Friendly Fire

"This is memoir writing at its best. Thoughtful. Vulnerable. Palpable. Empathetic. Hopeful." —SMOKELONG QUARTERLY

One month before his college graduation, Paul Rousseau is accidentally shot in the head by his roommate and best friend.

At some point in the course of Paul and Mark’s friendship, Mark acquired—legally and with required permits—five firearms. Those weapons lived with them in their college apartment. It was a non-issue for the two best friends. They were inseparable. They were twenty-two-year-old boys at the height of their college experience, unaware that everything was about to change forever.

The bullet ripped through two walls before it struck Paul’s skull. Mark had accidentally pulled the trigger while in the other room and—frightened for his own future—delayed getting treatment for Paul, who miraculously remained conscious the entire time. In vivid detail, Friendly Fire brings us into the world of both the shooting itself and its surgical counterpoint—the dark spaces of survival in the face of a traumatic brain injury and into the paranoid, isolating, dehumanizing maw of personal injury cases.

Friendly Fire is the story of a friendship—both its formation and its destruction. Through phenomenal writing and gripping detail, Paul reveals a compelling and inspirational story that speaks to much of contemporary American life.

This discussion guide was shared and sponsored in partnership with Harper Horizon.

Book club questions for Friendly Fire by Paul Rousseau

Use these discussion questions to guide your next book club meeting.

The author wrote much of this book in real time, drafting as the actual events unfurled. What advantages did this produce for the book? What disadvantages? How would the book differ if he waited twenty years to write it?

As harrowing as this book is, humor is baked into the author’s voice throughout. How does his humor in the book differ from the humor that characterized so much of his college life and friendship with Mark and Keith? How is it similar?

The author includes multiple scenes painting himself in an unfavorable light. How do you weigh his candor against his likeability? How effective is the author at getting you to root for him throughout the book? Can you separate your sympathy for his situation from your opinion of him as a person?

The book’s subtitle, A Fractured Memoir, directs the reader to the design and structure of the narrative. In what ways did the book’s microchapters give you a sense of how the author’s brain works post-injury?

The chapters in Part I of the book alternate between the events of April 7 (“Holes I-XVII”) and something tangentially related, often a brief essay or an important moment from the author’s past. Did breaking up the “Holes” sequence benefit the book? If April 7 and its immediate fallout was presented without interruption, without any personal context or texture, how would your reading experience have differed?

The author gives proper capitalized names to the elements of his trauma, from the shooting itself to his PTSD to the morass of his personal injury suit (Ghost of April 7, Spirals, Painful Game). Would you have preferred more frank, upfront language? How do we creatively use language to manage things out of our control?

Studies have shown that when people with PTSD recall traumatic events, they don’t recall them as if they happened in the past, but instead as if they are always happening in a sort of never-ending loop. Do you think much of the book being written in present tense successfully simulates this effect for the reader? Why or why not? Is there enough perspective and narrative distance?

For most of the book, the author is reluctant to place blame on his former best friend, Mark. Do you think the author goes too easy on him? How would the author feel if the university and its liability protocols weren’t a factor in the aftermath of the shooting? What does the book question about our cultural and legal definitions of blame, responsibility, culpability, fault, and guilt?

Did the book challenge any preconceived notions you had about gun violence, disability, personal injury law, or any other topics included? How so?

How did the book make you reflect on your own life? What actions, if any, do you feel compelled to make after reading?

What was your favorite passage, quote, or moment from the book? Least favorite? Why?

Friendly Fire Book Club Questions PDF

Click here for a printable PDF of the Friendly Fire discussion questions

“A powerful, gut-wrenching tale of pain, suffering, and recovery.” —KIRKUS REVIEWS

“Unique and haunting…. A mesmerizing and unforgettable meditation on a stranger-than-fiction tragedy.” —PUBLISHERS WEEKLY STARRED REVIEW

"This is memoir writing at its best. Thoughtful. Vulnerable. Palpable. Empathetic. Hopeful." —SMOKELONG QUARTERLY

“‘The words are simple,’ writes Rousseau, ‘I got shot in the head by my best friend at school.’ But this story is anything but simple: a shattered life, broken friendship, long recovery and loss of self. Rousseau writes this vivid, startling memoir the only way he can: fractured. And in that structure there is so much beauty, so much bravery, and so much stubborn elegance—this is a gorgeous book that cuts to the bones of American life and a terrible injury.” —AMBER SPARKS, author of And I Do Not Forgive You

“One of the most riveting memoirs I’ve read in years, Friendly Fire unfolds with urgency and so much heart, and the magic lies in how effortlessly Paul Rousseau tells this wrenching story. This is a big-time debut from a big-time talent.” —JAMES TATE HILL, author of Blind Man’s Bluff

“This book is powerful, surprising, moving—and impossible to put down.” —AUSTIN ROSS, author of Gloria Patri