We Need to Talk About Gimmicks (We Need to Talk About Kevin)

I recently read Lionel Shriver's We Need to Talk About Kevin, which has been a bestseller in the US and won the Orange Prize for Fiction 2005 in the UK.

The novel is written from the point of view of Eva Khatchadourian in a series of letters to her estranged husband. The focal point of these letters is their teenage son Kevin who committed a school shooting.

This is the type of book that critics and the media love because they can label it as a novel " for our times" and praise it for "tackling a tough issue." Because the present media likes nothing better than keeping its viewers/readers/listeners in a constant state of fear, they can review a book like this in their publications, link it into their features about school shootings, discuss its themes and merits on their radio stations and therefore keep the cycle of scaremongering alive.

I did not dislike this book. I think Shriver an exceptional creator of characters--every single one was detailed and superbly realistic. But characters alone cannot support a story and, although We Need to Talk About Kevin asked a lot of interesting questions about nature vs. nurture and the creation of a killer, I did not think it was enough.

I also thought the letter-writing format was a weak gimmick. Without spoiling the plot, this particular style emphasises a twist in the story, but I am certain Shriver could have come up with a different, stronger way of manipulating that element.

I am afraid book awards are becoming a bit like the Oscars. You can usually guarantee a win for a "holocaust" or "minority overcoming society" movie. In the same way, novels are being awarded for tackling terrorism, school shootings, drugs, and any other issues that "define our era."