What do You think about The Doctor's Wife (2005)?
The basis of the book could be one of 'controversy' but, regardless of the pro/anti abortion theme, this book picks up as quick thriller. Just about half way through I become addicted to the characters and did not want to stop reading. The way the story was written you get to know the characters, as their backgrounds intertwine with their current lives. Michael and Annie, and their two children; Annie is a bored housewife, who adores her children and her husband, Michael, is a popular Ob/Gyn who reconnects with an old lover and goes to work in an abortion clinic. Their lives become hectic and filled with fear as Michael becomes the center of harassment for his work at the clinic. Simon and Lydia; Simon an artist/professor, working at the same college as Annie and his wife, Lydia, the "younger" wife, once the object of Simon’s desire, is emotionally unstable (to describe at best). This book was very well written, complete and thrilling.
—Stacy
I did not care for this book. it was a relatively easy read, but Im afraid I may have not read it carefully towards the end. I have a few unanswered questions, but there's a chance I just blew over them. Was her article ever published? What happened to her baby? Why didn't Lydia see Simons car at the house when she arrived? Who stuffed their dog? Did the minister ever get his cat back? How did they find a new house and move when they were at the hospital all week? Where were they moving to and would he go back to work at the Catholic hospital or the clinic?The characters would give any feminist a headache. The females, while different, shared an irrational longing men to complete them. The women are not properly tamed, so they run wild, messing everything up, trying to fix their problems by using men. There is a fair amount of liberal and conservative stereotyping as well. But those stereotypes seemed relevant to the story line.I would love a response to this, especially if you can answer the questions. thanks!
—Michelle
I actually find it funny that some people hated this book because they found the pro-life/anti-choice characters to be "too extreme" and took offense on the basis that "not all those who stand on the right of this issue are psychotic maniacs." Well, duh. Of course they aren't. But this book isn't about the ones who aren't. And why not? Because run-of-the-mill ordinary pro-lifers don't make for very interesting fiction. (Neither, for that matter, do run-of-the-mill ordinary pro-choicers). They have ordinary beliefs and do ordinary things and are, by and large, ordinary people. In other words, they're BORING. They don't, for instance, plot the deaths of doctors who perform abortions or bomb clinics. Both of which, while controversial, make for excellent centers of conflict if you are say, an author wanting to write a novel. This wasn't intended to be a piece of journalism in the New York Times or a documentary on the abortion debate. It's a work of FICTION. As such, it is art. The author has absolutely no obligation to present an unbiased view of the members of this or any other group. That some readers think she should is completely confounding. Give me a break. Have you not read fiction before? The reviews of this book which offer this as a criticism are utterly baffling and exasperating. I wouldn't think that you'd need to be a writer to understand the basic elements of fiction, but simply an astute reader. I'm sure there are plenty of sensible criticisms that one could make of this book, which I, on the whole thoroughly enjoyed. But this isn't one of them. In fact, as I read over the reviews which offer this criticism all I can hear in the back of my head is a whiny little voice saying, "But the characters . . . they're nothing like me at all . . ." Ugh.
—Laura
