the children act

i don't think that there is much to say about the children act aside from the fact that i thought some parts were interesting and other parts were rather dull. 

personally, fiona as the main character made the story relatively monotonous. her characterization dragged down an otherwise interesting plot. although i understand that fiona is supposed to be plain and predictable since she's a judge, a human vessel for the law, and therefore a rule follower. but with that being said, it makes for a relatively boring story or perhaps this novel just wasn't for me. her relationship with her husband was mildly interesting, but i didn't know much about him so it was difficult to feel invested in their marital issues. fiona was vastly underwhelming in comparison to the summary on the inner flap of the book cover. majority of the story involved her continuously avoiding uncomfortable conversations. while her point of view made it seem like she was doing a lot, in totality, she was actually doing a lot of nothing.  

the only character i found intriguing in this book was adam, but he makes up a pretty short portion of the plot in terms of his actual presence. he added a lot of beautiful moments to a bland narrative, which i get was the point, but there comes a tipping point when the boring starts to outweigh the exciting. the vibrance of his character was so wholesome. most of my colored tabs are probably of adam's dialogue. 

in addition to the characters of the book, one thing that i've always found funny is when music is an essential plot point in a novel. as a reader, skimming through words and lines, i obviously can't listen to the piano or the violin being played. i'm not automatically opposed to the involvement of music in literature, but i do think that it's difficult to write without being cliche or redundant. however, that's just my personal opinion. 

lastly, this book introduces an interesting conversation on the parallels between religion and law. while reading you come to the realization that the two both function within certain, quite limiting, boundaries and an adamancy that is extremely demanding. religion can be seen to function in the same way that laws can, and laws can be seen to function in the same way that religion can. there is no middle ground when it comes to these two fundamental pillars of the world. amongst the two, their foundations are built and strengthened by belief. such logic is exemplified in the book through the conflict between adam's religion, and the law. 

there were many special components of this book, but they were too loosely scattered and few in number. although mcewan's writing was beautiful, the plot didn't leave me feeling much of anything especially since i was able to predict the ending. if the summary entices you, i would say go for it, but for me personally, i don't think this book was attuned to my tastes, and that's okay. maybe it is for you.