Other Sellers on Amazon
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle Cloud Reader.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Enter your mobile phone or email address
By pressing "Send link," you agree to Amazon's Conditions of Use.
You consent to receive an automated text message from or on behalf of Amazon about the Kindle App at your mobile number above. Consent is not a condition of any purchase. Message & data rates may apply.
Faithful Place Hardcover – July 13, 2010
Enhance your purchase
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Frequently bought together
Sophie: Someone said to me recently that they found it strange we openly say we like each other's work, when we should surely regard each other as "the competition." I found this idea really weird. As far as I'm concerned, the only competition any writer ought to be interested in is the competition between good writing and bad writing. So, while I get very cross and resentful when a book that I think is terrible does well, I love it when books I think are great do well--I feel that the right side, i.e. good writing, is winning the competition, which I feel benefits me as much as anyone else, because I want to live in a world where brilliant books are valued. Also, if I think a book is better than anything I could write, then I want it to do better than my books in order to reflect that. I suppose what I'm saying is that I want there to be a meritocracy of literature. Would you agree or disagree?
Tana: I'd definitely love a meritocracy of literature--both for reasons of principle (same as you, I get jumping-up-and-down outraged if I see a good book sidelined in favor of what I consider a crap one) and for very practical reasons. It sort of ties in with why I've never seen you as "the competition." I love what you write. I think it's good. If someone picks up one of your books and reads it and likes it, I think it'll whet their appetite for good books--and, specifically, for good psychological crime. That makes them more likely, not less, to go looking for more and wind up reading something of mine.
Sophie, is there anything you wouldn’t write about for ethical reasons? I think mystery’s one of the most moral genres--it’s all about exploring right and wrong, finding truth, achieving justice, how these things are never black and white. We spend a lot of our time thinking about the more dangerous far reaches of morality and immorality. Any ethical lines you wouldn’t cross as a writer?
Sophie: There are no subjects that I think writers shouldn't write about--anything is a valid subject for fiction, and it's possible to handle any subject sensitively or insensitively. I think the ethics are in the way a writer treats a subject, not inherent in the subject itself. Having said that, there are things I don't think I could write about because I find them too horrible--the main one that springs to mind is state-sanctioned execution. If a film or book contains legal execution, I can't watch/read it. I find it too upsetting. The other subject I find too upsetting is fatal illness, especially when the terminally ill person is the loved one of the narrator--so, I guess since I wouldn't read about those things, I wouldn't write about them either! How about you, is there anything you wouldn't write about?
Tana: The one huge ethical issue, for me, is making sure that I give murder and murder victims the weight they deserve. I don't ever want to write something where the victim is simply a prop that's necessary in order for the story to get under way. Murder, taking another human being's life, is so earth-shatteringly huge: it doesn't just take one life, it affects everyone who comes into contact with it--families, friends, detectives working on the case, people who knew the killer.... I feel like using something so immense as a throwaway plot point would be unethical and cheap. I've got a responsibility to show that immensity, as far as possible.
I can't see myself ever writing about child abuse, but that's partly because it became so common in mystery books for a while there--either child abuse was the big secret that was revealed at the end, or else it was the killer's reason/excuse for murder. It got cheap. Apart from that, though, I'm not sure I can see myself avoiding a subject (not permanently, anyway) simply because it wrecks my head too badly. One of the reasons I write crime is in a attempt to understand things that I simply can't get my head around--how one human being can kill another, or deliberately damage another (like the sociopath in one of the books). So I tend to come back to the things that horrify me most, trying to understand them by writing about them.
People ask me a lot where I get the ideas for my plots, but someone recently asked me for the first time where I get the ideas for my characters. I thought that was a very cool question, so I’m passing it on. Where do yours come from?
Sophie: I agree with you absolutely about giving the crime the weight it deserves. Which is why I write books that some readers find upsetting. People should be upset about crime! The good thing about crime fiction (usually!) is that it attempts to deal with the worst things that can happen in a way that is uplifting--either because justice is done in the end, or because the light of understanding is shed upon the darkest corners of the human psyche. Even if all you do is understand why a monster behaves monstrously, it helps. I almost think understanding something does more good than fighting against it.
To answer your question, my characters come from the plot idea, always. I always start with an intriguing or mysterious situation, and then I work out how that plot starting point could develop. Usually, in order for it to develop as well as it can, it requires a certain kind of character. For example, in my novel The Dead Lie Down (published as The Other Half Lives in the UK), the opening mystery is that a man appears to be confessing to the murder of a woman who isn't dead. His girlfriend, to whom he confesses, knows that this woman isn't dead--and she's the one who keeps pursuing this until she finds out the truth. I needed her, therefore, to be the sort of person who wouldn't say, "Hang on a minute, you're a nutter, I'm off to find a sane boyfriend." So I thought, "What sort of woman would stay with a man she believed to be deluded?" And that was how the character of Ruth, the heroine, came into being--I gave her a past trauma that explained why she would cling to this man that loves her, even though he's driving her crazy and talking apparent nonsense. So I suppose what I'm saying is, plot comes first for me, and character follows shortly afterwards. Which comes first for you?
Tana: I'm with you on understanding it--I don't think it's possible to fight against evil unless you understand it or at least work to understand it. Otherwise, you're shooting in the dark. There's also the fact that I think the root of all real evil is lack of empathy--the inability to believe at any deep level that other people, people who are different from you, are still real. If I don't accept that people who do evil are real, if I see them as two-dimensional and don't at least accept the possibility of empathizing (not sympathizing, obviously) with their motivations and drives, then I take a step towards evil myself.
Plot and character--I work the other way around: I start with the character of the narrator and with a very basic premise, and then I dive in and hope to God there's a plot in there somewhere. With Faithful Place (my third book) I started out with the image of a battered old suitcase I'd seen thrown away outside a Georgian house that was being gutted--it made me start wondering where it had been found, and what if someone had hidden it there and meant to come back for it and never got the chance.... I had that, and the character of Frank Mackey--he showed up in The Likeness, as Cassie's undercover boss, the guy who'll do absolutely anything, to himself or anyone else, to get his man. I started thinking about the two things together--what if it was Frank's first love who had hidden that suitcase, what if they had been about to run away together, what if he always thought she had dumped him, and what if the suitcase resurfaced...
Sophie: I read a really interesting book recently about human evil. It's called People of the Lie, and it's by M. Scott Peck. Its subtitle is "Towards an Understanding of Human Evil." It's a superb book, and Peck's theory is that evil people are not necessarily those who do great harm, but those who cannot face the reality of their own faults, who have to lie to themselves and pretend they are always good, always in the right--thus making everyone wrong and worse. Peck believes that it's those who constantly lie to themselves about their own undiluted goodness, and sweep all the evidence of their moral flaws under the carpet of their own consciousness, who are truly evil. He sees the lying as a crucial part of the evil. So he would see someone who says, "Yeah, so I killed her? So what?" as less evil than the person who says, "I killed her because she's bad and I'm good, and so it was right to kill her." A lot of "baddies" do harm and don't care--which is obviously terrible, but Peck would say the people who do harm and believe it's good are worse--so people like Hitler, Saddam Hussein. Gordon Brown...just kidding!
Tana: Ooh. Interesting. The idea that evil isn't only in the action itself, but in the distortion of the surrounding reality, the destruction not just of people but of truth. ("We just sexed up the dossier...") That definitely ties in with mystery writing, where everything spins around the deep human impulse towards truth--the whole arc of the books is the movement towards truth, through various obstacles.
Sophie: Do you have a favorite of your books, and, if so, is that the same one as the one you think is the best? I can never decide which of mine I like best--I like them all in different ways, and I think they're all best and worst in different ways!
Tana: I'll probably always have a soft spot for In the Woods, simply because that was the first one and that was the one where, in some ways, I was taking the biggest risk--I put so much time and work and heart into it, I actually turned down acting work to finish it (if you know any actors, you know that turning down work is a HUGE deal, actors are the only people who always want to be working more)--and it was all just on hope, without any reason to think that this book would ever go anywhere except under my bed. I can't be objective enough to have any clue which one's the best, though. I don't think it helps that (maybe because of the different narrators) they're all very different in stuff like pace and tone. Apples and oranges. With the first two, by the time I'd finished all the copy-edits and proof-reads etc, I never wanted to see the bloody book again. That lasted till I saw the advance copies and was so stunned by the fact that this was a real book that I stopped hating the sight of it very fast! With Faithful Place, though, I've finished the proof-reads, haven't seen advance copies yet, and I still don't hate it. I'm hoping this is a good sign. Are there stages in the process when you like/hate yours?
Sophie: My favorite of yours would have to be In the Woods, but I think the best one is Faithful Place. Which means I should like it best, right? But there was one particular thing in In the Woods that I loved--Rob and Cassie's relationship and the way he ended up behaving. I've never come across such a good analysis in any other book of the way commitment-phobic men behave! I love my books when I have the idea, when I write the first hundred pages, and then again when they're in book form with their nice covers on! I hate them between page 100 and when they're finished--because that's when I'm laboring over them, and wondering whether I can make them fulfill the promise of the initial idea--and the end isn't in sight yet, so I feel weary. How important are titles to you? I can't start writing until I've got the title--it's a central part of the inspiration. My American titles are generally different, but I love them--I love all my titles. I hate thriller titles that just sound generic, like Dead Kill or something like that!
Tana: My favorite of yours is probably Hurting Distance because I love the fact that it doesn't focus on a murder. When rape comes up in mystery books, it's usually as an adjunct to the "real" crime of murder, rather than being the crime itself. I also think, without giving away too much, the angle on evil in that one is different from anything I've ever seen explored anywhere else. My favorite of your titles is A Room Swept White, though. I'm truly awful at titles--Faithful Place is the only one I came up with myself, I'm not even going to tell you what the first two books were called when they were living on my computer. I hate the generic wordplay-type titles too, but what I come up with if I'm left to my own devices isn't much better.
Tana French is the bestselling author of In the Woods, which won the Edgar, Barry, Macavity, and Anthony awards, and of The Likeness. She grew up in Ireland, Italy, Malawi, and the United States, and trained as an actor at Trinity College, Dublin. She lives in Dublin with her husband and daughter.
Sophie Hannah is an award-winning poet and crime fiction writer whose novels are international bestsellers.
From Publishers Weekly
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
- Publisher : Viking; First Edition/First Printing (July 13, 2010)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 416 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0670021873
- ISBN-13 : 978-0670021871
- Item Weight : 5.6 ounces
- Dimensions : 6.25 x 1.25 x 9 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #305,567 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
_The Faithful Place_ is told from the perspective of Frank Mackey, the handler of Cassandra Maddox in _The Likeness_. Mackey's impoverished childhood is detailed, as well as the disappearance of his first love, Rosie when was 19. What happened to Rosie Daly, and how it affected his childhood neighborhood (the Faithful Place) is plot of the story. As with the other Dublin Murder Squad thrillers, it is tragic, powerful and brilliantly written. While I was able to discern the details of the investigation mid-way through the book (which typically warrants four-stars), the motive was elusive - but most important was the way French writes.
Beyond the style of her series (each story from another perspective of a different character), each protagonist has a different voice, view of the world and inter-relationship with each other. Being able to see and interact with familiar characters through the eyes of another is no easy feat, but French does so as easily as a talented actor switches roles. The back-stories and personal histories further breathe life into her characters, the red-herrings, false leads and outfight lies and half-truths of suspects makes for engaging and fun reading.
For readers unfamiliar with the writer, I enthusiastically recommend her to you. For those who have read the previous books, you are in for a real treat.
The characters are well drawn and, as the plot develops, each character lays out the parts that allows the mystery to coalesce and be solved. It turns out that those recently discovered bones were once those of Rosie Daly, a local girl with big dreams who disappeared over twenty years ago and was never again never heard from. At the time, she had been in love l with a neighborhood boy by the name of Francis Mackey, who is now an undercover official certainly with the Irish guards. He is determined to find out what happened all those years ago to Rosie, who was the love of his life, and, perhaps, vanquish the ghosts that have haunted him ever since.
Beautifully written, those who enjoy mysteries will get much enjoyment from his book. It is both entertaining and gratifying on many levels. I certainly look forward to reading other books by this author.
I have now completed three Tana French novels this year. I wish I had an infinite supply of novels by this author to look forward to. I do believe she has become the best writer I follow. She has it all. She creates a powerful sense of place and ambience, her character development is second to none, and the stories she weaves are brilliantly poignant.
As a testimony to her phenomenalness (new word just for Tana), look how she picks her protagonists. She seems to pick a relatively unlikeable character from her previous book to be the narrator and central character of her next. With most authors, I would think that would backfire, especially with readers like me who require a bond with the lead cast member to enjoy a book. But I have such faith in Tana French that I am willing to go down her road. I did not like Frank Mackey in The Likeness. Not one bit. But there was no way I could abandon Tana, so I took a deep breath and went with it. Though Frank is still not my favorite character of all time, I now respect him and care enough for him to say I’m going to miss him. I feel I really know him and understand him after reading Faithful Place.
I knocked a half star off my rating as it took a while for me to engage in Frank’s story, expressly because I wasn’t his fan. I soon came over to his side and at that point went all in on the story. And what a story it is. So many themes, nearly all revolving around family. Desperation, fear, regret, ectasy, agony, love and hate. The what ifs, the coulda beens, the now whats.
The last 30% of the book is a glorious treasure trove of info dumping and character development. What a powerful combination in my eyes. Talk about being in the zone with a book. I didn’t want it to end.
So book #4 is featuring a character from Faithful Place who I don’t care one wit about. But I can’t wait to read it. Tana French is that good.
If you have not read Tana French, you are tragically missing out. I rounded my star rating to 5 stars as this book is so not a 4-star read. Of note, this particular installment can easily be read as a standalone. I don’t say that lightly as I am a strict read-in-order type of gal. But this book has absolutely nothing to do with Frank’s last case (The Likeness), which by the way could be my favorite book of all time. So no good reason to skip it. But if you want to read The Likeness, make sure you do read In the Woods first. Whatever you do, give this series a try.
Top reviews from other countries
First, I worked out who was the killer almost as soon as they were introduced as a character. It didn't spoil the book, but it just made me hyper aware of them in each scene. Which in turn reinforced my impression.
Second, and this is a deeper point about Tana's writing style. The three Dublin Murder Squad books so far have all been from a different point of view character, but Tana French's narrative style - her prose and descriptions - don't vary much from character to character. Now, don't get me wrong I LIKE her style, but I find it hard to suspend my disbelief the three very different characters (Young man sent to boarding school in England, ballsy woman, older guy from the Liberties) would all three of them undertake soliloquies on the nature of summer light or the fragile quality of a snowflake - for example. After three books, it is easy to spot the places where the author is on the page as opposed to the characters themselves. Which is a shame, because she does draw excellent characters.
I will definitely be continuing with this series and would recommend it to those who enjoy crime thrillers that have bucketfuls of character depth. Note, you do not have to have read he previous two books to read this one, they can be read as standalone.
I loved Faithful Place just as much as I loved the first 2 novels in the series. Yet again it is written in the first person and Tana develops her brand. Although each book is written from the point of view of a different detective each time, you still get the same strong feeling that you are part of the scene and are in the loop.
Yet again this book can be read as a stand-alone. The accent this time is on family life. Although the 2 murders are solved, it is not by regular police work but by Frank working friends and family. I particularly liked the dialogue running through this novel. It is written with a strong Dublin accent and Frank’s mother is the big surprise. Simply put, every time I read her spoken words, all I could think of was Brendan O’Carroll acting the role of Agnes Brown in the extremely popular BBC sitcom Mrs. Brown’s Boys.
Faithful Place moves away from regular murder and police thrillers. This is centered around the dynamics of family life and the meaning of home. There was plenty of back story and Frank’s character was fully developed. Although the tale runs back and forth with Frank’s teenage years 22 years ago, it was told skillfully and this time shifting did not annoy me, it simply added depth to this novel. I really enjoyed reading this book and it gets the top score of 5 stars from me.
These are not rapid page turner detactive stories, there is excellent characterisation, and I like to read them more slowly, to give time to refelct and ponder over what's going on. And they are flawed people, real people, which makes their stories all the more interesting.
You certainly could read these on the beach or the aeroplane, but read them now, before the summer blockbusters take over!