Just realized our book club spent 45 minutes arguing about a character's motive that the author confirmed in an interview.

We were discussing 'The Silent Patient' and half the group was convinced the main character's silence was about guilt, while the other half said it was about trauma. I looked it up after the meeting and found a 2020 podcast where the author flat out said it was about trauma. Does this mean we should check author intent before our debates, or does that ruin the fun of talking about what we think?

3 comments

3 Comments

maxburns27d ago

Oh, the "author confirmed it in an interview" trap. My old book club once had a full blown fight over symbolism in a novel, only to find the author said it was just a cool description. It felt like getting the answer key after a test you already failed. I say let the debate happen first. Looking it up ahead of time would kill the fun, even if it means being totally wrong. The talk is the whole point.

logan_lee8827d ago

Wait, you're totally right! I used to always look up author interviews right away, but that "answer key" feeling is so real. Now I love just letting the debate happen first.

tyler_fox4110d ago

Seriously, you guys fought for 45 minutes over that? I'd have checked my phone after ten. Let the debate happen, but maybe cut it off before you lose a whole meeting.