May Book Club: The Mother-In-Law

[Vespasia]

I hope ufcasey doesn't mind me starting this! Feel free to share your answers to some or all of the questions below or just your general thoughts on the book. 

Here are some discussion questions that were included at the end of the book:

1. In the opening chapter of the novel, Lucy describes feeling a “little niggle” in the pit of her stomach when the police showed up --- a warning of oncoming danger. Are you familiar with the feeling she’s describing? When have you felt it? How do you think this ominous tone serves to set up the rest of the book?

2. The book is told in dual timelines and dual narratives --- Lucy and her mother-in-law, Diana. How does this structure affect your reading experience? Did you feel more sympathetic towards one narrator or the other?

3. What was your initial impression of Diana, both through the lens of Lucy and through hearing Diana’s own voice? How did your understanding of her and her motivations evolve throughout the book?

4. Diana and Lucy have very different definitions of what makes a “good” mother-in-law. What you you think makes for a good mother-in-law? How universal do you think your opinion is, or how personal? How do you think you would react in Lucy’s position?

5. What did you think when you first learned about Diana’s Orchard House past? Did it make sense to you, or come totally out of the blue? How do you think it fits in to Diana’s character, and why she acts the way she does in the present timeline?

6. Before you learned about what happened on Thanksgiving, what did you think the “incident” was? What were the clues throughout the first half of the novel that make you think that way?

7. On page 133, Diana thinks, “When left to their own devices, bitter people can do bad things.” Do you think she’s right to asses Hakem this way? Where are the other place in the narrative where you think that this same quote applies?

8. Tom and Diana have very different philosophies about giving their children money. Is either of them correct? Or is there more of a middle ground that neither of them have considered? Do you think it’s cruel for them to let Nettie suffer when they could help pay for her treatments?

9. On page 219, Ghezala says to Lucy, “Maybe [Diana] was so busy looking at the problems in the world, she forgot to give chances to those right under her nose.” What do you think about that statement? Do you think she’s correct, or is there something more at play?

10. Before you learned the truth of Diana’s death, did you think that Lucy did it? What made you think that?

[travella]

I disliked this book. I gave it 1*. I found it boring and dull for a suspense/thriller.

The book is about how people are not one dimensional, they are complex, and can be something other than what they seem. However, the author is trying to show this complexity while her characters are one dimensional. For a slow character analysis the depth was not there. It didn't help that I didn't care for any of the characters.

I don't remember much from the book so I can't really answer the questions. However, I always figured she didn't kill her mother-in-law and that all the things pointing to her were red herrings.

[CrazyLucky]

I liked this book a lot. I thought the author did a good job of showing how one event can be interpreted so differently by two people. I liked having the story go back and forth from Diana to Lucy and even the sister in law, but I do not like back in forth in time. It seems like a lot of authors do that, and I don't know why. It rarely/never improves the book in my mind.

I never thought Lucy did it. There was a limited pool of suspects so the actual guilty person was my first choice.

[Vespasia]

I read this book very quickly and found it hard to put down. This was despite the fact that I generally disliked it.

Everyone in this book was terrible. They were unbelievable and lacked any depth. The only person I didn’t hate was Tom and that isn’t saying much. His relationship with Diana was also the only one that seemed to have any actual emotion portrayed.

This book leaned heavily on one of my least favorite things – a complete lack of communication between characters. I had to check a few times to make sure this book was supposed to be set today. There were so many annoying instances of things like “oh gee golly, I forgot to tell her why I brought a chicken” that could have been solved by taking two damn second to send a text.

Diana was a bitch. She may have done good and had her reasons, but she was still a bitch. She seemed incapable of interacting like a normal human being with her family but was supposed to be this great humanitarian that everyone loved?

Lucy was super naïve and annoying. She wanted to have this magical relationship with her MIL that had no basis in reality. She also seemed totally oblivious to her husband’s business dealings despite having the sense that the partner was shady.

I thought Lucy’s husband did it. I also assumed he was having an affair. I didn’t like him and I found their relationship lacking in substance.

I found the portrayal of Nettie (Nessie?) and her breakdown over her IF issues to be borderline offensive. I also hated how Diana handled this. She acted all superior about how her daughter didn’t deserve to be handed everything, as if a child was the same as a vacation home. She withheld money because she thought the husband was having an affair, but didn’t communicate this.

I don’t understand how Diana and Tom got so rich. It was mentioned briefly in the beginning that the money was all hers. How did she go from banished from her family to working in a movie theater to super rich? Did she just have amazing business know how that drove a shared business? How does that mix with her utter lack of ability to relate to human beings?

The end was annoying. Everyone is happy, hooray!

[mrspez07]

The premise was original but the delivery was disappointing.
it was hard to like any of the characters.
It was a quick read though.
I felt the treatment of the fertility obsession was bordering on trite and came off as offensive.
Not one of the best suspense novels, just average to me.

[aurora]

I found it a pretty easy read. I liked the premise and structure, though I agree the characters were somewhat flat. I listened to the audiobook, which always makes it harder for me to pay close attention.

[aurora]

5. What did you think when you first learned about Diana’s Orchard House past? Did it make sense to you, or come totally out of the blue? How do you think it fits in to Diana’s character, and why she acts the way she does in the present timeline?


Of course this was a formative experience for her, and colors everything about her life. It made sense that she would value self-reliance to such an extent.

The part that felt more like a cheap plot device was how she never told. I understand Tom wanting both kids to believe he was their biological father and I'm sure he had good intentions, but it spiraled out of control in terms of how they treated Nettie and Ollie while not being able to provide context. I really hated that they weren't just honest about the situation.

[aurora]

May 28, 2020 13:21:49 GMT -5 Vespasia said:

...
I found the portrayal of Nettie (Nessie?) and her breakdown over her IF issues to be borderline offensive. I also hated how Diana handled this. She acted all superior about how her daughter didn’t deserve to be handed everything, as if a child was the same as a vacation home. She withheld money because she thought the husband was having an affair, but didn’t communicate this. ...

Diana definitely tells Nettie that she's withholding the money because of Nettie's husband's infidelity and near-broken marriage. She asks if Nettie knows about the affair and Nettie says of course, everyone knows. She says she'll help Nettie, but to get our of the marriage, not to have the baby with a cheating husband.

I'm not saying she's right, but this is one of the few times she opened up about her beliefs/intentions to her children. I thought it was a turning point for her.

[Vespasia]

aurora that is true but I think that was years into it. It was literally too late considering what came next.

I think that is why it was so frustrating. It could have had such a different outcome if anyone could communicate. Except then there would be no book!

[expectantsteelerfan]

I also had the same thought that if you meant to say something and forgot, why didn't you just sent a text afterward?
I found this to be a quick read that kept me interested, but one that didn't hold up to a lot of thought or discussion.

[tacokick]

I liked her other book more.

My only note from when I read the book last year was that I liked the device of reading the MIL and DIL’s interpretations of the same conversations. In reading the comments here I remember the book a bit more and remember I didn’t find the ending very satisfying and it as a bit forgettable.

[dontlook]

I read the book last year. I gave it 4 stars. After reading the comments here I’m not sure what I read lol. I think it was a quick fine read that I didn’t bother to really analyze at the time. The book was very forgettable. I do remember thinking the infertility part of the story to be really sloppy and a terrible plot.

[ufcasey]

Thanks Vespasia!

I was annoyed that this book wasn't a thriller - at no point was I the least bit excited about finding out who killed Dina. I was annoyed that this wasn't good fiction either because there was no deep character development, no emotional connection, nothing to really make me invested in the story. And then to top it all off, what could have been a deeply empathetic situation (cheating husband, infertility) instead is used as a plot device to make her a 'crazed' murderer.

[wesleycrusher]

I rated it 4. When I rate books, I rate them compared to books in the same genre, so a 4 star domestic thriller book is not necessarily comparable to a 4 star memoir, or romance, etc. I agree that the characters could have been built up more and fall a bit flat, but I think that about every other book I've read in the genre, so it was nothing new for this book.

Here is my goodreads review: I enjoyed this more than most books in the domestic thriller genre. But that's because I really don't care for this genre and tend only to read them for book clubs. Since this book focused more on character building than thrills, I liked it more, but I could see how those looking for more mystery and action would be disappointed.