I'm still trying to figure what the title had to do with how the story plays out. Elena, the child, witnesses and experiences horrible things, but her age - 6 years old - has most of the adults making pretzels out of themselves to contain her experiences and shape her life into normalcy, so much so she primarily is either given a chapter or two showing us bad dreams about a dog, or she is living a normal life while the adults wonder why she is a bit sad. Until all is revealed at the end the reader can only suspect what happened to her, but while she is definitely important to everyone's motivation, Elena's eyes are never part of the plot. 'Love is Blinding', maybe or 'Love Hurts'. The adults were children with momentous childhoods, but only Teresa (Terri) Peralta's eyes as a child saw things which marked her psychologically. This affected her choices as an adult, but not irreparably or destructively. Terri ended up being a lawyer and a good mother, her only problem being her choice of husband, which she decides to fix by getting a divorce. Everything goes horribly wrong when Richie, the husband, is murdered.Besides the inappropriate title, the book is lifeless for the first 100 pages, killed by too much endless conversation between Richie and Terri, which beats the reader over the head with Richie's character flaws and selfishness (while it is obvious he is an asshole, he is a remarkably normal ex-husband-to-be asshole towards Terri, using Elena for blackmail and vengeance in the usual thousand-cuts manner, but unfortunately for the reader, described too much in too many pages) and way too much repetitious spelled-out agonizing by the lovers Terri and lawyer Christopher Paget while they are trying to BE lovers during Terri's separation from Richie. I found myself doubting a love could really develop between a couple so full of resentful emotions and fears.Once past the first 100 or so pages though, and laying aside the question about how Chris and Terri fell deeply in love despite the severe pressures successfully created by Richie, the novel revs up into a decent legal thriller, as advertised. There are twists and turns, with true noir surprises leading to everybody doubting each other. Eventually, everyone is suspecting each other of Richie's murder, yet in court plausible lies must be served up to a skeptical judge and jury. Meanwhile, Elena appears to have been sexually abused, but by who? The evidence seems to point at Carlo, Chris's son. This new suspicion fractures all relationships almost beyond endurance. I found the trial to be an interesting dissection of what happens when smart and self-serving individuals collide with genuine trouble, especially when everyone is playing for high stakes and protecting peripheral secrets. How most of the characters chose to 'shape the narrative' fascinated me. However, while the psychology behind the action makes this a book worthy of reading as it rings true to life (except for Chris and Terri falling in love in the first place) as does much of the divorce maneuvering, the incredibly awful first 100 pages setting up the thrills really maimed the book for me. It was like listening to girl teenagers on a bus talking about what to wear to a birthday party for an hour, agonizing and analyzing. It really needed cutting down, in my opinion.
"Gates leaned back, pulling herself more tightly together: it seemed clear to Caroline that what she was about to do violated her deepest professional beliefs. 'My sessions with Mr. Arias,' she said at length, 'indicated intense self-absorption; a profound lack of empathy for others; a disrespect for social norms and accepted rules of behavior; a tendency to project his own faults on other people; a lack of interest in anyone else's feelings or beliefs; a high degree of dishonesty and manipulation in interpersonal dealings; a distrust of other people's motives; and paradoxically, a tendency to see others strictly in terms of his own needs.'Gates paused, frowning, as if deciding whether to explain the man himself. 'This kind of personality,' she said at length, 'can be very charming. Indeed, charm helps such a person get what he wants, and as long as people give it to him, he can be quite pleasant, even cheerful. But if someone opposes him, the result can be extreme anger and a series of actions-often outside accepted behavior-to strike back at the offending party. So it was with Mr. Arias.'Caroline gazed at her a moment. 'That's an impressive cluster of symptoms, Dr. Gates. Does it happen to have a name?''Sociopath.' Gates smiled with one corner of her mouth. 'I could have told you that much without ever giving a test.'" (394)
What do You think about Eyes Of A Child (1995)?
Long-ish but rewarding if you stick with it . Really absorbing story with a good mix of likeable and loathsome characters . Paget is battling the establishment when he dares to put himself forward for the political world .His enemies jump at the chance to stitch him up when he has some success with the start of his campaign but misjudge the loyalties of the legal profession who consider Christopher one of their own .Some serious mud-slinging sticks and a major court case ensues gripping the readers attention and rendering the book un-put-downable .Do yourself a real favour and read all three Paget novels .
—Jeremy Owen
Not particularly hard to guess who the murderer is or what happened to cause them to murder the person. I guessed this from very very early on in the book actually and though my dad was surprised that I could guess this so easily, and that he couldn't I thought it wasn't really trying to convince you away from that conclusion.My dad however did make the comment that he thought "wouldn't an author try to lead you towards assuming it was someone obvious and so shouldn't you guess that there actually is some sort of conspiracy or something else happening somewhere?" I was like not really it was just so obvious. I thought In this case Patterson was trying to suggest other alternatives to you to make you think the obvious wasn't the truth. But it didn't dissuade my thinking that actually the obvious was what happened. In terms of language it was well written, and the court room stuff was (as you'd expect, from an ex lawyer/ judge whatever) very truthful and accurate, but written without so much legal jargon you can't understand. So in this way the book was successful. I found the book drew you into the characters lives well and held you feeling for them and wanting to know their fates. I did find that in the first half there was WAY too much fucking, which was actually crude and didn't make me think the two main characters were actually in love. I suppose that's what you get from a male writer, and a female reader. But anyway that's beside the point. It all added up to an easy enough read with enough to hold you into the story and get you feeling satisfied to the end. Not the best book, but certainly a book to read if you are relaxing...
—Susan
This book was too long - for me at least, considering I figured out the whole "who dunnit" part just about half-way through. So then I had to muddle my way through all the hint dropping the rest of the way. I lost interest but made it through. Because of this disinterest, I had lots of time to notice things like the author's love for the word "elliptical."This is a crime/court thriller set in San Francisco focused on an ugly custody battle that ends in a suicide. Of course, no one really believes it was a suicide, so a murder investigation and trial ensues. Mixed in with all of this there is political corruption, extortion, child abuse, sociopaths, spousal abuse, family secrets, high profile lawyers, jaunts to Italy and revenge. Frankly, I thought the entire story was ridiculous. Especially the pretty bow around the predictible ending. The perfectly choreographed courtroom cross examinations came in a close second.The parts I enjoyed the most were those featuring the evil Richie and how he was always one step ahead in his plotting. His character was written in a way that made me hate him as if he were real - so I would consider that effective writing. Unfortunately, all the rest annoyed me more than anything else.
—Molly
