Bream Reading club met last night the 3rd April to discuss Noah Hawley’s work The Good Father.

(Spoilers ahead)

We found the book gripping but for the heavy historical accounts on other political assassinations – though it was agreed that the Father (Dr Allen) needed those accounts in his attempts to understand his son, no real connections were ever made to his son and his actions. Perhaps that was left to the reader but it left us wondering how it added to our own understanding of Dr Allen and his son’s relationship.

All the way through the book Noah manages to keep us hoping that Daniel was somehow in the wrong place at the wrong time, and the final blow is hard to take. The three men on the train kept us hoping that there was some kind of conspiracy, and to be honest global conspiracies have been born on far less.

The brutally honest look at Daniel’s life is haunting and painful in differing degrees. Here is a man that believes he should have died on an airplane when he was eight. It appeared to us that he was a child that desperately needed his parents and they were not there for him, something that damaged him to some extent. He shows extreme apathy and detachment, this is aptly demonstrated by him rolling of a girl during sex and just walking away. He deliberately chooses to leave university and go driving around the States on his own with no apparent plan for returning to normal life.

Obviously a parent cannot be responsible for everything that their grown child does in this life, but there are also realities that must be acknowledged, would he have behaved differently if his parents had not divorced and he still had the full support and foundation of a stable family? We think his detachment was born on that airplane and the line having being severed there was no way of reattaching it.

Dr Allen thinking that many other children who lived that kind of life of travelling to and fro between divorced parents, didn’t go on to kill anyone, just sounds like an excuse. A great deal of the book is Dr Allen desperately trying to understand what happened to his son, and to an extent ever more desperately trying to find out if he is responsible.

In his quest to either vindicate his son or himself, he neglects his younger sons and so threatens to repeat history. He had an image of Daniel that wasn’t true, and Daniel had an image of his father that wasn’t true either. They were two shadows trying to understand each other and failing.

The Father with his touch of arrogance was slightly better than the ex-wife, Daniel’s mother who was irresponsible and in turns blamed herself or blamed Daniel for everything that had happened. We placed a great deal of blame at her door as her selfishness was so glaringly apparent.

The way the book concludes is touching and gave us closure.  The woman Bonnie is shown to be far more open and loving to Daniel than his own parents were, and though we will never truly know the full story of Daniel’s motivations because of ‘those missing pages in the journal’ we do know that he was loved by others even if his own parents had semi-abandoned him.

Overall rating out of 5 = 4.33

Our next meet in May will be the 8th as the first Monday of the month is a bank holiday