The Other Typist – the ending

This is the most controversial post I’ve written and am likely to ever write on this blog because, as a rule, I don’t do spoilers.

But this post is full of spoilers and the only way I’ll sleep at night after hitting ‘publish’ is knowing that in all probability, the only people who’ll be reading it are those that have already read The Other Typist by Suzanne Rindell and had the same reaction as me when they reached the ending (which was “Whaaaaaaaat?!).

If you haven’t read The Other Typist and you’re looking for a review of the book then please, please, please stop reading this now. It’s an insanely good story and there’s no point spoiling it for yourself. But if you are in need of a discussion regarding the ending, I understand. Because I have been talking about the ending of this book non-stop and I still don’t feel any closer to an answer.

Okay… last chance to look away…. hit ‘back’ on your browser if you haven’t read the book…..

……seriously, your last chance to stop reading…..


So here’s what I’m thinking –

My first reaction to the ending was that Rose was completely delusional and more specifically had schizophrenic tendencies or schizophreniform disorder. Initially, I was more attracted to the delusional element of this diagnosis rather than the split personality bit of schizophrenia simply because I felt that as well as being delusional, Rose was deliberately deluded by Odalie for much of the time. Delusional + deluded = crazy times.

If we focus on the delusional/ deluded scenario, it complements the idea that Odalie stole Rose’s identity (and that Odalie and Ginerva are the same person) – elements of the ending support this, particularly around the death of Teddy. It would have been in Odalie’s interests to pin Teddy’s death on Rose and Rose, already somewhat unstable, discovered that she had been well and truly betrayed by the person she considered her only friend.

This theory works right up until the epilogue and then it falls apart because Rose mentions the look in Teddy’s eyes as he fell off the balcony. So you go from thinking that Odalie did it to ‘knowing’ that Rose did. Huh.

Furthermore, I had trouble matching the stolen identity theory with the last line of the book – “How about that, Odalie, I think, and take another drag of the cigarette. Two can play at this game.” At that point, with Rose stuck in a mental institution, if there was any ‘game’, Odalie is surely the winner?!

So then there’s the possibility of Odalie being one of Rose’s alternate personalities (and therefore Ginerva is also the same person).

When I discussed the ending with my best reading buddy, her first response was “Fight Club“. I haven’t seen this film or read the book but after she gave me a quick rundown, I agreed that the most likely scenario was in fact that Rose and Odalie are multiple personalities of Ginevra. Rose ‘spying’ and keeping tabs on Odalie and the contrast between being judgmental and trying to win her affection work with this theory. You see an interesting little crossover between the personalities with the Vitalli case and also played out with the flirting/ disapproval of the Lieutenant Detective.

This theory also works better with the epilogue, particularly with the last line and the bit where ‘Rose’ cuts her hair. It also works with the author’s rather coy comments on the ending of The Other Typist

“Well, I have an idea of what I think happened, but I’m usually reluctant to share it, because I don’t like robbing a reader of any theory developed on his or her own. Once again though, for me, this goes back to the writing process being a rather passive state. As I listened to Rose’s voice in my head, I wondered to myself sometimes: Is Rose just totally nuts? Even I had my doubts! But in the end, I saw the end scene as Rose’s final transformation. Her eyes are open, she’s finally able to drop the I-miss-the-days-of-Victorian-sisterhood act, and become a new, terrifyingly “modern” woman.

But have I missed the point entirely? Are there other possibilities? Do we have to wait for the movie version of the book to fully realise Rindell’s vision?

Honestly, I feel that I have sold my soul writing this post but, as my reading buddy said, the joy of great stories like The Other Typist is the discussion that happens afterwards and an online discussion is as equally valid as a face-to-face one. So to all the readers pondering the ending of this marvelous book, what do you think happened?

UPDATE 12/7/13

I came across an Amazon discussion about the ending and a few new scenarios are proposed:

That Odalie is a real person and that Rose and Ginerva are the same person – look for D. Summerfield’s thoughts in the discussion thread.

“There are at least two murders committed — Teddy and Gib — and most likely three because I think that Ginevra’s mother was murdered also. It is possible that Rose/Ginevra committed two of those (her mother and Teddy) but her actions are accounted for during the time that Gib is killed. But Odalie could have killed all three, and I think that’s what happened.”

Then Janet Perez fleshes out the idea that Odalie and Ginerva are the same person but also reasons why the alternate personalities theory is a red herring –

“The author wants us to think the Odalie/Ginerva/Rose are all the same person, but that’s a red herring. I believe Odalie and Ginerva are the same person and framed Rose. Early in the book you can see that Odalie is almost “auditioning” the other typists to see which one is easier to manipulate. Rose is her pick and the fact that Rose also is obsessive and possessive of her friends is a bonus for Odalie. I believe Odalie always planned to make Rose the fall guy for whenever she got into some sort of jam. Initially I think it was to protect her speakeasies. Then Teddy enters the scene and poses a more formidable threat. So in one stroke, Odalie kills Teddy and Gib (whom she probably planned to dispose of at some point) and frames Rose.”

106 responses

  1. Pingback: ‘The Other Typist’ by Suzanne Rindell | booksaremyfavouriteandbest

  2. What a fabulous post. THANKS so much.

    This book has been driving me crazy as well since I finished. You think you agree with someone’s thoughts and then another idea comes up and you are totally confused again. 🙂

    But….I love all this discussion. The “mark” of a good book.

    I have a question: Was Rose in the insane asylum the entire time and just reliving all of this or is it made up too? How about that for another twist and confusion for all of us. 🙂

    Thanks again. I am now following your blog. I found your post on Amazon and stopped by.

    Happy Reading and thinking.

    Silver’s Reviews

  3. All those searchers will be so pleased, but then they’ll be like what – she didn’t provide the answer. My instinct goes to alternate personalities, but I don’t know that we’ll ever really ‘know’.

    • I know, it was a bit cheeky but I couldn’t resist the fun of the discussion in the end. I CAN’T WAIT for the movie because I don’t think they will be able to get away with leaving the story as undone as it is in print…

  4. Pingback: “The Other Typist” by Suzanne Rindell | Tony's Book World

  5. Richard Yates is a writer who will last and last, sure he a sad sack, but I’m OK with that. Probably my second favorite author from that era is William Styron, not like Yates at all but still excellent.

  6. I just finished reading the book and immediately did a google search for “The other typist ending.” Voila–ended up here. I tend to agree that Odalie and Genevra are the same person, and her whole purpose in befriending Rose was to have someone close to her who could eventually take the fall for her intended murder of Gib. Teddy’s murder ended up being an “extra” to pin on Rose. She hadn’t planned on murdering him (until the night of his murder) because she hadn’t planned on running into him again at all. But since she was already planning to frame Rose for Gib’s murder, she could also pin Teddy’s murder on her and get rid of another nuisance in her life. But then that doesn’t explain the line at the end, where Rose pictures Teddy falling to the ground. My theory on that bit is that she is simply imagining what it looked like when he plummeted to his death and she’s realizing for the first time that she is capable of doing something very sinister, just like Odalie, even if it means innocent people are harmed. She’s become like Odalie at the end–that’s her transformation.

    • Good take on that final scene – the ‘final transformation’ fits with her cutting her hair as well (and also what Rindell implied in her interview).

      I’m assuming you enjoyed the book – anything that makes you immediately jump on google to find out more has to be goos (as opposed to tossing it aside!). Personally, I can’t wait to see what she writes next (and I’m open to the idea of a sequel to The Other Typist).

      • Yes, I really enjoyed it. I’m already recommending it to my friends so I’ll have someone to talk to about it. 🙂 I’ll definitely be watching to see what Rindell writes next.

      • I was thinking that the last line was somewhat of a teaser for the next book. “How about that, Odalie, I think, and take another drag of the cigarette. Two can play at this game” was Rose’s final stage in transformation. She was set in her Victorian era way of thinking and when she is in the institution and cuts her hair, she has evolved into the free-thinking independent woman that Odalie was. Hence, this is her saying, “I’m different now…. just you wait and see”

        My question is, and maybe someone can explain this to me, how can there be an idea that Rose/Odalie (and possibly Ginerva) are the same person (in split personalities). The Lieutenant Detective says at the end that he spoke with Odalie after Rose was arrested and gives her the broach back. Unless, is the LD a piece of her imagination as well?

        I agree with others that believe that Rose was a scapegoat used by Odalie/Ginerva. But, really, I can see many options being plausible.

    • I completely agree with this assessment of the ending.
      I don’t see how the facts of the book support anything else.
      I was wondering if perhaps Rose AND Odalie did the deed to Teddy, and then Rose went to get the cigarettes, but I think this is reading too much into the narrative that is not there.
      The hair cutting and the kiss is part of the transformation.
      Jayna Richardson, above, is correct in her assessment in my opinion.

    • Ah. this was the best answer so far. I have been wondering all day if watching him go down, may have meant, it could have been me. I could become vile. I almost did.

  7. I enjoyed the book and was so annoyed with the unclear ending. I expect an ending to be satisfying, not infuriating. And the author wants us to draw our own conclusions? That’s BS.

  8. Finished book about an hour ago and was so intrigued by the ending that I search online and found your blog. Here are few more observations that don’t add up, assuming Ross and Odalie/Ginerva are two people:
    1. Why did Odalie dress Rose in a similar outfit the night teddy was killed? Odalie had no idea that he was coming to the speakeasy – it was Rose who had invited him earlier in the day.

    2. If Odalie wanted to get rid of Gib, she only had to poison him with tainted liquor. He would have died at the speakeasy, and no one would have notified the police, as it was an illegal operation.

    3. Did Odalie really destroy all evidence of Rose’s existence? What, she bribed all of the nuns, her classmates and teachers at her secondary school (where she was known for her swimming skills) and at the typist college? Her landlady had steamed open a letter from Adele at the orphanage – proving that Rose lived there. Likewise did Odalie bribe the entire hotel staff to claim that Rose lived there first and paid rent?

    4. Ginerva came from a wealthy family who was well known and summered in Newport. She had a much talked about debutante ball. No one from her past could come forward to identify her and exonerate Rosé?

    I’m sure I’ll think of other annoying questions but wanted to share these. Thanks for the great blog

  9. I actually listened to the audio of this book (great job, Gretchen Moll!) and was emailed this link to only read after I completed the book. Well, that is now and reading all these ideas as to what happened gives me thought. This will be a good read for my reading group and I look forward to that discussion. I could agree with most observations above, which only leaves me confused again. A movie? Hmmm.

  10. I just finished this book today and had several options to decide what really went on. I choose to think that she(Rose) was actually the pasty and entirely gas-lighted and Odalie got away with the entire shindig. I imagined her, after the shock of betrayal, loosing a bit of her innocence in regards to humanity and actually identifying with the evil, and becoming a bit more like Odalie. So will she then hunt her, if she ever gets out? Is that what that last sentence means? If she saw Teddy on the way down, could she have seen the murder and been in denial…no she did the murder, but then what did she get away with nd was it for love? She is incarcerated. No she was blamed. Good thing it was in a time when DNA tests were not done. It leaves you very confused.Of course can they be all the same. yes, when your narrator is unreliable, or is she? No doubt looking forward to a movie and if that has a this or that ending, I will dare say, I will loose my mind! I hope the author is steadfast in completing the next novel. I am now a fan.

  11. Same story-just finished the book-googled-found you-I went back to the interview with the author that was mentioned above and found this quote:

    “Rose lies to herself. Odalie provides the obvious “mystery,” but in my opinion, I think the much deeper mystery is really to be found in Rose and her twisted brain.”

    Hmmmm? She could very well be insinuating here that yes in deed Rose and Odalie are the same person. She leaves it up to us……

  12. I’ve just found this:

    “message 2: by Lorraine (new) Jul 30, 2013 04:11am
    Odalie, Rose and Ginerva are all one person. Rose wants to be the dominant personality, the one who is in control most of the time. that requires “killing off” or banishing the rest of the personalities. Hence, apparently, “two can play at this game.” You had an interesting idea to consider that the author just wanted to clarify that it was Rose, not Odalie, speaking when she “cut her hair.” But the whole epilogue wasn’t real. The Lieutenant Detective is a personality. There was some indication earlier that he wasn’t real, but the epilogue shows he wasn’t. Characters who see two people when Odalie and Rose were together were not real. Gil, however, is real. When he says “I didn’t realize…” he understands that Rose is mentally ill. “

  13. Tha last comment by Bee is really interesting! I couldn’t figure out how Rose and Oadalie could be the same person if the Lietenant Detective came and talked about Oadalie to Rose, delivering the brooch to her. That’s an argument against the multiple personality thing. However, if the Lietenant Detective is indeed another personality, then that fits!

  14. My only confusion at the end of the book was regarding whether or not Rose pushed the fellow off the balcony or just imagined what he looked like as he fell. I think all this talk of multiple personalities is reaching way too far. Incidentally, schizophrenia does not equate to multiple personalities, and schizophrenaform disorder simply means that the schizophrenia symptoms have not endured for a long enough period of time to warrant the diagnosis.

  15. Enjoying all the comments. I would have preferred a more definite ending. Also puzzled by the story of Adele and how it relates to the storyline. Also, didn’t Teddy actually fixate on Odalie and not Rose? And what of that blasted brooch? So much attention focused on it and yet never really resolved? I think there were two girls and that Odalie was Ginevra. Hmmm. Still thinking about it though.

  16. I have just finished the book and am so excited to be able to read other people’s theories. I believe too in the multiple personalities of Rose.
    Perhaps the brooch is a metaphor. Rose kept it hidden and hoped no one would find it. I feel this was a metaphor for a split in the personality and the hold ‘Odalie’ had over ‘Rose’.

    • I like your idea of the broach being there to serve as a metaphor. I am wondering though, can the broach be made up? The only people that make reference to the broach are Rose, Odalie, and the Lieutenant Detective. And, there is talk that all three are in Rose’s head…

      And another question, if the LD is made up, does she actually cut her hair? She got the knife from him…. and if he is made up, she would not have access to the knife. Still confused…. but LOVE reading everyone’s ideas! Thanks for the blog post to stimulate the conversation.

  17. The writer, Ann Patchet says…any questions can be answered in the text. I need to reread this book. One thing is calling to me….the brooch comes wrapped on rose printed paper?????a big clue…..or just a give away line…

  18. Rose was Ginerva. Think back to the letter from Adele asking her to leave her alone. Adele was Rose’s (Ginerva’s) fiance’s mistress. Also remember that Helen (her roommate at the boarding house) told the police that they knew Rose was scumming it by living there. They knew that she had weallth. And at the end, the Lieutenant Detective wanting to kiss her leads me to believe that she was not plain but rather, good looking. And pulling the knife in the end really clenched it for me.

  19. Loved your post! Even after finishing the book, I’m still convinced that Rose was a schizoid character and so much so, that all of the typists were figments of her imagination. I pictured Marie as the motherly figure Rose disdained; Iris as the lesbian or bi-curious side of Rose; and Odalie as her flapper alter-ego. There was one other typist, a male, which I believe Rose mentally discarded since she couldn’t pull that one off. The psychological aspect was clever in that there was at least one crazed person sitting in the interrogation room — the typist documenting the statements of criminal suspects. Sort of like the inmates running the asylum. This makes all of the interactions between the characters at the police precinct and the several typists as seen through Rose’s pretend or delusional state. (But I do think that Rose and the Sergeant had a thing going.) The ending however threw me for a bit of a loop as well but I kept going back to Teddy and how he recognized Odalie as Ginerva at the beach house. If: Rose is reminded by the Doc that she’s Ginerva, Teddy is convinced that Odalie is Ginerva, Rose gets all bent out of shape when Teddy shows up at the precinct, and Rose recalls Teddy as he falls, then there’s only one typist – Ginerva. And one whose imagination is constantly fed by the confessions she hears in the interrogation room. At least that’s my take. Rose the narrator hoodwinks the reader no differently than she sets up the Vittale character. Which begs the question – does Rose ever state anything credible? Yes, laughable considering this is a fictional work! And one that we’re discussing via typing. A very clever author. At any rate, I thoroughly enjoyed your post and will be writing my review of this novel at some point soon. But I am so glad I Googled for a spoiler review just to double-check my hunches and came across your post. Thank you!

    • “Sort of like the inmates running the asylum” – that made me laugh!

      The book was published in Australia well before other countries (why, I don’t know). I read an ARC so as a result had NO ONE to debrief with – it was killing me!

      • I just finished this book. I knew that your “spoiler” was on line because I saw it when I was deciding to read this book. Of course as soon as I finished it I knew I needed serious help. I believe a second reading is an option but am not sure it will help.
        If Rose was insane then her story was a fantasy. The final chapter had me constantly asking where are the people she worked with because they can certainly identify Rose. I remain confused but it was a fun ride while it lasted.

  20. Just found my way here as so many others, looking for answers to a disappointingly frustrating ending. Up to that last few pages I considered it a great read, but I dislike being left so far in the dark. It isn’t that I can’t come up with alternate endings for myself, for I can, and have, considered most of the ones set out in this thread. I just don’t care for an ending so ambiguous that it actually robs me of some of the pleasure I had while reading the book in toto. I’m no book critic, I just know what I like and am comfortable with reading. 🙂

  21. Pingback: Bookish (and not so bookish) Thoughts | booksaremyfavouriteandbest

  22. I have just finished the book and absolutely loved it! To begin with I was a little disappointed with the ending but after reading this blog have begun to ponder over the details.

    I believe in the theory that Ginerva/Rose/Odalie are in fact the same person. The narrator often tells us the importance of telling things in order even though she jumps around in time herself when telling the story.

    I think Ginerva is from Newport and murdered Teddys cousin, this could possibly be the start of her psychosis. After this she created the boot legging business with Gib and decided to lay low in the boarding house and assume a job as a typist to conceal her illegal business and not cause suspicion. She began to develop a back story for herself at the boarding house, that she was an orphan and that the nuns had educated her ( hence why there is no record of her being at the orphanage). Ginerva began to completely believ her own story and it is well known pathological liars are so good at doing so because they believe it themselves. Ginerva then became Rose. She became plain, quiet and observant and able to go through certain situations unnoticed.

    Odalie begun making her way into Roses head when she dropped the broach and Rose placed it in her desk. I believe this symbolises he begginnig of Roses transformation into Odalie. As Odalie starts to develop she begins to have the affair with the sergeant and the lieutenant starts to fall in love with her as ‘Rose’ starts to become more confident and attractive. When Rose lies on the transcript she runs into the bathroom and says she sees Odalies face in the mirror for a second.

    To remove herself and make herself feel less guilty about the murders and other illegal activities Ginerva sees the chain of events through roses eyes as Odalie carrys out the wrongdoings.

    As someone mentioned previously the fact that the lieutenant hands Ginerva a box covered in Roses with the broach inside symbolises that Odalie was part of Rose all along.

    When Rose cuts her hair this is the final transformation into Odalie or perhaps it is the tranformation into someone like Odalie and this woman Ginevra, Rose or whatever her real name is will continue to transform and change as the psychosis is deep within her.

    I too would like to read the book again and anticipate the film release!

  23. I think Janet Perez’s thoughts are the red herring. I believe Odalie/Rose/Ginerva are the same person. I just wrote a blog post about it. I finished the book last night and tossed/turned thinking about the crazy plot turned like that at the very end. My thoughts aren’t altogether coherent in my blog, but I bring up a few good points. It’s too easy to assume Rose’s identity was stolen and she was framed. I, too, mentioned this book to my boyfriend who immediately thought “Fight Club”. I’m looking forward to seeing the movie, although I’m not keen on Kiera Knightly. Hopefully she plays a good Rose. The ending of the book reminded me a little bit of Black Swan too. Okay, enough for now! I REALLY enjoyed your thoughts/blog. 🙂

  24. Listened on audio then registered to the end five more times before doing this search to get an answer about the ending. Love a book that makes you think, glad I’m not the only one wondering what happen. A few weeks ago l read gone girl, books are cool

  25. I enjoyed this book but for me the end was a huge disappointment. I appreciate the author wanted to keep us guessing, but there are far too many holes for any of the above theories to be viable. If Rose/G/O are all one person then most of the conversation throughout the book, and most of the actions must be falsified. That makes me feel vaguely cheated. I like a book with a twist at the end … but only when everything fits into place and you realise how terribly clever the author has been.

  26. I am curious to see HOW they make the movie. IF Odalie/Rose/Ginerva are the same person, how are they going to show that? Will the actresses look like Kira Knightly (to show some hint that they are linked) or will they be physically different to show each personality.

    I am excited to see the movie to give me some clarity about the story,,, but I am also nto looking forward to it. I kind of like not knowing and reading everyone’s theories. Thanks everyone….This is fantastic!

    • I just finished the book. Didn’t know of anticipated movie? Wouldn’t it be something if actress took all three personalities with changes of appearance to fit each personality! That would definitely support this theory right off the bat.😀 Of course, it would ruin the movie too!!!LOL I’m just thinking out loud…..

  27. Just finished this book, it reminded me a lot of other great books, The Great Gatsby in particular. Anyway, I believe Ginerva, Rose and Odalie are the same person. I was a bit geeky and went back and read some earlier chapters and the one where Odalie makes her first appearance I think tells a lot once you know the outcome! When describing the police precinct, she says “perhaps it is a misnomer to refer to her as the other typist as there were other typists all along. I was one of three.” She then goes on to describe Iris and Marie but I don’t think this is the intended other 2 she means.

    I think whoever she is, Ginerva, rose or Odalie, she always has 3 personalities. Shedding one to take another. I think Adele was one her previous inventions, or else what is the point of that story to the plot?

    I think the Detective Lieutenent is real. I think he knows something is not right about Rose but is still drawn to her, this is demonstrated throughout the story. In the epilogue I believe he knows about the multiple personalities, but still wants to believe Rose is the “true” person and he pretends that Odalie is a real person and gives her the brooch to try and help her say goodbye to Odalie and perhaps become Rose again. I think the result is the opposite, she cuts her hair, sheds Rose personality ad becomes even more of Odalie. Who knows what her next personality will be? Or is the reference “two can play that came” a reference to the fact she will only be Odalie and Ginerva from now on??

    Just my thoughts!!

  28. This is my theory. Rose and Ginevra are the same person and i THINK Odalie is a different individual.

    You would think that by reading in Rose’s point of view that Odalie and Ginevra are the same person but then when Teddy was found dead and Odalie was nowhere to be found that’s when it started to baffle me…also the part when they investigated Rose’s background and they didn’t find any record of her in that orphanage she said she gew up in meant that she’s lying from the beginning.

    What if Odalie is the innocent one and while Rose/Ginevra was narrating the entire story, she was really pretending to be Odalie and narrating her (Odalie’s) story….so who we thought Rose is really Odalie and the rich young woman with a luxurious apartment is Rose (the narrator).

    But i don’t know, that was just my theory, can’t wait for the film! I heard Keira Knightley is to star and produce the film version 🙂

  29. So many responders say a film version would answer their questions! What do these readers think a movie is? The last word? Film writers impose their own commercial/filmable rewrites. Look what Bazaar Lurman did to The Great Gatsby. Let’ s all enjoy the private puzzling versions in our heads. Patsy in Princeton

  30. Hi there. I’m a year late to this discussion but I just finished The Other Typist and I had SO many questions! I googled “The Other Typist theories” and your blog popped up.
    After reading all the comments I think I’ll just have to read it again to really take in everything that was happening.
    For me it always felt like Rose and Odalie were two different people and that Odalie and Ginerva were the same person. The way Rose handled herself in situations is what made her so strange and suspicious. Like after Teddy dies and she goes back up to the apartment with the officer. She was trying to be calm but smoking the cigarette and putting on the bracelet was just odd.
    I “think” this is how I feel, but now I don’t know! I really wish the author would tell us how she thinks the book ended. I need closure.

  31. This is the book that just keeps giving- more than a year after your original post and I’m weighing in! So many comments and so any thoughts and I feel like they’re all valid which makes me come down (a little it) on the side of too much ambiguity in the ending. Discussion is great and multiple opinions are great but if no consensus can be reached than hasn’t the author missed the mark? It’s almost as if she wasn’t sure about the ending and so left it to the reader.

    I don’t know- this is easily the most mind-bending book I’ve read in a long time. I enjoyed it even with the ending but wish Rindell would put us all out of our misery!

    p.s. My thought? There are two characters but how they split up I’m not so sure.

    • I know, right? Needless to say, this is my most visited post on my blog!
      I think you’re right though about consensus. I’m eagerly awaiting the film where I think the story won’t be able to be left so open-ended.

  32. i am of the mindset that rose/odalie/ginerva is one person. One of my clues was that they shared a closet and Rose’s clothes were in Odalie’s closet. They always slept in the same bed. Then after Teddy died, Rose couldn’t find Odalie in the apartment. There was only two glasses on the terrace as well. The trio (rose/odalie/ginerva) saw the look in Teddy’s eyes when he fell off the terrace and then left the hotel room. When “Rose” came home was the same time that “Odalie” came home because they are one and the same. My only crack in my wall is when the detective questioning Rose and he says that Odalie has already given her statement. I wouldn’t be surprised if sister Adele was another side of the trio. It’s the only way it makes sense to me!

    • I LOVED this book but have yet to find out who was who.

      I like your answer, but do any of us really know? 🙂

      Thanks to everyone who commented. I replied before, but wanted to comment on your comment, reba. THANKS.

      Silver’s Reviews
      My Blog

  33. As an English major many moons ago, I enjoyed the obvious homage to The Great Gatsby sprinkled throughout the novel by the author. Also one of my favorite books ever!! I remembered reading that F. Scott Fitzgerald had an early love affair with a girl named GINEVRA KING. The real Ginevra was a teenager from a very wealthy family and broke up with Fitzgerald because he was poor and could not support her properly. It is widely believed that Ginevra King was the inspiration for Daisy Buchanan in The Great Gatsby. Also, Rose Baker shares her last name with Jordan Baker, another major character in TGG, and I am pondering the significance of that..? I just finished reading the novel today, and am sure I have not figured it out yet! Definitely leaning towards the Rose and Odalie/Ginevra being two separate people theory. It really makes the most sense to me, but I may have to reread the book before all my questions can be satisfied….. Did however, thoroughly enjoy the book and actually look forward to rereading it looking for the clues I may have missed the first time 🙂

  34. Pingback: The Other Typist - The Gilmore Guide to Books

  35. I am definitely have to re-read this book now! I’ve forgotten too much since I read it The thing is, the film-makers could have their own take on the book – so they may not help! Regardless, it was a fabulous book. Apart from all the debate it’s opened up, I really enjoyed the portrait of that era.

  36. Thanks for stopping by my blog! I had to come over and read your ‘spoiler’ post once you mentioned it. There are a lot of great theories here, but I’m still confused about the ending. I think I may have to find some time for a re-read over the summer!
    BTW, did they ever make the movie? I need to find and watch it, too!

  37. Pingback: Bookish (and not so bookish) Thoughts | booksaremyfavouriteandbest

  38. Omg i totallly didnt think about the multiple personaility disorder angle until i read your post. But for some reaosn it doesnt click, the mai reason being the brooch. She couldnt have picked it up anywhere in the precint. If she wouldve picked it up somewhere else i wouldve believed it triggered the multiple personality thing. Plus i would be dissappointed if it was MPD cuz the novel would be a copy cat of fight club, and i really loved it

  39. Pingback: Six Degrees of Separation – from The Outsiders to The Other Typist | booksaremyfavouriteandbest

  40. Pingback: Six Degrees of Separation – from Fight Club to Love, Nina | booksaremyfavouriteandbest

  41. I was also torn at the end and had not considered split personality until reading this blog, which actually explains a lot, but I’m still hanging on to Odelie/Ginevra using Rose to pin the murders, not realizing Rose would actually go through with it herself in the end for Teddy. Great book regardless, I really enjoyed it!

  42. Any book that still generates blog comments after nine years, must have some merit. So many theories. Wonder who is right??? I’ve recently tried to find the movie so I can watch it before our book group discusses the book…but all I could find was that it’s “still in production”. Maybe they can’t decide how to end it also!!!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.