NOW CLOSED We Need to Talk about Kevin - tell the film makers your views on the topics it raises (spoiler alert) - a £200 Amazon voucher to be won

[NewGirlHelenMumsnet]

Hello. As you may know, the film version of "We Need To Talk About Kevin", based on the book by Lionel Shriver, is out in cinemas soon and we've been asked by the film's producers to find out how you feel about the issues the book/film covers.

WARNING - This thread may well contain spoilers for anyone who hasn't read the book/seen the film.

OK, so, "We Need to Talk About Kevin" has been called a "compelling and repulsive" book about motherhood. It is, as one MNer put it "one of the first novels to put motherhood under the microscope and to state honestly that motherhood isn't always a walk in the park".

It's the story of a woman who doesn't bond with her son - and whose son grows up to do something monstrous. It's deliberately - and unsettlingly - unclear how much the difficult relationship between mother and son was a catalyst for his monstrous actions.

Do come and post your thoughts here on motherhood, bonding, parental guilt, nature/nurture etc etc. It doesn't matter whether you've read the book or not. (This isn't really meant to be a debate about the merits of the book, more about the issues it, and film based on it, raises. Comments will not be used anywhere - the film producers are just interested to hear what you think).

You can read what author Lionel Shriver has to say about it all in the fascinating Q&A we did with her recently - and you can watch a trailer for the film .

Everyone who adds their comments to this thread will be entered into a prize draw to win a £200 Amazon voucher.

Thanks
MNHQ

[LoveBeingAWitch]

Wow I had completely forgotten I had read this book when it came out before dc. Didn't know it was being made into a film. But given what he does not really surprising now is it?

A mum not bonding is one thing but this is a very extreme example of it. Always makes feel uneasy that women are seen as failing if they haven't bonded or don't take to motherhood.

[Bledkr]

I have read the book several times and am off to see the film on Friday.
It raised the question for me that was it her parenting that caused his behaviour or was he truly an odd child.I never came to a conclusion,but as a mother and a professional i found it fascinating.
Him as a baby,not wanting her to hold him and seemingly screaming to annoy her,my head tells me this isnt possible and that this was just her interpretation of things.

[DestinationUnknown]

Interesting thread. The ambiguity of the book being whether the mother's failure to bond caused Kevin to become the person he did and act so terribly, or whether he was "born evil" so to speak, to the extent that his own mother reviled him, is an extreme example of the nature/nuture debate.

We've all heard of children born into terrible backgrounds of violence and abuse who use this as a "how not to" example and pull themselves out of it, becoming successful parents and citizens. Equally there are children born into relative wealth, privilege and stability who will go off the rails, testing their parents to the limits with drug use, theft, abusive behaviour etc.

Surely however it's far more likely that those with poor life chances will go on to have a poorer life than those born with more advantages who will benefit from their stability and education. So nuture, in my opinion, has a much bigger role to play than nature.

Clearly we don't yet know the scope of genetics - is there a dominant gene that predisposes you to criminal behaviour, and this gene will out no matter what social conditioning you've been put through? Is there a gene which would cause a child born into a decent, if not overly loving, family with enough money for good quality housing, food, education, leisure etc to inevitably act as Kevin does?

Equally it seems that the early years are being given increasing importance in their role. It used to be thought that the first 5 years were absolutely vital in shaping a child's future, more recently it has been put at 2 years being the key. So if a child is neglected, rejected, abused before he or she is 2, then nuture is effectively shaping nature.

What I think is problematic is that the Kevin story is all about his mother. What about the father? He is weak, vacuous, reluctant to probe into the depths of his son's and wife's minds and motivations. He sees a happy family because he wants to, but doesn't seem to do much to promote one. He puts his head in the sand about Kevin's early behaviours rather than tackle them as an involved and concerned parent would. Parenting seems to be left to the mother alone - true of many households today? Possibly.

The mother obviously fails to bond (and the subtext screams PND at us) to the extent that she feels as though Kevin is a complete stranger. What effect would that have on a child - to feel always rejected, pushed out? No wonder he acts as he does - to an extent. Most people who suffer rejection on this scale would be likely to have some problems in life, but how many set out to kill and maim as Kevin does?! Ultimately that choice is his own and can't be laid at his mother's door.

Finally, it's while since I read the book, so I can't remember if there is any mention made of the mother's own parents. If Kevin's actions can be blamed in any part on his mother, then her inability to love her son (though she bonds with her daughter), may well relate back to her own childhood. Nuture again, rather than nature.

[Dolcegusto]

I think it's the classic nature vs nurture argument. Was he born like that or was it a result of his upbringing. And if he was born with a genetic abnormality that made him like that, can he/ should he still be held responsible for his actions?

[Snapespeare]

i enjoyed the book very much, didn't see the plot twist at all. However, I found the argument tedious. I tend to feel mothers are blamed for everything that goes wrong and ignored when things go well. Whilst the book may have been ambigious about the nature/nurture/lack of bonding, audiences will leap to conclusions and use the film to reinforce their own view (although people who use a work of fiction as evidence are prone to leap to a conclusion in my experience.)

[sieglinde]

Really sorry to be negative, but I think both the book and the author very overhyped. The idea that not all mother-child relations are idyllic has been very amply canvassed elsewhere.

I don't think the book added much to the hilarious scene in Parenthood in which Steve Martin thinks that if he makes the wrong choice his son will become a mass shooter, while the right choice will see his son become class valedictorian. It was supposed to be funny....

The uncomfortable truth is that our children's lives ultimately belong to them. I don't blame my mother for my mistakes (and there are many). I blame them on the choices I made.

That said, my own eldest hated being held closely. He just did. Still does, at 17. He has yet to murder anyone, though I suppose it might happen, and I never thought he screamed to annoy me - the Shriver mother just seemed to need to read a sane neurology textbook at this point.... My younger child liked being hugged. This made breastfeeding easier, and suited me because I like close contact, but I'd say I'm now equally close to both of them. My own mother disliked hugs too, and would have bonded more easily with a less clingy baby like my son than she did with me hanging on her like a monkey.

The POINT is that everyone - parents and children - has to learn to manage difference. Difference is part of life. The book was cringingly sure it was making EXPLOSIVE!!!! points, but it really was making heavy weather of a bit of common sense.

[PosiesOfPoison]

Bonding with your child is natural and completely expected, I cannot imagine not wanting to die and live for each of my children. I try to rebond every now and again of I feel things slipping, you have to work at it as well as it being automatic.

[KatieMortician]

I first read it when it came out and I was childless. I thought it was brilliant. Now I have a child I find many of the themes and ideas within it a bit contrived. It feels 2D rather than 3D now i know what i know. None of the worst dilemmas and struggles I have as a mother really feature. For example loving your child but not always liking them or wanting to get away from them. The sheer exhaustion and relentless responsibility of being a parent. The inate obligation that is always nagging in the background of all thoughts.

[Abgirl]

I read the book before having my DSs and thought it was OK, but I'm now not very keen either to read it again and won't be going to the cinema to see it. The thought of it makes me uncomfortable and I'd rather go to the cinema to see something I enjoy (because other than the kids club I only go once a year or so now anyway)

[EdlessAllenPoe]

i loved the serialisation of this on Radio 4.

as a tense drama...very engaging.

as a commentary on motherhood - nothing new. i know 'a mothers place is in the wrong'. Move on.

[PinotScreechio]

I've read the book but I don't want to see the movie. I found the book very haunting actually - it raised issues within my childhood (nothing like Kevins, but...) and I liked the fact I could stop reading and out it down when it got too close.

I'd urge people to read it though - it makes you really think . That is a GOOD THING.

[thecatatemygymsuit]

I read 'We need to talk about Kevin' before I had my daughter, loved it - in an uncomfortable way - and recently reread it and loved it even more. The thing I found most fascinating was the ambivalence I had to both Eva and Kevin... I couldn't entirely blame either of them for the way Kevin turned out, but it posed an interesting question in my mind: Are some children simply unlovable? Kevin seemed impossible to bond with at every stage, a deeply horrible baby, toddler, child and obviously teenager.
On the other hand, I found Eva such a detached cold fish, so knowing without being remotely self-aware.
Chilling and compelling and oddly plausible, it reminded me of Doris Lessing's The Fifth Child - equally brilliant. I cannot wait to see the film!

[poorbuthappy]

Will I still be entered into the draw if I say what sieglind said

[sieglinde]

Yes, katieM, that's my sense too. Having kids means all this is not really front-page news. Am I right that Shriver has no children?

[GossipWitch]

I haven't read the book or seen the film, I am going to now have to find the book and read it....

[KatieMortician]

I'm sure she has no children. And I wonder if that's why the subtle difference between her book and Lessing's excellent The Fifth Child. In that book where the child really is supposed to be some sort of monster she reacts and has emotions like a mother does; even though the mother can't understand and feels horror and revulsion towards the child and resents him for changing the dynamic of their happy home (I defy even the most loving parent not to feel resentful of the lack of time, freedom and personal space having a child brings) she still has that sense of obligation.

If I am to be completely frank. It is only that sense of obligation that keeps me going some days. I adore DS and I love him very much but I am not in denial that it is bloody hard being a parent for most of the time.

[stickylittlefingers]

I agree with Sieglinde as well . A book that was very sure of itself as being Brilliant and Ground=breaking, but I wasn't at all convinced. It's not often I preface anything with "if you are a parent, then", but in this case I think it's clear that NS didn't see that the parent-child relationship is always going to be a little more nuanced than the one she portrayed. But being more simplistic makes it easier to make a point (and sell a book).

[vincenta]

I didn't read book and to be honest don't want to do it!
For me bonding with child is something very natural and I can't understand how parents couldn't bond with their children.
My mum told us that we (my younger brother and I) are most important persons in her life, she always will stand by us, will help us and will be near! Our parents spend with us as much time as possible. They read for us night time stories, always asked what we did that day,and always listened.We were feeding ducks near river.Visiting parks and play areas on weekdays.when we were smaller we think that mum can do everything, she bake cakes for school baked goods market, she make costumes for Halloween or Christmas school parties when she was tired in late evening after her work, helped to do our home works, when we need her help.She never said that she is fed up or too tired.
Now I am mum too.And I love my 2 years old son with all my heart, he is the best thing in my life , meaning of my life.When he was born it was so amazing to hold him so tiny so beautiful in my arms and understand that he depend on me, that i should protect him, love him and take care.
To my mind every baby, toddler and child needs love and care.
Every mum can give her child it, no matter how busy she is or how much money she earn, love, cuddles, kisses, her time. Play with children , go for walk, read books and get fun, child don't need expensive toys, he need attention and love.
Of course no one is perfect, we all sometimes feel tired and fed up with changing nappies, cooking, cleaning and need some "me" time.
When my son fall asleep I take bath with candles and glass of wine, afterwards I read good book or magazine and relax...
Next morning when he wakes up I smile give a hug and say "hi, sweety!
he smiles me back, give me hug and lot of kisses and says, love you mummy!
these are word every mum are so happy to hear....

[Tortington]

i read half the book and decided it was so bloody boring that i couldn't read any bloody more. not even for the spectacular (apparently) shock ending.

[Tortington]

oh theres a sub discussion about bonding.

erm... its not natural actually , not for everyone and this shouldnt be stated as a fact.

[KatieMortician]

Agree with Custy. It doesn't come naturally to everyone.

The ending isn't a shock. It's revealed at the beginning.

[Tortington]

oh - i assumed there was more, rhubarb was urging me to read to the end in what i assumed would be some shocker of huge proportions that would make the rest of the book seem good.

well that rhubarb is a fibbing fibber

[PosiesOfPoison]

It is natural, for some.

[Tortington]

but not for all

[TanteRose]

I read the book after it won the Orange Prize - it was the summer holidays, and although I was "enjoying" reading it, it seemed that my personality was changing the more I read it

I became more than usually irritable and snappy with my DCs...I have heard that other people felt the same when reading it.

I went back to normal when I finished it. Not sure what this says about me...

The first time I read, I thought it was brilliant. The second time I read it, I wasn't so sure. It suddenly became blindingly obvious that Shriver had not had children of her own, and various scenes became very contrived and unbelievable.

Having said that, the scene when she discovers her daughter and husband still makes me shiver.

I am looking forward to seeing the film - especially Tilda Swinton's performance.