The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

By Liz

Book Review: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo by Stieg Larsson

Official FC Rating: 

I wasn’t entirely sure what to expect when I started reading The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. I saw the movie a couple years ago and was blown away by it, but, not surprisingly, I heard from many that the book was way better. So, when I came across cheap copies of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and the second book in the series, The Girl who Played with Fire, in an antique store, I snatched them up.

Explained simply, the novel is a murder mystery. Mikael Blomkvist, our protagonist, is publisher and co-founder of the magazine, Millennium, and is charged with libel against a billionaire industrialist, Wennerstrӧm. Because this case is widely publicized throughout the country, Blomkvist catches the eye of Henrik Vanger, a competing CEO of Wennerstrӧm’s. Vanger lures Blomkvist to investigate the cold case of his missing niece, Harriet Vanger, by promising him that he has evidence against Wennerstrӧm that Blomkvist can use. As the investigation into Harriet’s disappearance gets too challenging for Blomkvist to handle himself, he ends up partnering with one of the best investigative researchers and hackers in Sweden, Lisbeth Salander. The closer the two get to solving the mystery, the closer they also find themselves to imminent danger.

Let me start explaining my feelings about this novel with this: Lisbeth Salander is all that matters. Lisbeth Salander is everything. I mean it- she’s one of my favorite female characters I’ve read in a novel in my adult years, and she’s undoubtedly the best thing about The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, and, I assume, the rest of the Millennium Series by Stieg Larsson. “Bad ass” is probably the best way to describe Salander, but to break that down, she’s incredibly intelligent, clever, unconventional, and takes no shit from any man. Basically, I want to channel her energy in my daily life.

Salander is significantly more interesting than Blomkvist. To be frank, Blomvist is pretty boring, and I couldn’t figure out his allure. Nearly every female character he has some sort of close relationship with sleeps with him. Sure, there are some redeeming qualities about Blomkvist, but I genuinely get the sense that this character is a “Gary Stu,” the male equivalent of the “Mary Sue.” Blomkvist is described as kind, sensitive, intelligent, handsome, and, obviously, a ladies man.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is frequently described as a feminist novel. Undoubtedly, this was the intent of Stieg Larsson, and I don’t disagree that the novel is in many ways empowering. The original Swedish title of the novel is “Men Who Hate Women.” The novel is also filled with various statistics about violence against women in Sweden. It was made clear that Salander has faced sexual violence in her past and is generally untrusting of men because of this. Without spoiling too much, Salander is faced, again, with sexual harassment and assault by a man with power over her in the novel. Despite the novel addressing this horrendous aspect of the patriarchy, I wouldn’t say the writing is all that feminist.

As I mentioned earlier, it’s problematic that Blomkvist is the “good guy” trope and every woman consequently wants to sleep with him. Additionally, the female characters that are featured the most in the novel have no strong friendships with other women or each other. In fact, because each of the main female characters have slept with Blomkvist, there is this gross jealousy that ends up taking place between them. For a novel that’s supposed to be about the empowerment of women, there isn’t a lot of solidarity seen between the women in the novel.

The physical descriptions of the women are much more in depth than any for the men, in my opinion. I could really picture the women, but not nearly as much with most of the men, including Blomkvist. The women are also, of course, described by a man’s narrative in most cases and thus described in a moderately sexual manner.

Feminist critique aside, I loved this novel. I enjoyed the detail and how I was able to envision the characters and the scenery. The plot was really exciting. Because it had been a while since I had seen the movie, I couldn’t remember entirely who was responsible for Harriet’s disappearance, so new information and plot twists were thrilling. In written form I was able to retain more details about the case and the various suspects. Some people told me that the book was really confusing for them and hard to follow, which wasn’t the case for me, but that could be because I saw the movie first.

And because I know people will be dying to know which I liked better, I definitely have to say that I liked the book more. That being said, I really do think they did a great job with the movie! The hardest thing about seeing a movie version of the book before reading it is being able to envision your own images of the characters and scenes instead. In the case of this book though, I thought the casting was pretty great. Rooney Mara was cast as Lisbeth Salander, and I really think in both appearance and acting Rooney was an excellent fit. Rooney wasn’t a perfect physical match to the description of Salander, so I was able to picture her a little differently. Daniel Craig was cast as Mikael Blomkvist, which, given how mediocrely the character was described physically, was probably a fine fit, but personally I think Daniel Craig is so blah looking. If Blomkvist was described better maybe I could have done a better job creating my own mental  image, but, try as I might, god damn Daniel Craig’s face kept popping into my head.

In conclusion, this book gets 5 stars because of Lisbeth Salander mostly, but also because the book was too good to put down. I’m hoping I enjoy The Girl who Played with Fire just as much! 

Murder on the Orient Express

By Liz

Book review: Murder on the Orient Express by Agatha Christie
Official FC rating: 

My first Agatha Christie novel was And Then There Were None, and it was fantastic! It was your perfect mystery- a bit scary, difficult to predict, and atmospheric. Dame Agatha Christie isn’t called the “Queen of Crime” for nothing, after all.

Both Charlotte and my partner, Sean, love Agatha Christie, so Sean stocked me up with a few of her novels from his collection, and I decided a mystery novel would be perfect to read in October. Thus, I chose Murder on the Orient Express.

Wikipedia summarizes the novel as follows (I’d summarize it myself, but I am a lazy mother effer this evening):

Upon arriving at the Tokatlian Hotel in Istanbul, private detective Hercule Poirot receives a telegram prompting him to cancel his arrangements and return to London. He instructs the concierge to book a first-class compartment on the Orient Express leaving that night. After boarding, Poirot is approached by Mr. Ratchett, a malevolent American he initially saw at the Tokatlian. Ratchett believes his life is being threatened and attempts to hire Poirot but, due to his distaste, Poirot refuses. "I do not like your face, Mr. Ratchett," he says. 

On the second night of the journey, the train is stopped by a snowdrift near Vinkovci. Several events disturb Poirot's sleep, including a cry emanating from Ratchett's compartment. The next morning, Mr. Bouc, an acquaintance of Poirot and director of the company operating the Orient Express, informs him that Ratchett has been murdered and asks Poirot to investigate, in order to avoid complications and bureaucracy when the Yugoslav police arrive. Poirot accepts.

Murder on the Orient Express didn’t grab me as quickly as And Then There Were None. And Then There Were None had a chilling element to it that I loved, but Murder on the Orient Express lacked that completely. I felt that the beginning of the novel sort of dragged, but I pushed through (Sean insisted that it got better). I would say the book finally caught me not long before the actual murder takes place.

Once the murder happens, it’s a whirlwind of information. As I was reading I was thinking to myself, half seriously, “should I be taking notes? Is this like ‘Clue’?” I’m terrible at solving mysteries, so naturally my first instinct is to suspect everybody, or to suspect the one person one would assume is the least likely to have committed the crime.

SPOILERS AHEAD. DO NOT READ FURTHER IF YOU PLAN TO READ THIS BOOK.

I should’ve just continued to suspect everyone because, Agatha Christie, looking to fuck with us all, made EVERY SUSPECT GUILTY OF THE CRIME. Almost every suspect stabbed Ratchett, except, of course, the person with the best motivation to kill Ratchett.

I literally laughed at the ending. It was great. I enjoyed that the novel has humor now and then at various parts. For example:

Such sass, Poirot.

“I DON’T LIKE YOUR FACE.” Man. I just need to channel that in my daily life. #PoirotGoals?

Christie’s character descriptions are both a great strength of hers, but also a great flaw. She creates unique characters that are easy to envision, but she also relies heavily on racist and anti-Semitic descriptors. I noticed this in both And Then There Were None and Murder on the Orient Express. In Murder on the Orient Express she type-casts the lone Italian character as brusque, thick, burly, and mafia-like. There is at least one Jewish character in Murder on the Orient Express, but, thankfully, I did not see any overt anti-Semitism. In And Then There Were None, however, the character, Lombard, describes a young boy as “Jew-Boy,” and characterizes him as sneaky and conniving.

To be honest, when I noticed Christie’s anti-Semitism in And Then There Were None, I almost put the book down vowing to never read her books again. Of course, that didn’t happen. I enjoy her writing, and her books are easy reads. However, Christie is undoubtedly one of those authors that I could never be friends with. In fact, I’d probably hate her.

In summary, I enjoyed this novel, and I’m looking forward to reading another novel of Christie’s. I’d recommend her books to someone, but I would always be sure to let them know that Christie is a racist, anti-Semitic piece of trash.

The Quest

By Charlotte
Book Review: The Quest by Nelson DeMille
Official FC Rating: *

Phew. Okay. 

This is about the 700th book of DeMille's I've read and I feel the same way about it that I do most all of his books: great story, loved following along, but..... can you be better, man? I rounded up to four stars, but this is more of 3.5 out of five stars. I know, I know, it's half a star but just bear with me for a minute. 

Let's start with the good. DeMille's stories are always enjoyable. They're action packed and filled with suspense. I have a lot of complaints about his novels, but I keep reading them because they're thrilling and entertaining. You pick up one of DeMille's books and then you don't want to put it down. 

There are a few other good things about DeMille. He's funny. Sarcasm may as well be another character in his books. He writes well, too. He's no Tolkien, and he doesn't use words the way Maya Angelou or Ayana Mathis can. They're poets, DeMille is... well, he's a good storyteller. He tells exciting stories, and he does it well enough. 

But, I wouldn't call him a masterful writer. 

Every book is the same. His characters are always the same. They go by different names, sure, but you know who they will be. The main character will be a smart aleck cowboy type. He'll definitely find a lady friend, who will both motivate and distract him. There will probably be another guy who is a good guy, but might have his own agenda - and he'll probably be into the main character's lady friend, and even if he's not, our main character is going to feel threatened and will start to act like a petty child. 

Because apparently, men are just overgrown teenage boys. Or animals. All of them. DeMille's central male characters are almost always the same. (I've read seven or eight of his novels now, and this holds true for all of them.) 

I'd understand if one of DeMille's characters was a macho-man, smart mouth, thinks-he-knows-best type. Hell, I'd even understand if he included this kind of character in every novel. But for this same character to be your protagonist in every single book? Come on. Our main character in The Quest is Frank Purcell. He might as well be named John Corey or Sam Hollis, because he is them. He is the same character as those in DeMille's other books. Sarcastic (not as sarcastic as John Corey, if you're a DeMille fan reading this), somewhat reckless, rebellious (or at least disobedient), and, well, perpetually horny. A fine character, but sometimes I wonder if DeMille is incapable of writing other kinds of characters or if he just thinks suspense novels necessitate this kind of character (I don't believe they do).

Speaking of the sex issue... Listen, I'm fine with sex scenes. And a well written sex scene is good even if there's no deeper meaning or plot twist attached to the sex. But in DeMille's books the alpha male cowboy, whose thoughts we're privy to, thinks often of his "meat" "wood" "sausage" etc etc and it's so frequent that it gets annoying. I don't want to hear this overgrown bro think about his "swollen meat," I want to read the story. I was very tempted to ask one of my male friends if this is how full grown men really think, but I figured that might be awkward. But my female friends and I have all agreed it's unlikely. I mean, I'm sure men think about sex often, I just doubt that most men think about it the same way. I'd be lying if I said I didn't sometimes think that the author just really likes his own penis and is frequently motivated by erections and that his main characters are heavily influenced by his own personality.

And the women. Oh, the female characters. They're all the same. Conventionally pretty, at least a little bit naive, skilled (but, usually, not too skilled, and definitely not more so than the main male character), and younger than the protagonist. They have some role in the stories, but mainly they're there for the protagonist to lust after, fall in love with, question the depth of that love, confirm that love, and then save from certain death. (Kate, from DeMille's John Corey novels, sometimes breaks away from this basic outline.) It's frustrating to read.

And then there is often a third main character, a man, who is somehow threatening to the main character. Usually because he's been with the woman before or because in the character's mind, everyone is after his girlfriend. 

But let's talk specifically about The Quest. Here's the description given online:

A sweeping adventure that's equal parts thriller and love story, Nelson DeMille's newest novel takes the reader from the war torn jungles of Ethiopia to the magical city of Rome. 

While the Ethiopian Civil War rages, a Catholic priest languishes in prison. Forty years have passed since he last saw daylight. His crime? Claiming to know the true location of Christ's cup from the Last Supper. Then the miraculous happens - a mortar strikes the prison and he is free!  

Old, frail, and injured, he escapes to the jungle, where he encounters two Western journalists and a beautiful freelance photographer taking refuge from the carnage. As they tend to his wounds, he relates his incredible story.  

Motivated by the sensational tale and their desire to find the location of the holiest of relics, the trio agrees to search for the Grail.  

Thus begins an impossible quest that will pit them against murderous tribes, deadly assassins, fanatical monks, and the passions of their own hearts. 

The Quest is suspenseful, romantic, and filled with heart-pounding action. Nelson DeMille is at the top of his game as he masterfully interprets one of history's greatest mysteries.

AHAHA no. The basic stuff is right - a priest escapes, relays his story, and the characters decide to go on this quest to find the Holy Grail. They're pitted against a murderous tribe once or twice. There were no assassins or menacing monks. That's all gross exaggeration. Also, it was by no means a "love story." Twisted love triangle, yes. 

The story itself was a good one. I know there were many people who read this and hated it, because they were expecting it to be more action-packed. His other novels are a bit faster paced and less research based. I actually liked that aspect of this book. The middle of the story was largely devoted to the trio - Frank Purcell and Henry Mercado, both journalists, and Vivian Smith, a photographer - delving into the stories of the Holy Grail. Doing research, perusing Rome. I liked that. I like the history. It never got too slow. 

Spoilers (sort of) ahead.

Let's talk about the love triangle real quick though. Love triangles are rarely necessary, and this was no exception. I have no clue why DeMille wrote it in, and it wasn't enjoyable just for kicks, either. Basically, Vivian is with Mercado first (a much older man), but then has sex with Purcell behind Mercado's back.. oh, except it's not behind his back. It's in front of his face, as he's tied to a pole, a prisoner of war with certain death quick approaching. The whole things adds nothing but frustration to the story. Of course, as the story progresses and the three characters need to work together to manage this quest they've been chosen to make, things get awkward. There's a lot of jealousy. And then, because DeMille's women are often there to motivate or distract men, she sleeps with her first boyfriend, Mercado (the one she previously cheated on), while she's in a relationship with Purcell. Why? Literally to make Mercado feel better. She sleeps with him to make him feel like a man again. Easily the most annoying part of the novel. I'm not going to tell how the love triangle ultimately ends, but just know it's useless and detracts from the story. 

Over all, the story is engaging. I didn't fall in love with any of the characters, and they don't possess much virtue. DeMille's characters often don't though (sometimes justice, but usually a vulgar, vengeful kind of justice, so..). Characters aside, it was a good read. I prefer a deeper story with more character development, but the plot was good and thrilling. I complain about DeMille's books a lot, and every time I read one I have to roll my eyes a bit, but he does know how to tell an exciting story. The Quest was especially good because it's filled with history and background, something his other novels sometimes lack. The ending was predictable, but that's okay. DeMille is a good enough writer that you'll find the tale gripping despite guessing the ending.  

Bottom line: Good story, crappy characters. DeMille is a successful author and it's clear why. His stories are ones you can't put down. His characters lack substance and I think his model man/woman formula is very problematic, but he's got a formula and he knows it sells books, and he runs with it. If you're looking for an entertaining story, go for it. But be prepared for some disappointment with the characters. 

__

Charlotte