peter rietbergen

There seems to be a mix-up between one Terry, and Fred....

Another great chapter. And: I'm getting to appreciate Therese...I really do admire the way(s) you introduce her, and her changing attitude(s).

Will this saga leave us with an "end good, all good", i.e. "happy end" - a great couple living in an idyllic house, in an unexpectdely 'diverse'neighbourhood and with their perfect jobs, et cetera? Or will the author let us face reality - a world in which such ends rarely occur...?

I'll confess that I do try to "feel" for Michael - for yes: many of us have had to go through a double live before accepting that to lead one is to betray and indeed harm other people. And yet: the ease - in words and in gestures, actions - with which M continues to betray Sarah makes it hard going.

an entire world in a few words, only. Well done. As the other commentators write: a dangerous situation, the more so since G does not know his own reasons...

One may "feel" for M - though a man who, in the 21st century, marries and "begets" children while knowing that he really loves (?) - or, rather, lusts for - men is, perhaps, not very likeable. But as other commentators write: one cannot but hate M's mother, despise his father, and feel that both Andre and Ryan are less than upright men. So that leaves Sarah and the poor twins; in the end, they are the ones who will remain shattered For, inevitably, M cannot see "the light". He is gay, and unless his family, perhaps, accepts that, the pain is theirs, mostly.

totally enjoyable. And, what's more: believable.

Do we really want to believe that Ryan is as morally bad as M's mother?

I do realize a story always needs time/suspense, but: if we are to believe that J. is - as Americans have it - developing "feelings" (for the rabbit) - a rather strange expression because every person always has feelings for every other person (s)he knows... - I cannot but wonder why he hasn't yet simply forced the man's mask off. Also, assuming that the rabbit isn't a 17/18-year young man anymore (?), but in his (early) twenties, one also must wonder why he allows himself to be bullied by his brother. But I'm sure all will be explained in (the author's ...) good time...

The exchanges at the pub were a very clever narrative device! As to the umpteenth police interiew: i think in my country that would not have happened, after so many previous, equally exhausting reiterations. Certainly the lawyer would have wanted to know: why? Admittedly, it does keep the story going...

It seems M's T-shirt is removed twice... But otherwise: lovely....

good heavens. Three secret lovers. (Do they actually know about each other?) And a wife pregnant. And he still doesn't know what he wants? Really, a rather despicable character.

Whatever thoughts i have about Michael's moral vaccillations, I feel that for a grown-up man to still be tied to his mother is - well: let us say: not easily believable/plausible. The more so since, unspoken, this tale seems to suggest that overprotective, possessive, manipulative mothers create weak - gay? - sons: which, I'd say, is a notion that is a bit dated. With the father always and never there, one would assume the son mght have come to realize what kind of imbalance he chooses to continue tp belong to.

Except for a few typos: near-perfect, in pace and psychology. I already know I'm going to look forward to the next, and the next, and the next. Thanks!

a very sweet interlude indeed....

A last, and in many ways powerful chapter. With a "happy end", after all. Do I believe it ...? But who am I to deny the author - and his creations - this finale....

Obviously, a "happy ending", especially for/between Nicholas and Dawson, would be a betrayal to the strength of this story. Whatever happens, Nicholas - and poor Beth - will be miserable, whether Br lives or dies. And one canot but feel for poor Jett. So often, even the innocent suffer, both in the short and in the long run.

This is, indeed, a complex story. I have remarked on a few stylistic choices that, for me, bring the quality of the narrative down a bit - as do, I feel , the over-long graphic sex scenes that, in my view, impinge on what is a tragedy of grand proportions. Tragic because - again: my POV - to start with I do not understand Nicholas's feeling that he "loves" Marcus - how can he love a man young enough to be his son but, far more important, a person of whom he knows next to nothing... It is, cerainly intitially, sex, desire - and that wells from deep layers in Nicholas and in Marcus that, towards the end, the story does explain a bit. Obviously - if that sounds pedantic: I apologize - Nicholas feels he has lost his son and that mingles with other needs not/no longer fulfilled. Marcus needs a father, and the sexual relationship with Nicholas that develops is in a way a semi-incestuous one. As is, I feel, the one that Brandon engages in with Tom. Both young mn feel they have no father - anymore. In Brandon's case, since we do not know what Nicholas saw on his PC, there may be more than just the feeling of being abandoned - for a younger sibling, and for a young man of his own age: hence Tom. If Tom did not, after all, kill Marcus, I feel the author has something more to say about his almost defiant willingness to be killed for a crime he did not commit. As to Marcus - we will read what "explains" him...

Slowly, the scene almost is (back to) a Barchester novel - delightfully so. But story-telling being what is is, this modern urban idyll probably will prove a bit of a bubble. But it all serves to keep us wanting more... So: thanks.

The story really is powerful. But I must confess: I truly dislike the references to the two protagonists as: the hunk, the stud, the dark-haired hunk, the tall hunk, et cetera. It smacks of cheap porn, unworthy of a narrative that, on all other levels, is so very good.

Fascinating. But... "The dorm room door had only just closed behind him when Mickey yanked his phone from his pocket and dialed his Mom. But almost immediately he pulled the phone off his ear. “Damn, it’s busy!” he said. It seems this sentence got in the wrong place...since they're still in the car? Also, when M tells the friends assembled in A's apartment what häppened, he talks as if Drew isn't sitting right beside him...

Continues to fascinate. But: really, are Americans such prudes? An adult young man, living with an equally adult, obviously feisty and free girl, sees her enter his bedroom and then, though wearing boxers (also: really ?), is scared she sees a bit of his naked chest and hitches up his blanket till his chin?

Emotionally moving, in the best way.

I agree with the above comments. And yet... Is (not) "being gay" such an absolute category...?

Not only very cleverly constructed, but, also, very emotionally empathic. Bravo.