Why do you think Parrett chose to leave some specifics out, such as how Isla's mother met Bo?

Parrett leaves a number of details out of her narrative – for example, we don’t know how Isla's mother met Bo and we’re left to assume they’re romantically involved. Why do you think Parrett chose to leave the specifics out?

I love ships and stories about ships and the sea, and this one was no exception. My son is a fisherman in Alaska, and some of my happiest times have been on the water. Although I have not yet read Past the Shallows, When the Night Comes has inspired me to do so. I have questions about Isla's mother and Bo and their relationship. I thought the story was a little disjointed and wanted more information.

Bo developed a relationship with Isla's mother that one senses he wished she would allow to progress and continue. Bo is the gentle, capable, loving father Isla and her brother yearn for in their new life away from their implied abusive father. Isla and her brother probably met kind Bo on one of their rambles around their new home in unfamiliar Hobart.

Parrett leaves a lot of specifics out. You get to know something of the character then the development stops and you are forced to use your imagination! A very different writing style! There is so much about the characters that I do not know...The story does leave me wanting for more information!

I think the author gives us enough clues to come to our own conclusion - not all the information, but just enough.

"When The Night Comes" seems to be comprised of many nuances as opposed to things being black or white. It is therefore not surprising that Parrett chose to leave some specifics out. Bo spent considerable time in Ilsa's house when he had shore leave. Bo seemed like either a father figure or a big brother to Ilsa.

Hints are given that Bo is involved with Isla's mother. At one point he hugs her Mom and kisses her on the top of the head. Hints are given that he spends his time on land at their house. Although it is not mentioned so far (I am on p. 133 at the moment), it appears as though they are a family unit and all seem comfortable with each other when he is there.

As to why Parrett chose to leave some specifics out, sometimes authors like for readers to use their imaginations to fill in the blanks on some aspects of the story so even though the ending is the same for all, the path to get there is different for each reader.

The story is about the relationship between Isla and Bo and putting details in about Isla's mother would have changed the whole feel of the story. This way it stayed focused on Isla.

I think the relationship between Bo and Isla's mother was just not as important to the story as Islas's relationship with Bo, so I think the author left that to the reader's imagination. I don't think it mattered in the outcome of the story of Isla. Also, it adds something to the story to use your imagination to figure some things out.

I also thought that Bo and Isla's relationship was the focus in the story and that the relationship between Isla's mother and Bo wasn't important nor was it important that we know how the mother and Bo met. I have to admit though that I wondered about that particular detail. Isla's mother just wasn't an important character in the plot of the story, it seemed to me. I also thought that Bo's and Isla's relationship was definitely that of a little sister, big brother and far more important to Isla than if he had tried to be her father.

The important thing is that Isla's mom is not around, the best way to make this obvious is by not talking about her, thereby reminding us of isla's loneliness and leaving Isla open to a relationship with a Bo. Likewise because she is not "around " to spend time with Bo, His loneliness from his home, his ship and his family are not helped by Mom and therefore he is open to spending time with Isla. Leaving her out helps make it more believable that they would Bo and Isla would turn to each other and also allows the book to focus on them more. After the book is over, it is Bo and Isla that resonates with us, not the mother or any of her issues.

It appears as though the book is written from the perspectives of Isla and Bo. Perhaps Isla never knew how Bo and her Mom met. The first time Isla officially meets him is at her table after returning from the movie with her brother. I think possibly he is the guy waving to her in the rain at the beginning of the book. Through Isla's eyes, we do not see a close relationship between her and her Mom. Of course that does not mean it does not exist, only that the author does not want us to see it. The same holds true for Bo. We do not really see a relationship between Bo and Isla's Mom. Then again, the time periods on land are written from Isla's perspective and being a young child, she probably would not have understood the mechanics of an adult relationship. So far (and I have not finished the book yet), the only parts that have been from Bo's perspective have been from on the ship.

The book isn't about them but about Isla and Bo.

Similar to another poster here, it seems each POV was written with that character in mind. Bo felt a little more put together, like a normal narrative. Isla felt like a child...random thoughts smushed together as she remembers it. She emphasizes on certain things perhaps adults wouldn't. From her POV the meeting of mom and Bo just wasn't important and not memorable for her.

This whole novel is a series of memories stitched together and disjointed. It is no surprise that so many specifics are left out. Personally, I would have liked more detail as this book was way too quick a read, but the relationship between Bo and Isla was clearly defined and after turning the last page that is what I took away.

Hi everyone,
I'm finding all of your answers so incredible, insightful and intelligent. Thank you all for posting. It is amazing for me to read such detailed feedback about specific ideas/problems that the novel brings up.

The novel reminded me of an impressionist painting, with the important story sketched in while leaving the extraneous out. It took a bit of getting used to, but was remarkably effective.

Not really necessary, relationship is implied. Parrett's writing reminded me of Hemmingway's writing. It's rather sparse, like the landscape of Hobart and the sea.

Evidently her writing style dictates the need of the reader to place specifics if they feel they're needed. I liked the sometime sparseness of detail--a person has to refer back in memory to something that previously happened or was said in order to tie it together.

The book does not supply in-depth details which leaves a lot to the imagination. Isla's mother is very much in the background. Since the main storyline is really about Bo and Isla, they are much clearer, but even their relationship has gaps. I found parts of this book very disjointed and difficult to connect.

I'm going to leave it alone for awhile and then reread it to see if the second time brings pieces together more easily for me.

Maybe the author plans a sequel. Then she can do a flashback and fill us in on all the juicy details.

I think he told us specifics about what he thought was the main story, the Nella Dan and the relationship between Bo and Isla. I do not mind leaving things to my imagination. That is one of the fun parts of reading a book. I can spend some time filling in my own conclusions.

I think that not giving many details about secondary characters kept the relationship between Bo and Isla at the center. What connection the mother had with Bo was minor. I could imagine that Isla never even asked her mother questions about how they met.
Although the children first saw Bo when they came home from the movies and he was sitting at the kitchen table, the only thing the mother said was "This is Bo". She did not elaborate. The mother didn't seem to have much of a connection with her children.
By keeping the details in the book centered on the main characters, the Nella Dan, and the locations, I felt the author was able to keep the focus on the themes of her short novel.

I thought the author left quite a few specifics out, and found the book hard to read. To me it didn't flow and I didn't realize Isla was a girl until half way through the book. I didn't read the blurb on the back before reading and didn't even know her name. It just seemed disjointed. Not one of my favorites.

Describing the detailed relationship between the mother and Bo would cause the reader to make judgements about both the mother and the relationship. The primary relationship, aside from Bo's relationship with The Nella Dan, is his relationship and mentoring of Isla. Developing the mother/Bo relationship would detract from this. However, it did make it difficult to determine why Bo was staying with the family.

This is not the story of Isla's mother; rather it is the story of Bo and Isla and how they relate to one another. It is also about the Nella Dan and the people who sailed on her. I found the lack of details refreshing, it made the story different from most other books I have read lately.

I am coming into this discussion a bit late but I agree that the gaps of information do make the novel disjointed. If this was the author's intention then maybe it was a way to show us the way life and relationships are for people who's livelihood takes them away for long periods of time. We are so "connected" now wherever we are but I think the author is showing us very separate, remote lives and how they connect for short periods of time.

Frankly, I did not even question how the two met as I didn't think it mattered. The story made it obvious that Bo enjoyed being with both Isla and her mother. I agree with those who commented that some authors don't choose to dwell on specifics and like to leave some things to the reader's imagination. Personally, that never bothers me - the flow of the story is much more important and Parrett does reveal all that is necessary plus her characterizations of all the relationships brought out a clear picture of the personalities involved.