What Dreams May Come: A Novel Paperback – January 1, 2004

This novel is the most vivid, complex, and surprisingly convincing depiction of afterlife I have ever encountered in a work of fiction. Nothing else I have seen on the subject, in literature or in film, comes close--certainly not the 1998 film. Before I read the novel, I had no idea that a story about Heaven and Hell could have such a profound effect on me.In the metaphysics of the film and the book, dying involves shedding your physical body and entering a mental environment shaped by thoughts. Your fate in such an environment is largely self-imposed. That much of the movie intrigued me, the first time I saw it. The problem was the schmaltz. I mean real schmaltz, piled on in large mounds, in place of strong narrative.It's hard for me to convey just how very different the novel is. Of course there are major differences in the plot. One such difference is the ending. (Even Roger Ebert, who heaped high praise on the film, was disappointed by the ending.) Another is the beginning, where the film adds Chris's children to the list of characters who die and go to Heaven. In doing this, the movie (1) makes the early scenes so depressing they become surreal (2) needlessly clutters the story with extra characters (3) introduces a silly and confusing subplot about Chris's attempts to find his children, who are in disguise.In the book, Chris's children are adults, not youngsters, and they're minor characters who never die in the course of the story. The details of Chris's life on Earth differ so greatly between the book and the film that it's like reading about a completely different person. Even though I saw the movie first, the image of Robin Williams completely vanished from my mind as I read, because he was so unlike the character described in the book.The entire feel of the book is different, telling a touching love story that uses real characterization, not cheap manipulation, to move the audience. And Matheson's vision of the afterlife truly comes alive on the page. The Hell scenes are actually terrifying, reminding us, as the movie does not, why Matheson is primarily famous as a horror writer.I won't overlook the movie's gorgeous visual effects, which earned the film a well-deserved Academy Award. They just aren't put to good purpose. The movie's vision of the afterlife as like being inside giant paintings fails to evoke a sense of reality. The book, in contrast, bases its afterlife imagery (vividly brought to life by Matheson's skillful prose) much more on Earth-like scenery. This approach ironically leads to far more exotic ideas, such as architects who build things using their minds, and a library containing history books more objective than those on Earth.One of Matheson's unique qualities as a fantasy writer has always been his almost scientific approach to the supernatural. Here, Matheson makes Heaven and Hell seem like a scientific, natural process, and one of the joys of the book is discerning all the intricate "rules" of how everything works. (That's another area where the movie falls short.) What needs to be kept in mind, however, is that Matheson doesn't do this just for entertainment purposes. In the novel's introduction, he tells his readers that the characters are the only fictional component of the novel, and that almost everything else is based on research. The book even includes a lengthy bibliography. Thus, the afterlife that Matheson describes isn't some fantasy world he concocted from his own head, but something he believes to be an accurate description of reality.Some people may wonder, at this point, about Matheson's religious background. He was raised a Christian Scientist, but gradually developed what he calls his own religion, taking elements from many sources. One of the book's main influences, I believe, is eighteenth-century Christian mystic Emanuel Swedenborg.From what I've seen, people react negatively to this book based on how far it departs from their personal beliefs. Christians complain about the absence of Jesus, while those who don't believe in any afterlife consider the story too nonsensical to accept. Most readers, it seems, are put off by the New Age terminology and concepts scattered throughout the book.These reactions are puzzling, if you stop to think about it. Books about elves, fairies, dragons, and wizards remain popular even though nobody believes in any of those things. Why should people be bothered by a fiction book portraying a Heaven and Hell that conflicts with what they believe? The book is perfectly enjoyable whether or not you accept Matheson's metaphysics.Of course, I personally do think Matheson provides insight into the subject--though I admit I'm a little wary of his acceptance of paranormal phenomena. But it amazes me how so many people refuse to even touch the book, thinking that any story with such a plot must automatically be hokey. In most cases, they'd be right. "What Dreams May Come" is a big exception. It suggests the endless possibilities in a subject that normally is dead weight for fiction. And it really makes you think.

I’d recommend getting and reading the book if you’ve ever seen the adaptation on the big screen with Robin Williams, there’s more important backstory than what they were able to squeeze in on the big screen

I thoroughly enjoyed this novel. It is an exquisite, genius blend of metaphysical knowledge into what we're told is a fiction story. I'm not ashamed to admit that I wept with joy and sorrow through much of the first third of the book, especially Chris's death at the very beginning.I thought the entire book resonated quite well with my own belief system, which has been aquired from many books on mysticism, spiritualism, and metaphysics in general.While I speak about the ending in the sentences that follow, I will attempt to not put out any spoilers and try to speak about things in broad, general terms. I was very disappointed and upset by the ending of this book. More than disappointed, angry, enraged. Upon reflection I felt that the ending was a complete contradiction of the principles established in the first third of the book. It felt like an immoral and contradictory conclusion to an otherwise flawless masterpiece. The ending for me was nothing more than dogma. Having read it, I understand now why the movie's creators were so conflicted about how the story should end, but I believe that the movie got it right here and the book, wrong. I prefer the book to the movie's everything else for the most part though.And the following paragraphs DO CONTAIN SPOILERS...As a hopeless, head over heals romantic, I more than identified with the story. It felt like I was reading a real account of the afterlife from a real person.The ending felt as hollow as Ann did in hell. It felt like a punishment, not like a balancing of the scales. And I do not accept the idea of karma as described by the author. The idea of karma ends when a soul realizes, learns, accepts, and repents the wrong of their actions, no further action is required. Why would there be? If the requisite knowledge becomes a part of the soul, it does not need to be learned again through some forced action of retribution. There is no karma as retribution. Karma is a tool to teach, empathy, compassion, patience, and so on. Not a tool of punishment. I do not believe that a soul would ever be forced to be reborn, first, without their own choice in the matter, and, second, with any handicap or ailment that soul hasn't specifically selected for itself for it's personal growth, no matter what its past life deeds. And I do not accept that any person so brought to the pit of despair to commit suicide will have any conclusion forced on them as a result of leaving the earthly plane before their scheduled departure. As the book establishes, reality for any soul is a result of that soul's thoughts, this is as true for a soul that has been taken naturally or one that takes itself through suicide.It is also unacceptable that the hall of records would not have known about this potential suicide. Each thought is a chain, one leads to the next, the examiners there would have certainly known of Ann's plan to take her own life, especially at that moment of her intense suffering and despair on earth. She would have been surrounded by guides and helpers to help her at the moment of her crossing to attempt to prevent her from sinking into the turmoil of hell.The ending was completely unacceptable to me. So much so that I feel that every single copy of this book should be recalled and the ending rewritten completely. Keeping two souls, who love and are devoted to each other so completly, apart from each other after so much anguish and despair and toiling just feels cruel and way over the top. Even if they were eventually brought together in a new life. What about their children? Wouldn't they like to see their parents in the great hereafter after /their/ heartache? It makes no sense. I do not accept (at least in the context of this story) that rebirth could possibly take place so quickly.Furthermore, if a soul's thoughts and will create their own reality, how can it be said that Ann must be reborn immediately? No one would possibly choose such a path after that experience.I have other issues with the story here and there. The concept of a soul's ultimate goal being to be reunited with God is written about an awful lot. Personally, I believe we all already reunited with God since we all contain the essence of God already, as does everything around us. So, what would be the point? I can imagine no greater boredom than becoming little more than a fixture. Perhaps there is more to it that my tiny, feeble mind does not yet understand. But this thought goes to my greater point, life, afterlife, whatever, is what God does to keep eternity interesting.The book was so much more detailed, expansive. I hated that the movie dumbed down so much, introduced unnecessary characters, and added far more drama and grief to a story that already had more than enough grief. This is just Hollywood making things more dramatic than necessary.