When it comes to psychological thrillers, the adjective “unputdownable” has become a gold standard. It is used as a subtitle, in publicity blurbs, and is especially prevalent in book reviews. Sometimes, when a word is used too much, it loses its meaning, and that can certainly be the case in some novels. I have read at least 6 books in the past few months that have used this descriptor. Strangely For Better and Worse doesn’t use it, yet it was one of the most interesting page turners I have read in a long time.
The author starts with a combination of two simple questions: “What would you do to protect your family?” and “Is there a limit to what would you do?” Natalie and Will meet in law school, and on their first date, they discuss hypotheticals about whether or not the perfect crime exists. Little do they know that 17 years later, they’ll be faced with a real-life version, and each of them will have to re-evaluate just about everything they believe in.
The first half of the book is told from Natalie’s point of view. Told in a very conversational style, the reader gets a very solid look at her beliefs and how they are influenced by her job as a criminal defense lawyer. Without giving the plot away, Natalie is forced to make some very difficult decisions. She must do so because her husband, Will, has been very distracted. Exactly half way through the book, the author switches to Will’s point of view, and this is where things really take off.
In switching the perspectives, the author allows the reader to understand the motivations of Natalie in a cool, collected, methodical way; this is a mirror image to Natalie’s personality. When the reader gets to Will’s perspective, the feeling of being at loose ends, barely hanging on (essentially freaking out at all times) is palpable. Splitting the novel into two distinct halves like this gives the reader a much stronger feeling for Will and Nat and how they each deal with their situations.
The book is aptly titled. Most people are familiar with the phrase “for better or for worse” as it is found in traditional wedding vows. The choice of replacing “or” with “and” illustrates the author’s intent to show how easily simple words can be disregarded when faced with an actual struggle. This was a very good read, and I recommend it to all readers, especially fans of thrillers.
Review by Jeanne McAvoy