needs in the way of results, feedback, or even feeling like she's done her motherly job, he denies her.
He progresses to being a killjoy. Anything that anyone else delights in, he destroys. Only once does he get caught (prior to the big day), water pistol in hand destroying his mother's beloved maps. Otherwise, bad things just happen to those around him. He is adept at finding peoples' weaknesses and nursing them: turning a pretty girl scarily anorexic, helping a child with severe psoriasis scratch her face bloody, ruining a teacher's career with sexual abuse allegations, and so much more. He is interested in computer viruses because they tear down other people's hard work. There are a couple of sub-thematic diatribes in the book about how there is nothing left in life to create, the only possibility left is to destroy. Most notably, the classmates that he singles out for death are those who irritated him, and how did they irritate him? By having interests. That is it. Folks that are interested in things bother him. Even as a child, he wasn't interested in doing a darn thing. It's like he never outgrew the "no" phase.
Even when he's not being blatantly evil, Kevin seems to enjoy making people feel uncomfortable. In complete opposition to the my-pants-are-falling-off-of-me trend, he wears his clothes too tight. I felt embarrassed just reading the descriptions of pants not quite zipping up and shirts stretched too tight across the nipples. I suspect that in addition to thrilling in making teachers and schoolmates uncomfortable, he is also trying to cast doubts about his wealthy family.
There is one omission to the list of possible explanations for the massacre and that is mental health. As a possibility, it is neither presented nor eliminated. I believe that the author is presenting Kevin as a sane individual, but what if he did have some form of mental illness? Kevin does confess to depression and asks for a Prozac subscription but you feel that he is only building a plausible excuse of being medicated. The narrator does seem to be building a case that her son was very deliberate and in control of all of his choices and planning, but I'm not sure if that is the same as clinical sanity. Perhaps it is.
Eva knows that her son is very much like her. But clearly he is the worse of the 2 devils because she still wants his what? love? approval? cooperation? and he needs nothing from her except maybe an audience and another person to toy with. By her own admissions, in the courtroom she is bored, manipulative, and uncooperative. I don't think she feels victimized and if anything, she just sees this as an inconvenient fall from grace. I wonder if she regrets the deaths of Kevin's classmates. In her letters to her ex-husband, I sense a competition (only on her part as it is a one-way dialogue) that at least she was "on" to Kevin and and least he was "real" with her. This, again, makes her unlikeable to me as her thoughts and emotions are inappropriate and misplaced. Why be in a contest with the ex-husband as to who was the favorite parent of a killer? Where is the regret? What is she doing to try to make amends to society? Does she completely disassociate herself? What human being wouldn't at least feel a little badly about a mass murder even if it wasn't their fault?
So as to the nature vs nurture question, here is what I think: it's a terrible child with a terrible mother. He came out of her womb uncooperative, manipulative, and destructive. But his mother possesses at least the first 2 characteristics, so is he the genetically cranked-up version of her?
Just when you really can't stand the narrator, the author slightly redeems her but breaks your heart with the introduction of a sister for Kevin. Docile, obedient, "doormat" Celia is the apple of her mother's eye. If the author hadn't introduced a second, sweet, pliant, and appreciative child you may wonder if indeed Kevin is so rotten because his mother is so cold. But Celia helps to endorse the theory that Kevin is just a bad seed. With dread in your stomach, you realize that Kevin will destroy that which gives someone else pleasure, and his sister gives his mother pleasure. He maims her permanently, and the quiet accepting manner of this little girl, well, it just puts me beside myself.
Confession: I've been writing this review as I'm reading the book. The author just dropped such a bombshell that I should go back and edit my reactions to Kevin's mother but I will leave them as testimony to the fact that the author does play with your emotions brilliantly. Now I see that she is not un-remorseful, she is shell-shocked. She has been stripped of everything that meant anything to her. The unfolding of this scene, the scene in which she discovers her 2 loved ones dead, stands in stark contrast to her factual reporting on the school massacre and its victims. As the reader, you are crushed by her discovery and it truly unfolds in horrific, dreadful slow motion. Now I see that when it comes to the school massacre, she simply has no emotion left and resents having to answer for any responsibility in a courtroom when she is in the same position as the plaintiffs; she is in a position of complete and utter loss.
I also see now that when she appears to be talking down to her husband, she is doing it in a loving, honest, and complete way. I understand and feel the same, you should not glorify the dead, true love means remembering all the flaws too. I imagined her writing condescending but unsent letters to an ex-husband who had custody over their daughter which of course is not true. I could be wrong but I think she may even feel complicit in their murders because Kevin is so clearly her child. Her child, who has saved the worst punishment for her: to be left alive and living in the aftermath of his destruction. Does she visit her son in jail because she feels complicit or because he is all she has left of her former life? Maybe both.
I imagine that in writing letters to her husband she herself is trying to understand how this all happened. Just as Kevin confesses at the end that he "doesn't know" anymore why he did it, she doesn't know if she is at fault. She seems to want to think that if she hadn't disliked her son or had been more defensive of him perhaps matters would have turned out differently. I doubt that, given that the father who always defended his son is portrayed as a dupe and ends up dead. She concludes her final letter with this statement: "I am too exhausted and too confused and too lonely to keep fighting, and if only out of desperation or even laziness I love my son. He has five grim years left to serve in an adult penitentiary, and I cannot vouch for what will walk out the other side. But in the meantime, there is a second bedroom in my serviceable apartment. The bedspread is plain. A copy of "Robin Hood" lied on the bookshelf. And the sheets are clean."
My aching heart and saddened mind strongly recommend this book as an honest and complicated answer to one of the most difficult questions we currently face. And that answer could very well be "We don't know."
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Frequently bought together
![We Need to Talk About Kevin by Shriver, Lionel. (Harper Perennial,2006) [Paperback]](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91S9IK7VuXL._AC_UL116_SR116,116_.jpg)
$31.57
Get it May 10 - 14
In stock
Usually ships within 2 to 3 days.
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
Similar items that may deliver to you quickly
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Popular Highlights in this book
Only a country that feels invulnerable can afford political turmoil as entertainment.Highlighted by 1,283 Kindle readers- In a country that doesn’t discriminate between fame and infamy, the latter presents itself as plainly more achievable.Highlighted by 941 Kindle readers
- In the particular dwells the tawdry. In the conceptual dwells the grand, the transcendent, the everlasting.Highlighted by 631 Kindle readers
- In the particular dwells the tawdry. In the conceptual dwells the grand, the transcendent, the everlasting.Highlighted by 380 Kindle readers
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Reviews with images
Different cover than in the picture
I know I shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, but I really liked the the red and blue cover with Ezra Miller and Tilda Swinton on it. I really liked the movie and it reminded me of the cinematography. Maybe it’s because I’m not a big book reader, I’m more of a movie person haha. Anyway the book itself was in good shape, a small rip in the back but that’s fine, it’s used and a paperback. I received a cover that looks like this. I also appreciate it was the unabridged version :)
Top reviews from other countries
Ishika
Quality is good
Reviewed in India on October 4, 2023
Ishika
Reviewed in India on October 4, 2023
Images in this review
Natha Nova
No lo podía encontrar en México
Reviewed in Mexico on September 25, 2019