I really wanted to love this book, but I just didn’t. It was too convoluted and unbelievable. I could not believe that Avery just happened to have studied different subjects that happened to be needed in this case. (If they had needed someone who could use a pogo stick, I am sure that she would have had 2 semesters of pogo stick at one of her schools.) She is dealing with Homeland Security AND the FBI, and never thinks about the bugs and the tails. She dealt with the law and cases for gosh sakes. This brilliant woman was sometimes dumb as a brick. I mean, if her apartment was bugged, couldn’t have there been cameras, too?
It was also predictable. Once I got into it, I knew that one of the bad guys would be one step ahead of her, like when she went to the cabin. She never even thought about the possibility. I would give this book a C+/B-. The whole book is less than the sum of the parts for me. It could have been so much better.
…an editor who read While Justice Sleeps in 2011 turned it down on the grounds that the villain, a megalomaniacal and corrupt U.S. president, was too awful to be believed. The manuscript languished on her hard drive. In 2019, when Abrams showed it to her agent, a bombastic president and an intense focus on the failing health of a Supreme Court justice were all too real. This time, she had no trouble finding a publisher.
Also, as regards Avery’s race and the effect thereof:
Avery is a woman of color, with green eyes, corkscrew hair, light-brown skin, and a prominent nose. Abrams describes these as “complicated features”—that is to say, Avery’s is a face that triggers an old, deep American anxiety about who is Black and who isn’t.
Other tidbits:
Her romance novels are racy (glad she spared us that in WJS)
She has five very accomplished siblings and the six of them have their own book club (I’d like to see that list)
One of the things I like about While Justice Sleeps: the spark of romance between Avery and Jared feels more true-to-life than many a romance you find in a book, i.e., insta-love that immediately morphs into insta-sex all the while being pursued by someone out to murder you.
I despise novels that try to manipulate the reader by refusing to solve obvious misapprehensions. If I find myself yelling at the protagonist to just tell her, or for the dupe to simply read the letter he dropped, then I’m likely to put the book down and walk away. But when the writer has crafted a sincere or, better yet, sly confusion, the ensuing tragedy and its ultimate reveal are gut-wrenching.
Well whether we liked the book or not, I think we can all agree that Abrams did a little bit too much of the first in this book. I did think it was funny that the publishers thought the set up seemed less far fetched with the passage of time.
BTW, I second her recommendation of Robertson Davies. I remember the Deptford trilogy better (starts with Fifth Business) which I read and reread in high school. Maybe it’s time to reread his books again.
Convoluted plot aside, I was really taken aback at the information that there’s no mechanism parallel to the 25th Amendment for removing a Supreme Court justice who becomes incapable of performing the job and is unable or unwilling to resign. Chilling possibilities…
And apparently, the U.S. dodged a few bullets throughout history:
While on the bench, Justice Frank Murphy, who served from 1940-49, had a serious drug problem (Demerol addiction), and was seeing a psychoanalyst. One biographer reports that at one point, he was illegally purchasing drugs twice a day. Law clerks, and other justices, were deciding his votes. No one outside the Court knew.
I don’t have a problem with the psychoanalysis part (the above is from a 20 year old article, so some ancient bias there); however, drug addiction and putting votes in the hands of clerks is another story.
Also:
For nine years, from 1972-81, the Capitol physician, Freeman H. Cary, had prescribed Justice William Rehnquist a powerful hypnotic medication, Placidyl, because of Rehnquist’s chronic lower back pain.
This powerful controlled substance is prescribed for relief from insomnia. Its known side effects include “confused thinking, impaired memory,” and even “delirium.” Rehnquist started at 500 milligrams a day, but the dose soon tripled, to 1500 milligrams a day.
Wow, mary13 that link about the health of those justices is incredible.
Wonder why Abrams didn’t include some of these historical realities, after all, this novel was inspired by the comment about the “life” tenure for justices !
Perhaps Abrams would have had to defend the need for a constitutional admendment and taken focus away from the book !
From mary13 article this expert
“ University of Chicago Law Review, in a piece entitled “Mental Decrepitude on the U. S. Supreme Court.” Professor Garrow concluded that it will take an Amendment to the Constitution, imposing a mandatory retirement age on justices, to provide a solution”
With the stats about Alzheimer’s as we all age, a mandatory age would be reasonable -
Here is a good article (from before RBG’s death) that addresses both sides of the issue. It acknowledges the dangers (e.g., “Justice Henry Baldwin remained on the court for nearly a dozen years after his 1832 hospitalization for ‘incurable lunacy’”), but also explains how fixed term limits and/or disability removals could create a new set of problems.
@rockymtnhigh2, I enjoyed the book as well – despite its imperfections, I flew through it and I think I would read another Abrams thriller, should she ever write one.
This discussion is making me keenly aware of the book’s flaws, yet at the same time I’m gaining a greater appreciation of the author with every article and interview. She might not have perfected the art of writing a tight thriller, but she is an incredibly accomplished and interesting person.
I thought some of Abrams personal politics would spill over into While Justice Sleeps, but she kept that pretty well in check. She made the evil president a member of the opposite party, but other than that, it was fairly even-handed.
At one point, I thought the novel might move in a more partisan direction because of a conversation between the Senate Majority leader and Speaker of the House re staving off a recess appointment. This was pp. 179-183. We’re introduced to new characters (Ken Neighbors, DuBose Porter) and hear about the procedural tricks they’ve got up their sleeves – and then poof, that story line is gone. I guess it was just there to set the mood rather than move the plot along in any way.
@mary13 you express exactly how I feel about this book. Zipped through it, way too far ahead of this conversation, gave the book 5 stars on goodreads. Looking forward to the TV Adaptation, and certain it will be edited and simplified.
Also, @caraid would love to know what your other reading group thinks of this book.
Thankful, to @HImom for recommending this one- I would have never read it on my own.
I thought she toed the line with politics quite well. And all the issues she touched on - they could advantage either party in the end. So for example right now ending the filibuster could be good for Democrats, but it could be a double edged sword down the road. I certainly think you could have an evil president on either side. I know here in NY for the NY Assembly and Senate, it seems that we have corruption issues regularly on both sides of the aisle.
@jerseysouthmomchess - We just started discussing the book yesterday in my other group. I think the like to dislike ratio is very similar to here. The folks who disliked the book have many of the same reasons we have seen here. I haven’t seen anything new in the discussion yet. I’ll let you know if anybody posts something mindblowing!
