It took me quite a long time to finish this one. Honestly, it was mostly because I was reading this as a book, and doing most of my pandemic reading through 2-week Kindle borrows from my local library...so this book just kept being pushed aside. That being said, there was nothing about this book that made me want to pick it up more in between reads (or while reading others). I didn't like any of the characters and as a result, wasn't really interested in the story itself. I was, however, a bit surprised by the ending - but not enough that it turned the book around for me.

Ik hou van zijn sarcasme, maar dit boek is niet het beste van Koch.

This is a “literary” thriller: it has a mystery to be solved but also examines the literary world.

The book opens with an unnamed narrator (later identified as Herman) stalking his neighbour, a writer known as M. There is a definite undertone of menace as the narrator makes statements like “Yes, I have certain plans for you, Mr. M” and “I’m here, and I won’t be going away, not for a while yet” and “I consider you a military target” and then proceeds to follow not just the writer but his family. Gradually, it is revealed that in his bestselling book, M used events from Herman’s adolescence and distorted them to create an exciting plot. Using a highly publicized case involving a teacher, Jan Landzaat, who went missing and was never found, M distorted events in his fictionalization and basically portrayed Herman and a friend as killers.

The novel examines the connection between fact and fiction and the process of creating and crafting a work of fiction. Does a writer have the right to appropriate facts and use people as material for fiction, especially if by rearranging events for the sake of the plot he negatively impacts the lives of the real-life people involved? Herman certainly wants to exact retribution because he feels M exploited his life. Authors observe people and the world around them and inevitably incorporate them in their work, but should they be allowed to do so with impunity? Writers are taught to eliminate coincidence because “Coincidence undermines a story’s credibility” and “Coincidence ruins the credibility of a writer” though “reality is glued together with coincidence.” What if a coincidence is a key factor in a real-life event and its omission totally distorts reality? Koch introduces his theme in a tongue-in-check epigraph: “Anyone who thinks he recognizes himself or others in one or more characters in this book is probably right. Amsterdam is a real city in the Netherlands.”

There is considerable suspense in the book. Koch uses a number of techniques to keep tension. When action reaches a dramatic point, the perspective is abruptly shifted to a different point of view. The viewpoints of a number of characters are given, some in first and some in third person narration, and there are frequent shifts between past and present. There is more than one unreliable narrator so the reader is left to try and decipher the truth. And, yes, there are unexpected twists in the plot.

One benefit of the changing points of view is that the reader’s feelings about a character change. Herman describes M as a fading, mediocre writer who is narcissistic and exploitative. When M becomes the narrator and the reader becomes privy to some of his thoughts and feelings, a more sympathetic picture emerges. When the opinion of others is added, like that of M’s wife, another dimension is added. By the end, M is fully developed. The same is the case for Herman; parts of his personality are described by various people with whom he comes in contact. Flashbacks to his youth help round out his character.

What is interesting is how similar M and Herman are. Herman accuses M of invading his life and stealing it for his purposes, yet Herman does the same with his video camera. He photographs people in personally devastating moments, invading their privacy, and then mocks those people in a public way. There are other similarities: both have troubled pasts, both are jealous of others who are more successful, and both have mean streaks that occasionally come to the fore.

One aspect I really enjoyed is the way characters mock others for things which worry them. Herman constantly refers to Landzaat’s long teeth and Landzaat agrees that “his own teeth weren’t exactly his ace in the hole” but when he thinks of Herman he describes his teeth at length: “And his teeth! His teeth were too weird to be true. To call them irregular would be putting it mildly. Those front teeth that curved inward and the open spaces between his canines and the molars behind made him look like a mouse more than anything else. A mouse that had been smacked in the teeth by a much bigger mouse. How could a girl be drawn to that? They were teeth that let the wind through, a girl’s tongue would have a hard time not getting lost in there.” M is married to a much younger woman and worries about growing older and being forgotten, yet M and his wife mock N, an older colleague who always has a young woman on his arm, and M comments that N’s “countless wrinkles and folds in his cheeks and around his eyes seem to deepen even further – the landscape of gorges and deep valleys above which the sun is now doing down.” Koch definitely knows a lot about human psychology.

Readers who enjoyed Koch’s previous books The Dinner and Summer House with Swimming Pool will certainly enjoy this one. There are sections that I found a tad tedious – the discussion of Dutch politics and the changing relationships among Herman’s various friends – but there is much to recommend this book. Koch is an author who pokes fun at authors but examines serious issues as well. And provides well-rounded characters and an entertaining plot that keeps the reader guessing.

Note: I received an ARC of this book from the publisher via NetGalley.

Please check out my reader's blog (http://schatjesshelves.blogspot.ca/) and follow me on Twitter (@DCYakabuski).

No puedo empezar de otra manera que dejando constancia de lo mucho que me ha decepcionado. Si estáis esperando una experiencia literaria como lo fueron «La cena» o «Casa de verano con piscina» podéis esperar sentados. Soy consciente de que juzgar un libro en base a compararlo con sus obras predecesoras no es hacerle justicia, pero me temo que es complicado no hacerlo.

«Estimado señor M.» carece de la chispa, la reflexión y la controversia que tanto me atrajo de Koch. No he conseguido ni conectar, ni empatizar, ni tan solo interesarme lo más mínimo por ninguno de los personajes, lo que harán o lo que hicieron. Tanto el narrador como M. (sobre todo el primero) comparten un carácter aburrido, egocéntrico, y con bastantes tintes machistas. El misterio que rodea al libro no logra despertar ni tensión ni interés. Las reflexiones son muy banales, superfluas, y no ahondan en ningún tema en concreto. Mientras que las otras dos novelas de Koch me obligaron a detenerme, a pensar, a cuestionar, este libro sólo ha conseguido que me encoja de hombros y continúe con la lectura.

Lo más destacado es la imagen plasmada del mundo literario y editorial, así como la figura del escritor, por lo que me atrevería a decir que estamos ante un análisis personal y visceral de Koch.

Un libro que se alarga sin aportar nada, y a veces cuando parece ser que la trama comienza a avanzar, se pierde el hilo de nuevo. Por ejemplo, en el último tercio del libro cobra importancia un personaje, al punto que hacen mención de «algo que hizo». Una mención que se hace de pasada, de puntillas, pero que promete. Al final te encuentras con que ese cabo nunca se ata y queda flotando entre las páginas de libro. Demasiados pasajes que no aportan ni trama, ni momento de reflexión, ni siquiera de elemento contextualizador.

Quizá he sido demasiado dura por juzgar en base a mis expectativas demasiado altas, pero por más que intento abstraerme de ellas y valorar el libro por si mismo acabo encontrándome con los mismos dilemas, la misma decepción.

The fallout of a murder mystery novel. This books looks at a crime from the perspective of the suspects and the author who has fictionalized their crime for his own benefits. With plenty of twists, turns, and insights into the human condition, Herman Koch paints a world of what we will do for love, power, and prestige.

Honestly, I don’t think I ever really figured out what what going on. It’s rambling and disjointed and doesn’t seem to have a purpose. Characters barely seem to connect, and I could often not tell who was even talking. This book was really good for making me fall asleep though...

A little note of interest: This book (amongst other things) is about a book. My version (Bolinda - an Australian audiobook publisher) has this book titled The Payback. I hear that some other English versions have The Reckoning instead. That intrigued me. I dug deeper but found only one translation into English, by Sam Garrett. Now I wonder what is the story behind that changed title.

Now back to the book:

If you've read the Goodreads blurb, which is the same across the book universe including libraries, bookshops, bloggers and reviewers, you might think that this is some action filled thriller about an unsolved cold case. If that's what you are expecting put it away now and find something else, preferably half the size.

It took me a while to get started on this book and by the time I did I already forgot about these promises so wasn't expecting anything and it was just as good, because otherwise I'd struggle through the first chapters waiting for action. This way I didn't expect action but still found it hard to get into it - just wasn't my kind of a story. What kept me going was the style of writing, the language, the merciless sharp insights, the unforgiving disdain, the inside out of the human condition. Cool, I thought, and then the story itself drew me in. By then the plot was shifting, often the same scene seen from multiple points of view, the style flowing along, accommodating, smooth like water over many shaped river stones. Yes, it is a story about a teacher who disappears in the suspicious circumstances. Yes, it is about a writer who takes that story and turns it into a bestselling novel. Yes, in the end we will find out what happened, but the what is not really important, it is the why and the how and it is about the people the story touched, then and many years after.

It is a slow, deep story. I didn't find it a "hair raising tour-de-force"; perhaps my hair doesn't rise easily or perhaps I was able to see beyond these glittery ornaments. Could be because I listened to an audiobook and there is no rushing with audiobooks, no turning pages half read. When you listen long in the night with a small lamp and a knitting project as your only companions perhaps you can reach deeper into the book, beyond the words, right into the author's mind, be it dear Mr Koch or Mr M.

Not nearly as good as The Dinner.

Koch should have taken Mr. M.'s advice and focused on only one narrative.