In the absence of our leader, Sharon, Maureen is
attempting to write a synopsis of our discussion. I won't try to attribute comments to a
particular person but will try to summarize the group as a whole. We used many of the questions in the Reader's
guide to stimulate discussion.
Everyone seemed to like the book, which we commented was
unusual. And as the discussion
progressed it was evident that the author did a good job of making this a
mystery. No one seemed to know who the
killer was until the end, guessing instead Emilio's wife, Dr. Nichols and
Professor Rosen. We also thought that
Mr. Wright was real and were a little disappointed that he was not. We thought that the structure of the book, an
interview with Mr. Wright and a letter to the sister, Tess, was an effective
although unusual way of telling the story and we compared it to the Guernsey
and Bernadette books that we read this year, with letters and emails as
conveyances. We were not all sure that Bea was rescued at the end but thought
that Kasia would have been Bea's only hope.
Some of us wanted a sequel.
We thought that the sisters' relationship and that of
their mother were deeply affected by the death of their brother and the absence
of their father. We thought the mother
seemed to soften at the end after also losing Tess. Some of us thought that the sisters seemed to
be more mature than their ages of 21 and 26 indicated, one an artist and the
other in an established career in New York.
We were confused as to how Tess had time to do several
violent paintings in the week between the death of her baby and her own
death. And we pieced together that
William was giving her drugs which created hallucinations. We figured out that the babies of Tess and
Kasia did not have cystic fibrosis but were given the other gene therapy which
caused breathing problems. We think that
Bea will help Kasia's baby in the sequel.
All in all we had fun being detectives with this book.