Now many of you have already finished this month’s Book Club selection, SJ Watson’s Before I Go to Sleep, we thought we’d give you somewhere to go to talk about it without worrying you’re going to reveal anything crucial to those still reading. It is, after all, a rather plot-critical book.
So, here you are – comment away below …
To get the ball rolling, can I just say: I imagined all sorts of twists (I think I’d have played much more cruelly with Christine that Watson does), but not that one.
Gillian Croad Mar 18 2012, 9:56pm
Naell Crosby-Roe Mar 18 2012, 9:06pm
I wouldn't normally opt for a thriller but liked the fairly compelling device of writing in the present tense. Adds a nice sense of urgency to the whole thing. Typically I'm more of a reader of historical biographies so this did make a pleasant departure for me. Some of the plot felt a little over engineered with things like the high turnover of staff apparently making it easy for a fake Ben to plant photos and convince the hospital he's the safe pair of hands that Christine discharges herself with.
And Christine seemed far too concerned with bobbing genitals wherever the opportunity arose!
I nice easing into the new book club so probably a good choice.
Maureen Jansen Mar 18 2012, 8:25pm
I enjoyed the device of the journal and the unravelling of Ben/Mike ... Don't normally read thrillers but this one had me in its grip ... until the end.
As many have also said, I felt empty after finishing it. Funnily enough I found The Hunger Games more nourishing.
Linda Neale Mar 17 2012, 11:28am
Jeremy Andrew Mar 14 2012, 10:10pm
Jeremy Andrew Mar 13 2012, 9:30pm
The ending leaves you up in the air somewhat, but again, if you feel optimistic, there are clues earlier in the book - twice Chris seaches the house for something, both times she ignores some pills along the way; after Mike dies, her memory starts improving rapidly. Was he drugging her? Perhaps exacerbating her amnesia with something he learned about doing his Chemistry PhD? Or were they just the meds he was supposed to be on?
stuart burns Mar 13 2012, 11:31am
Jenni Ogden Mar 12 2012, 2:52pm
Watson also utilised the story of another well-described amnesiac, Clive Wearing, an organist and choir master at Kings College, Cambridge. Clive contracted herpes simplex encephalitis, which often destroys the hippocampus on both sides of the brain, resulting in a similar type of amnesia to that suffered by Henry. Henry and Clive both live in the moment, and although they can repeat 5 to 7 bits of information such as a five to seven digit phone number, as soon as they are distracted, the information is gone forever. In Watson’s interview he incorrectly commented that Henry could remember information for 15 minutes; 15 seconds would in fact be a stretch for him. Henry did however show signs of storing snippets of muddled information about people who became very famous after he underwent his brain operation. For example, when I asked him, almost 10 years after Elvis Presley’s death, who Elvis Presley was, he recalled that he was a singer (of jive!) and he thought perhaps he was dead and got the first bullet that was meant for Kennedy. Elvis was first heard on the radio in 1954, a year after Henry’s brain operation, and the Kennedy assassinations were many years later.
Watson would have struggled to write his story of Christine if she had suffered exactly this type of amnesia, as she would not have been able to record what she had been told or done in a journal; nor would she have been able to hold onto more than seven words of the information in her journal as she later read through it. So Watson gave her a new “rare” form of amnesia that in reality doesn’t exist, where she is able to retain information while she is awake, but as soon as she falls asleep all her memories are erased. Her amnesia also differed from true amnesias in that she lost most of her past memories. This is rare, although in some situations, such as advanced Alzheimer’s, more and more past memories are lost as the disease worsens. Following severe emotional trauma, loss of past memories might also occur, although this would be more likely to be specific for the events surrounding the trauma rather than the loss of one’s entire past, and it is unlikely that there would also be a loss of the ability to form new memories.
Clive Wearing’s desperate attempt to make sense of the fact that he had always “just woken up” by writing the time followed by this and other similar short statements over and over in his diary, probably gave Watson the idea of having his protagonist, Christine, write in her journal each day, and read what she had written the following day in order to “catch up”. Although for me it was at times a stretch to “suspend disbelief”, because of my knowledge of true amnesias, the feelings of desperation that the real amnesiac, Clive, clearly experienced every waking moment, were well reflected in Christine’s desperation to write down everything she could remember before she went to sleep and it was all once again erased. Henry never knew his own age and made various guesses, almost always of someone much younger. When shown a photo of himself as a 60 year old, he thought it was probably his father. When he saw his own face reflected in a mirror he was always surprised at how old he was, just like Christine. Christine’s vulnerability to exploitation also reflects the real situation. For example, Henry was totally protected from the public and even from the majority of memory researchers during his life. He was known only as HM until his death, and access to him was given to just a handful of researchers. He would have happily gone off with anyone who asked him to, always assuming that they were friends.
Although I didn’t think the writing was strong, and it took me quite a few chapters to become engaged, “Before I Go To Sleep” is a good example of the way a novelist can craft a novel by borrowing an idea from real life and tweaking some of the facts in a subtle ways that enables the reader—even those who know the “facts”—to suspend disbelief. It also highlights the importance of understanding that fiction is fiction. I must say the many reader comments about Dr Nash, the neuropsychologist, and how he was probably the evil one, were rather concerning! Nash was rather a strange fellow, I agree, but neuropsychologists are, on the whole, a pretty ethical lot! (see more on Henry and true amnesia on http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/trouble-in-mind-0)
Guy Somerset Mar 11 2012, 11:03am
pluto Mar 10 2012, 2:20pm
Having had another day or so to consider this novel (I ruminate a fair bit after finishing something) as well as listening to the podcast, the themes of this novel are quite unsettling, almost misogynist...men controlling a vulnerable woman in varying degress, and yes I do include the Dr in that sentiment. Having these themes presented by a man writing as a woman sits a bit uneasy with me. Another thing that has nagged at me is the device of the journal to tell Chrissy's story; I get she has a limited 'voice' but boy it got to be a chore to read!
The main problem is possibly that the day before I picked this up I was reading Kate Atkinson's Started Early, Took My Dog; and the excellent quality of her writing, plot, character development etc was sitting in the back of my mind the whole time I was reading Before I Go To Sleep. Atkinson's books are clever, funny and so well written, she's been at his for many more years than SJ Watson so maybe an unfair comparison. I spent only 2 days reading Before I Go To Sleep vs the almost 5 days savouring Kate Atkinson.
So yes, to get back to your main point, good writing reigns supreme. As a first novel SJ Watson has done a fairly good job, just feels (in hindsight) that he ran out of steam, and the writing does lack some depth. Would I recommend it? Not so sure now.
Craig Ranapia Mar 10 2012, 10:24am
Gerard Thompson-Tindling Mar 9 2012, 11:20pm
I guess as a reader we have to figure out where these books fit. Obviously this is all about individual preference but for me I will always remember the enthralling experience of reading this book, even if I forget a lot of its detail and language.
Sue LaFleur Mar 9 2012, 4:03pm
The plot ,in a nutshell, goes a bit like this. It is a bit of a confabulation, a word used three times in the novel, meaning major confusion and not making any sense.
Ben, a chemistry teacher lives with Christine, a graduate in English. She is 47. The year is 2007, November. They were married in 1985. When she was 29 she had an accident that caused severe amnesia.They have been married for 22 years. They live in Crouch End, London.
Every morning she wakes up, groans and thinks she's woken up with yet another married man.She imagines the wife coming in and calling her a slut. There are photos of the two of them stuck on the bathroom wall, reminding her that Ben is her husband.
This is in fact, not her real husband Ben. While she was in the hospital with severe amnesia, her real husband and son get on with their lives, in fact Ben has divorced her. She gets collected from there by her ex-lover Mike, after he begins to visit her in the mad ward and because there is a very high staff turnover, they let him remove her to his house to live happily ever after. She takes all her old photos and documents with her.
They live happily for 4 months and he is solid and reliable and tells her he loves her alot. He has destroyed most of her precious photos of her and the real-Ben and her son Adam and he fakes other documents. He tells her she has no son, no novel, no friends and a fire destroyed alot of the photos, and only tells her some truths once she starts reembering them for herself.
Kindly Dr Nash tells her all this as well, but only because she had written about it in the journal he made her keep. And she relates this to him. So fake-Ben and Dr Nash tell her the same story for a while. But then she starts to remember things differently all by herself.
It turns out that fake-Ben has faked the son's death notice, lied about having a son, about her friend Claire, the novel, the fire. All lies. Fake-Ben reads her journal in secret, gets panicky, and arranges to take her to Brighton to jog her memory and become the real-Mike and not the fake-Ben. He wants it all to be like it was when they were having that affair years before, when she had that second pregnancy which just had to be his and not Ben's.
In the Hotel she reads the lost week section of her journal. It starts on 9 Nov goes up to 23 Nov and then there is week ripped out. There it is in fake-Ben's luggage. She remembers more stuff and realises that fake-Ben is Mike, the previous ex lover. There is a fight. Injuries. A fire! Mike dies. Christine is rescued with a broken collar bone and an intact memory. Ben, Adam and Claire magically appear in the ambulance.
She realises that she can remember a heck of a lot more and Ben wants to give it another go. They all LOVE her. Dr Nash reckons she won't need to write another journal. She dozes off whispering I LOVE YOU ninety times to anyone who will listen.ZZZZZZZZzzzzzz.
I took copious notes during the second reading which is why I can be so picky and pedantic.
I counted ninety, yes 90!! times the phrase I love you or variations of cropped up. I think this is called purple prose and becomes laboured.
I noticed the author has an obsession with colours especially gold, orange and yellow. I counted 39. Here are a few: yellow note (x 2), yellow lamp, yellow romper suit, yellow earplugs, yellow birth certificate, lots of gold jewellery references, orange carpet, model of a brain parted like an orange, orange plastic chairs and yellow formica tables, orange squash, orange fireworks, carrot cake, orange blossom (x4),orange bedspread, orange sunrise and it goes on.
And then I thought the author, when choosing real names, had the dictionary open at A and progressively worked his way through it. Such as Adam, Ben, Christine. There is our ABC. Then Alfie, St Annes, Australia, Adelaide, Amanda, Alan..oh that's enough A's, how about some B's.....Ben, Barcelona, Birmingham, Claire, Christine, Canary Wharf, Dave, Ed, Fisher, George, Giles, Hilary, Helen, Italy, Julie, Kristian, Keith, Lou, Lucy, Lizzy, Mike, Manchester, St Marks, Mathew, Nige, NZ, Nash, Nicole, Paxton, Parliament Hill, Roger, Soper, Toby, Verona, Wheeler and ZZZZZZzzzzzzz.....
Loads of real and imagined sex and bobbing male members and liberal use of the F word do not put this book into any great literary category.
The best part of the book is the quote writen in the front by Iranian author Parviz Owsia:
I was born tomorrow
Today I live
Yesterday killed me.
Google this and you will see it imprinted onto a park bench in Hampstead Heath.
I think a good part of this story is based on first hand experiences of the author as it is his debut novel, this is often the case. I reckon he read the quote on a park bench, had a germ of an idea, then read about some one with amnesia to spark a thought. He has a backround in a hospital and the MRI scene was very accurate. He's probably read some bad romance novels and has a fixaton on yellow and orange and likes to frequent dull cafes around Parliament Hill.
I'd like to sum this book up in a song. "I Will Always Love Youuuuuuuuu" sung by Whitney Houston, ad nauseum.
So glad I only borrowed this from the library and am not happy that I chose it for the next book club choice I have just joined.
pluto Mar 9 2012, 10:09am
I do agree with Carole Beu's comment about whether or not this qualifies as a 'literary thriller', I don't think its quite there; its well above standard airport reading but not quite at the levels it aspires to be. I was also hoping it would be a bit more abstract like Memento, but with a late-40s woman protagonist, I guess maybe not! I'm not so sure the device of a man writing as a woman really worked, it just wasn't really convincing to me. Like others I thought the kindly Dr was going to be revealed as someone who was manipulating the plot. Glad to have read it and certainly look forward to next month's selection.
Craig Ranapia Mar 9 2012, 12:47am
stuart burns Mar 8 2012, 9:00pm
Yeahbidy Glasgow Mar 8 2012, 7:31pm
Guy Somerset Mar 8 2012, 1:06pm
Linda Lee Mar 7 2012, 4:20pm
Excellent first novel, very well done in the fact that a lot of the detail is repetitive without being boring and in each instance we gleam a little bit more into what is happening. I didnt pick the ending, in fact I thought the therapist had some sinister motive.
Gretchen Kivell Mar 7 2012, 12:25pm
Helen Edwards Mar 7 2012, 10:54am
Siobhan Clare Mar 6 2012, 9:24am
Gerard Thompson-Tindling Mar 5 2012, 10:07pm
Lincoln Gould Mar 5 2012, 2:52pm