Today, I want to talk about two books I’ve read recently: The Sickle’s Compass by Stephen Woodfin and Still Alice by Lisa Genova. Both are excellent books, although Publisher’s Weekly was brutal toward Still Alice. Nonetheless, it debuted at #5 on The New York Times Bestseller list, spent 36 weeks th
ere, and won several prestigious awards.
I would recommend both. Both received high marks on reader reviews. Still Alice got 4.7 average on hundreds of reviews, and The Sickle’s Compass was close behind with a 4.6. And each was the first book published by the author.
Both show the effects of Alzheimer’s disease, not just on those suffering from the disease but also on the families. Both treat the disease with compassion.
But with all the similarities, the two authors approach the subject from very different points of view – literally. Woodfin’s book is told from the perspective of those around Woody, including his wife of sixty years. Woody escapes those who watch over him, gets in serious trouble with the law, but manages a heroic act in the end. Woodfin characterizes the book as an indictment of America’s refusal to make preparation for the coming tsunami: Alzheimer’s Disease. And yet, my wife describes it as a love story, showing a wife who never loses faith in or love for her husband, despite his current problems.
Genova’s book is in many ways a frightening story, mainly because it depicts a state that many of us will face in the future. It is told from the point of view of the person actually experiencing early onset Alzheimer’s. We feel first her frustration over forgetting words or appointments. We feel her fear as these lapses become more significant, until she cannot remember where she lives. And we are appalled when the woman’s husband is not so understanding or supportive as Woody’s wife is. My wife did not think of this as a love story, but as a scary, upsetting book.
Woodfin’s victim is a man. Genova’s is a woman. Woodfin’s Woody is around 80 years old, a World War II veteran. Genova’s Alice is in her early 50’s, a Harvard professor. But the main distinction between these two books is the point of view. They treat the same subject, but from different angles. And it is this shift in point of view that makes all the difference. We can identify with Woody and pull for him, even as we want his wife to find him and return him to the safety of his family. We feel for Woody’s wife, still loving her husband and trying to protect him from himself. But Woody is on a mission and we’re with Woody.
If we identify with Alice, it strikes too close to our brain. We realize that such a fate can easily be ours. And while she is in a very intellectual setting, we can’t feel the same love and support from her husband. Alice is alone. Alice is losing her mind. Alice is terrified. And the reader is uncomfortable.
I recommend both books. See what an amazing difference the point of view makes. Then, on your next book, consider different points of view, and how each would affect your story.
Jim, You made such a good point, and you used two books that may hit close to home for a lot of people. As a writer, thank you! As a reader, thank you! And as someone who’s not 25 anymore, thanks for recommending these books.
Nicely done, Jim. I’m amazed and saddened by the people who exhibit “well I didn’t sign up for this” attitudes when their loved ones start to slip away, so I applaud Stephen for creating a character who will stand by her man, no matter what. That’s true love.
Hi Jim — The Alice book does sound scary. But it must happen a lot. Families are not necessarily supportive when things go wrong. How many relationships have we heard that are like that? How many dads or moms walk out when there’s a special needs child? So, scary but all too realistic. Thanks for letting us know about both books, and yes, the differing points of view are so interesting.
Thanks for this, Jim. I’ll be looking over the books when I get the chance. I’m very much interested in POV, as a writer, teacher and editor. I’m always so glad when a writer “gets it” after much confusion in his or her writing.
Jim, thanks so much for featuring my book, The Sickle’s Compass, in your blog. So your readers know, Alzheimer’s is not a theoretical interest for me. My mother suffered from it for ten years. Also my father fought in the Battle of the Bulge, so the character of Woody in the book is drawn in part from the few things my dad shared with me about WWII.
As you say, the approach I took is diametrically opposed to Lisa Genova’s in Still Alice. In that book, she dealt with “early onset” AD, which is terrifying because it strikes people who are relatively young. But early onset only represents a very small fraction of AD patients. (1-2 percent). The vast majority of persons with AD are people like Woody, members of the greatest generation who now face their last final battle, often alone and forgotten.
I am glad for the success of Lisa Genova’s book, but it wasn’t anything like the story I wanted to tell.
Also, I would like to let your readers know that The Sickle’s Compass will be free on the Kindle store this coming Saturday and Sunday as a way for me to say thank you to the mothers out there, who like Woody’s wife, so often find themselves as caregivers for their loved ones who are in the throes of AD.
Thanks again. Stephen Woodfin
Thanks for this review. It’s easier for me to write intimate and challenging prose in the third person. Often, I do that to start out, changing it to the first person later. POV shift is an amazing, distancing device and I one with which I like to play.