top of page
Search

The Silent Patient is Overhyped

Somebody had to say it, and I am incredibly brave.


This week on the chopping block...

The Silent Patient

by Alex Michaelides


SUMMARY

Alicia Berenson, a once famous painter, now infamous patient at The Grove psychiatric ward hasn't spoken a word since being charged with her husband's murder. Psychotherapist Theo Ward is determined to connect with her, but does he have ulterior motives?

PUBLIC CONSENSUS

This book was so heavily recommended to me by so many people who's taste in books I admire. Along with the real life positive reviews, the internet is very much in agreement.

  • Goodreads: 4.18/5 stars (1,517,357 reviews)

That's a lot of positive reviews.

DO I HATE IT? (SPOILERS)
No, but I think it's pretty overhyped

Pacing issues

  • In a rather minor complaint, I had a lot of trouble getting invested in the beginning, I picked up and put down the book four or so times before I really committed to it, so in terms of a gripping introduction, it was severely lacking for me.

Predictable

  • Along with my pacing beef, I was so disappointed by the actual mystery. Everyone raved about the twists at the end, but by the end of the first chapter or so, it all seemed abundantly clear. I try not to beat the author at their own game with mysteries and thrillers as best as I can. I try not to intentionally work the story in my brain and solve it, rather I try to let the author tell the story as intended, but it was so obvious I wasn't even trying. I will give some credit, though, there were a few little aspects of the ending that I thought were really interesting, and unexpected. Nothing that blew me away, but little details I enjoyed that made me mad the story wasn't better written.

THE TONE INCONSISTENCIES

  • My biggest issue with the book however, was the tone inconsistency in Theo. The whole story hits the crux, we finally learn about Theo's involvement in the murder, and don't get me wrong, I love an unreliable narrator, but this was sloppy. A narrator can lie to it's reader, he can evade the truth, he can manipulate the reader, and when done right, you feel genuinely betrayed. I want to be clear that I am not giving the author credit for crafting this deeply complex character, but that there is a right and a wrong way to achieve this goal. Theo post unravelling has no similarity with our previous understanding of him. The entirety of the book up until this point, he is empathetic, and while a raging narcissist (psych majors smh), he is consistent in being rather placid as an actor. Simply put, I don't believe him. I don't believe this story. If I were the editor, I would have suggested a change of position for Theo in regards to narration, either have him telling his story to the reader or to someone else. You read this, and go, "but Lila, that's what he did, he was writing this book." And yes, I agree with that position, my issue then lies with how he proceeds. Think about it, this book doesn't make sense.

    • As a quick aside before continuing, Theo is deeply unlikable, but that is not relevant in a review in my opinion. Michael Scott, while more redeeming, is generally deeply unlikable, but rather than a critique of the writing, that is in admiration of a really well constructed character. I hate Theo, but that seems to be the goal. He's self obsessed with a savior complex and clearly delusional, and to this I give some credit to the author. He wrote a character I hated reading about. He made me feel.

Okay now that that is out of the way, back to this book within a book we're writing. Theo is a smart guy, albeit a shit head, but he's a smart guy. He has crafted this very specific narrative of him thus far and then at the most crucial part of the story for him to narrate with care, he drops the ball. I think the intention is to do the "I'm so sneaky, but my hubris is too strong and I am telling on myself so you all know how brilliant I am," kinda thing, but even that fails for me. After finishing this book, I still don't understand what Theo is trying to say. I needed connectivity between Theo before and Theo after, and without it I am completely removed from this world. The whole book fell apart for me.

Overall,

I think it's a fine book. If it's on your shelf or it's on your list, you may as well read it. It is not a bad book, even though I just tore it apart in totality. It's a decent enough read, I get why people liked it, and to give it a fair shot, I will say that in an interview with the author, he said that it was originally intended for the stage, first a play, then a movie, then he settled on a book, and I think this would be a killer watch. I think 2 hours of this story without the narrator's tone in the way would be great. I hope a movie comes out for this, I will absolutely go see it. There's a good story here, and it's so outrageous of me, a person with absolutely no authority to say, but in my unfounded opinion, it just needed more eyes on it before going to press.

TLDR

50/100 on the Lila Rating

It's fine. Overhyped in my opinion and had some disruptive tone inconsistencies, but overall, a decently okay book. I stand firm that this would have (will have?) made a phenomenal film, and I hope they give this story the medium it deserves and it becomes a movie.




Have you Read The Silent Patient? Rate it 1-5 (1 being terrible, 5 being fantastic)

  • 1 (terrible)

  • 2

  • 3

  • 4








Comments

bottom of page