I just finished reading The Story Of Edgar Sawtelle. It’s a book I resisted for quite awhile, at least partly because Bookdwarf was so enthusiastic about it, and I just didn’t want to admit that she’s always right about these sorts of things.
Another factor that scared me off was that the book contains dogs. That immediately makes me think it’s one of those dog books – you know, of interest only to dog fanciers. It’s not. I’m pretty sure that people who like anything with dogs in it will like this book. After all, it contains dogs. But it’s not the sort of thing that appeals only to them. It will also appeal to novel-lovers. It’s a tale of family and secrets and betrayal, a northern Wisconsin sort of Hamlet mixed with Lear, a story of almosts, of near-breakthroughs in communication and understanding and perfection.
“The Story Of Edgar Sawtelle” uses the relationships – sometimes beautifully tender and joyful – between people and dogs to reflect more clearly the relationship between humans. Just as even imperfect communication between humans and dogs requires years of training and practice, the mute Edgar is stymied by his own imperfect understanding of the world and by other people’s inability to grasp what he’s saying. And of course, more generally, everyone fails to communicate or hides what should most be unearthed and shared.
No, there’s no happy ending there. Nice dogs, though.
Secretly Ironic 
Finished about an hour ago, walking around in a kind of stupor, turned off my phone so I’d be left alone. I don’t know yet if I’m angry about the ending, maybe when I “come to” I’ll have a clearer opinion about that, but as for a story about communication I need no delay: this book is remarkable. The simple notion that there is no need for the silly, unimaginative zero-sum game of dominance/subservience is the great lesson in this work for me: teaching and learning are one, giving and taking love are one, and doing either and still leaving room for choice is an aspirational ideal. If the author deprived me, it was only of gratuitous scenes (which I would nevertheless have “enjoyed”, in a tear-jerker, “justice meted out” way): I would have heaved sobs when Almondine died, I would have crackled with satisfaction when Trudy learned about Claude, etc. What is most important: I want to talk to people, as so many above have said, and in that sense the book is a complete success. If it is, indeed, about communication, then here I am, looking on the internet for complete strangers to give me a gaze, or a scent, or to cup my belly and tell me they, too read this…
LikeLike
I LOVED this book. I just finished it last night and would rate it in my top 5 best books EVER! I would have liked a better ending – with Edgar and his mother together with all the dogs. I do not own a dog but was fascinated with the training and loyalty of Sawtelle dogs. I found myself totally captivated with this book.
LikeLike
I have one question – What were the references to Edgar’s real father? The mother at one point asked Edgar what he remembered about his real father – What was that about?
LikeLike
The Haa could also refer to Hangul. The language that was spoken where Claude received the poison.
LikeLike
So many unanswered questions: Did Claude buy the poison intentionally so he could settle a longstanding conflict w/ Gar? The old Chinese man showed the power of the poison by using it on a dog. Foreshadowing? What was the conflict between the two brothers about? What was the significance of the questions the old man “ghost” asks as Edgar cleaned out the shed? Any significance to Henry’s character, other than he was totally different from anyone Edgar had ever experienced? Or his beat-up car? A lot of mention of cars, trucks, buses. Somebody tell me the meaning of Gar (or his message) in the rainsheets. So what’s the theme? “Revenge can cause destruction [of spirit, lives, love]”? Perhaps the ending with Essay giving the other dogs a choice is intended to give us the feeling of the uncertainty of life. So many bad decisions made by the human characters in the story…thanks to all who shared the confusion I had as I finished the book yesterday. I had to re-read the ending also, but it was because I just couldn’t accept that Edgar’s character died. “Now what just happened here??”
LikeLike
About Susan’s questions re the father and Haa: The references were not to Edgar’s real father; they were to Trudy’s (remember her foster family upbringing). It’s sometimes confusing as to who is “speaking” when the dialogue is in sign. Also, the Haa was later described to mean the loyal dog in Japan, Hachiko, waiting for the long-dead master’s train. The ambassador wrote about “…possibly a third presence… whom only Hachiko could see.” Hmm, more ghosts. I just finished the book an hour ago, and still can’t decide how I feel about it. Alternately annoyed/warmed.
LikeLike
I read this book in short sessions, savoring it, unwilling to have it end. I had to stop and set it aside at times – worried about the dogs. I think Claude was a sociopath. He killed animals – that’s a sure sign. He obviously was jealous of his brother all his life especially having a loving family and a successful breeding business. He was obsessed with the poison as the answer to his problems. I wanted Edgar to save the syringe and have it tested in a crime lab! Why did he throw it away when it was proof he needed to show his mother? Why didn’t he ever confront Trudy? He knew Claude was dangerous, yet he let him insinuate himself in his mother’s life. The dog training/communication was eye-opening. The shared-gazing in the book led me to watch my own dog with a new insight. I like the idea of the dog making a choice. Essay, Babou, and Almondine made life-altering choices, and Edgar was aware of what they were doing. I had to reread the summary of Hamlet, as I forgot important plot elements. Edgar’s story follows it like an outline. This book is worthy of all the attention it is receiving.
LikeLike
My sister is reading this book now and wondering what all the fuss and praise is about. She says that it’s readable, and pleasant enough but nothing to rave about.
Is all the “fabulous” saved for the end of the book???
I was going to read it but I’m less excited about it now.
LikeLike
I am very disappointed. So much in the book about character and noble intentions, then “Thwack!” with the ending. What?? Did ANYONE in this book go on to a happy life? Poor dogs- stripped of their home and their family. I’m glad this is fiction. I am sorry I wasted my money, though.
LikeLike
i finished this book about an hour ago, and i can’t stop sobbing. I don’t mean tearing up, actually sobbing. this book so totally got into my soul, that I feel as though members of my family have died, and my own dogs have run feral. when i was about 60 pages out, i told my mother that this was one of those books that you want to get to the end to see what happens, but you don’t because then the journey will be over. i had no idea it would be so tragic. this author made me feel and care about these people and animals, and i really feel a sense of loss. i agree with steve from 9-13, i have to keep telling myself that none of this is real, and i shouldn’t feel a loss. i just can’t help it. i know this is not a story about dogs, but the parts from almondine’s pov have enlightened me on a dog’s sense of loss. i’ve always known they have feelings, and grieve. i am going to pay more attention to how my own three dogs are feeling.
LikeLike
I could not get over how disappointed I was with this ending. The book was amazing in all other ways (although there was a typo that didn’t sit well with me.) Everyone DIES??? What is THAT?? I’m pretty sure Trudy dies. Trudy knew in the end that Claude killed Gar, at least I thought so, so that was somewhat satisfying. I’m glad Claude dies. The most unsatisfying was not that Edgar died, but he was killed by Claude. Also, how could Trudy take in Claude? I was disappointed by that fact. I’m happy Edgar reunited with Almondine, his soul mate at the end, but I did not like the circumstances. I miss reading this book.
LikeLike
This book was haunting, and I’d recommend it without reserve to anyone because it is great literature. PEOPLE–it is not a soap opera or one of your favorite TV dramas that must be resolved in an hour. It is fashioned after classic literature, and apparently many of you don’t recognize that (i.e. inane complaints of it not having a happy ending). Trudy does not die; she must live any empty husk knowing what her role in the tragedy was. Edgar had to die because that’s the only logical way to resolve the conflict. Claude must die to balance the evil he perpetrated on all (he’d used poison to kill before Gar). Edgar being reunited with Almondine (real or not) was satisfying for me. The author couldn’t have let Edgar survive after his being responsible for a man’s death and for blinding that man’s son. Too much tragedy for a 14 year-old to bear.
LikeLike
Hey, Fellow Readers,
I, too, was devastated by the ending; so tragic! I loved the book in spite of that. It spoke to the human spirit of us all and to the animal spirit in each of us as well, and, yes, I am speaking of both people and dogs.
The one thing I would like to ask the author is what the purpose of the little girl who told Edgar he couldn’t speak beacause he was born with a secret? Her Granny told her? Was her Granny Ida?
So many questions!
Also, Trudy was a weak woman. She should have turned on Claude the moment she realized he had betrayed them all, but I know we are all so stupid about relationships, and so easily into denial. DAMN!
Wish I had a good book to turn to tonight. I miss the gang in Sawtelle!
Gwynneth
LikeLike
I loved the book, but found it disturbing and haunting.
Edgar is 14 years old, and never seems to miss Trudy, or indeed, Almondine.
Almondine moved me, but Edgar was growing up, and parents, animals, and grandparents frequently get left behind.I believe that as Edgar’s lifelong protector, Almondine would not have walked into the road and stood in front of a truck.
Trudy was an unsympathetic character, her choice caused the tragedy.
My happy ending would have been, they sell the farm, move to a farmhouse near town, and learn to live a different life, remembering Gar.
LikeLike
I loved the book….how the author got into Almondine’s head and let us know how she felt about Edgar leaving…it tore my heart out….the ending was so so sad though…but the reading was captivating. I believe that Essay was on her way to Henry…hopefully and I believe that she is carrying Forte’s pups….
LikeLike
p.s. what was the deal with the liquid in the bottle with the ribbon…did it have a hidden meaning…I just didn’t get it…..also what about Ida…how did she figure in….
LikeLike
I loved this book, but I was so let down by the ending that I had to reread it to make sure I didn’t misunderstand it. I wanted Essay to stop Claude and to save Edgar. I started rereading it because it paints so many beautiful pictures in mind and I wanted to see the crumbs that were dropped at the beginning leading to the ending. I partly listened in the car through my iPod, and I highly recommend that. The reader was great. I can’t wait for my family to read it, so we can talk about it. Thanks for the blog, so I don’t have to wait so long. What a great movie this book will make!
LikeLike
What a great book!That is until the end!Why spend 10 years writing a masterpiece and then just throw it all to the wind for the sake of finishing.No one I know has enjoyed much less understood the ending.It was such a huge failure.I read that book like it was my last breath and then WHAMO what the heck????
LikeLike
I believe this book left alot of questions unanswered…..on purpose. Noone takes that long to write a book just to leave so many questions unanswered with reason. There will definitely be a sequel. Or maybe even another, completely different story that may help read as guide to Edgar. Bravo to the new author. I only hope he answers all the questions he left us with.
LikeLike
So glad I found this site…I just finished it last night and like most everyone posted here I, too, was devastated by the ending. BUT, I still absolutely loved this book. I agree with Linda (9/27) that this is great literature…what prose. It leaves one breathless and in awe of the author’s mastery of language. I still have so many questions…I have never re-read a book until now. I think a second reading will give me new insights since I already know all the basics of the story. Almondine definitely came back to Edgar as he was “dying”?…he was “lost” and she finally “found” him. And yes, she was hit by a car because she decided to “ask” the “strangers” if they knew where her boy had gone. No one else had answers for her…she chose to seek out others. It’s not clear to me if Claude actually injected Edgar with his poison of choice. He stood in the barn with the “syringe still in his hand”. Doesn’t clarify if it was empty. And why did he get it from the old man in the first place…who else did he kill? Edgar was able to “see” & “talk” with those that had died even though he was alive. Couldn’t he have been having this same experience with Almondine? I believe Trudy did die. Strangled by the pitiful character Glen. And Claude…his last vision was of Gar manifesting within the smoke of the advancing fire. Interesting that the barn only contained smoke…no fire for so long? Too many questions that only the author can answer. I would love to hear his explanations. Does anyone know where I could read his comments? I can only hope that he writes a sequel…I really NEED to know what happened to Essay (and Forte..I don’t think he was a “ghost” as some have said)& the Sawtelle dogs that chose to follow her. Also what happened to those dogs that chose to stay at the farm? Is Henry (so “ordinary”)the next one to become extraordinary in raising the Sawtelle dogs? If there was ever a book to have for a book club to discuss this is it.
LikeLike
I can accept that some people didn’t like the ending (or even the entire book for that matter), but it surprises me how many were outraged by it!
I guess I was prepared for the ending, because one thing I got pretty quickly was that Edgar and Almondine came into this world within a short time of each other and I knew they’d exit this world within a short while of each other. There just was no other alternative. Edgar was half of a soul and Almondine was half a soul. Together they were whole.
I loved the book and was almost comforted by the ending in a weird way. I was sorry for Trudy’s tragic losses (she suffered so many throughout her entire life), but ultimately this book wasn’t about her. It was about a boy and his one and only.
LikeLike
Gotta say, I too, fell for the dog and adventure story, but didn’t understand what the heck all the death at the end added to the story other than frustration. I think there were messages to be communicated, relationships to be explained and richer deeper understandings that were forfeited in the wholesale consumption of characters and opportunity by a fire. So many unexplained threads…like what was this old riff between brothers about anyway such that Claude premeditates a murder across continents and time? Clue me in here folks.
LikeLike
What a waste of talent and good storytelling and many long hours when I should have been sleeping and money. Yes, I am angry, feel cheated and totally at a loss. All because the ending was unnecessarily stupid. All the rest was brilliant and an elixir unto itself. I did indeed rewrite the ending only to please and appease myself. For shame is all I can say. I do not recommend this book to anyone because of the ending being a big joke being played on the readers.
LikeLike
I hated this book. I kept reading chapter after chapter waiting for the book to become interesting. Question: What was Claude’s motive in killing Gar? Did he actually kill Gar? the ending was terrible and did not wrap up the so called mystery.
LikeLike
I’m glad to see someone shared the feelings I had at the end of the book. I was completely hooked, absorbed in such a deep part of my soul with all the characters and the beauty and depth of the writing. Then, at the end everyone good has to die, and evil had to prevail. I felt shocked and angry, and so saddened by the horrible ending. Why, when so many choices, would the author choose to end the book the way he did. I was ready to recommend this bood to many friends and now I can’t wait to dump it in the Goodwill box. All because of the ending. I don’t think I can read another one of his books if he is capable of this.
LikeLike
It was a captivating and engrossing book. I have taken to calling one of my two chocolate labs “Almondine” and the dope is so eager to please she answers to the name!! After reading the book and then these posts I have to say I didn’t really mind the ending, but I would have liked a little more detail as to the fate of the dogs. After all the author could have made it the feel good story of the year and have Forte, Essay, Almondine, Trudy and Edgar live happily ever after, with Edgar finding his voice from the fire. It would feel good but not be very thought provoking.
LikeLike
I am very much a dog lover – not as a “pet” or object to show off – but as a fellow animal that cares for me as I care for him. The treatment of dogs and the descriptive narrative of this book are engrossing — BUT – it all gets lost in disjointed unexplained events that can only be described by a line from the book itself “Life was a swarm of accidents waiting in the treetops, descending upon any living thing that passed, ready to eat them alive.” The trouble is – that doesn’t make for a very satisfying story.
LikeLike
I too just finished reading the book and am still in the process of digesting everything. I am torn between loving the first 80% of it but the ended left too many unsatisfying questions and visions. No doubt, great literature one of the best, no doubt not meant to be a fairy tale ending. But — why so many unanswered questions. Why so many wrongs that could have been righted but instead took a totally dark un-redeeming turn for Edgar. I kept waiting for him to be vinidcated, by Glen, by Trudy, by Claude, by Almondine. NONE of it really happened.
I was grateful for the small piece when Edgar lay there on the cement floor of the barn presumably crossing over to death to find Almondine waiting there for him. I was at least pleased for the brief exchange between them but I didn’t think that did her or their special bond the justice it deserved as the author had built up too so eloquently in earlier passages.
I recently lost my beloved dog of 14 years. He was in every way “my Almondine” , he was my heart, soul, and essence and maybe it’s just where I’m at right now missing him but I felt like the author could have done more to honor that which was the heart and core of this story.
I hope there is a sequel, and a movie. Maybe Stephen King will direct it and help it make more sense.
There was a lot of subtle ironies sprinkled throughout that did tidy some of the plots and subplots up but not in a big enough way for me.
I did love the book, mostly because of the way it portrayed the emotional bond that exists between humans and animals and especially when told from the animals point of view.. I just ended up feeling a bit cheated in the end. I may have to go back and reread some key chapters to make sure I didn’t miss anything.
LikeLike
Also, there was one blooper in the book when Henry was helping Edgar care for Tinder’s wounded paw he gave her tylenol. Any true dog person knows that Tylenol can be fatal for dogs! That kind of bothered me.
LikeLike
Did anyone notice a chronological mistake in the history of Trudy’s miscarriages and story of Edgar’s birth. I have read and re-read that section numerous times and have to come to the conclusion that it is a mistake by the author. Trudy has two miscarriages and then the book says she becomes pregnant for the third time in late 1957. That pregnancy ends with a stillbirth in April of 1958. But later it says that her fourth pregnancy ends with the birth of Edgar in May of 1958. Am I missing something? If I’m mistaken and someone can set me straight, I would appreciate it. This is really bothering me.
LikeLike
Lori,
Maybe they didn’t know that back in the 70’s. Some of those side effects were discovered much later. Just a thought…
LikeLike
I just finished the book and feel so depressed. It was bad enough for me when Almondine was pining for Edgar, then we find out that she died. No, I dind’t know she actually stood in front of a truck and got hit. I assumed she died of old age, though she was trying to find Edgar on her own.
One mistake they made in the book was when Henry first met Edgar and the dogs, and they gave Tinder two Tylenols because of her injury. Anyone who knows anything about dogs knows you can not give Tylenol to a dog or it can be fatal!! Aspirin is a different story–not fatal–but Tylenol is a Bozo no-no. The author should have known this.
I was thinking that Essay was guiding the other dogs back to Henry’s house…
It’s so nice to hear I’m not the only one depressed after reading this book! I was telling my husband about it and almost started crying! I felt like I needed to talk to somebody who read the book!
LikeLike
WHY DID EDGAR KILL THE VET?
I READ THIS PART OVER AND OVER , PRACTIICALLY RE READ IT TO FIND OUT WHY HE WOULD KILL THE VET WHEN IT WAS CLAUDE THAT KILLED HIS FATHER?
PLEASE LET ME KNOW THIS REASON?
LikeLike
WHY WOULD EDGAR KILL THE DR. WHEN IT WAS CLAUDE THAT KILLED HIS DAD? WHAT REASON DID HE HAVE TO DO THIS?
LikeLike
I think this book is very overrated. Had to struggle to finish it.
LikeLike
He didn’t see who it was–he thought it was Claude. This comes from Hamlet–he kills Polonius, who is eavesdropping on him, believing it to be Claudius, his uncle.
Seriously, I have problems with the way Wroblewski followed the Hamlet story (though not entirely faithfully, since Trudy and Glen don’t die, and Claudius doesn’t kill Hamlet, and Hamlet stabs Claudius, and etc.
I thought the book was best when he got away from Hamlet, such as the trek through the wilderness, and their time with Henry (who is clearly Horatio). Personally, I don’t think the modern setting works as a setting for the direct retelling of Shakespeare stories–I hate modern dress versions of Shakespeare–the stories are timeless, but also anachronistic–the timelessness of the stories is ruined when you rip them out of the time they’re set in, and stick them in a different era.
And I hated to see Edgar never get a chance to use what he had learned. But that was the choice the author made, to follow the outline of that tragedy, and people should respect it. It is a very dark novel, though–darker than anything Stephen King ever wrote.
If you read the play, or rent one of the movie versions, you’ll pick up on the names–Forte stands for Fortinbras, King of Norway, who appears at the end of the play, too late to save Hamlet. He is going to inherit Edgar’s kingdom. The dogs have evolved to the point where they can make choices for themselves, and thus do not need humans anymore. Edgar’s grandfather’s dream has come to pass, not in the way he expected.
I’m not sure I understand who or what Essay stands for, in terms of the Shakespeare play–or why Trudy is left alive, since Gertrude dies without ever knowing (consciously, at least) what has happened. That’s a really horrible punishment Wroblewski inflicts upon her–Shakespeare was never that cruel. Glen might as well be dead without his eyes–he’s useless now.
It’s not a satisfying book, but it’s got some amazing moments. I have a dog who reminds me of the Sawtelle dogs–not quite that smart. Maybe just as well. But the questions Wroblewski asks are meaningful on a lot of levels. I don’t agree with all of his answers.
What the Sawtelles were selling was not the dogs, but the chance to form an intensely close bond with a non-human being. And that, ultimately, is the attraction of the dog-human relationship. We are more together than we are apart.
So why does the book end with the dogs and humans parted? Because, Wroblewski is saying, people aren’t yet worthy of dogs like that. If we want better dogs, we have to be better people.
LikeLike
I just finished reading the book in about 4 days. Loved most of it. Hated the ending. I hated that so many questions remained unanswered. I had to go back and reread the part where Almondine dies. I didn’t get it at first. I did notice the Hamlet connection immediately. Another bit of sadness to an already dark ending is that in Edgar’s final act of saving all the dog files from the burning barn, embers land on them and they are burnt up anyway which made his final effort in vain. And what iof the mother Trudy? I don’t believe she dies. I might reread this book because I think I missed some of the elements.
LikeLike
I kept thinking of the Cain and Able story from the bible while reading (I was ignorant of Hamlet until I saw a million references to it). I was thinking it was the brother’s hatred towards each other that was driving everything in the story. I’ve been kind of wandering around here for a couple of hours kind of shocked at the ending. I did notice how Edgar was distancing himself from all the adults, even his mother, and didn’t think it was going to turn out good, but was really surprised.
LikeLike
Am I the only one who hasn’t read Hamlet? If I’d known he pretty much “copied” the story line from a freaking Shakespeare play, I probably wouldn’t have bothered reading it, because now I feel ripped off, like he didn’t have an original thought and just ripped off Shakespeare pretty much. I was unhappy enough with the ending, but now reading about all these parallels to Hamlet makes me even more angry…
LikeLike
Shakespeare didn’t invent the story of Hamlet–in fact, nearly all of Shakespeare’s plays are derived from earlier sources, though he almost invariably improved upon them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_of_Hamlet
I think it’s outrageous to suggest there’s nothing original in the novel because he patterns the bare plot of the narrative after one of the most famous stories of all time.
I have no problem with people not liking the book–which I did, very much, in spite of some things I wish had been done differently. It is a very bleak ending, though not as hopeless as it might seem. I think most people here dislike it because it’s not 101 Dalmatians, or whatever. Not a good enough reason.
Most great books have bad things happening in them. Happy endings are not guaranteed, in fiction or in life. And that includes stories about dogs.
Spoiler alert–Travis shoots Old Yeller–in the book, he doesn’t even wait to see if Yeller gets rabies! The original story of A Dog of Flanders involves both the boy and his dog dying of cold and starvation! Call of the Wild ends with all the humans dead and Buck taking over a wolf pack and never returning to civilization!
One thing I liked very much about the book was the idea that dogs deserve better than us.
LikeLike
I liked the idea that David Wroblewski gave the special Sawtelle dogs a voice. I liked the prose – the lines of poetry – the long descriptive passages. I liked that Edgar and the dogs learned to live in the wild – an important point to connect the story’s end. I understood the undertone – human characters kept secrets, had loose connections and kept readers wanting more. I got the theme – forget Hamlet. Concentrate on the Sawtelle family’s success for generations in training dogs – not in forming solid human relationships. In the end their demise, dying off physically and emotionally was expected. The dogs grouped together. As David wrote,”Yet witnesses they were, one and all, trained and bred to watch, taught by their broody mothers to use their eyes, taught by the boy himself to wait for a gesture that put meaning into a world where none existed.” Essay got it- Edgar’s sign – took the lead – “watching it all,” “when she was sure all of them were together now and no others would appear, she turned and made her choice and began to cross.” This was a great story of survival and failure.
LikeLike
I wanted to comment on the balance of Edgars birth on the death of a wild wolf pup, and then when Edgar finally dies Forte, possibly a litter mate or parent of the wild pup, is joined by his cousins the Sawtelle dogs as they choose to leave the farm. The debt of the pups life is repaid again to nature just as Edgar finally got the privelege of his life in return for this wild pup. Jungle boy…Nathoo, and each made their choices.
The pendulum swings from one world to another and balance maintains. As in the opening scene, this is a law here, life from life and life for life…No one gets to play god, the rules do not change.
The story goes beyond epic to prophetic.
No death, no failure, only the constant of change, from one form to other forms.
LikeLike
Of course everyone could see the references to Hamlet, but did you also catch the comparisons to the Jungle Book? Often times throughout the 550 pages, I felt the author channeling more Rudyard Kipling than Shakespeare. Just curious if anyone else got that.
LikeLike
I’m still pretty uncertain if I liked the book or not. I guess I can say I do since it has me thinking on it so much. The book started going south for me when Edgar accidentally killed the vet. I had the sour feeling in my tummy after that. Also, I knew it wasn’t going to go well when he was headed home after the tornadoes, because Ida told him not to unless he had the bottle. Since he didn’t, well it went badly. Even if Edgar had outed Claude, Edgar would still have had to live with the knowledge that he was responsible for someone else’s death. Not a happy burden to place on a kid. I think Claude and Edgar both needed to die. Claude for being a cold blooded murderer, and Edgar for the inadvertant death he caused, so he wouldn’t have that burden on him. I was hoping against hope that somehow Edgar had found that syringe and bottle before Claude could use it, and replaced it for some benign substance. Edgar could then come around later and live happily ever after, but where’s the justice in that? I’m not saying it gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling that Edgar died, but it had a touch of poetic justice. Trudy gets to live with the knowledge that she chose a man over her child. She will probably waste away, along with Glen, until the “blackness” swallows her.I’d like to think that the Sawtelle dogs have learned to live in the wild. That while on the return journey home with Edgar, Forte was schooling Essay on living in the wild. That’s why she had the blood on her after a little time away with Forte, and it wasn’t her own blood. Forte was teaching her. She will in turn help teach the others. Also, since Sawtelle dogs can see “ghosts” they will all have reunions out on the land that they all love and enjoy.
LikeLike
Please forgive me for writing again so soon, but I had another thought. What if perhaps I may have been a little correct in thinking Edgar did find the bottle of poison before CLaude could use it? What was that patch of dead grass that kept growing out in front of the barn? If I overlooked something, please let me know.
LikeLike
Scratching my head after reading this one…Couple of questions…how could any mother send her child away-mute or not? Also-what about all the rain and storms encountered in the book? metaphor for what? Almondine was the only hero here….
Am I the only one that missed something??
LikeLike
Edgar found the used syringe that Claude used on Gar, which still had a small amount of the poison in it–and which would have been all the evidence he needed, but he was in too much emotional upset to act. I mean, he just saw his dead father.
Trudy sent Edgar away to hide near the farm, until she figured out a story to explain Page’s death. It had nothing to do with his muteness. She never wanted him to just disappear into the wilderness.
It’s not fair to say Trudy chose Claude over Edgar–and Claude had fixed things so that they couldn’t keep the farm, or the dogs, unless they accepted his help.
However, there is a deeper failure in her inability to see Claude for who he is, and using him to help her forget Gar.
LikeLike
Amazing! I don’t want to compare the story to Hamlet or any other story. It stands by itself and I will remember it for a very long time. A great book doesn’t always have a happy ending. I don’t have to like the ending to feel it was still a fantastic novel. The unanswered questions just adds to the intensity of the book. I too would like the answers, but what would we chat about or mull over if was all clearly laid out in the pages. Makes us think!
LikeLike
I loved it! I will never look at my dogs in the same way again.
LikeLike
It’s puzzling and disheartening to read some of these “reviews.” I get the impression that some readers have difficulty with the hard truths in life and can only appreciate blinding sunshine. Certainly, the author indulges in prophecy too much. But if the ending was a surprise to you, I suspect much of the author’s gifts were also unseen.
This story will remain with me. The author has invited us into a world where the elemental is exposed, and its discovery is both devastating and triumphant. I feel sorry for those who refuse to look.
LikeLike