Do. Not. Agree. With. Reviews. That. Romanticize. Adultery. WTH?
Steiner has, rather skillfully, written a drama featuring a young couple's immeasurable and infinitely tragic lack of communication that unsurprisingly resulted in their failure to achieve closure and resolution of mixed emotions, the least of which were Cameron's and Charlie's grief, pain, and misery over the death of their babies. Five years have elapsed wherein Cameron and Charlie have existed in a bubble without addressing and resolving their feelings and their consequential, residual problems that grew and became so enmeshed inside of Charlie that Cameron didn't know how to help her. Naturally, as a man, he dealt with feelings and emotions clinically -- I think he thought they'd wear down or disappear, which is how most of the men I know would have handled it. The way I see it, Charlie's a grown ass, modern day woman who had a mouth to ask for whatever she needed. Yet, her method was to sit and wait for Cameron to save her, pamper her, do everything for her, which she had been spoiled into expecting. The writer has presented a natural tragedy that many couples have faced and dealt with, except her characters did NOT due to a breakdown in communication. She presented temptation for Charlie in the form of Reese, a long-ago acquaintance and missed opportunity before Charlie even knew Cameron.
Steiner's characters are flawed, and make choices that are, to them, justified. What I cannot agree with are the romanticized, pro-adulterous and illogical reviews that gush about "poor Charlie and Reese," or rhapsodize how touching and sweet Reese is with Charlie. Are these readers not picking up on all the facts and details the author has provided them? While it is a testament to Steiner that she can spin a tale, how has our society devolved to the point we can ignore and trivialize a good man's personal, UNTREATED anguish, instead applauding and encouraging the other man who, without a second thought for the very important fact that Charlie is LEGALLY MARRIED to that suffering man, therefore is not available to be courted, seduced, or comforted in such an intimate manner?! What are these reviewers basing their five stars on? Are they celebrating the degenerate, unscrupulous and sneaky behavior of Reese, who, in his final chapter, admits Blake IS technically his girlfriend, because I don't know in what form or fashion that what he's done isn't cheating - he cheated on his girlfriend when he seduced Charlie into cheating on Cameron. NFW (no f**king way) is Reese "sweet" or deserving of pity, sympathy, empathy, or compassion. He had none for Cameron (understandable since Cam's legally got rights to Charlie, whom Reese covets. The Bible states "Thou shalt not covet another man's wife."
Charlie and Reese's interlude bothered me, because I think he took advantage of Cameron's mistakes, the biggest one being his failure to seek professional help for his own grief. WHY does the responsibility for the lack of communication, distance, and his wife's misery fall only on him? He is but one man who had his own sadness and numbness as a result of their tragedy to deal with. What gives Reese the right to be so selfish he can cheat on his girlfriend and cause Cam's wife to cheat, too?
Is this book a realistic portrayal of true human nature? Maybe some of it; however, let's not glorify Reese's selfishness and complete lack of scruples in taking advantage of a woman starved for attention and romance, or her husband's failure to deal with his own pain. The two need counseling, closure - how is an adulterous affair the answer? I found Charlie to be so insipid, so caught up in herself, and even more selfish than Reese. Yet, Cam loves her, and wants to fight for her. He saw something in her, had something with her, and married her once before, so she must have redeeming qualities I just didn't sense. Again, it's all in each reader's perception of what this writer has presented. I took everything literally, looked at and read into her details, and came up with admiration and grudging respect for Cameron because HE NEVER CHEATED ON CHARLIE, just immersed himself too much in work, which distanced him enough he lost touch and time with her. I could barely stomach Reese as I found him to be a snake in the grass whom no one should turn their backs to; and Charlie left me with a bad aftertaste needing to be mouthwashed and touched up with spritz, bright paint and a makeover. She came across as outdated, tired, extremely needy, and washed out. One star for unlikable characters and controversial choices by characters.👎