Book Club Discussion: The Night Swim

[ufcasey]

It's the last Wednesday of the month, so it's time for our monthly book club discussion! This month's book is The Night Swim by Megan Goldin. As always, feel free to answer any, all, or none of the questions or just put your general thoughts about the book.



Optional questions (found from the internet):

1. Hannah sent Rachel letters rather than approach her to ask for her help. Was this something you agreed with or felt was reasonable?

2. Scott Blair's mother accuses Rachel of covering her son's trial for the fame and the money. Do you think that Rachel treated Scott fairly in her coverage of the trial. How important is objectivity in media coverage of trials and other news events?

3. Mitch Alkins tells Rachel that he's not a fan of true crime podcasts. He says he doesn't understand people's fascination "with other people's tragedies" and he calls these podcasts "modern day rubbernecking". Do you agree?

4. Were you surprised at the manner in which the two cases intersected? Did you find their resolution satisfactory?

5. Of the three perspectives in The Night Swim—Hannah, Rachel, and the podcast transcripts—did you find one more engaging over the others? Or did you find all three equally compelling?

[ufcasey]

Tagging people who may have read this book:
travella , meowmaps , expectantsteelerfan , charlatti , aurora , litskispeciality , dontlook

[meowmaps]

Overall, I really liked The Night Swim. The content was upsetting but I think the story was well told and paced.

1) While I didn't mind the letters being used as a device to slowly reveal the story, I found Hannah's evasive maneuverings annoying. I mean, she was basically stalking Rachel. It definitely bordered on creepy.

2) I thought Rachel was pretty generous and objective up until more damning evidence came out against Scott. Scott Blair's mom was just upset that her coddled golden boy got what was coming to him. I think it was very telling that his dad almost let the word p**** slip out when he was talking about boys being boys during his interview with Rachel. We all know exactly where Scott Blair came from and he was not raised to respect women but felt that they owed him something.

3) I'd say it's a valid point. I don't judge anyone for listening to those podcasts but I don't choose to.

4) I was a little surprised. I knew that Jenny Stills' rapist/murderer had to be one of the adult male characters but I wasn't necessarily expecting who it ended up being. Then again, I guess it would've been too obvious had it been Scott Blair's dad.

5) I enjoyed all three perspectives pretty equally.

[charlatti]

The writing and editing of this book really turned me off. I actually wrote notes on what annoyed me:

Sloppy editing, such as Hannah’s nightlight. First she says the foster parents bought it for her night terrors, then toward the end she mentions them buying her a nightlight for some completely different reason.

The author made a point of saying this fictional town is three hours north of actual city Wilmington, North Carolina. The setting details bear absolutely no resemblance to that part of NC. If you’re going to use a real location to orient your made up town, at least Google.

Also setting: is this a small town or not? Population is 96K but Kelly’s mom can’t grocery shop without being harassed. It’s a tiny town but it has three florists.

Awkward writing example: “His clothes were creased, like he’d literally thrown them on.” What does that even mean? They’re wrinkled? Creased is like when you get them out of a drawer and they’re creased from being folded. He’s a teenager, and they aren’t known for caring about neatness anyway. How does one literally throw on clothes, and how is that different from normal teenager dressing? (I have another example in a photo I saved, but that’s probably enough ranting.)

Random things that made me think the author really just wanted to set it in Australia but needed NC’s rape laws: she mentions a barbecue on the beach that takes quarters and also boat sheds (who says that here?) on the beach, ocean side. That’s not a thing. And barbecue? You might find a public grill, probably charcoal, so what would the quarters do? Again, maybe don’t pick a setting that you clearly don’t know at all.

Podcast transcriptions seemed much too short to be a real podcast and lacked any other voices, which makes the success not believable.

I’ll look at the actual discussion now that I’ve vented my complaints. (I had more. I just didn’t write them all down in my notes.)

[charlatti]

1. Sending letters at first made sense because it was a good way to get Rachel’s attention, but it seemed less reasonable or realistic after the first few.

2. This one is hard to answer because the author never let us doubt Scott’s guilt, but the podcast content seemed fair.

3. True crime isn’t my thing, but people being fascinated by crime is nothing new. The world of media today makes it much easier to access information. I prefer fictional crime, but since that tends to be at least somewhat reality based, it can still have a rubbernecking vibe.

4. Well, it was pretty obvious they were going to end up intertwining. I didn’t love the ending, but the lack of justice for anyone is unfortunately realistic, I think.

5. I sort of disliked them equally. We never knew much about Rachel and Hannah’s personality wasn’t all that well developed either. The podcasts didn’t seem realistic.

[dontlook]

Overall I enjoyed the book. I’m in a bit of a mood right now so I had to force myself to start but after about the first quarter I had a hard time putting it down. The subject matter was tough but the switching of voices was sufficient to let the reader breathe a little.

1. Hannah sent Rachel letters rather than approach her to ask for her help. Was this something you agreed with or felt was reasonable?

I didn’t like it and it felt icky. She seemed unstable and I was waiting for her to have nefarious reasons for hiding herself for so long.

2. Scott Blair's mother accuses Rachel of covering her son's trial for the fame and the money. Do you think that Rachel treated Scott fairly in her coverage of the trial. How important is objectivity in media coverage of trials and other news events?

I think she was quite fair. It seemed likely he did rape her but Rachel’s treatment of him actually made me pause a bit and wonder if the book was going to switch gears.

3. Mitch Alkins tells Rachel that he's not a fan of true crime podcasts. He says he doesn't understand people's fascination "with other people's tragedies" and he calls these podcasts "modern day rubbernecking". Do you agree?

I enjoy true crime but I haven’t kept up with any in real time. I can see the perspective of it being rubbernecking.

4. Were you surprised at the manner in which the two cases intersected? Did you find their resolution satisfactory?

I knew one of the adults was going to be the rapist from the first rape but I didn’t guess who. I was also surprised when Bobby was revealed.

5. Of the three perspectives in The Night Swim—Hannah, Rachel, and the podcast transcripts—did you find one more engaging over the others? Or did you find all three equally compelling?

I found the podcast short and lacking but the other two voices were compelling and the pacing kept the story moving.

[travella]

I cannot recall anything about this book even after I read my review, the Goodreads blurb, and the reviews here. Usually I can at least vaguely recall the book, but not this time. So, I need to completely rely on my Goodreads review.

3.5* This book is wrongly labeled a gripping nail biting thriller. It's more of a very slow burn with a twist at the end. I think my rating would have been higher had it been more accurately marketed.

The book is very slow and the court scenes were not well written in my opinion. I was bored for the first 40% of the book. However the book did pick up towards the end. I did like the author's focus on the catch-22 that rape victims face. It's a real problem faced by many victims and the author did a good job of portraying their difficulty and continued victimization both in and out of court.

[sarapocalypse]

I liked this book overall, but some of it fell a little flat for me. The characters and setting all seemed pretty one-dimensional and some parts of the book seemed a little all over the place. But, it was a well-paced story that kept me interested. Not the most memorable book for me, but entertaining enough to enjoy.

1. Hannah sent Rachel letters rather than approach her to ask for her help. Was this something you agreed with or felt was reasonable?
- I understood her need to write the letters rather than approach her but didn't like the way it kept escalating into more and more invasive ways of delivering her message. That was one of the things that bugged me a bit about the book. In the end, I didn't see any reason for Hannah to get super creepy with delivering her messages once she has Rachel's attention.

2. Scott Blair's mother accuses Rachel of covering her son's trial for the fame and the money. Do you think that Rachel treated Scott fairly in her coverage of the trial. How important is objectivity in media coverage of trials and other news events?
- I think her coverage was pretty fair, though it was obvious in the non-podcast sections what Rachel's personal opinion of the case was.

3. Mitch Alkins tells Rachel that he's not a fan of true crime podcasts. He says he doesn't understand people's fascination "with other people's tragedies" and he calls these podcasts "modern day rubbernecking". Do you agree?
- I am not a fan of true crime podcasts myself, but I think it is human nature to be interested in hearing stories like that.

4. Were you surprised at the manner in which the two cases intersected? Did you find their resolution satisfactory?
- Not surprised by how they intersected, but I was surprised when they revealed who did what and the nature of the subsequent cover up.

5. Of the three perspectives in The Night Swim—Hannah, Rachel, and the podcast transcripts—did you find one more engaging over the others? Or did you find all three equally compelling?
- The podcast transcripts just seemed to unrealistic to me to be compelling.

[ufcasey]

I rated this 3.5 stars when I read it back in January. It's been a lot of books between then and now, so I'm going to C&P one portion of my review:

A large portion of the secondary story hinges on Rachel receiving letters from the sister of a drowning victim, Jenny Stills, asking for Rachel's help. Only she never actually asks for help. She just slowly reveals information, letter by letter, until she finally asks Rachel to meet her and blindsides her with being forced to be a witness to her confronting another person. I feel like the way this story was integrated into the main storyline could have been better. The main storyline, which felt a little ripped from the newspaper (Brock Turner) didn't really have any mystery to it and at no point did it seem like the accused was maybe innocent.


So yeah, I didn't really care for the letters and logically I couldn't understand why Hannah wanted to trick Rachel into being there for the big reveal/confrontation. None of that was necessary other than that was the only way to tie the two plots together. 

[tacokick]

Jul 28, 2021 17:01:43 GMT -5 charlatti said:

The writing and editing of this book really turned me off. I actually wrote notes on what annoyed me:

Sloppy editing, such as Hannah’s nightlight. First she says the foster parents bought it for her night terrors, then toward the end she mentions them buying her a nightlight for some completely different reason.

The author made a point of saying this fictional town is three hours north of actual city Wilmington, North Carolina. The setting details bear absolutely no resemblance to that part of NC. If you’re going to use a real location to orient your made up town, at least Google.

Also setting: is this a small town or not? Population is 96K but Kelly’s mom can’t grocery shop without being harassed. It’s a tiny town but it has three florists.

Awkward writing example: “His clothes were creased, like he’d literally thrown them on.” What does that even mean? They’re wrinkled? Creased is like when you get them out of a drawer and they’re creased from being folded. He’s a teenager, and they aren’t known for caring about neatness anyway. How does one literally throw on clothes, and how is that different from normal teenager dressing? (I have another example in a photo I saved, but that’s probably enough ranting.)

Random things that made me think the author really just wanted to set it in Australia but needed NC’s rape laws: she mentions a barbecue on the beach that takes quarters and also boat sheds (who says that here?) on the beach, ocean side. That’s not a thing. And barbecue? You might find a public grill, probably charcoal, so what would the quarters do? Again, maybe don’t pick a setting that you clearly don’t know at all.

Podcast transcriptions seemed much too short to be a real podcast and lacked any other voices, which makes the success not believable.

I’ll look at the actual discussion now that I’ve vented my complaints. (I had more. I just didn’t write them all down in my notes.)

Yes to all of this. I checked it out but couldn’t get into it. The details didn’t quite add up at any point and it kept throwing me off .

[So_Fetch]

1. Hannah sent Rachel letters rather than approach her to ask for her help. Was this something you agreed with or felt was reasonable?
At first, it seemed like it might have been the only way. The subsequent stalking/leaving letters was creepy and strange.

2. Scott Blair's mother accuses Rachel of covering her son's trial for the fame and the money. Do you think that Rachel treated Scott fairly in her coverage of the trial. How important is objectivity in media coverage of trials and other news events?
I agree with the previous poster who said that the podcast sections were pretty fair, but then her personal entries showed more bias. I appreciated that her journalism was more objective.

3. Mitch Alkins tells Rachel that he's not a fan of true crime podcasts. He says he doesn't understand people's fascination "with other people's tragedies" and he calls these podcasts "modern day rubbernecking". Do you agree?
I can see how that could be a good description. The court of public opinion does complicate jury selections and the ability to get a fair trial.

4. Were you surprised at the manner in which the two cases intersected? Did you find their resolution satisfactory?
I figured there would be some intersection. I was surprised at the lengths that the killer went to to hide his crime and how many people were affected by it.

The resolutions were strange and unsatisfying. I felt like maybe there would be some chemistry between Rachel and Cooper, but then she kisses the prosecutor and that's it. And then she makes the hotel give her the bird. It was choppy and strange

5. Of the three perspectives in The Night Swim—Hannah, Rachel, and the podcast transcripts—did you find one more engaging over the others? Or did you find all three equally compelling?

[aurora]

Thanks for the tag, ufcasey, and sorry I'm late to the discussion. I had finished the book a couple of weeks ago but then this week got away from me.


I liked the premise of this book, but only sometimes the execution. The three different mediums for telling the story (regular narrative, podcast episodes, and Hannah's letters) made it more interesting. I was listening to the audiobook and the podcast music was a bit annoying. Also, the title should have just been "Guilty or Not?"

I was a little alarmed at the level of stalking that Hannah was willing to do and surprised that Rachel was willing to overlook that and work with her.

The different but similar ways that the two women who experienced rape were viewed/treated was interesting (and the author talked about that in her interview linked recently, too). Sadly I think the bigger difference was their socioeconomic statuses and not progress with time.

[aurora]

charlatti, I am impressed at your attention to detail! I always have more trouble focusing on audiobook details but I missed all of those. (They would have annoyed me, too, though, if I had noticed them.)

[aurora]

Jul 30, 2021 15:07:52 GMT -5 So_Fetch said:

...
4. Were you surprised at the manner in which the two cases intersected? Did you find their resolution satisfactory?
I figured there would be some intersection. I was surprised at the lengths that the killer went to to hide his crime and how many people were affected by it.

The resolutions were strange and unsatisfying. I felt like maybe there would be some chemistry between Rachel and Cooper, but then she kisses the prosecutor and that's it. And then she makes the hotel give her the bird. It was choppy and strange
...

I had forgotten all about the bird! Yes, that felt really out of place to me.

[meowmaps]

Jul 30, 2021 20:54:09 GMT -5 aurora said:

Jul 30, 2021 15:07:52 GMT -5 So_Fetch said:

...
4. Were you surprised at the manner in which the two cases intersected? Did you find their resolution satisfactory?
I figured there would be some intersection. I was surprised at the lengths that the killer went to to hide his crime and how many people were affected by it.

The resolutions were strange and unsatisfying. I felt like maybe there would be some chemistry between Rachel and Cooper, but then she kisses the prosecutor and that's it. And then she makes the hotel give her the bird. It was choppy and strange
...

I had forgotten all about the bird! Yes, that felt really out of place to me.

She should've given the bird to Vince/Bobby!  He was a bird guy.  It made no sense that she would take it. 

[charlatti]

Jul 30, 2021 20:48:43 GMT -5 aurora said:

charlatti , I am impressed at your attention to detail! I always have more trouble focusing on audiobook details but I missed all of those. (They would have annoyed me, too, though, if I had noticed them.)

I don't usually get so wrapped up in the details -- usually if I find myself that annoyed by little things, I'll just give up on the book. I stuck with this one since I never manage to read book club books at the right time! 

[So_Fetch]

Jul 30, 2021 20:57:50 GMT -5 meowmaps said:

Jul 30, 2021 20:54:09 GMT -5 aurora said:

I had forgotten all about the bird! Yes, that felt really out of place to me.

She should've given the bird to Vince/Bobby!  He was a bird guy.  It made no sense that she would take it. 

I love this idea.  maybe theres a sequel where she picks which guy she likes and gives him a bird. 

[expectantsteelerfan]

I am mad at myself for being late to this discussion, because I read this book right before the discussion date and had lots of thoughts on it, but then totally forgot to participate!

I really disliked this book, but in all fairness, I had just read another true crime podcast book (Beneath Devil's Bridge, which was an Amazon Prime First Reads book) that I thought was much more well-done.

The podcast transcripts did not read as actual podcasts to me. They were inconsistent.

I found a lot of the details other mentioned as jarring as well (the quarters in the barbeque...I was like what the heck does that mean? and her taking the bird at the end).

For Hannah writing letters, at first it made sense because she couldn't face dealing with what happened in person, but the way it was written made it seem like Hannah was supposed to be suspicious or something and it didn't make sense.

The biggest downfall for me was what happened with the rape case. This is what I wrote in my goodreads review about it: And I REALLY didn't like how the ambiguous rape case turned up a surprise witness at the end. I kinda felt like the whole purpose of this book was to show how unfair the justice system is to rape victims and how they are basically put on trial themselves trying to prove their word. It was brought up several times that rape trials are his word against hers when there are no witnesses, and that seemed to be the main issue being highlighted, until they skirted the issue by finding the witness.

For an investigative reporter, Rachel sure didn't look into the car crash that was obviously related to what happened to Jenny.

[tacokick]

Aug 4, 2021 17:37:59 GMT -5 expectantsteelerfan said:

I found a lot of the details other mentioned as jarring as well (the quarters in the barbeque...I was like what the heck does that mean?

I know this part from watching Australia tv and reading a lot of Australian fiction lol Some grills at busy public parks/beaches in Australia are coin operated. You add coins and they heat up. I think it releases some sort of fuel into the grill? I guess the author assumed this was universal.

[litskispeciality]

Sorry I never got back to this. Can't wait to read your responses. I liked this book, but it fell off at the end, like the author was like oh no I need an ending.

1. Hannah sent Rachel letters rather than approach her to ask for her help. Was this something you agreed with or felt was reasonable? I could see Hannah's concern to approach Rachel, however thinking back...how did Hannah know what she looked like if Rachel admittedly had no internet presence and had never been to the town before?

2. Scott Blair's mother accuses Rachel of covering her son's trial for the fame and the money. Do you think that Rachel treated Scott fairly in her coverage of the trial. How important is objectivity in media coverage of trials and other news events? I think she tried to treat it fairly, but she clearly (for good reason!) was team K.

3. Mitch Alkins tells Rachel that he's not a fan of true crime podcasts. He says he doesn't understand people's fascination "with other people's tragedies" and he calls these podcasts "modern day rubbernecking". Do you agree? I have a love hate with crime shows and documentaries. I love to watch them, but feel dirty because people are putting it out there and reliving it. I'm happy when justice comes, but it must be so hard.

4. Were you surprised at the manner in which the two cases intersected? Did you find their resolution satisfactory? No, this almost felt like the author didn't think of an ending until then. I don't know I didn't like how that went.

5. Of the three perspectives in The Night Swim—Hannah, Rachel, and the podcast transcripts—did you find one more engaging over the others? Or did you find all three equally compelling? I liked the trail the best, that felt the most real. Hannah's letters were ok, but I'd start and stop and then forget what happened.

The more time I have away from it the less I give this book 4*'s lol. Glad I read it though, quick read.