OnlineBookClub.org

When the lifeboat carrying William and part of his crew finally landed along the craggy coast, it made sense that William would share some stories to pass the time and get their minds off of their dangerous situation. Do you think that telling the story (at least part of it) of Sarah, Myra, Tom, Sergi, and himself hiking the mountains would make people want to read Strong Heart, the author's first book? Was this the intent of the author or do you think that it tied the two books together as one story?

Having only read Adrift and not Strong Heart, it was only when William was telling their stories that I realized that's what the first book was about. The intention could be both, because it did make me interested to read the first book, especially if it was as beautifully written as Adrift. At the same time, reminiscing was a nice flow to tie the two books together.

I have read both the books. I believe William's story telling was a both a ploy to attract the readers to read the previous book and also a means to the the two books together. It provides some background for those who did not read Strong Heart. Also, it did not disrupt the flow of the story.

While the writer depicts a strong suit of subtle marketing skills, the story narrated by William is a thread connecting to the first book. It fits the situation the crew was in along with creating a trail for the fans of the book to read the first installment.

I wasn't enticed to go back and read Strong Heart, since I had no idea that that story was an allusion to the previous book. Whoops! Missed that detail. But for those of us that didn't read it, it brought in some much-needed background to get a new reader up to speed. I think that that was its main purpose, or to remind prior readers of what had come before.

I had no idea that his story was an allusion to a previous book...that is good to know now.

After reading the book, I disliked that I was left with the feeling of wanting more of the stories that were told while they were struggling to survive, especially since these ancestral stories are so significant to the native American culture. I love a story within a story. The chapters ended with the character beginning to tell a story, so I was expecting to hear the story being told in the following chapters, but I felt disappointed and never actually got to listen to the story being told. Only hearing the conversation after the story has already been told when the spectators are asking the storyteller clarifying questions felt like I was being gypped out of hearing a great story. Because this missing story within the story is integral to the plot and theme, it was like missing a piece to the puzzle, leaving a whole in the picture for me.

I was meaning to read Strong Heart before this, but never had the "push" to go with it. However, when I read about it in Adrift, it certainly made me want to read it. I think the author hit two birds with a stone with this part of William telling the story. If it's part of the strategy, then it actually worked well, and very impressive too.

Had I not already read "Strong Heart," I don't think I would have noticed that William was referring to the previous book.

I had no idea that his story was in the previous book. I kept finding myself wishing that the author would have actually written William’s story out for the readers. I thought it was odd that he only put in bits and pieces. If I hadn’t read it here, I never would have known. It makes sense now that I do know. If the author was using this to get readers to go back and read Strong Heart, then I don’t feel like it would work. People who don’t know what Strong Heart is about, or that this story is included there, won’t get it from what they read in this book. Now that I know, I’d like to go back and read it. It may help me understand these characters even more.

Somehow I am of the opinion that he was trying to encourage the other survivors. In some aspects also, there would have been no need to introduce another story when there was one that could have kept the spirits of the survivors high. The author could also be using it to introduce new readers to the prequel of this book.

I think it served both purposes and mainly to make readers look for the first book. I was also compelled to go look up the first book. Also, the story really motivated Annie when they went out to look for help.

If it was then it worked on me.

This was an excellent way to tie the two books together. It focused on the amazing things that had happened in the woods and highlighted the characters from the first book. At the same time, the author did an excellent job of not revealing too many facts, inducing readers to seek out the first book to complete the backstory. Well done, Mr. Sheldon!

I think it tied the two books together as one story. As someone who didn't read the first book before reading this one, I enjoyed those background details.

It has occurred to me that the main similarity between the two books are the characters. The author in a way might have also been trying to tie the two stories together because apart from the characters and Buckhorn, the other events are different.