I read the book about 3 years ago. I enjoyed it. The series is pretty good so far. I preferred the book's 1849 segments and the show's 1915 segments. I feel that the son Pete is presented much more sympathetically in the show. In the book he just came across as pathetically governed by emotion and lack of self control.
SPOILER ALERT: The highlight of the show so far has to be Eli's fantasy of scalping that annoying fat businessman in the restaurant while shouting "Coward!" in Comanche.
I wasn't aware there was a novel until I began watching the show. The show has held my interest so far, but I don't know if the conceit of telling two stories in different time periods is gonna fly when/if the show returns for a second season.
And I have to add that I didn't like at all the day-dreaming scene where Eli imagined himself scalping the businessman. While it did provide a moment of macabre humor, I found it to be a jarring moment that didn't fit in with the overall storytelling style of the show that was (until then) grounded in reality.
Yes, the scalping segment was quite a shock. Eli lived with the Comanches in his youth, and his fantasy imagining of what he'd actually like to do to the arrogant businessman provided some bizarre humor. And it was quite in keeping with the sublimated savagery in his persona. Not long ago, he'd cut off the ear of the Mexican (Cesar) while interrogating him over the destruction of his oil-rig. The Comanches would have been proud of him.
It's been a while since I read or watched either. I can't really recall the ending of the show, but I don't think the two seasons were enough to complete the novel.
I'm currently rewatching it though. Saw the first two episodes last night.
Did you know that originally there was supposed to be 3 seasons of The Son but AMC cancelled the 3rd season halfway through the filming of the 2nd season and the writers were forced to cram both seasons 2+3 together and rush the ending in an effort to try and properly complete the show. Are you enjoying the rewatch? No surprise, I thought season 1 was far better than the season 2. I really didn't like the rushed ending of the show at all, hence why I'm interested in how the story ends in the book.
Have you finished watching it, if so, how does the ending of the book compare to the ending of the show? Do they both have the same ending or different endings?
Hi! Sorry I did not respond earlier. I have finished the series, and I don't think it really matches the ending of the book from what I can recall. I am presently about halfway through rereading the book, so I cannot make a concrete statement yet.
One thing I can tell you about the show compared to what I have read of the book so far, is that they seem to have taken a serious, high-minded historical novel and adapted it for TV in the spirit of one of those Harold Robbins-style lurid potboilers of the 1970s... Not that there's anything wrong with lurid potboilers, of course.
This criticism applies mainly to the 1915 and 1988 era segments of the show. Sometimes it felt like watching Dallas or Yellowstone. The 1850s segments seem to be taken more seriously. At times, watching Toshaway and his adopted white son, Tieteti (Eli) I was reminded of Chief Dan George and Dustin Hoffman in "Little Big Man".
Season 2 definitely suffers in comparison to season 1. I felt so cheated that we never even got to see Eli and Ingrid reach white civilization and attempt to reintegrate. There's this huge mysterious gap in their relationship between the two of them riding away after killing the cavalry officer in 1851 and Eli showing up at her door in 1915.
Thanks for repying, good info. I was wondering how the story ends with the events of 1915, especially the father and son relationship with Eli and Peter in the book compared to the show? In the show Peter kills his father and then takes off with Maria and together they start their own family in Mexico. Is that ending the same in book?