This worked for me. I don’t remember the first one that well, so I’m glad it was too much of a direct connection. I also don’t know that much about Jungian analysis, so a story in which a well to-do lawyer being put under such a lens was captivating for me. I think it is very much a book where you have to be interested in the subject matter though, because the character, though well drawn and a study in the typical, modern man, does not present a particularly likeable character. Nor, because it is necessarily solipsistic, told from the lawyer’s perspective, recounting his past or present to the analyst, do you really get too much time with any other particular character to say they are well developed.

He explains why he thinks he is seeking help and what are his problems, but of course he’s wrong about nearly everything. It works pretty well in addition because as the analyst picks up on things and brings them up, in her own time, the reader also notices things. Being pitted against the narrator is always an engaging exercise I find, and it isn’t unreliable for the sake of shock and awe or gotcha moments, so I liked it even more. Basically, I think by the end of the first chapter you will know of the book is for you. The framing either works or it doesn’t.