Kate, along with her two siblings Nell and Eliot are traveling to Atlanta for their father's funeral after an unexpected death. Their father, the seasoned philanderer leaves behind a trail of wives and children from the five marriages he had since his first, to their mother. Feeling like they are the 'original family' they have stayed out of contact with their father and half-siblings. As the family gathers, trouble is brewing, as each has secrets they are keeping from each other. Bogged down with extreme debt, Kate has also cheated on her loyal therapist husband Peter, the man who affords her the good life and wants more, children. With her siblings severely against the very idea of infidelity, which smells too much like their lusty father, Kate is terrified of revealing her 'sin'. Straight away this is going to make readers dislike her, because we don't see a lot of remorse. I actually prefer this in the character, what we feel compared to how we're supposed to feel about our mistakes. Take a cheating woman and immediately the minds close and out goes compassion from other women, and men. Cheating could be tied to her father, or it could be the result of a woman who hasn't fully come into herself and grown up, who is pressured into being told what to want by her husband. Peter has changed his mind about having a child, something they decided they wouldn't do before marrying. Naturally, he had been pushing his will on her because 'she doesn't really know what she wants, until she has a child, which of course she will want when she has one'. Interesting, because maybe just maybe some people don't want to be parents, aren't ready and won't ever be. Why this is such an affront to those with children? I can understand her resenting her husband and looking for escape, she just chose an affair. Stupid, wrong- sure but certainly a human reaction. I love children, I have children, but do I feel the need to convince those who don't want them into having them? No way, never. Don't have children just because someone else wants one, they're not puppies. Okay rant aside, I felt that had to be addressed.
I liked this mess of a character that so many readers are going to judge harshly. She is out of control, an often cold little mess, but examine her life. I liked her because she is flawed and lost. Not all characters are meant to be nice and pure. It's easy to understand her siblings reaction when truths are exposed but more because they are thinking of the act in terms of their own situations. Now for Peter, lets dissect his wonderful qualities of saving her, of judging her and trying to force his will on her. Is that really good qualities? In fact, I didn't like him. Something about a spouse standing in high judgement over his 'inferior' mess of a woman just ate at me as a reader. Maybe a lesson too, aside from the merits of being faithful, should be not to try and save someone from themselves. It seemed he did some underhanded things, but of course people may miss this because it is always 'well meaning'. What's the famous saying? "God save us from people who mean well." - Vikram Seth Usually, it's more about what they intend for themselves, with no regard about our own growth and needs. I felt that way about Peter. Am I the only one? And communicating with her through everyone else? That's a well rounded person?
Before it's over, she has lessons to learn, things to face and maybe a chance to open herself up to the trail of children her father left behind. Leftovers, her father's leftovers may just have meaning in her life. She will open her eyes to the younger children seeing that maybe they too are hurting. It is a slow process, but she will begin to crack. And maybe along the way her siblings have some growing and confessions of their own. Likable or not, she is all too human.