#i hope rhemann gets to make that difference for jean

[little2nerdy]

as someone who has a parent who has coached a collegiate team for 30 years watching jean say “a coach was supposed to take, not give” made me so incredibly sad.

i’ve watched my parent give their heart and soul for their team and i can see elements of that in both wymack and rhemann. coaching a collegiate sport is no easy feat but they work their butts off to make sure they’re doing everything they can for their kids.

for jean’s view to be so incredibly warped makes me so upset. knowing that if he’d had a different coach and been on a different team his love for the sport may still exist.

i really really hope he gets to connect more with rhemann (and wymack) in book 3, i hope that they can help to repair his relationship to a sport he once loved while showing him a coach is there to give you everything you need to succeed

[hourafterhour]

hmmm actually i'd be so interested in hearing about why you hated tsc? i personally didn't hate it but thought it was very flawed and would love to hear your critiques <3

very long below!

starting more generally, i thought the structure of it was bizarre, especially the choice to start it where she did. rehashing the end of TKM in very minute detail from a new pov did nothing for me, and i don't think it's where this part of jean's story "starts" if that makes sense. i found a lot of parts really ham-fisted and poorly written, esp very sloppy/lazy/straight up bad characterization (jeremy giving the homeless man a gift card, lmao); and her reliance on very high drama plot points (surprise secret sister - that was when i could not believe what i was forcing myself to keep reading; also reacher showing up, other parts i've forgotten). i think this approach works so well in aftg, where the melodrama is crucial, but it fails here, and i got the impression that she didn't feel like she was telling (what should have been) a fundamentally different type of story in content and structure than aftg. using any of the very compelling interpersonal dynamics wrt jean in her original trilogy to build drama in a subtler way would have been so much more rewarding imo. "can jean make a life outside the nest” is the built in stakes of the story. can he survive what has happened and what comes next. no need to make it any more dramatic than that - those are pretty high dramatic stakes to me. to give a more specific example, i thought the scene abt jean having to relearn how to check because the way the ravens do it is dangerous was excellent, especially when jeremy explicitly tells him “you’re hurting me” and it’s still unclear if that will be enough to make jean resort to a style of gameplay that’s less effective. this is more along the lines of what i’d hope we’d get from this book — subtle moments that arise from this being a sports narrative and a recovery narrative, and the unique situation of jean being forced into intimacy with a new team (again, a situation that is already so dramatically rich!) 

but my main issue is that I think aftg is a pretty exceptional (and exceptionally unique) trauma narrative, and i think jean’s trauma was poorly written here from start to finish, and pretty unimaginative/cliche. my overwhelming thought while reading it is that it was a really poorly researched book. writing the perspective of a character IMMEDIATELY after release from years of captivity is an extraordinarily difficult task, and the way she tried to account for what his patterns of thinking would have adapted to under those conditions was paltry to me: “I am Jean Moreau. My place is at Evermore. I will endure.” — i was literally rolling my eyes. just a really depressing lack of depth of interiority wrt an experience that was already so rich and subtle in canon. the single line in tkm when abby says he's already tried to escape back to the nest twice was more complex and worth more to me than all of tsc

to give another specific example bc this is one part i remember well, i was so annoyed at the scene when jean offers his racquet to rhemann for punishment. like it's so lazy!!! it's so lazy. jean is not stupid, and i could have believed it if it was written as jean being confused/getting where he was and who he was with mixed up, but a crucial part of the ideology of the nest was that this was not like other teams, and their lifestyle is not ordinary, and this is necessary to make them better than everyone else. jean would be well aware that other people on most other teams do not get physically abused by their coaches, in front of the rest of their teammates, as a matter of course. like maybe that seems nitpicky, but this actually seems so essential to me. and there were so many other moments where it just didn't seem like any meaningful or interesting thought had been paid to how jean would have interpreted his own life, and i hated how she had to make him do things like this to make certain things about his past visible because she couldn't do it in more skillful ways

i was kind of withholding judgement through the first little bit, but the first scene with kevin really solidified that i would not enjoy this book. jean is, what, a few days removed from the nest? i just do not believe (or want to be asked to believe) that he and kevin would be able to articulate any of that by that point, or have the words to discuss these things openly like that already. this was baffling to me because, once again, this is handled really well and compellingly in the original trilogy!!! hence my 40k two months of madness!!!! jean and kevin literally cannot even speak to each other when they see each other at the banquet, to the point where andrew intervenes just to get them to stop watching each other. iirc there was a part in the EC where nora said they don’t have a real conversation till a year (or multiple years?) out of the nest which felt extremely true to me. laila, cat, and jeremy constantly pressing him to express what happened, as if being able to narrativize a traumatic experience is not actively one of the hardest things about recovery, again just felt like lazy writing. everything has to be spoken out loud for it to work here, because she didn’t build conflict in any other way. i actively disliked laila and cat by the end of the book because she had to use them in such annoying and blunt ways to drive the story forward.  

OKAY there is my quota of "joyless hater" for the day... i appreciate you wanting to hear my thoughts!! if you have any thoughts on any of this i'd love to hear them as well. and if you're interested, i'll take the opportunity to rec an academic text on some of these dynamics, Alexandra Stein’s book “Terror, Love, and Brainwashing: Attachment in Cults and Totalitarian Systems"