Review of THE RAIN WATCHER by Tatiana de Rosnay (New Release)

2 Stars

To state that this book is a disappointment is an understatement.  I really struggled to finish it; were it not for the fact that I felt obligated to review it because I received a digital galley, I would have abandoned it.

The Malegarde family meets in Paris in January of 2018 to celebrate the 70^th birthday of the family patriarch Paul who is a world renowned arborist.  Paul and his wife Lauren arrive in Paris where their son Linden and their daughter Tilia are waiting.  The family reunion does not go as planned; much of Paris is experiencing flooding and Paul suffers a medical emergency that requires his hospitalization.  While they are together, various family secrets are divulged.

The narrator is Linden, a celebrated photographer who is gay but has never actually discussed his sexuality with his father.  Of course, communication seems not to be the métier of any of the family members.  Lauren keeps a secret from her husband; Tilia never speaks of an accident in which she was injured; and Paul has a secret which he has hidden “where it won’t be found.  No one knows.  No one will.”  It is Tilia’s secret that seems contrived.  Linden might not have heard personal details from his sister but there would have been information easily available online.

The book needs extensive editing.  Over and over again, there are detailed descriptions of the flooding and a comparison to the 1910 flood which is repeatedly mentioned.  Then there are the constant references to Paris streets and arrondissements.  Words referring to street (“rue” or “avenue” or “boulevard”) are used over 100 times! 

Even the style is tedious.  There is very little dialogue; instead, Linden just recounts conversations so there is no sense of immediacy.  So much telling, as opposed to showing, leaves the reader feeling detached.  What’s with the obsession with years?  Besides the 2 dozen references to the floods of 1910 and 2016, various years between 1997 and 2016 are specifically identified 58 times!  There is little variety in sentence structure.  So many of the sentences are short, choppy, simple sentences (“Tilia halts.  Her trembling hands cover her face like a mask.  Linden and Mistral do not move.  The only sound is the gush of rain . . . Suddenly the phone rings . . . Mistral answers it.  She nods, murmurs a few words, then hangs up.  Linden asks her who it was.  She whispers that it’s not important.”) as if the author cannot write a compound or complex sentence.  Then there are the long series of interrogative sentences:  “What does Paul know?  How long has it been going on? . . . Is this a recent affair?  Or one of those long-lasting clandestine ones, like Candice and J.G.’s? . . . Are his parents happy?  Have they always been happy?” and “Why her?  Why them, and not her?  Why had all her friends died?  Why had she been the one left behind?  The only one?”

The author often seems to toy with the reader.  At the beginning, she avoids using gender-specific pronouns to refer to Sasha as if to later shock the reader about Linden’s homosexuality.  The same is done with the opening passages of the chapters when it is not made clear who (Linden or Paul) is writing the flashbacks.

Symbolism usually adds depth to a novel.  In this case, however, the symbolism is clumsy and heavy-handed.  Paris is being flooded and the reader is to understand that the family is drowning in secrets and a storm is brewing as they gather for their reunion which arouses a flood of emotions.  As the Seine dredges up what has been buried, so are the family’s secrets dredged up.   It’s impossible to miss the metaphor:  “It seems his father’s life is slowly ebbing away, with the same stealthy pace as the rise of the Seine, as if the two events are intertwined and preordained.”  As Paris is deluged by water, Linden is inundated with memories of his time in the city.  After the waters recede, will the family emerge cleansed?

Much of the narrative is disjointed.  Much is made of Tilia’s speaking about the accident which left her with mental and physical scars, but then it is never mentioned again.  The backstories of characters are supplied but they serve little purpose.  Linden is placed in positions that make little sense.  Why does he go on the second boat trip since he is not allowed to take photos and his presence would serve only as a hindrance to rescuers?  Likewise, he is asked to be at an evacuation though he would become one more person for those in charge to worry about?  And what’s with unexpectedly dropping characters into the story?  Three different people arrive unannounced.

Sometimes things just seem thrown into the plot mix.  Linden leaves Tilia to get some medication for his mother:  “He leaves Lauren in Tilia’s care.  She’ll deal with getting the prescription.”  Then later we are told that “medication has been the subject to avoid with his sister ever since her accident.  She harbors profound skepticism about doctor’s prescriptions” and “It had been complicated enough getting her to approve of the treatment Lauren was receiving for her pneumonia.”  This complication was never mentioned!  And don’t get me started on that ending with its great reveal.  It’s anticlimactic and explains little.  Is it supposed to explain the reason for Paul’s preference for trees over people?  It does not connect to the rest of the storyline except to suggest that Paul decided he should share his secret. 

A repeated message is that people need to care more for each other.  One woman dies because of “the lack of caring.”  One character “hates this egocentric world where selfies rule, where no one bothers to find out if their neighbor is all right.”  We are told that in the 1910 flood, “people were kinder to one another . . . They watched out for their neighbors; they made sure everyone was dry and safe.  Solidarity ruled, and this, sadly, is no longer true in our modern selfish world.” 

Despite the many references to deep waters, I found the book rather shallow.  It does not flow; rather, it is disjointed.  Many scenes lack purpose.  I hate being so negative, but I honestly found little to admire in this book.  Reading it was like wading through the detritus of a flood.  

Note:  I received a digital galley of this book from the publisher via NetGalley.