I wasn’t sure what to expect with this one, but I enjoyed it much more than I expected to.
Unrelated to the idea of psychos, one of the first things that I noticed was that this book seemed to have a lot of romantic elements. I’m not saying that is a bad thing, however, it was somewhat unexpected to have it come across as so heavy handed. Cathy is in the process of getting a divorce from this crappy guy. Markham walks into her life and fulfills this strong, trustworthy, masculine role; in addition, he has a lot of his own emotional baggage due to the murder of his wife. These two are thrown into a situation where they have to work together. In those initial stages we see the awkwardness as they realize their feelings and figure out how to work together. We see the blushing and the crushing. Eventually their relationship moves to the next level. By the end of the novel, they save each other’s lives (I guess in more way than one), and they get married and are happy.
As for the psycho, I noticed the same idea of the killer making a transformation (much like in Red Dragon). In this case, however, it had to do with an awakening. Not only did The Sculptor undergo an awakening where he realized his true purpose, but he wanted to help society undergo an awakening also. The Sculptor thought that “he was put on this planet to save mankind from its own spiritual destruction. And so, just as he himself had awakened from a lifetime of slumber, The Sculptor would see to it that others would awaken as well.” His sculptures, though, were just one part of it. He felt that Cathy was “a genius on par with his own,” and he was going to use her to “become is mouthpiece – the vehicle through which he would get his message out to the world.” This created an interesting situation in the book because it all started to feel like this weird game. The Sculptor was using Cathy’s book as inspiration for his crimes. The detectives were using Cathy’s book to try to figure out the crimes. And the whole time The Sculptor is trying to plan and organize things in just the right way so that his message is transmitted correctly.
I am not sure how I feel about the ending of this novel. I liked that Cathy gets to take a major role in bringing down The Sculptor. However, I still have a few issues. Markham is taken out of the way as soon as they get to the house, only to come to the rescue at exactly the right moment later, when Cathy would otherwise have been doomed. She does shove The Sculptor into the tub of acetone and snaps one of the locks into place – that was fine. Then a fire starts, The Sculptor is burning, and there is a pretty decent explosion. But The Sculptor’s body can’t be found, which is rationalized with information about chemical fires and explosions. And by the very end there is another murder and it sounds like The Sculptor is at work again. It almost seems too easy. It kind of felt like other goofy cliffhangers where you think the monster/murderer/whatever is dead and then in the last few seconds, you realize it’s not dead. For such a neat idea with the sculptures and the art history aspects, I kind of expected a more interesting ending.
MISERY by stephen king
I have read this book several times and love any excuse to read it again.
One of the things that amazes me each time I read this book is that it is such a simple premise. Woman kidnaps writer. Woman tortures writer. Writer must escape. That’s it for 300+ pages. What’s really impressive is that there is not one part of the book that is boring. On page nine, Paul knows that “Annie Wilkes was dangerously crazy.” By page 201, Paul knows that “If he meant to get out of this, he would have to kill her.” From a writer’s perspective it is simply impressive that Annie’s craziness can be built up for 200 pages and it never seems boring or redundant.
Another thing that impresses me about this book is the chapters from Paul’s novel. Not that I wanted more of that story or anything. There are several pages of excerpts throughout the novel. In a way, it’s a little weird to get such long portions of a book…especially when you realize it’s portions of a fictional character’s book. In a way though, it makes Paul seem very realistic. I’m reading parts of his book. So, when Annie tortures him, it’s that much more real.
One of the creepiest parts of the book for me is when Paul finds Annie’s book with all of the newspaper clippings. (It is also a nice touch of irony that she has her own book that she’s written.) The book itself is creepy because it is confirmation that she crazy and that she’s almost proud of it. She knows what she’s doing and she’s okay with it. But then there’s that moment when she explains to him how she knows he read the book. She tells him that she placed hairs – from her own head – across the book. When she saw that the hairs were broken, she knew that he had read the book. She may be crazy, but she’s smart. She thinks of all those little details. This also works to increase the tension because Paul really has his work cut out for him if he is going to get away from her.
It’s also interesting that Annie may not be the only psycho. Annie is clearly crazy and I don’t think any explanation is required there. Paul is crazy too, although, his is a different kind of crazy. At first, he’s hooked on pain killers. His injuries are serious enough to justify pain medications, but if he takes everything that she gives him then he runs the risk of never being in a state of mind where he can escape. And then he is confined to a wheelchair and is trapped in her house. There are a lot of factors that influence the way he thinks and the decisions he makes. While Annie is crazy on her own, her actions force Paul into a state of mind where he's unstable/crazy.
The strength of this book is that it conveys Paul’s frustrations perfectly. As a reader, I feel like I can experience his fear, anger, and desperation. As a writer, I want to know how to take such a simple concept and make it so amazing.
One of the things that amazes me each time I read this book is that it is such a simple premise. Woman kidnaps writer. Woman tortures writer. Writer must escape. That’s it for 300+ pages. What’s really impressive is that there is not one part of the book that is boring. On page nine, Paul knows that “Annie Wilkes was dangerously crazy.” By page 201, Paul knows that “If he meant to get out of this, he would have to kill her.” From a writer’s perspective it is simply impressive that Annie’s craziness can be built up for 200 pages and it never seems boring or redundant.
Another thing that impresses me about this book is the chapters from Paul’s novel. Not that I wanted more of that story or anything. There are several pages of excerpts throughout the novel. In a way, it’s a little weird to get such long portions of a book…especially when you realize it’s portions of a fictional character’s book. In a way though, it makes Paul seem very realistic. I’m reading parts of his book. So, when Annie tortures him, it’s that much more real.
One of the creepiest parts of the book for me is when Paul finds Annie’s book with all of the newspaper clippings. (It is also a nice touch of irony that she has her own book that she’s written.) The book itself is creepy because it is confirmation that she crazy and that she’s almost proud of it. She knows what she’s doing and she’s okay with it. But then there’s that moment when she explains to him how she knows he read the book. She tells him that she placed hairs – from her own head – across the book. When she saw that the hairs were broken, she knew that he had read the book. She may be crazy, but she’s smart. She thinks of all those little details. This also works to increase the tension because Paul really has his work cut out for him if he is going to get away from her.
It’s also interesting that Annie may not be the only psycho. Annie is clearly crazy and I don’t think any explanation is required there. Paul is crazy too, although, his is a different kind of crazy. At first, he’s hooked on pain killers. His injuries are serious enough to justify pain medications, but if he takes everything that she gives him then he runs the risk of never being in a state of mind where he can escape. And then he is confined to a wheelchair and is trapped in her house. There are a lot of factors that influence the way he thinks and the decisions he makes. While Annie is crazy on her own, her actions force Paul into a state of mind where he's unstable/crazy.
The strength of this book is that it conveys Paul’s frustrations perfectly. As a reader, I feel like I can experience his fear, anger, and desperation. As a writer, I want to know how to take such a simple concept and make it so amazing.
THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS
This was the first time that I’ve seen this whole movie, start to finish. I’m a little unimpressed with the whole movie. I’m not saying that I don’t like it. Not at all. I don’t feel as wowed as I guess I think I should. That may have something to do with how I watch this movie. From the first time when I saw only parts of the movie until now, I spend my time looking for the skin suits as if I’m playing a demented version of Where’s Waldo? My grandmother was a seamstress in Pittsburgh when the movie was being made; she was good and she also worked a lot with leather and she (along with several others) created the skin suits used in the movie. I end up focusing on the skin suits more than anything else.
There are several things about this movie that I like. One of them being the portrayal of Hannibal Lecter. There’s no argument that he is one of the two psychos of the film. But, I have mixed feelings about him. Casting Anthony Hopkins in this role further complicates this issue because he does such a great job with the role. For a character who is a brutal killer, I kind of like him. He comes across as smart, sophisticated, and dangerous. The brutality of his attacks is enough that it should make the viewer immediately dislike him. But there’s another side of him that is almost likeable (he’s intelligent, values politeness, likes art, etc.).
Part of this may stem from the idea that I don’t know who to cheer on. For example, Dr. Chilton comes across as arrogant and ineffective. He ends up breaking one of his own rules and accidentally leaves a pen in Lecter’s cell. Lecter takes advantage of this and I felt like the doctor was going to get what he deserved. When he kills the two guards and escapes, I was impressed with the plan and relieved that he got away. That kind of reaction would make sense if he were wrongly imprisoned. But, no. Logically, he needs to be locked up. There are so many layers to this character that it complicates the viewers’ reaction to him. It is both interesting and challenging to create a character that is simultaneously vicious and sympathetic.
On the other hand, we have Buffalo Bill. Another violent killer, but I don’t feel one bit of sympathy for him. Even though he has a troubled past and is working out his own personal issues, I just want him to be caught. And if that meant he had to get killed in the process, I was fine with that too. It’s interesting to have two characters who are both brutal murderers be portrayed in such a way that one is likable and the other not. If nothing else, the book and the movie are valuable tools for studying character development.
There are several things about this movie that I like. One of them being the portrayal of Hannibal Lecter. There’s no argument that he is one of the two psychos of the film. But, I have mixed feelings about him. Casting Anthony Hopkins in this role further complicates this issue because he does such a great job with the role. For a character who is a brutal killer, I kind of like him. He comes across as smart, sophisticated, and dangerous. The brutality of his attacks is enough that it should make the viewer immediately dislike him. But there’s another side of him that is almost likeable (he’s intelligent, values politeness, likes art, etc.).
Part of this may stem from the idea that I don’t know who to cheer on. For example, Dr. Chilton comes across as arrogant and ineffective. He ends up breaking one of his own rules and accidentally leaves a pen in Lecter’s cell. Lecter takes advantage of this and I felt like the doctor was going to get what he deserved. When he kills the two guards and escapes, I was impressed with the plan and relieved that he got away. That kind of reaction would make sense if he were wrongly imprisoned. But, no. Logically, he needs to be locked up. There are so many layers to this character that it complicates the viewers’ reaction to him. It is both interesting and challenging to create a character that is simultaneously vicious and sympathetic.
On the other hand, we have Buffalo Bill. Another violent killer, but I don’t feel one bit of sympathy for him. Even though he has a troubled past and is working out his own personal issues, I just want him to be caught. And if that meant he had to get killed in the process, I was fine with that too. It’s interesting to have two characters who are both brutal murderers be portrayed in such a way that one is likable and the other not. If nothing else, the book and the movie are valuable tools for studying character development.
RED DRAGON by thomas harris
It’s weird. If someone asked me what type of movies/books I like, I would not respond by saying that I like crime drama, police procedurals, etc. If the story follows the work of a cop or a detective, I typically do not think of it as something I like. However, after I watch or read one of those (as long as it is a well-done one), I like it. And that’s how it was for Red Dragon.
This novel fits well with chapter 5 from Howdunit. However, I’m not sure which category Dolarhyde would fit. He seems to show characteristics of all of them. Here are a few examples:
“Many serial murderers are not considered to be psychologically impaired. They are in touch with the real world but have absolutely no feelings for other people. The opposite of that would be the delusional killer who murders because he has seen or heard people or voices that demand he kill a certain type of person or persons” (42). The Dragon seems to be an actual voice that Dolarhyde hears talking to him. He hears it and responds to it. The voice of the Dragon eventually sounds like his grandmother because the voice tells him to get the teeth and he goes to get the grandmother's teeth. The voice then tells him to “put them in your palms. lock your fingers and squeeze my teeth together.” This is reminiscent of the time when she threatened to cut of his penis using a pair of scissors.
“The delusional serial killer’s crime scene is in total disarray. There are probably signs of forced entry, and the scene shows signs of a struggle, such as the victims attempting to flee” (42-43). I got the impression that the crime scene where the Leeds family died was in disarray. “Graham switched on the lights and bloodstains shouted at him from the walls, from the mattress and the floor. The very air had screams smeared on it.” The whole description was just violent (one kid hid under a bed and was dragged out, the father ran to protect the kids with his throad slit, the bodies were moved around after the fact).
“When the delusional serial killer goes out looking for his victims, he has an idea he wants to kill but doesn’t have a particular person targeted” (43). This part does not seem to match. Dolarhyde was very deliberate in who he selected.
“The goal-oriented serial killer wants to achieve some result from his murders” (43). “The gold-oriented serial killer has an obsessive-compulsive mind-set and may have deep-rooted psychosexual problems, but he is not delusional. This type of killer does not hear voices or see visions directing him to kill certain types of people” (43). Part of this sounds like Dolarhyde. He does have a goal AND he does hear voices giving him direction. “With the fervor of conversion he saw that if he worked at it, if he followed the true urges he had kept down for so long – cultivated them as the inspiration they truly were – he could Become.” He uses his murders to help him reach his goal: “The Jacobis were the first to help him, the first to lift him into the Glory of his Becoming.” Even though this factual part does not fit the description of the character, it does not take away from the character at all. This is not a detail I would have even been aware of had I not read that Howdunit chapter.
“This killer [the domineering serial killer] actually enjoys seeing his victims suffer. He likes to inspire fear” (44). I saw this in the way Dolarhyde killed Lounds. He glued him to a chair, bit of his lips, and then set him on fire.
The sexually obedient serial killer “is emotionally immature and was probably physically and/or sexually abused as a young child” and he “kills for the sexual pleasure he derives from his killings” (45). I think part of this fits him as well. He murdered the other family members, but he did more than just kill the women. In addition, he was abused as a child and elements of that abuse linger into his adulthood.
In the end though, Dolarhyde is a believable psycho, regardless of how well he matches the descriptions of serial killers. He is believable and totally crazy.
Works Cited
Boertlein, John. Howdunit: How Crimes are Committed and Solved. Cincinnati: Writer’s Digest Books, 2001.
Harris, Thomas. Red Dragon. New York: Berkley Books, 1981.
This novel fits well with chapter 5 from Howdunit. However, I’m not sure which category Dolarhyde would fit. He seems to show characteristics of all of them. Here are a few examples:
“Many serial murderers are not considered to be psychologically impaired. They are in touch with the real world but have absolutely no feelings for other people. The opposite of that would be the delusional killer who murders because he has seen or heard people or voices that demand he kill a certain type of person or persons” (42). The Dragon seems to be an actual voice that Dolarhyde hears talking to him. He hears it and responds to it. The voice of the Dragon eventually sounds like his grandmother because the voice tells him to get the teeth and he goes to get the grandmother's teeth. The voice then tells him to “put them in your palms. lock your fingers and squeeze my teeth together.” This is reminiscent of the time when she threatened to cut of his penis using a pair of scissors.
“The delusional serial killer’s crime scene is in total disarray. There are probably signs of forced entry, and the scene shows signs of a struggle, such as the victims attempting to flee” (42-43). I got the impression that the crime scene where the Leeds family died was in disarray. “Graham switched on the lights and bloodstains shouted at him from the walls, from the mattress and the floor. The very air had screams smeared on it.” The whole description was just violent (one kid hid under a bed and was dragged out, the father ran to protect the kids with his throad slit, the bodies were moved around after the fact).
“When the delusional serial killer goes out looking for his victims, he has an idea he wants to kill but doesn’t have a particular person targeted” (43). This part does not seem to match. Dolarhyde was very deliberate in who he selected.
“The goal-oriented serial killer wants to achieve some result from his murders” (43). “The gold-oriented serial killer has an obsessive-compulsive mind-set and may have deep-rooted psychosexual problems, but he is not delusional. This type of killer does not hear voices or see visions directing him to kill certain types of people” (43). Part of this sounds like Dolarhyde. He does have a goal AND he does hear voices giving him direction. “With the fervor of conversion he saw that if he worked at it, if he followed the true urges he had kept down for so long – cultivated them as the inspiration they truly were – he could Become.” He uses his murders to help him reach his goal: “The Jacobis were the first to help him, the first to lift him into the Glory of his Becoming.” Even though this factual part does not fit the description of the character, it does not take away from the character at all. This is not a detail I would have even been aware of had I not read that Howdunit chapter.
“This killer [the domineering serial killer] actually enjoys seeing his victims suffer. He likes to inspire fear” (44). I saw this in the way Dolarhyde killed Lounds. He glued him to a chair, bit of his lips, and then set him on fire.
The sexually obedient serial killer “is emotionally immature and was probably physically and/or sexually abused as a young child” and he “kills for the sexual pleasure he derives from his killings” (45). I think part of this fits him as well. He murdered the other family members, but he did more than just kill the women. In addition, he was abused as a child and elements of that abuse linger into his adulthood.
In the end though, Dolarhyde is a believable psycho, regardless of how well he matches the descriptions of serial killers. He is believable and totally crazy.
Works Cited
Boertlein, John. Howdunit: How Crimes are Committed and Solved. Cincinnati: Writer’s Digest Books, 2001.
Harris, Thomas. Red Dragon. New York: Berkley Books, 1981.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)