We Begin at the End
We Begin at the End
A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Summaries & Analyses
Author Insights
NEWQuizzes
NEWReading Tools
Chris Whitaker on We Begin at the End
In his own words: quotes and insights from the author.Why he wrote it
The girl he needed before he knew her nameThe night Whitaker first wrote Duchess, he was nineteen years old, recovering from a stabbing, and had just written a farewell note to his parents alongside a stockpile of painkillers. A library self-help book had described a technique: write about the traumatic incident, but change the people to fictional characters, change the location, change the outcome. He sat down and tried it.
I sat down that night and wrote. I wrote the character of Duchess who’s in We Begin at the End. Obviously, I didn’t know she was Duchess. I just wrote about this girl that had the weight of the world on her shoulders. Everything was going wrong for her. She looked like a victim. And then that night, I slept for the first time in ages.
The debt crisis in his mid-twenties brought the same symptoms back: sleeplessness, drugs and alcohol, a performance of outward success while privately falling apart. The character he had written at nineteen was the one he returned to, including on the trip that was supposed to mark the start of his recovery.
Writing saved me. It helped when nothing else could. It grounded me, even on our honeymoon I would sit up writing when my wife thought I was sleeping.
Despite the decades he spent with the material, Whitaker did not write toward publication. He held the manuscript back because its origins were too close to share, and he only moved it toward a finished book after his editor Amy Einhorn at Henry Holt pressed him to hand over what he had.
I can’t imagine setting a book in London... America feels... There’s a freedom to it. I can just create anything I want and any kind of character I want in a way that I don’t think I could here.
The California coastal setting of Cape Haven, and later Montana, gave him the psychological distance that London never could. He had visited America twice in his life and built both locations entirely through maps, travel guides, and photographs borrowed from the library where he worked part-time.
How he wrote it
Three years, three screens, one sentence at a timeThe original pitch to his editor was a revenge story, promised in six months. Whitaker delivered the manuscript three years later. The delay was almost entirely Duchess. He describes roughly half of that writing period as spent on her dialogue alone, cycling through drafts of single paragraphs and losing sleep over individual word choices.
I start with dialogue. I’ll write the conversation between characters in a given scene and then begin to build out around them. I work across three screens. On the centre screen I’ll have a Word doc, and either side I’ll have a number of pictures that roughly fit the location of the scene I’m writing. It helps me escape into the story I’m telling.
Cape Haven, the fictional coastal California town at the heart of the novel, does not exist, and Whitaker built it entirely from secondary sources. Its design was not arbitrary: he gave the town a specific physical quality so that it could carry the emotional weight of its main adult character, Walk, the police chief whose life has been arrested since childhood.
I had such a strong vision of Cape Haven, this beautiful coastal town slowly eroding and being claimed by the ocean and property developers. And in many ways the town mirrors Walk, who had this idyllic childhood and has never really moved on from it.
Whitaker has said he came close to abandoning the book during the years he could not get Duchess right. The pressure he placed on her was absolute: the entire novel’s success, in his own accounting, depended on whether she worked on the page.
Duchess was created because I needed her... And when I first sat down, all those years ago, and began writing as therapy, it was Duchess that I wrote. I saw her so clearly. Outwardly small, in her large Stetson, with the name she has, she screamed victim. But she was also carrying a gun.
The standard he set for himself before he would let anyone read the manuscript was not a draft count or a word count. It was a felt certainty about every sentence, which he now acknowledges as both a genuine artistic commitment and a form of self-imposed paralysis.
I had to feel like I couldn’t write a better sentence in that book before anyone could read it, which is madness because I could read it right now and change loads of stuff.
He also described Duchess as his favorite character he had ever written and said the story would live or die with her, which was the main reason he almost gave up when he couldn’t get her right. [paraphrased from audio]
The personal thread
Projecting onto a thirteen-year-old outlawWhitaker has been precise about why a thirteen-year-old girl became the vessel for his most private material: the character who appears most vulnerable, carrying the most obvious markers of victimhood, also carried the thing he needed most at nineteen. The Stetson and the gun were not aesthetic choices.
I’ve never put as much into a character as I did Duchess. She is lost in so many ways, and so desperate for something tangible to grasp onto, something defining that helps her make sense of who she is.
He kept writing Duchess in disconnected fragments through his twenties, through the debt, through the marriage. He has described the process not as plotting but as offloading, using fiction to carry weight that had no other place to go.
It’s a book about sacrifices that people make for those that they love. It’s about making mistakes and learning how to move on from them. It’s a book about life.
That description arrives after two decades of living with the material. The book Whitaker eventually published is, among other things, the record of what he needed fiction to do for him at the worst points of his life.
What he wants us to sit with
After the crime, the rest of lifeWhitaker positions the novel against the crime genre’s usual center of gravity. The act of violence that sets the plot in motion is not the subject. What it leaves behind is.
The crime, the act itself, it’s usually brief, but the repercussions can last a lifetime. I’m interested in how these acts change our lives, and where my interest lies shapes the kind of story I want to tell. I like a story with heart. I want my readers to fall in love with my characters.
The emotional engine of the book, for Whitaker, is a relationship Duchess would never describe in these terms herself. Walk, Cape Haven’s police chief and the only consistent adult figure in her life, is at the center of the scene Whitaker returns to most often when talking about the book.
Her relationship with Walk is everything to her, though she’d never admit it... Walk is her constant, as close to a good person as she’ll allow herself to see... There’s a scene in the book, around halfway, where Duchess reverts to calling him Chief Walker instead of Walk. And when I read it back it always gets me. Because it’s that moment when she believes she’s truly alone in the world.
Whitaker extends that same principle outward from Duchess to the reader’s own relationship with the book. The passivity that fiction forces on a reader is, in his account, the condition that makes the story work: you cannot intervene, only watch and want.
I think we are, by our nature, good. And when we see someone struggling our instinct is to reach out. And throughout the story Duchess is a child struggling, and that can be a very powerful, emotive thing to witness. And whilst we, as readers, are forced to be passive observers, we can still hope and dream for a better future for the characters we care about.
He has also said that the book does not deliver what every character deserves, that some do and some don’t get what they’ve earned, because that is how life tends to work. [paraphrased from audio] The ending is deliberately unresolved, and Whitaker has described knowing from the start how it had to close.