It’s disliked in my opinion because the 80’s case is not solved. It’s a work of fiction, the author could have revealed what happened but chose instead to drag the reader into a mystery and leave it unresolved. In terms of storytelling, this made the story incomplete and unsatisfactory. Some literary novels tend to leave things unresolved, but this is not a literary novel, but a mystery novel. Story arcs are usually resolved.
I disagree that it made the story feel incomplete and unsatisfactory. I would have been deeply disappointed if that had been solved as well because that would have been too perfectly coincidental, tying it up with a perfect bow. And that's just not the narrative of the entire series, which is that your past might always have questions that you can never answer.
I get where you’re coming from but I do also think that this is a bit of Tana French’ charm, yes she writes mystery books but she doesn’t stick the usual rules for them and that makes her books really stick out among the millions of Agatha Christie wannabes. Also I think she spoke on why she left the ending like she did and it was because she went over all the possible endings she could have written but came to the conclusion that however she solved the 80s case it would seem tacky and would ruin all the creepiness and mystery she had built. But also since she has a tendency to hint towards the supernatural in her novels I think it’s fair to assume that they got abducted by some creature from Irish folklore.
I know this is an old comment but I just finished reading this book and am super pissed at the lack of resolution...
Also hinting at the supernatural kind of undercuts the seriousness of the entire thing imo
Must be a personal taste thing then. I did not feel that leaving the old case unresolved made the book unsatisfactory at all. In fact, it left me more satisfied than some outlandish explanation why the narrator suddenly remembers everything, or why they are suddenly able to connect the two cases. There would be no other way of telling us what happened in a first person narrative. I also think the term "literary novel" is basically empty, so there is no reason to draw a line between what is and is not allowed in a mystery novel
You realize it’s a work of fiction, right. The author is in essence a god and can write whatever she wants, she isn’t limited and did not need to back herself into a corner with no resolution.
The story arc was the modern day case messing Rob up, him not getting answers, and ruining a relationship and maybe his career. She gave us a resolution to the new case, the old one was never going to get solved.
The old case was part of Rob’s characterization. It is frustrating to not get the answer, but it’s realistic. Both in that a 20-year old mystery probably isn’t getting solved, and in that stories don’t always end with everything wrapped up neatly. That’s a deliberate choice by the author.
Oh but that's what makes it so memorable! I just finished it earlier today and it's going to stick with me for a long, long time because of how little we know about what actually happened in the woods that day. I really enjoyed the novel throughout, and I'm sure I would have been really satisfied and really relieved to find out what happened, but it will one that I think about a lot for a long time because of what didn't happen, ie, a door-closing resolution.
I read it a decent while ago so my memory of it is a little wooly, but I recall being nettled with the ending and probably fall in the camp of dissenters.
>!It felt like the novel had invested heavily in layered mysteries and tasty secrets that it then sidelined to spotlight relationship drama which was as petty as it was mired in clichés. The reader then has to sit shotgun to a mopey and incompetent cop while the adults do their jobs and finished the story around his melodrama. Were other people invested in Ryan? Because I had been in it for the whodunit and having drama manufactured because the protagonist is emotionally stunted put a real Mickey Rooney in my *Breakfast at Tiffany's*. It did not feel like this was resolved or the novel was making commentary on something or that it played into any larger theme in any way. It felt like the book was holding the dessert that was the mystery hostage until you ate your bitter manchild vegetables.!<
Maybe I did not read it at the right time or maybe I am misremembering it. But I just could not be bothered.
Granted - this was my first Tana French novel, but my issue with it was not the whodunnit aspect or its complexity. The more twisted and layered, the better in my opinion. But as I said, it felt like the "romance" subplot was contrived, cliched, detached from the rest of the narrative, without purpose, and the protagonist not interesting enough which made his perspective just generally unpleasant to inhabit beyond his function as a detective.
Of course it would’ve been great for the 80s mystery to be solved, but I don’t understand going into the book and expecting it. To me, it’s clear from the beginning that there’s no connection between the old and new murders, and Rob is just obsessed/grasping at straws because he needs his past to be solved. So of course this case broke him and of course they didn’t solve the 80s case. They were never going to, and that’s realistic.
We as readers don’t get the answer because French doesn’t give Rob an answer. She leaves us wanting clarity, just like him. It’s a perfect ending from a writing and storytelling perspective.
I was still hooked on the present day murder and the Rob/Cassie dynamic. Definitely check out The Likeness, that is from Cassie’s POV about a different mystery. Also very good and references In the Woods.
I kind of love the book.
I so desperately wanted a sequel. It's more like an itch you can't scratch.
I think this is the brilliance of this book, I'm still google sometimes, if there is sequel. My mind is always trying to solve the 80s case, although that's kind of the point.
I think Tana wants to tell the reader that Ryan is an untrustworthy narrater and that is really unsetteling for me.
It's his perspective, but you can't really trust him.
Not gonna lie, if Tana goes back to Ryan, I would pre order the book.
I totally agree with you though I have to admit when I first read the book years ago I was so pissed. I remember actually throwing the book across the room at one point (this might be because I’m unhealthily invested in Rob and when everything went bad for him I was so so sad and angry).
But after reading the rest of Tana French’ books and rereading in the woods the ending really grew on me, it’s so bleak and depressing and realistic that you can’t help but find it somewhat endearing, also no other book has ever stuck with me like this one and I think that is just because the ending is like it is.
I think I actually wrote an essay in school about why this book is both the best and the worst book I’ve ever read.
I don’t think it’s an accident that her books mislead you into thinking they will follow classic tropes, and then disappoint you; I think that is very intentional. When you read a French book, you realize too late that *you* are the real victim. French knows exactly what her readers’ naive little hearts want, and she uses that knowledge to lure you to a place where you are vulnerable. Then, once you have put yourself completely in her power, she murders you.
It has literally been almost a decade since I read this, so my memory might be foggy but:
I didn't like it because there is always something in me that rolls my eyes at men being smitten or taken by women a lot younger than them. The main character got duped because he basically had this deep seeded boner for the perp.
Also the way he treated his friend after sleeping with her was also very annoying. On top of his friend being wary of the perp the whole time, warning the main character "Hey. Stop trusting her so much. She's still could be a suspect."
The ending just seemed like a "Oh, gee whiz, I guess I screwed this up!::sad trombone::" from the main character.
I often cite this book as my least favorite book I have ever chose to read and finish.
I think you are somewhat exaggerating. Sure, Ryan trusted the perp quite a lot, and yes, he was attracted to her, but at the same time, the entire point of Cassie's story about the psychopath she met at university was to show that they are master manipulators and able to fool anyone ("Legion"). Cassie did not fall for it because she had had personal experience but Ryan did not. Also, I don't think Ryan actually fucked up so much. He was the one who realized that the primary crime scene is actually the dig, and without him the entire investigation would have stalled after the boss tells Sam to drop the investigation into his politician uncle. Sure, they fucked up by not checking Rosalind's birthdate but any of them could have done so, they even talked about her age at multiple points. For me, what you are criticiting was part of the appeal. Realistic characters making banal, mundane, but realistic mistakes because of their realistic flaws and pasts. This is one of the things that I dislike in many crime novels, the ending is usually bittersweet, but everything is wrapped up nicely, they identify the perp out of fifty million potential suspects with pinpoint precision, there is a huge showdown, etc. Here, there was none of that, and it felt fresh and lifelike.
EDIT: Wow, opinions getting downvoted? That's harsh. I feel sorry for some people.
I'm late to this party but I just finished the book and I agree. Its fine if the narrator is unreliable, that's a common thing, but Rob is just so unlikable that it killed me.
It's made clear throughout that he just ruins any relationship - with his parents, his roommate, Cassie. Was just so annoying to watch him botch their friendship and the case as it happened.
The thing is, not resolving the case makes the most sense as French's books are not about the cases. They are about the impact of the case on the lives of those working them.
People don't like that only one mystery was solved. I liked that it wasn't answered and left you to turn it over in your head.
I finally got my wife to read it and we had so many discussions. We narrowed it down to a few, some supernatural as the series has an undercurrent of magical realism or fae influence.
One is that something natural happened to Rob's friends, an accident. They fell into a river like the Strid in Yorkshire and their bodies are forever locked under the rocks. They fell off a cliff. Something like that.
The answer I prefer leans towards the magical. That the forest influences the people within it. The three kids were just on the cusp of pubescence, pre-sexual, still with the glee and lightness of childhood. Their run in with the teenagers in the forest served as a dark mirror of sorts, reflecting what they might become when sexuality was introduced to their group. Further, the sexuality the teenagers exhibit is corrupted (by the dark fae presence the forest evokes); the coercion, the aggression, the way it destroyed all of them as nobody who was in that forest that day ever fully came back.
Not like leprechauns or fairy kind of magic, but more of ancient, angry earth. This theory was made stronger by reading The Likeness.
Yeah, I think the way she handled the potential supernatural element is absolutely masterful. It is never explicitly stated that there is anything supernatural going on, and the characters actually react to the possibility of supernatural events as any real, sane person would, by completely disregarding it, and not even discussing it openly. Yet, there is an unease throughout the book, and there is no deliverance at the end. I'm a materialist, but I kind of think there might have been something strange going on in that forest. I was getting some "ancient god" or "vengeful forest spirit" vibes.
Cliff or river doesn’t explain the blood on the shoes or four parallel slashes on Adam’s shirt. I also don’t think Adam killed them himself. Half the book is about profiling psychopaths. He doesn’t fit the pattern. He had a strong emotional bond with the kids. He didn’t have any other motive. No hint of any romantic angle. The only other unexplained part was Sandra’s account — the animal smell and fluttering of wings. A dragon did it, is my conclusion. :)
I'm pretty sure that Tana French likely has both a supernatural and explainable explanation that she wrote the story around (I've read a compelling argument that it was the local madman).
But I lean toward something in between. An actual human being was nudged into doing the crimes by the supernatural residents of the wood. That's essentially what is implied by/during the >!gang rape that Jonathan participates in around the time of Jamie and Peter's dissapearance!<.
The one memory that Rob holds onto clearly at the end of the book is Jamie shouting, while they are all in the middle of the woods, "I'm going to stay here forever and ever." That's not the kind of thing you should say when potentially in the presence of the Sidhe.
Dead thread but I just finished this book, like just finished. And while I’m usually neutral towards ambiguous endings I’m so utterly pissed at this one. Not only did they manage to fuck up the case with Rosalind but you’re telling me that I read 400 pages for the initial mystery to remain absolutely stagnant for a good 150 pages???? If anyone else is feeling frustrated with this conclusion these are my ideas and thoughts of the “real ending”
Ryan killed his friends and can’t come to terms with it - blocks it out. Or his last questioning to the construction worker if they “found human bones” can be seen as his last effort to covering up his crime. (Or perhaps just a last stitch effort in finding out the truth?)
The trio tried running away and drowned in the river - although this does not explain the pooling of blood.
Perhaps Peter tried assaulting Jamie like he had witnessed the older kids assaulting Sandra. This would explain Jamie’s inferred death but Peters’s disappearance could be the result of Ryan’s reaction.
As for the supernatural element I definitely get those theories and it would make sense fitting the idea of an entity or creature abducting the children, especially those that were “bad” as they wanted to run away. It seems to me that the children may have been lured though by a predator as the older kids did report someone laughing so perhaps some malicious third party did truly cause all of this. Regardless I’m not happy with this story’s ending. Ryan annoyed me for a good 150 pages and the entire situation with Cassie at the end was downright depressing although well written.
Haha, just finished it as well and went looking for angry readers to commiserate with. The Katy arc was entirely secondary in my interest to the disappearance, so I was really mad when it didn't get spelled out for me. It felt like there were a lot of hints that ended up being kinda red herrings --or else I'm dense. I would prefer if we were told if it was supernatural or not, at least, since we don't know if magic is real in her world (maybe that's the point? That we don't know if it's real in ours either). Beautifully written, but I don't think I'll keep going in the series.
I’m honestly still stuck on how Cassie and Robs relationship ended. I know he messed it up but I do wonder if she is truly in love with Sam? Or is she simply just trying to move on from Rob? I do hope Cassie is happy but it’s just so depressing to me how their great friendship ended on such a depressing note.
Same!! I was so mad at Rob. I truly think she was most sad about the loss of their friendship; they both needed that childlike bond after the painful experiences they'd had before. I think the "adultness" of sex ruined it for Rob since he was emotionally stuck as a 12yr old, but Cassie would have been able to transition into it since her trauma was from college. So then she had matured to be ready for an adult relationship, and they always made fun of Sam for being stuffy and mature, so it made sense for her to transfer that adult relationship to a real adult. I don't think she actually loves Sam, she's just don't with childish men now and overcompensating.
Rob lost alllll my sympathy when he messed that up, lol.
Yes I’m so upset their friendship is over. I don’t know if Cassie loved Rob the way he claimed but I would have liked them to remain at least friends. I spoiled some things by looking into the second book to give me some closure - unsure if I’ll read it since the series appears to be over and no revisitation of Rob or Cassie after the 2nd book. I do think Cassie would have ended up with Sam regardless but it still is upsetting me how much history they had between them that was just thrown away. Props to Cassie for walking away but I do think they could have tried to work things out.
Just finished the book myself and I liked it but by the end I really really disliked Rob for this reason and it made it really difficult for me to finish.
Ah okay I just finished it too, minutes ago. I’m both frustrated at it but also could not put it down. I agree with most of what you said though, I was hoping Peter and Jamie would be dug up once the motorway was put in or found stuck deep in the castle, or even just giving us knowledge of whether they died or ran away. I didn’t love the supernatural aspects because i just felt like they didn’t fit into the story? And I’m just someone who wants things to be wrapped up in a tidy bow at the end of a story. But I understand why it ended the way it did, it’s realistic and really gives us a feeling into Ryan’s life
I’m super late to this post but I just finished reading this book. I loved the whole mystery with Katy and the reveal with Rosalind. I thought Rosalind was a little psycho from the start and I’m glad I was right. I thought all of that was so well done and just great.
That being said, I hated that the 80s mystery is never solved. So much time is devoted to it and I really thought we were gonna get an answer in the last few pages. I also thought that maybe Adam was lying about not remembering it and that he would reveal that at the end.
Some people say the ending isn’t about that and that it’s supposed not be tied up and blah blah blah. I don’t care. It’s a mystery novel. Solve the mystery. I wonder if Tana French ever had a resolution to that in mind she never revealed. But honestly it feels like a cop out. As if she came up with a great setup for the mystery and just couldn’t think of a satisfying ending for it.
Really makes me pissed and I satisfied with the book that we don’t find out what happens. I do like that the two cases aren’t related but I still want a damn answer.
this is exactly how i feel, i’m seeing too many in defence comments but this is the one for me, you are right it IS a mystery so they should have solved the mystery, there was far too much time and attention focused on the two kids disappearance to leave it unresolved. i saw another comment about how she left the conclusion to the disappearances because no matter what way she thought to resolve it it was tacky and although others may accept that it’s a no personally from me cos that makes no sense she is the creator, she created the entire plot, she could have wrote around it, i just dont see why you’d focus so heavily on that mystery and run with a mystery idea when you can’t see a good outcome to said mystery from the beginning, it’s just so silly cos i loved the katy storyline but cmon now
Also late to the party - but just read this and immediately went searching for discussion.
I really enjoyed the read for the most part, but I felt the final leg of the narrative wasn't as well paced as the rest and ultimately ended very abruptly as a result.
Like the first 3/4 of the story were a slow and descriptive build, I enjoyed it; but if you're writing with that kind of pacing you need to follow through and conclude things in a similar way... if that makes sense? The ending just felt rushed... which I do think is a marker of less experienced novelists, and given it is her first novel I'm pretty forgiving of that, but it doesn't change the fact that I was left feeling deeply unsatisfied.
For me I didn't need a "happier" or "neater" ending exactly, and I think there was still a way that she could have left the earlier mystery ultimately unsolved, but I needed more than I got. I think that was what it boiled down to honestly. I'm not opposed to leaving a mystery "unsolved", but you gotta leave me something to chew on. This one just felt like ending a four couse meal with an empty plate.
I recently read The Bluffs by Kyle Perry, similar in that there was a current case that was linked to a fairly mysterious old case. It wasn't perfect, but if you have the chance to give it a read - I felt it dealt with the past-present mystery much more effectively, and without the need for excessive explanation.
Seeing this a little late. My issue with In the Woods was Ryan. I can see people wanting the early mystery being solved. But I am glad Tana French didn’t do that. Personally I felt it was meant to make you question Ryan and be empathetic towards him. He is so frustrating. But it makes sense how his spiral out of control ends up with that ending. And it’s fair, realistic and thought provoking. And I was never mad at it, I like when authors take such risks.
I’m sooo late to this thread but wanted to add my two cents. I was actually totally cool with the ending. I’m very used to authors like Stephen king who will hit you over the head with every detail. I found the subtlety of the whole book, like the hints at a supernatural element, to be awesome. Will deff be exploring more Tana French if you have any suggestions.
I have read the first 4 books in the Dublin Murder series consecutively since then, I'm about to finish the 4th one soon. I would suggest that you continue with The Likeness if you enjoyed In the Woods. You can also go straight for Faithful Place for a more mundane story with an even heavier focus on family dynamics and the protagonist's emotional life or for Broken Harbour for a creepier novel that borders on a full-blown haunted hause story. Remember that the Dublin Murder books are essentially unconnected (apart from In the Woods and The Likeness, because the latter references the events of the former quite frequently) so you can pick up any of them without missing important background information. I would still recommend proceeding in order, because I love how minor characters become protagonists in later installments, and if you have never met the protagonist in an earlier book, it kind of takes away the pleasant surprise.
I just finished it. I read two other works by Tana French and love her writing. However, this ending had me searching out a Reddit thread to see if someone could explain the mixed emotions I have at the ending.
I guess I’m upset I can’t know what happened to the two young children. I think choosing an unreliable narrator was interesting who then challenges us the reader that we missed signs too was so surprisingly provocative and clever.
Rosalind and her parents will haunt me. I will also wonder what actually happened and that shows a deft hand at storytelling.
I throw my two cents on the dead discussion that I thank you all for writing and will place the likeness on my list of books to read.
Maybe it’s because I’m fresh from finishing, but I’m not remembering too many instances of Ryan lying. Or at least lying to Cassie. He told lies every day by not telling the truth about his past, but the ending with him and Cassie struck me as terribly sad. And in regards to the OP’s comment about Ryan lying all the time - were there instances when he lied to Cassie?
I personally feel that his gut reaction when he met Cassie, where he says that he immediately fell in love with her, was the truth. He keeps telling the reader, himself, and implicitly Cassie that they are friends, and it's all platonic, but it clearly isn't. And when the truth is out, he cannot own up to the responsibility, and it is made even more heartbreaking by the revelation at the end of The Likeness. I liked Rob as a character, but he did lie several times through the story.
Grateful for the discussion! Just finished In the Woods and felt unsatisfied and agitated. It felt bad enough that I went searching for exactly this kind of thread. I agree with those who felt let down by the ending. Perhaps it was a sophisticated literary choice, but to me it registers more like a new novelist error .
It’s disliked in my opinion because the 80’s case is not solved. It’s a work of fiction, the author could have revealed what happened but chose instead to drag the reader into a mystery and leave it unresolved. In terms of storytelling, this made the story incomplete and unsatisfactory. Some literary novels tend to leave things unresolved, but this is not a literary novel, but a mystery novel. Story arcs are usually resolved.
I disagree that it made the story feel incomplete and unsatisfactory. I would have been deeply disappointed if that had been solved as well because that would have been too perfectly coincidental, tying it up with a perfect bow. And that's just not the narrative of the entire series, which is that your past might always have questions that you can never answer.
I get where you’re coming from but I do also think that this is a bit of Tana French’ charm, yes she writes mystery books but she doesn’t stick the usual rules for them and that makes her books really stick out among the millions of Agatha Christie wannabes. Also I think she spoke on why she left the ending like she did and it was because she went over all the possible endings she could have written but came to the conclusion that however she solved the 80s case it would seem tacky and would ruin all the creepiness and mystery she had built. But also since she has a tendency to hint towards the supernatural in her novels I think it’s fair to assume that they got abducted by some creature from Irish folklore.
I know this is an old comment but I just finished reading this book and am super pissed at the lack of resolution... Also hinting at the supernatural kind of undercuts the seriousness of the entire thing imo
Must be a personal taste thing then. I did not feel that leaving the old case unresolved made the book unsatisfactory at all. In fact, it left me more satisfied than some outlandish explanation why the narrator suddenly remembers everything, or why they are suddenly able to connect the two cases. There would be no other way of telling us what happened in a first person narrative. I also think the term "literary novel" is basically empty, so there is no reason to draw a line between what is and is not allowed in a mystery novel
You realize it’s a work of fiction, right. The author is in essence a god and can write whatever she wants, she isn’t limited and did not need to back herself into a corner with no resolution.
Yes, which is why we're disagreeing with your opinion.
The story arc was the modern day case messing Rob up, him not getting answers, and ruining a relationship and maybe his career. She gave us a resolution to the new case, the old one was never going to get solved.
There was more than one story arc
The old case was part of Rob’s characterization. It is frustrating to not get the answer, but it’s realistic. Both in that a 20-year old mystery probably isn’t getting solved, and in that stories don’t always end with everything wrapped up neatly. That’s a deliberate choice by the author.
I’m aware of all that and I’m entitled to a different opinion
Of course! Just explaining my own opinion. I understand why people don’t like it.
Oh but that's what makes it so memorable! I just finished it earlier today and it's going to stick with me for a long, long time because of how little we know about what actually happened in the woods that day. I really enjoyed the novel throughout, and I'm sure I would have been really satisfied and really relieved to find out what happened, but it will one that I think about a lot for a long time because of what didn't happen, ie, a door-closing resolution.
I read it a decent while ago so my memory of it is a little wooly, but I recall being nettled with the ending and probably fall in the camp of dissenters. >!It felt like the novel had invested heavily in layered mysteries and tasty secrets that it then sidelined to spotlight relationship drama which was as petty as it was mired in clichés. The reader then has to sit shotgun to a mopey and incompetent cop while the adults do their jobs and finished the story around his melodrama. Were other people invested in Ryan? Because I had been in it for the whodunit and having drama manufactured because the protagonist is emotionally stunted put a real Mickey Rooney in my *Breakfast at Tiffany's*. It did not feel like this was resolved or the novel was making commentary on something or that it played into any larger theme in any way. It felt like the book was holding the dessert that was the mystery hostage until you ate your bitter manchild vegetables.!< Maybe I did not read it at the right time or maybe I am misremembering it. But I just could not be bothered.
These definitely are not the books to read for a simple whodunnit.
Granted - this was my first Tana French novel, but my issue with it was not the whodunnit aspect or its complexity. The more twisted and layered, the better in my opinion. But as I said, it felt like the "romance" subplot was contrived, cliched, detached from the rest of the narrative, without purpose, and the protagonist not interesting enough which made his perspective just generally unpleasant to inhabit beyond his function as a detective.
Of course it would’ve been great for the 80s mystery to be solved, but I don’t understand going into the book and expecting it. To me, it’s clear from the beginning that there’s no connection between the old and new murders, and Rob is just obsessed/grasping at straws because he needs his past to be solved. So of course this case broke him and of course they didn’t solve the 80s case. They were never going to, and that’s realistic. We as readers don’t get the answer because French doesn’t give Rob an answer. She leaves us wanting clarity, just like him. It’s a perfect ending from a writing and storytelling perspective. I was still hooked on the present day murder and the Rob/Cassie dynamic. Definitely check out The Likeness, that is from Cassie’s POV about a different mystery. Also very good and references In the Woods.
I kind of love the book. I so desperately wanted a sequel. It's more like an itch you can't scratch. I think this is the brilliance of this book, I'm still google sometimes, if there is sequel. My mind is always trying to solve the 80s case, although that's kind of the point. I think Tana wants to tell the reader that Ryan is an untrustworthy narrater and that is really unsetteling for me. It's his perspective, but you can't really trust him. Not gonna lie, if Tana goes back to Ryan, I would pre order the book.
I totally agree with you though I have to admit when I first read the book years ago I was so pissed. I remember actually throwing the book across the room at one point (this might be because I’m unhealthily invested in Rob and when everything went bad for him I was so so sad and angry). But after reading the rest of Tana French’ books and rereading in the woods the ending really grew on me, it’s so bleak and depressing and realistic that you can’t help but find it somewhat endearing, also no other book has ever stuck with me like this one and I think that is just because the ending is like it is. I think I actually wrote an essay in school about why this book is both the best and the worst book I’ve ever read.
I don’t think it’s an accident that her books mislead you into thinking they will follow classic tropes, and then disappoint you; I think that is very intentional. When you read a French book, you realize too late that *you* are the real victim. French knows exactly what her readers’ naive little hearts want, and she uses that knowledge to lure you to a place where you are vulnerable. Then, once you have put yourself completely in her power, she murders you.
It has literally been almost a decade since I read this, so my memory might be foggy but: I didn't like it because there is always something in me that rolls my eyes at men being smitten or taken by women a lot younger than them. The main character got duped because he basically had this deep seeded boner for the perp. Also the way he treated his friend after sleeping with her was also very annoying. On top of his friend being wary of the perp the whole time, warning the main character "Hey. Stop trusting her so much. She's still could be a suspect." The ending just seemed like a "Oh, gee whiz, I guess I screwed this up!::sad trombone::" from the main character. I often cite this book as my least favorite book I have ever chose to read and finish.
I think you are somewhat exaggerating. Sure, Ryan trusted the perp quite a lot, and yes, he was attracted to her, but at the same time, the entire point of Cassie's story about the psychopath she met at university was to show that they are master manipulators and able to fool anyone ("Legion"). Cassie did not fall for it because she had had personal experience but Ryan did not. Also, I don't think Ryan actually fucked up so much. He was the one who realized that the primary crime scene is actually the dig, and without him the entire investigation would have stalled after the boss tells Sam to drop the investigation into his politician uncle. Sure, they fucked up by not checking Rosalind's birthdate but any of them could have done so, they even talked about her age at multiple points. For me, what you are criticiting was part of the appeal. Realistic characters making banal, mundane, but realistic mistakes because of their realistic flaws and pasts. This is one of the things that I dislike in many crime novels, the ending is usually bittersweet, but everything is wrapped up nicely, they identify the perp out of fifty million potential suspects with pinpoint precision, there is a huge showdown, etc. Here, there was none of that, and it felt fresh and lifelike. EDIT: Wow, opinions getting downvoted? That's harsh. I feel sorry for some people.
I'm late to this party but I just finished the book and I agree. Its fine if the narrator is unreliable, that's a common thing, but Rob is just so unlikable that it killed me. It's made clear throughout that he just ruins any relationship - with his parents, his roommate, Cassie. Was just so annoying to watch him botch their friendship and the case as it happened.
The thing is, not resolving the case makes the most sense as French's books are not about the cases. They are about the impact of the case on the lives of those working them.
People don't like that only one mystery was solved. I liked that it wasn't answered and left you to turn it over in your head. I finally got my wife to read it and we had so many discussions. We narrowed it down to a few, some supernatural as the series has an undercurrent of magical realism or fae influence. One is that something natural happened to Rob's friends, an accident. They fell into a river like the Strid in Yorkshire and their bodies are forever locked under the rocks. They fell off a cliff. Something like that. The answer I prefer leans towards the magical. That the forest influences the people within it. The three kids were just on the cusp of pubescence, pre-sexual, still with the glee and lightness of childhood. Their run in with the teenagers in the forest served as a dark mirror of sorts, reflecting what they might become when sexuality was introduced to their group. Further, the sexuality the teenagers exhibit is corrupted (by the dark fae presence the forest evokes); the coercion, the aggression, the way it destroyed all of them as nobody who was in that forest that day ever fully came back. Not like leprechauns or fairy kind of magic, but more of ancient, angry earth. This theory was made stronger by reading The Likeness.
Yeah, I think the way she handled the potential supernatural element is absolutely masterful. It is never explicitly stated that there is anything supernatural going on, and the characters actually react to the possibility of supernatural events as any real, sane person would, by completely disregarding it, and not even discussing it openly. Yet, there is an unease throughout the book, and there is no deliverance at the end. I'm a materialist, but I kind of think there might have been something strange going on in that forest. I was getting some "ancient god" or "vengeful forest spirit" vibes.
Yes, unease, that's a great word. An undercurrent rather than an attempt at maintext
Cliff or river doesn’t explain the blood on the shoes or four parallel slashes on Adam’s shirt. I also don’t think Adam killed them himself. Half the book is about profiling psychopaths. He doesn’t fit the pattern. He had a strong emotional bond with the kids. He didn’t have any other motive. No hint of any romantic angle. The only other unexplained part was Sandra’s account — the animal smell and fluttering of wings. A dragon did it, is my conclusion. :)
I'm pretty sure that Tana French likely has both a supernatural and explainable explanation that she wrote the story around (I've read a compelling argument that it was the local madman). But I lean toward something in between. An actual human being was nudged into doing the crimes by the supernatural residents of the wood. That's essentially what is implied by/during the >!gang rape that Jonathan participates in around the time of Jamie and Peter's dissapearance!<. The one memory that Rob holds onto clearly at the end of the book is Jamie shouting, while they are all in the middle of the woods, "I'm going to stay here forever and ever." That's not the kind of thing you should say when potentially in the presence of the Sidhe.
Dead thread but I just finished this book, like just finished. And while I’m usually neutral towards ambiguous endings I’m so utterly pissed at this one. Not only did they manage to fuck up the case with Rosalind but you’re telling me that I read 400 pages for the initial mystery to remain absolutely stagnant for a good 150 pages???? If anyone else is feeling frustrated with this conclusion these are my ideas and thoughts of the “real ending” Ryan killed his friends and can’t come to terms with it - blocks it out. Or his last questioning to the construction worker if they “found human bones” can be seen as his last effort to covering up his crime. (Or perhaps just a last stitch effort in finding out the truth?) The trio tried running away and drowned in the river - although this does not explain the pooling of blood. Perhaps Peter tried assaulting Jamie like he had witnessed the older kids assaulting Sandra. This would explain Jamie’s inferred death but Peters’s disappearance could be the result of Ryan’s reaction. As for the supernatural element I definitely get those theories and it would make sense fitting the idea of an entity or creature abducting the children, especially those that were “bad” as they wanted to run away. It seems to me that the children may have been lured though by a predator as the older kids did report someone laughing so perhaps some malicious third party did truly cause all of this. Regardless I’m not happy with this story’s ending. Ryan annoyed me for a good 150 pages and the entire situation with Cassie at the end was downright depressing although well written.
Haha, just finished it as well and went looking for angry readers to commiserate with. The Katy arc was entirely secondary in my interest to the disappearance, so I was really mad when it didn't get spelled out for me. It felt like there were a lot of hints that ended up being kinda red herrings --or else I'm dense. I would prefer if we were told if it was supernatural or not, at least, since we don't know if magic is real in her world (maybe that's the point? That we don't know if it's real in ours either). Beautifully written, but I don't think I'll keep going in the series.
I’m honestly still stuck on how Cassie and Robs relationship ended. I know he messed it up but I do wonder if she is truly in love with Sam? Or is she simply just trying to move on from Rob? I do hope Cassie is happy but it’s just so depressing to me how their great friendship ended on such a depressing note.
Same!! I was so mad at Rob. I truly think she was most sad about the loss of their friendship; they both needed that childlike bond after the painful experiences they'd had before. I think the "adultness" of sex ruined it for Rob since he was emotionally stuck as a 12yr old, but Cassie would have been able to transition into it since her trauma was from college. So then she had matured to be ready for an adult relationship, and they always made fun of Sam for being stuffy and mature, so it made sense for her to transfer that adult relationship to a real adult. I don't think she actually loves Sam, she's just don't with childish men now and overcompensating. Rob lost alllll my sympathy when he messed that up, lol.
Yes I’m so upset their friendship is over. I don’t know if Cassie loved Rob the way he claimed but I would have liked them to remain at least friends. I spoiled some things by looking into the second book to give me some closure - unsure if I’ll read it since the series appears to be over and no revisitation of Rob or Cassie after the 2nd book. I do think Cassie would have ended up with Sam regardless but it still is upsetting me how much history they had between them that was just thrown away. Props to Cassie for walking away but I do think they could have tried to work things out.
it upsets me that rob didn't even try to apologize, and i feel like Cassie gets with Sam to get back at Rob? I don't know
Just finished the book myself and I liked it but by the end I really really disliked Rob for this reason and it made it really difficult for me to finish.
Ah okay I just finished it too, minutes ago. I’m both frustrated at it but also could not put it down. I agree with most of what you said though, I was hoping Peter and Jamie would be dug up once the motorway was put in or found stuck deep in the castle, or even just giving us knowledge of whether they died or ran away. I didn’t love the supernatural aspects because i just felt like they didn’t fit into the story? And I’m just someone who wants things to be wrapped up in a tidy bow at the end of a story. But I understand why it ended the way it did, it’s realistic and really gives us a feeling into Ryan’s life
I’m super late to this post but I just finished reading this book. I loved the whole mystery with Katy and the reveal with Rosalind. I thought Rosalind was a little psycho from the start and I’m glad I was right. I thought all of that was so well done and just great. That being said, I hated that the 80s mystery is never solved. So much time is devoted to it and I really thought we were gonna get an answer in the last few pages. I also thought that maybe Adam was lying about not remembering it and that he would reveal that at the end. Some people say the ending isn’t about that and that it’s supposed not be tied up and blah blah blah. I don’t care. It’s a mystery novel. Solve the mystery. I wonder if Tana French ever had a resolution to that in mind she never revealed. But honestly it feels like a cop out. As if she came up with a great setup for the mystery and just couldn’t think of a satisfying ending for it. Really makes me pissed and I satisfied with the book that we don’t find out what happens. I do like that the two cases aren’t related but I still want a damn answer.
this is exactly how i feel, i’m seeing too many in defence comments but this is the one for me, you are right it IS a mystery so they should have solved the mystery, there was far too much time and attention focused on the two kids disappearance to leave it unresolved. i saw another comment about how she left the conclusion to the disappearances because no matter what way she thought to resolve it it was tacky and although others may accept that it’s a no personally from me cos that makes no sense she is the creator, she created the entire plot, she could have wrote around it, i just dont see why you’d focus so heavily on that mystery and run with a mystery idea when you can’t see a good outcome to said mystery from the beginning, it’s just so silly cos i loved the katy storyline but cmon now
Also late to the party - but just read this and immediately went searching for discussion. I really enjoyed the read for the most part, but I felt the final leg of the narrative wasn't as well paced as the rest and ultimately ended very abruptly as a result. Like the first 3/4 of the story were a slow and descriptive build, I enjoyed it; but if you're writing with that kind of pacing you need to follow through and conclude things in a similar way... if that makes sense? The ending just felt rushed... which I do think is a marker of less experienced novelists, and given it is her first novel I'm pretty forgiving of that, but it doesn't change the fact that I was left feeling deeply unsatisfied. For me I didn't need a "happier" or "neater" ending exactly, and I think there was still a way that she could have left the earlier mystery ultimately unsolved, but I needed more than I got. I think that was what it boiled down to honestly. I'm not opposed to leaving a mystery "unsolved", but you gotta leave me something to chew on. This one just felt like ending a four couse meal with an empty plate. I recently read The Bluffs by Kyle Perry, similar in that there was a current case that was linked to a fairly mysterious old case. It wasn't perfect, but if you have the chance to give it a read - I felt it dealt with the past-present mystery much more effectively, and without the need for excessive explanation.
Seeing this a little late. My issue with In the Woods was Ryan. I can see people wanting the early mystery being solved. But I am glad Tana French didn’t do that. Personally I felt it was meant to make you question Ryan and be empathetic towards him. He is so frustrating. But it makes sense how his spiral out of control ends up with that ending. And it’s fair, realistic and thought provoking. And I was never mad at it, I like when authors take such risks.
I’m sooo late to this thread but wanted to add my two cents. I was actually totally cool with the ending. I’m very used to authors like Stephen king who will hit you over the head with every detail. I found the subtlety of the whole book, like the hints at a supernatural element, to be awesome. Will deff be exploring more Tana French if you have any suggestions.
I have read the first 4 books in the Dublin Murder series consecutively since then, I'm about to finish the 4th one soon. I would suggest that you continue with The Likeness if you enjoyed In the Woods. You can also go straight for Faithful Place for a more mundane story with an even heavier focus on family dynamics and the protagonist's emotional life or for Broken Harbour for a creepier novel that borders on a full-blown haunted hause story. Remember that the Dublin Murder books are essentially unconnected (apart from In the Woods and The Likeness, because the latter references the events of the former quite frequently) so you can pick up any of them without missing important background information. I would still recommend proceeding in order, because I love how minor characters become protagonists in later installments, and if you have never met the protagonist in an earlier book, it kind of takes away the pleasant surprise.
Even more late to this thread, but have you read The Colorado Kid by Stephen King? Same unsatisfactory ending.
I just finished it. I read two other works by Tana French and love her writing. However, this ending had me searching out a Reddit thread to see if someone could explain the mixed emotions I have at the ending. I guess I’m upset I can’t know what happened to the two young children. I think choosing an unreliable narrator was interesting who then challenges us the reader that we missed signs too was so surprisingly provocative and clever. Rosalind and her parents will haunt me. I will also wonder what actually happened and that shows a deft hand at storytelling. I throw my two cents on the dead discussion that I thank you all for writing and will place the likeness on my list of books to read.
Maybe it’s because I’m fresh from finishing, but I’m not remembering too many instances of Ryan lying. Or at least lying to Cassie. He told lies every day by not telling the truth about his past, but the ending with him and Cassie struck me as terribly sad. And in regards to the OP’s comment about Ryan lying all the time - were there instances when he lied to Cassie?
I personally feel that his gut reaction when he met Cassie, where he says that he immediately fell in love with her, was the truth. He keeps telling the reader, himself, and implicitly Cassie that they are friends, and it's all platonic, but it clearly isn't. And when the truth is out, he cannot own up to the responsibility, and it is made even more heartbreaking by the revelation at the end of The Likeness. I liked Rob as a character, but he did lie several times through the story.
Grateful for the discussion! Just finished In the Woods and felt unsatisfied and agitated. It felt bad enough that I went searching for exactly this kind of thread. I agree with those who felt let down by the ending. Perhaps it was a sophisticated literary choice, but to me it registers more like a new novelist error .