untangling-thoughts

[untangling-thoughts]

I feel like I'm falling apart. The mirror image makes me nauseous.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 20 | part 2

'The Chalk Man'

C. J. Tudor

What wasn't said

There are quite a few things you have to theorize on. But if you get some logic in, you get to see a proper picture.

The only thing I couldn't figure out was the origin of wings pattern, carved on Reverend Martin's back. I don't want to support the idea that the cop and his friends, after the beating, cut priest's back. Sure, I can envision them turning church into a place of destruction, or stripping Martin naked. But they were drunk and angry. You need some precision and think stuff through.

Thirty years later, when Eddie met up with Nicky, he saw that exact shape of wings tattooed on her arm. She said it was in memory of her father. But I think it was rather a symbol that Martin got what he deserved. The tattoo made the whole thing more tangled. Yet Nicky couldn't have made the carving. She was just a child back then. You'd need to be coldblooded to do it. Still, somehow she's the most probable culprit in my eyes.

Strange logic

In general the book was good but there were some questionable moments.

For once, the fight between Reverend Martin and Eddie in the forest. You're telling me that this old priest had enough strenth to wrestle a 42 year old man? I get it, Eddie wasn't exacly athletic. But realistically speaking: he'd have an advantage against a scrawny, limping Martin. Also, how the hell was that priest so strong if all he did for his past 30 years was primarly sitting in a chair? Was he doing push ups under the moonlight? I don't think so.

Secondly the party where Hoppo poured alcohol in Mickey's soda. I took it as a normal thing, but my friend did point out that Mickey would taste the alcohol in the drink. In the book it was said that Mickey bought a car and didn't drink because he cherished the vehicle. Yet during the party, he had some alcohol and still convinced everyone that he was sober and could drive. Then crashed the car. I couldn't find any logical explanarion for this. The whole situation was contradictory. Unsuse of how to excuse it.

Bittersweet ending

Eddie stayed single in the end, which made me exhale in relief. The story didn't need romance to be good. Also, he gave good reasons for not getting together with Chloe. She didn't see him as a man, he couldn't bear to date Nicky's sister. Not only that, Chloe was dishonest for a long while. Perhaps Eddie's trust shattered too.

One thing did leave aching as an aftertaste from the book. Eddie forgot the word "mailbox". Panicked but then remembered it. Seemed like his regular burst of paranoia. But in a story, everything done for a reason. I think we got to witness the first showcase of developong Alzheimer's. Eddie kept telling himself that he's not like his father and wasn't losing parts of himself. But the facts told us the opposite.

Core thoughts

To me, the main messages the story had were:

You don't have to follow god to be a good person.

A lot of bad things can happen because of small deeds combined with underestimation of impact.

Life isn't mystery. We tend to decorate it ourselves.

Not all your friends are true. Some are simply people you get to bond with due to shared experiences, yet there is no depth in the connection.

Some seem quite obvious, yet this story serves as a reminder.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 20 | part 1

'The Chalk Man'

C. J. Tudor

It's been a long while since I eyed C. J. Tudor's books, and finally I was lucky to come across "The Chalk Man". It felt like a very down-to-earth story, despite all paranormalities. Overall, a pleasant read. Was worth my time.

Abnormalities

The whole story was soaked in this kind of mystical atmosphere. A lot of things thay happened initially seemed quite difficult to explain. The author played with fear of the unknown and terrorizing suspense. They planted seeds of unease.

From the very beginning I involuntarily perceived the events through the lens of realism. Because despite the creepiness Eddie (the MC) felt, all his strange dreams, chalk men occuring out of nowhere and deaths could've been explained logically. I thought so even before learning all the facts. And such approach was rewarding: indeed, there was nothing paranormal going on.

Sean died because Fat Gav threw his bike into a river. And Sean tried to take it out despite not knowing how to swim.

Hoppo's dog passed away because Hoppo's mother accidentally gave it some pest poison.

Reverend Martin was heavily beat up because a local cop found out that Martin got his daughter pregnant. So the cop with his friends paid a night visit to a church.

Elisa (the Waltzer Girl) got killed because Reverend Martin, who mistook her for Hannah - a girl pregnant with his child.

Eddie's kitchen was bloody because his mom's cat caught some small animal.

Eddie's coat was wet and bloody, because Chloe wore it when she wen outside and punched Mickey in the face.

Each from the friend group received an unsettling mail with a chalk man and a piece of chalk because Mickey sent them. He wanted to spice up his future book.

That someone who spiked Mickey's drink was Hoppo. He still believed that Mickey was at fault of the dog's death and wanted to get even.

Mickey drowned in a river because he met up with Hoppo and tried to sabotage him: he knew what Hoppo did with the drink in the past. Mickey got pushed into the water.

A lot of these things remained in a fog of mystery and seemed scary. Mainly because Eddie was quite uninformed on the past events, and he was kind of a paranoic.

The narrator

You might initially think that Eddie was the most sane or adequate among his friends. But soon you learn: he was the reason why the story appeared so disturbing.

1. Vivid imagination.

It made Eddie's nightmares scarier and more realistic. Also, it was never said directly, but he most likely saw his dreams as a warning of future events. Tough, if you study them close enough, those nightmares were a simple reconstruction of past experiences. Eddie, a 12 y.o., learned of someone's unnatural death. It was his bully, Sean. That guy learned about secret code with chalk men that Eddie's friend group had. Sean used it to lure Eddie out. Hence the message Eddie got in his dreams "Stay away from the chalk men" was not a prophecy. It's the way his brain processed trauma. Chalk men were equal to danger.

2. An inclination to believe in paranormality.

When Sean died, he immediately recalled teacher's words about "what goes around, comes around" karmic stuff. From the way Eddie perceived deaths and other unusual events, you understand that he never personified the cause. It was something, not someone. Something unknown and strange.

3. Paranoia.

Due to his high suspicion, Eddie was wavy of all the unusual things. He felt uncomfy in the presence of mr. Halloran (albino, kind, simple clothes) and the Garden Lady from the hospital (forgetful, a little out of her mind, talked nonsense). Also went into a quiet panick mode whenever something was out of the ordinary (control freak much?). Reminds a time when a door was left unlocked and Eddie spiraled. Because he either started developing Alzheimer's like his father, or something unexplicably horrible happened in his house.

4. Unreliable narration.

His imagination and sleep walking weren't the only things that made Eddie untrustworthy. In the very end you learn that he was the one who drew chalk girls on the trees next to Elisa's body parts. Who drew chalk men with different colors to gather friends on a playground. He even drew one for himself, then pretended to be surprised when he saw it. Eddie probably only walked around while being asleep. But there are lots of other chalk men he probably drew and didn't inform the reader.

The mystery of chalk men

I suspect that drowning chalk man and a chalk man with a dog were made by Eddie. Sure, he said that nobody in the friend group used white chalk. But who said the boy didn't have it? There was a scene where Eddie bought chalk, but there was no specification that he got the blue one. Considering the drawings he confessed to making, it gets confirmed that Eddie had chalk of different colors, including the white one.

But then what about the church accident? The priest was found beaten to a pulp (cop's and his friends' work), had angel wings carved on his back (remained unexplained), and there were a bunch of chalk men drawn all over the church. Did Eddie truly make them? My answer is: most likely not.

There was no proper timing for him to do it. Though, in the hospital, decades later, Reverend Martin did grab his hand and told Eddie to "Confess". Could've been a hint that the boy was in church and drew all those things, but I think the priest was simply being out of his mind. I am also more inclined to believe that Eddie imagined those chalk men. Because nobody in the town discussed strange drawings. They could've been something the boy added to narration to tie things together in his head. To him all the events were connected.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 19 | part 2

'The Thursday Murder Club'

Richard Osman

Light humor

One of the things that make the book so easy to accomodate was this kind of British humor. Light and unprovocative, that makes you internally giggle.

The first murder scene was already worthy. Tony got hit in the back of his head and wss about to die.

"You can't win everything, Tony. Fair enough, he thought, fair enough"

I cried. This was so silly but also set up the mood for the rest of the strory.

All of the small investigations The Murder Club made were laced with unspoken humor, hidden into their conversations. For instance, Ron and Ibrahim tried to get Bernard to talk so they could figure out whether he's a killer. The dialogue was built in an organic yet very obvious way, so the reader could easily guess their intention. Bernard wasn't an idiot as well.

Bernard: Are you guys playing a good cop and a bad cop on me?

Ibrahim: Yes! It's a very efficient psychological method. I can give you a book on it if you're interested.

WHO SAYS THINGS LIKE THAT? I'm not even mad because the whole thing was hilarious.

My favorite was probably the way characters handled their boundaries. They said things that mean "I won't tell you because I have a right to do so" and others didn't do anything about it. They just accepted that they won't get any information. That's a healthy communication lots of people can only dream of.

Also, the main murderer reveal was also peak comedy. Two men, Bogdan and Elizabeth's husband, played chess when she was away. And the casual conversation developed into:

Husband: So, you killed Tony, right?

Bogdan: Of course I did.

Then dude proceeded to tell the whole reasoning for it. Right in Elizabeth's house. The Thursday Murder Club founder's place. She didn't even find out. What made it better was that she started treating Bogdan like her son at some point of the story.

[On the other hand, the confession was handled well and made in-character. Also logical and nicely compiled]

About life and death

Thanks to the fact that the majority of story's cast were either middle aged, or elder people, author managed to explore a niche topic: what happens after youth. Perhaps books don't talk enough about the time when the peak of life had passed. When you get old and wrinkly. Whem your strength, wit, enthusiasm and life itself slowly fade away.

Throughout the story you constantly bump into those melancholic hills. People mourned their friends and spouses. They recalled their past, whether it was sweet or bitter. They dwelled on mistakes they made. They constantly got reminded that they wouldn't live forever. Everyone would eventually die. And it's sad, but also a normal cycle of life.

While reading, I experienced some unpleasant emotions, but that's what such stories usually rise within others. The book isn't heavy or depressing, so my saddness was fleeting. It's admirable how author handled the topic gently. The authenticity was kept, but there was no double down on depressing reality.

Portrayal of issues

Another thing I truly enjoyed was the fsct that characters had very human problems. They weren't over-fictionalized.

Joyce didn't talk about it much, but her relationship wih daughter wasn't the best. Perhaps Joyce wasn't the greatest mother, yet she appeared subtly loving. And her daughter also searched for reparation of their connection. Joyce was also implied to be lonely and wishing her daughter visited her or spent more time with her.

Donna ran away from South London because she couldn't bear to see her ex. And she kept stalking him on social media. Sounds like something a lot of people do nowadays. It's both comedic but also saddeningly real. But it was shown that day by day, she began thinking of the ex less and less. It would've taken a while, but she'd heal.

Chris wanted to lose weight but had a horrible self control. A lot of people probably experience the same thing he did. Low discipline only strenghtens self-hate and insecurities. He also felt deeply lonely without someone in his life. No spouse, no kids, no pets. Chris eyed some women he met during the story but had to remind himself that he thought of wrong things and must've focused on his work. It was pleasant to see him get his happy ending. Not perfect, but something that fit Chris well.

After reading "The Thursday Murder Club", I am now genuinely thinking about buying more books from the same series. It was... very engaging, shall I say.

[untangling-thoughts]

whim no. 5

× × ×

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 17 | part 3

'Hannibal: Rising'

Thomas Harris

Japanese references

It was a bit unexpected to see Japanese culture-sque elements. That's not what I had expected from a book, where main events unfolded Lithuania and France. There was already a huge mix of different nationalities because of World War 2 setting. And then we get Japanese, too. The execution was… okayish. Considering that the whole book had this "purposefully cinematic action movie" vibe, I won't complain on the lack of depth in characters. I can't demand meaning and non-stereotypical portrayal of a Japanese woman from a story that is very simple in narration.

Yet I'd like to mention that author added a bunch of references to actual people and events. It made the story less realistic for me. It's not horrible, per se. I simply had a hard time believing the plot was "real" in book's universe.

Murasaki

Lady Murasaki was Hannibal's adoptive mother, in a sense, since she was considered uncle's wife (though there were some issues with documents). But! If you look up her whole name, you'll learn that Murasaki Shikibu is a descriptive name (read: NOT real) of a Japanese novelist and poet, who approximately lived around the end of X and the beginning of XI centuries. She wrote "The Tale of Genji" and "The Diary of Lady Murasaki". And it is said that "The Tale of Genji" was published in English in between 1925 and 1933.

I briefly read into her biography, and there are a few things worthy to be highlighted.

Lady Murasaki didn't marry on reaching puberty, and stayed in her father's household until her mid-20s or to early 30s.

While her age wasn't mentioned in the 'Hannibal: Rising', I think we meet her when she's in her 20s.

She married her father's friend. They had a daughter. The husband was sh*t. Daughter died due to a disease. Husband died too after 2 years of them being married.

In the book Murasaki married a completely different person, and they haven't had a child, but she did become widowed.

There was a legend that Murasaki retreated to a temple near a lake, where she was inspired to write "The Tale of Genji" on an August night while looking at the Moon. That's also the reason why a lot of Japanese artists depicted her that way.

There was a haiku about moon and herons that Hannibal and Murasaki used. While she was compared to a heron, there was something about "looking at the moon".

Yosano Akiko made the first modern Japanese translation of "The Tale of Genji".

Guess what? On one of the pages Murasaki quotes Akiko's work!

"The Diary of Lady Murasaki" seemed to not contain anything eye-catching. "The Tale of Genji" was also very different and it's overall plot didn't match anything in "Hannibal: Rising". Except one thing. Direct quore from wiki:

"Genji's mother dies when he is three years old, and the Emperor cannot forget her. The Emperor Kiritsubo then hears of a woman (Lady Fujitsubo), formerly a princess of the preceding emperor, who resembles his deceased concubine, and later she becomes one of his wives. Genji loves her first as a stepmother, but later as a woman, and they fall in love with each other. Genji is frustrated by his forbidden love for the Lady Fujitsubo and is on bad terms with his own wife (Aoi no Ue, the Lady Aoi)."

Oh wait. Doesn't it sound familiar? Hannibal being in love with his uncle's wife? Yep. I know. Wild coincidence.

There might be more crossing points within the book. To find out, you'd have to find all haikus, that Hannibal and Murasaki made, and look them up. Maybe some are actual cutouts from real literature. Maybe not.

Chiyoh's cousin

We barely get to know anything about Chiyoh, Murasaki Shikibu's maid. But Lady Murasaki mentioned that Chiyoh's cousin is sick dying due to radiation and they were making paper cranes for her. The cousin believed that after making 1000 cranes she'd be cured. But that was a real person.

A quote from wiki:

"Sadako Sasaki was girl who became a victim of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. And she is remembered through the story of the more than one thousand origami cranes she folded before her death."

There is also a book "Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes", written by Eleanor Coerr, that is dedicated to the girl.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 17 | part 2

'Hannibal: Rising'

Thomas Harris

Some remarks

Love? You sure?

Genuinely, the moment 13 years old Hannibal confessed his love to Lady Murasaki, I screamed in pain. I read 'Hannibal: Rising' freshly after 'Hannibal', and I still get vivid flashbacks of Lecter pondering over Clarice Starling's 'incesty' relationships with men at work. Like, Hannibal, for f*ck's sake, SPEAK FOR YOURSELF. Were you projecting on her or something?

Dude fell in love with his uncle's wife. Who's much older than him. And Lecter was THIRTEEN. Can you make it any worse? And surely, eventually, Lady Murasaki started loving him too. That was after her husband died and Hannibal grew up, of course. I am a little disappointed that the roots of her feelings were never explained.

I must also add that the way author depicted Murasaki Shikibu in Hannibal's youth was kind of cringe. Sure, understandable, there was an attempt to show that beautiful woman evoked something within Lecter. That's why author kept pushing Hannibal into her inappropriate images. Figuratively AND literally. The boy got to see Lady Murasaki in a bathtub, a painting where she was nude, and (the weirdest one) Lady hugged him after nightmares while her chest was bare, so Hannibal's face got smashed into it. I prefer to ignore these because what the hell?

By the way, now knowing how graceful Lady Murasaki was, the scene with Clarice in last chapters of 'Hannibal' hits differently. During that dinner with Krendler, Lecter told Starling to not say 'thanks' in a non-elegant manner. I wonder why, hm? Was Hannibal trying to make sure Clarice was well-mannered like his aunt? No idea.

Despite all that mixed-in romance that resembled some typical subplot in an action film, I don't think Lecter truly loved Lady Murasaki. Did he appreciate her beauty? Yes. Was he somewhat lustful after seeing her naked on different occasions? Absolutely, yet Hannibal never acted on it. Did he feel happy to be tended to as a kid? Of course. But that's about it.

Sometimes people feel things, and on the lack of better words, call it romantic love. In Lecter's case, to me it was more of… attachment that he NEEDED to have after living through horrible events. Hannibal didn't know any proper kind of care for years after his parents died. He was stuck loveless and underappreciated. So, sure thing, when some wonderful caring lady emerged, he started feeling things. Combine the feeling of being loved as a son after a love-draught and teenage sexual curiosity, and you receive… a think that oddly seems like love. If it was a true feeling, then rejection would've hurt deeply. Hannibal moved on too fast. Not just externally. Murasaki saw no flame within him, which pointed at missing passion.

Lecter DID care about Lady Murasaki and held her dear to his heart. "You're my favorite person in the world". I think he meant it genuinely. It's just that his love was different from what you'd conventionally expect.

Accuracy problems

Unfortunately I can't tell whether author could properly depict World War 2 setting, because there was a bunch of confusing stuff. But I have read that some readers considered the knowledge put into the story quite shallow. It doesn't even irritate me, because the whole book was made in this cinematic kind of way.

On the side of things that did bother me, I shall say that languages and nationalities were extremely confusing. "Lecter" and "Hannibal" are not quite Lithuanian names. Nevertheless, we had a Lithuanian Lecter family, with the servants. Then there were marauders of, as it was implied, multiple nationalities. Then - Russian and germal soldiers. And of them were all in Lithuania. And somehow they all managed to communicate and understand each other! Lecter lived in an orphanage, organized by Russian communists. It became even more bizzare when Hannibal got taken in by his uncle. Technically, Lecters were Lithuanian. But uncle lived in France, and his wife, Murasaki, was Japanese, and had a maid from Japan. So… how did Hannibal learn Russian and French? With help of some magical powers? Or were they speaking English? Lithuanian? No idea. I had to turn off my brain so it wouldn't explode from thinking.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 17 | part 1

'Hannibal: Rising'

Thomas Harris

Overall impression

After 'Hannibal', with it's nauseously stretched plot and horrible ending, 'Hannibal: Rising' felt refreshing. Because I could turn off my brain and not look too deep into the psychology while reading. Does this mean that the book was great though? No. I'd call it primitive, in a way. It doesn't hold as many layers as previous books and feels oversimplified. Other characters were left as side elements and were never fully explored. They are like interior decorations, meant to only exist to compliment young Hannibal, standing in the spotlight. Perhaps that allowed author to not disperse his attention on several characters, and focus on the main one.

All psychological elements were on the surface and could be picked up with ease. It was a relief. I was not ready to deal with another pile of sickening, illogical, know-it-all explanations.

The plot was quite straightforward. You quickly catch on that it's going to be a revenge-based kind of story. Initially, after clocking a few elements of investigation, I was excited to have a detective sub-plot. But no. It all got reduced to inspector Popil. He shielded a 13-year-old Hannibal, and later was acting like a kind uncle with him. Later Popil was continuously irritated with Hannibal's stunts and never properly tried to stop him until Lecter killed everyone he wanted. How… weak plot-wise.

Regarding story itself, it was a well-curated box of cliches. It wasn't poorly executed, no. Simply good enough to fill the mold of a trope. What do we have here?

Ah yes. The young boy became ruthless, his heart - impenetrable fortress. He fell for a beautiful woman that showed him warmth and care. The boy declared his love and intended to be with that woman despite their age gap.

There are quite a few works on a "lady, who remains beautiful and young due to magical or other mysterious reasons, raises a boy who didn't know love". And they are tagged romance, because of course the boy grows up and wants to wife the woman up. And to my surprise that's exactly what I got after opening the book. Genuinely? I screamed and rubbed my face as if it would help me erase the words "Lady Murasaki, I love you" from my memory. Because CAN YOU MAKE IT ANY MORE MESSED UP?

But at the same time… I wonder whether readers of Hannibal Lecter book series feel tired of the AMOUNT OF INSEST AND FATHER/MOTHER ISSUES IMPLIED EVERYWHERE. Because I still remember how Hannibal kept rooting all Clarice's issues into her father. How he said that her relationships with male colleagues were incesty. Look at yourself, Lecter. First I learn that you wanted to make Misha out of Clarice, now I read about you crushing on your AUNT? Like, okay, they are not related. But it was mentioned that Lecter kind of saw Lady Murasaki as a motherly figure. I swear, was author into Freud's teachings or something?

A man who's obsessed with getting revenge on those who killed and ate his sister. Cruelty and coldness are excused, because it was all vigilante justice!

Young Hannibal is more harsh and cold than his older self. He wasn't theatrical, only twice showed some warmth to appeal to others. The 90% of his demeanor I would frame as "deadpan face, detached speech". Yet, both versions of Lecter were good at carrying out plans and scheming (more or less?). Yet the drastic difference was in the way Hannibal treated others. His older self enjoyed manipulation and watching others twitch. Young Hannibal, on the other hand, had no inclination to it. Yes, he was cruel when executed those guys who ate Misha. There you can justify his desire to delay men's death and let them experience emotional horrors. But that's about it? Young Lecter was ferocious when the weak suffered. Had a high sense of justice. Decades later he was killing and eating bad people, but he was always depicted much… calmer? Less concerned about unfairness? I'd say that the younger version had that burning anger inside. But it seemed to evaporate over the years? To me young and old Hannibal don't blend well. As if his personality was changed for the sake of the plot of 'Hannibal: Rising'.

Your typical revenge story where everyone gets punished and the main character doesn't get caught. And of course, obsession with vengeance results in sacrificing connections with other people for the sake of the goal.

It was expected, hence I don't have any particular feelings about it. Grown men continuously tried to kill Hannibal, but always waited out longer than needed and died. Also, somehow Hannibal was always stronger and easily handled them (when not caught off guard)? Phenomenal. [insert dry clapping] And the chapters where Lecter went to save Lady Murasaki? I could see that American action movie in my head. Very performative and overdone. It is what it is though.

When this picture got pieced in my head, I thought: "Oh. Why does it sound like some typical morally grey male lead from a romance book?" Like literally. Rename him, and I totally see Lecter being some man whom readers are fangirling over.

Young Hannibal might appeal to the reader because of his strong feeling of justice, moral ambiguity, intelligence etc. For me though? Every time Hannibal was depicted somewhat pleasant to a reader, my brain kept showing me images with old Lecter drugging Clarice and turning her into his lover. Utter displeasure.

[untangling-thoughts]

whim no. 4

The moon is hiding tonight

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 16 | part 3

'Hannibal'

Thomas Harris

About 'Part VI - A Long Spoon'

Hannibal Lecter book series is a good suspense. 'Red Dragon' and 'The Silence of the Lambs' were great, hense I bought the 3rd book. And it was nice. Wouldn't say that plot disappointed me. But then the 'Part VI' happened. Reading 'A Long Spoon' chapters made me want to throw a book across the room and scream in agony.

Want to know how it felt? I'll tell you. It's like I bought a box of cereal. Good, well made cereal that I purchased in the past. Every time I ate it, I read the back of the box and repeatedly bumped into jokes about a frog inside of the box. It was a funny little tease. I thought to myself: "It's just a joke. Even if there was a frog, which I doubt, it would be a toy. Nobody is sick enough to put an actual frog into the box of cereal, right?" Wrong. On my last meal, when I emptied the box into my bowl, a LIVING FROG FELL OUT. Right on top of all the cereal. The food is ruined. My desire to buy the same brand of cereal is ruined. I scream and cry next to the bowl looking at the frog in disbelief because WHAT THE ACTUAL HELL?

Frankly, I dislike every plot decision made in 'A Long Spoon'. Let me explain.

The sheer pain

I was truly put into despair after reading last chapter. It was like a fever dream. Honey. Warm lights. A spinning head. Nausea that isn't even in my stomach. It was within my chest. Sheer absurdity kept increasing with every read line. That chapter brought to life things I haven't imagined, and things I logically assumed were false. And the worst part? As a reader, all I could do is sit there and helplessly keep reading, because I couldn't change anything.

Can't believe I'm saying this, but I feel sorrow and disappointment for Clarice Starling. For how her life turned out. In 'Silence of The Lambs' she's the main character. Standing strong, despite all the discrimination thrown into her way. Despite being brushed off. Despite being mixed with dirt. To me, that is a novelty, in a way. Seeing a female character facing a very tough reality of this world, and staying strong. Clarice was a warrior, though not without gaps in her armor. But she tried and tried. To put her best effort. To live how her inner self said. She had standards. Didn't bend. And yet the ending was a pure pain. It doesn't hurt like a punch. Rather like helplessness.

She wasn't considered an FBI agent when she went to rescue Lecter. Starling decided to follow her principles, and almost succeeded. If not that tranquilizer dart.

Let's realistically summarize what Hannibal has done. He rescued her. Then used drugs and hypnosis to do therapy on her. He made her mind to regress and act like a kid, and even when Starling war more or less normal, Lecter preferred to keep her unaware of reality. Of what was happening. Initially you'd think he was trying to cure her psychological wounds in his strange ways, but no. It was said that Hannibal was preparing her to be a vessel for Misha, his dead sister. But Clarice remained Clarice. Just… very deranged.

You will NEVER convince me that she willingly chose to be with Lecter. She was continuously hypnotized and kept under strong drugs that could have altered something in her brain. Knowing Hannibal's abilities, I wouldn't be surprised if he partially brainwashed her.

There was a small paragraph in a story where Hannibal realised: no matter how much he shaped Starling, she still couldn't be exacly what he wanted her to be. Please don't mistake it as 'she still remained her identity even as Lecter tried to change her'. He DID change her. Just not entirely. But the fact that Clarice willingly stepped into a relationship with Lecter, even after he stopped using drugs, is a HUGE sign of her not being the same. To me it didn't look like she had any feelings for him both in 'Silence of The Lambs' AND 'Hannibal'. Starling might had respected Hannibal's brain, or at least found such encounter memorable, but she felt nothing. Otherwise, why would she immediately give her letters from Lecter to FBI? Why never left him a message through newspapers?

She didn't refuse her old life and pick happiness. She got manipulated! Lecter took advantage of her unstable state of mind! It was… absolutely unpleasant to read.

You'd say 'Hey! He killed Krendler for her!' Honey, Krendler deserved to be cooked even if Hannibal didn't know Clarice.

When you think of it, Starling's life would've been a mess if she returned from captivity. Because she went on a mission nobody asked her to do. Clarice barged into a rich man's house, used weapons, killed some people. And worst of all, Lecter escaped! On the bright side, she already learned how to track him based on the purchases he made, so I think FBI would've been able to catch him. Still there was a high chance that Clarice would've been fired. That is, if nobody discovered that she was kept captive.

Still, I dislike the ending she received. Even if reality was hurtful, I believe Starling could push through it. Yet author picked the other route. The worst route imaginable. It wouldn't have been less hurtful if she died because of pigs, to be honest.

Misha

Before the Part VI, Misha, Hannibal's dead sister, was mentioned several times. It was obvious that even after decades, Lecter still held her dear to his heart.

At some point it was said that he wished the time turned back and Misha came to life. That maybe, if the timeline reversed, there would be a place for her. And in Hannibal's mind it was a place of Clarice Starling. Strange, right? It made me confused too. Clarice's life wasn't exactly all honey. And I'd say her spot is far from ideal. At some point Lecter wanted to merge Misha's and Clarice's images in his head. We also get a scene after Hannibal rescued Starling. He was doing calculations on physics while she was recovering. Trying to somehow reach the point where the time reverses back. He couldn't, and Hannibal was hit with despair.

So what could it possibly mean? Since we didn't get any proper explanation, I've developed a theory. Maybe the "place" Lecter thought of was a metaphor to his heart. Perhaps Clarice was gradually becoming more important to Hannibal than his sister. When Lecter was doing calculations, he was coping in attempt to prove to himself that Misha would eventually be more dear to Hannibal. It could be that his value system changed because of Clarice. He kept cherishing the memory of Misha, but she wasn't as important. It's not about romantic feelings, but the attachment.

The issue is that my theory crumbled the moment I read all the leftover chapters of 'A Long Spoon'. Apparently he wanted to make Starling a VESSEL for his sister? I have NO idea how that was supposed to work. Maybe Lecter wanted to brainwash Clarice so much that he'd make Misha out of her. Or was it some sort of spiritual thing where he wanted to summon Misha's soul into her body? (It's absurd, I know)

Also, can we talk about Lecter being 54, super smart and having a vast knowledge in psychology and STILL having issues to accept the death of his sister? Man, you were 6. I know the trauma of loss remains. But it's baffling that he didn't come to terms with it. I didn't expect Hannibal to cure his own mental issues, but if he was truly intelligent, I'd expect him to reflect on his past and eventually move on - let go of painful memories and cherish happy ones. Lecter never did, apparently. Didn't do self analysis. Yes, it'd be not ideal, but also… who ELSE would have a therapy with you? Self management where?

Awful psychology

I loathe the chapter for poor execution from psychological stand.

Firstly, author used Hannibal to give us some guesses, framed as confident statements, about Clarice's trauma. Where were the roots and how it reflected on her life, what projections she made on people. While initially it might appear solid, I doubted every piece information.

Yes, Starling still has unprocessed trauma regarding her father's death. She loved him yet hated for dying in such a stupid way. It was a loss she never got to heal from. So it all went into repression. But there is so much more to her personality. The screaming lambs are probably more impactful, because that's what set Clarice's value system and properly showcased her inner core. And I am sure there were more past experiences that shaped her, but they were never got mentioned. It's unpleasant that Hannibal was so tunnel-visioned on her father.

Lecter called her relationship with John Brigham incest-y because he had some qualities of Starling's dad. Same was said about Jack Crawford. And while I do agree that the latter has a parental figure vibe, there wasn't anything weird. Clarice was his subordinate, and he did guide her in work by via advice, motivational speech and instructions. Jack also hyped her up when she did something correct though it caused some dispute, and stood by her side when she needed defense against higher-ups. But their relationship was completely normal! There wasn't even a drop of romance. Meanwhile, regarding Brigham… My dear dude…

We are prone to be attracted to what we saw during childhood OR to something we were missing. We could make an assumption (!) that Clarice was attracted to mature men personality-wise, or simply older men. BUT she wasn't even attracted to anyone who'd fit that description! Crawford was her mentor and she treated him like one. Brigham, as I suspect, had a much smaller age gap with her and even then, she asked to stay friends. And they did! They remained good friends! The only relationship we know of is the one Starling had in 'The Silence of the Lambs', 7 years before 'Hannibal', with one guy from a botanical center. And he was around her age.

Sometimes people can have similar qualities, you know? And other get attracted to those qualities because they are good? Or nuanced in an appealing way? But Hannibal IMMEDIATELY made it weird. It's like if I said I like kind people and someone would point at me from the crowd and scream 'IT'S BECAUZE YOUR DAD WAS KIND!! BOO INCEST!!' Like, for the love of god. Are you okay, old man?

Not only that, Lecter came to the conclusion that Paul Krendler was a bad side of father figure for Starling. And okay, such theory had the right to exist. But it was claimed with too much confidence.

She could've been insecure due to childhood trauma, yes, but being upset because higher ups kept putting her down. Two completely different things. Krendler didn't have to resemble a bad father figure to rise a reaction. He was just an a*hole. And I think Lecter forgot that sometimes we can hate people just because they are irritating or being b*tchy towards us. Everything in our lives doesn't revolve around 1 single traumatic event!

And I considered those arguments to be logical and reasonable. Until author arrived with his pen and said 'Well, actually, Lecter was right about everything! Clarice is, indeed, a girl who has daddy issues that affect every single part of her life! No exception!' ARE YOU SERIOUS? I'm not mad because I'm wrong. I am mad because the explanation author gives and deems truthful makes. no. sense!

Also, the hypocrite Lecter was? How could you talk about incest-like relationships Starling had when you LITERALLY tried to turn her into Misha, and eventually started dating her and sleeping with her? Excuse yourself.

Conclusion

Shortly? I hate that Clarice was 'happy' with Hannibal. I hate that were sleeping together. I hate that author had the audacity to write about it. I hate that this book series gained my trust before slipping a frog into my cereal.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 16 | part 2

'Hannibal'

Thomas Harris

General remarks

Emotional whimsy?

I've noticed in 2 previous books as well, but it especially burned my eyes in 3rd. Thomas Harris seemed to write his books by mixing methaphors and whimsical vibing into grounded stories. It is hard to put into words, but there are loads of examples where spirituality gets involved. I find it an interesting touch to the story. While my preference is realism and believable story-telling, I don't dislike this weaved-in 'feelings' stuff. Yet my opinion on it is quite uncertain. On the one hand, it's refreshing, and on the other… reading a letter from Hannibal where he asked Clarice to look into a frying pan and see her mother's in it was kind of comical.

Can't properly explain this because you have to read it yourself to properly understand what I mean. But there is this vibe of 'feeling objects/situations' that is unique to Thomas's writing.

The very first situation in 'Hannibal' where such vibe was shown is when Starling sat at home, trying to find so-called guidance in her dreadful situation. Her career was falling apart and she started looking for what? An example from ancestors? And then reminisced about the story of her roots? Not to disregard author's work, but when the story is more heavy on the facts, psychology, and keeping things natural, it felt way too deep. I don't think any average person thinks that far back into their story line. It all usually ends on grandparents. While yes, people are different, and Clarice's way of thinking might differ and be unique… The issue I have is that such sophisticated emotional attunement is a default for all of the main characters. It's in Will Graham (Red Dragon book), Hannibal Lecter, Clarice Starling. What a coincidence, right?

I find it very hard to relate to such intuitive, emotion-heavy way of perceiving things. Hense it only strengthens my feeling of alienation.

Unrealistic elements

In 'Part II - Florence', some symbolism was added through Gypsies. When Romula grabbed Lecter to rob him, she withdrew because Hannibal was like a Satan himself and had evil eyes. That was so obviously theatrical that I couldn't even take it seriously. But it's okay. I recognise the artistical efforts.

Another fantastical event was in 'Part V - A Pound of Flesh'. The fact that pigs haven't eaten Hannibal because 'they smelled no fear' was WILD. Because throughout the story it is shown that you didn't have to bleed to be devoured. Pigs ate chicken and other meat that wasn't soaked in blood. There was also a part that talked about one of pig supervisors barely surviving after being in a pigpen. He was trying to take back a piece of clothing that was left from a mannequin. That was a clear sign that while hungry, those animals would tear you apart. Yet Hannibal survived? Just by standing in there, around pigs, all chill? Absolutely NOT possible. But fine. Plot armor. I'll let it slide.

Inappropriate stuff

My genuine question is: why are there some sexually-related phrases thrown in very randomly? They are usually one-sentenced. Often appear without a proper reason and never get addressed afterwards. Like some kind of extra ingredient in a product - unnecessary yet still there who knows why. "Might contain raisins". IT'S LITERALLY RICE.

Undirect quotes I vaguely remember:

'Clarice looked at the woman that walked in and wondered whether she used plaster on her [private parts]'

Girl? Are we okay? Why did you just think that? No explanation. The thought was so random I had to do a double take.

'Pazzi was imagining what he'd have after selling Lecter to Mason. Wealth. Doing some charity with his wife, giving coins to the poor. Shore that reminded him of a wonderful vacation. His wife's hand around his [private part]'

Okay, I know why it's related. He was thinking about joys of life. But the last sentence was NOT connected to the money. But it was absolutely not needed. And his horny thought just gets totally ignored afterwards. As if it was never mentioned and you hallucinated it.

'Pazzi died [insert description of death and gore]. His [private part] was hard after death'

What kind of literature Tourette's syndrome is this.

And don't get me wrong, I don't mind vulgarity or descriptiveness. Described things are natural, and this is an adult book about murder and people that are sick in the head. Violence and explicit language are normal. Instead, I am bothered by sheer dysregulation in the way such things are added into the plot. They are just as extra as an additional body part nobody asked for (Lecter would know).

Over-italianized

The amount of Italian words used in 'Part II - Florence' is SICKENING. I know! They are in Italy! But the book is written IN ENGLISH. And pages are literally blooming with all of the motoro, pompieri etc. You could've just used normal English words. Because their meaning would be EQUIVALENT to those Italian nouns. I'd understand using some language-specific words, like katana for Japan, because yes, it can be translated as a 'sword', but katana usually implies Japanese-specific kind of sword. But in this book all Italian words were simple. Was the author trying to flex his Italian vocabulary at the cost of reader's eyes? Like okay, pal, you made those people use Italian words. What about the other 95% of their speech? Why isn't it in Italian too? Or were you implying that they all talk in English and only know a few words from Italian vocabulary? (Yes, I am annoyed)

Lecter's speech about Dante and hanging people

I have to say it. That lection was… oddly dumb-worded.

From the very first time when Hannibal mentioned corruption and hanging you already know where it's going. The whole lection was directed at Pazzi. It was a very ironic and symbolic way to marinate him. Pazzi's reaction was not described, but I suspect he became very nervous. It's a bright and subtle way to do threats. And I liked it!

But be for real. I understand that the whole lecture was probably shortened to not add another 10 pages into the book. Yet the execution confused me. Have you fully read that lecture? Hannibal repeated the same shallow stuff again and again.

Author could have used first phrases to let readers know what's happening, and let Pazzi join (as it was in a book) and watch photos on hanged people with other guests with some simple commentary. It would have been enough for Pazzi to clock it. The rest of the lecture could've been wrapped up as 'Lecter kept talking about corruption and greed in a calm and somewhat enthusiastic manner [add a few more sentences]'.

Instead we get 5 paragraphs of same words in different order. The idiocy of the text made ME feel like an idiot too. No idea how that shallow research deserved clapping from listeners.

Margot Verger and her under-lesbianism

A refreshing touch - queer character emerged. Added variety to the story, which is appreciated. But as much as Margot was portrayed as a lesbian, there were several extremely questionable moments.

For once, she showered in one room with Barny. It can be excused, sure. Author never specified whether Margot was simply trying to be masculine or wanted to be a man (I lean towards the former). But nevertheless, I would've expected her to be keenly aware that being in one shower room with a man, fully naked, is a truly bad idea. Especially if we take into a consideration that Mason used to SA her as a kid and she was still perceived as a woman.

Barny was a dumbass too. He KNEW Margot had a wife. Barny KNEW she was a lesbian. It was implied that she haven't had any proper friendships with men (probably because they kept hitting on her or being sexist). And still, when he got physically excited, Barny decided to stand naked in front of Margot and go for a kiss! Honestly, he should have gotten punched harder.

Later, when they were making up and trying to be friends, Margot told Barny that if she liked men, than it'd be HIM ONLY? I'm sorry, what? First of all, you can't know for sure, right? You're just speaking about it because he's your good friend, right?

It's also understandable why Margot offered Barny to sleep with her. It was a deal. Just so Barny would help her murder Mason. Despair made her offer things she wouldn't have done normally. But the main thing that bothered me was a kiss. When they met for the last time, Margot kissed Barny on the lips. WHY? Brother, this is not platonic at all. And felt absolutely wrong. I wanted to rip my hair out.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 16 | part 1

'Hannibal'

Thomas Harris

About first 5 Parts ('Washington, D.C.', 'Florence', 'To the New World', 'Notable Occasions on the Calendar of Dread', 'A Pound of Flesh')

On the moment when I finished 80% of the story, I had a formed opinion on 'Hannibal'. Overall, the book was moderately enjoyable. It held a good ground on the level of 'Red Dragon' and 'The Silence of the Lambs'. There were some questionable parts that caused irritation, yet they didn't ruin the book for me. 'Hannibal' had lesser amount of detective elements. Understandable: our main focus here wasn't the investigation, but characters. Hannibal, Clarice. Their past and future. Because of it the story might seem a little underwhelming. Still solig though. Yet my mostly positive evaluation was ruined by the last Part. I'd prefer to focus on my initial thoughts and leave 'A Long Spoon' for later.

Clarice as a strong female character

Clarice Starling is fascinating. She's not perfect. But determined, hard working, and has a brain. Let's be real, her life was kind of shitty. Starling kept being undermined, discriminated, ridiculed. All because she stayed true to herself and didn't want to bend for others. She was an honest worker who wouldn't cheat her way up the career ladder, and a woman, which only added complications.

Still, she stood strong. Found ways to secure her importance, so she hasn't been discarded to something less. She kept fighting for herself, even when all the efforts were futile. Clarice resembles true strength. She kept on surviving horrible attitude and shitty work life.

The misunderstandings

An underlying theme you can notice in both 'The Silence of the Lambs' and 'Hannibal' is bias. Or misunderstanding. Characters assume things countless times, and their wild suggestions appeared realistic, though remained false.

I thought it was actually a very cool writing decision. In real life, people are constantly perceived in the wrong way, so seeing the same thing reflected in a book was wonderful.

Clarice was constantly mischaracterised by others. She was anything you could think of. An arrogant worker who's all up her own butt. A cheap girl from the farm. A ruthless FBI killing machine. Crawford's lover. A lesbian. A woman in love with Hannibal Lecter. The latter is probably the most notable one. And I found joy in reading about what people deemed her to be and who she truly was.

Hannibal also fell victim of others' assumptions. Because of his interest in Clarice it was said that he had feelings for her. Thankfully people were more insightful when it came to Lecter. As one of the conversations in Verger's mansion went:

- Does he want to sleep with her, eat her or kill her? - Maybe all three. The order is unknown though.

I liked how Mason, Cordell, Krendler and Barny kind of argued about it. Because it showed: they don't know Lecter. They can assume things, but never know for sure. Barny did quote Hannibal's opinion on Starling, yet it was taken with a lot of skepticism.

The nonexistent romance

Following on the topic of misunderstandings, we have to dive into the relationship between Clarice and Hannibal. While I am no expert, I did draw some conclusions from the story.

Lecter wasn't romantically attracted to Starling. I believe that he told Barny the truth: Hannibal found her entertaining. As he said, Clarice was a small, kind of naive kitty who was fighting other kitties. And growing to be a graceful adult cat. She was smart and somewhat idealistic, which probably stirred Lecter's curiosity. He helped Clarice in 'The Silence of the Lambs' because her past was painful and interesting enough to satisfy Lecter. In 'Hannibal', he wrote her a letter after 7 years of silence to try and patronize her and push her to reply.

Yes, there are moments that show Hannibal's strange appreciation of Clarice. We get to read about him playing on a piano while looking at her photo from a newspaper, to see him draw Starling in a strange way. We learn that Lecter stalked Clarice after retuning to USA. He watched her running in a park. Came into her car to breathe in her smell or lick the wheel. It became close to an obsessive behaviour at that point. But I didn't catch any of romantic coloring in it.

It's a sick interest. Twisted adoration. He liked to watch her as some wonderful creature. When Hannibal spectated Starling as she went for a run, he later on replayed that moment in his head. Taking into the consideration author's love to throw in extra vulgarity, it was fully absent here. Lecter wasn't drawn to Clarice's body or face. He was not imagining himself doing anything to her (ranged from a hug to whatever extreme you can imagine) and simply found comfort in watching Clarice for afar.

Clarice had no feelings towards Hannibal. In 'The Silence of the Lambs' she visited him several times. Yet it was mostly clinical. Clarice respected Lecter as a person but took no effort to appeal to him. She did her job. Told him about her life just as quid pro quo. Nothing overly emotional. Of course, she remembered Hannibal. People like these are quire unusual and she had a one-in-a-lifetime experience. So there is nothing strange.

You can tell that she had no desire to entertain Lecter or get closer to him. We learn that Clarice never replied to his letters, and whenever she received any, they got handed over to FBI. Starling remained sober-thinking. She repeatedly announced her opinion, which I believe was correct. To Hannibal, Starling was probably the most amusing person to spectate. Unlike others, she didn't try to take power from him, made no attempts on getting into his head. Lecter clearly liked to play with her, maybe respected a bit, but nothing more.

And I genuinely liked that both of them got misinterpreted by others. It was a great piece of fiction. That is, until I read 'A Long Spoon' Part.

[untangling-thoughts]

whim no. 3

Dissecting each book like a bug on the table is merely my way of engaging with it. Doesn't mean I haven't enjoyed reading it. Getting into writing style, studying the way plot is constructed, how characters are made etc. It's interesting. And I might predominantly comment on parts that bug me, there are, indeed parts that are quite enjoyable to read.

The plot can still be engaging and likeable, even if I found some gaps or was overly attentive to some elements. When, as a big picture, everything seems good more or less, I often can help but consider how realistic the story was, or what could be a more natural/suitable way to execute something, or other possibilities of explaining some plot turns.

Of course, in no way or form I claim to be better than any writer out there. Neither I'm saying that I would have done something better.

One person told me: 'Stop looking for perfection in books. It ruins your experience'. Which... was surprising. Because I'm not? I simply prefer to point out shaky parts when I see them. Mostly it's just... my way to indulge in reading. This way I don't mindlessly flipp through pages, but attempt to actually think about the stuff I read.

[untangling-thoughts]

sketch no. 1

- I used to like you, you know.

They were sitting side by side on the rooftop. The night sky sprawled before them. Stars shone in the distance.

- You say that as if you dislike me now, - she laughed, nudging him lightly. There was a twinkle of humor in her voice. Light and soft. The corners of his mouth curled up momentarily, relaxing in a short bit.

- ...No. I meant romantically.

His tone remained even and calm. Yet it took some dedication to not trail off while talking. A soft ribbon of relief slipped in and out of his chest. Right through the ribs. There was no fear.

The silence fell. Her eyes averted to the sky. He looked away too. Knew that she needed space.

- Oh.

It slipped out of her mouth quietly. Something heavy settled within. She didn't say anything, not at first. Expression remained relaxed, yet it was blank. That happened when she didn't know how to respond.

- ...I wish you had told me, - despite the neutral tone, words carried notes of tiredness.

- It was unfitting for our relationship. Sitting it out was the best solution.

He felt at ease while speaking. A rational conclusion, that's what it was. Connection mattered more than unnecessary mess. A charcoal, that's what remained of his feelings. It betrayingly simmered, yet was weak enough to ignore. He was planning to redirect his attention later.

She hugged her legs, chin rested on the knees. Gaze drifted to his frame. Not face.

- No, you should have, - the protest was a bit louder than her usual speech. She unintentionally let a droplet of emotion to sink in.

- Because... - the words died in her lungs, not even making it to the throat, - I liked you too.

She chocked the last words out. Unsure. Reluctant.

- I see.

His heart stuttered, strangely so. Expression stilled, but then relaxed quickly. To show that he accepted such outcome without trouble. Yet, on the inside, the heart was licked by warm tongues of flame. Cozy yet thrilling.

- Seems like the moment had passed, huh, - he hummed, as his throughts drifted away. A simple conclusion. Not bitter.

He turned the head when she sighed. Gaze lingered on the slouched frame beside him. Meanwhile, she stared down. Eyes didn't focus on city lights, only looked past them.

- Are you upsed that we missed the opportunity? - on his studious gaze he only received silence and a weak shrug. They sat like that for a short while.

- Don't grieve over something that never was. Things like that happen, and it's normal, - he spoke again. Unusual gentlessness laced the words.

- It's not that.

Despite the pensiveness and calmness on her face, the voice was wavering. Like a melody played with shaky hands. He knew that tune. That's how people sound when they're about to cry. But she didn't. Sucked it up until the end. Even when eyes became watery and throat hurt from restraint.

- I'm not sad because the timing is gone. I'm sad because it was probably my only opportunity to be with you. And I missed it.

She swallowed, then sniffed. Wiped her face with the palm to remain composed.

He understood. Heaviness in the chest came so suddenly that he forgot to inhale. Sensation was too loaded to think of it at that moment.

-...You still like me.

Not a question. Her restraint broke the moment she felt seen.

- Y-yeah. Kind of. No pressure though! - she kept on babbling as if her voice didn't shake, and her face wasn't flooding with tears. - I don't expect you to reciprocate, and I'm not planning to act on it, and-

All that endless thread of talking got cut off the moment he hugged her. Awkwardly. Unsure of where to touch and how to hold, yet determined.

- I don't feel pressured, - his even voice carried more force. He had to tie the words together to make it make sense.

The sudden care made her heart whine. Fear tingled in the fingertips. Fighting it, she dared to hug back. A loud sob got muffled against his clothes. She let herself cry.

[untangling-thoughts]

whim no. 2

Tired. Things are not bad. The life is simply lacking, and I am stuck in a stagnation phase. Once again. In a different form, but with similiar conditions. I know how badly it can get, but I'm too aware to let myself drown. Won't happen again. Yet I wish to get out of my skin. To peel it out (figuratively) and free myself. To crawl up the wall.

Being stuck is so frustrating. I am close to walking out of the comfort zone just for the sake of new connections. To be more visible to others.

Hopefully this mental discomfort pases though. I don't want to force things in my life.

[untangling-thoughts]

A list of finished books. Numerated in the order they were read.

[upd. 24.07.2025]

The Picture of Dorian Gray | Oscar Wilde | not reviewed

Spy the Lie: Former CIA Officers Teach You How to Detect Deception | Philip Houston, Michael Floyd, Susan Carnicero, Don Tennant | not reviewed

Black Water Lilies | Michel Bussi | not reviewed

The Seven Deaths of Evelyn Hardcastle | Stuart Turton | not reviewed

American Psycho | Bret Easton Ellis | not reviewed

× × ×

The Chemistry of Death | Simon Beckett | not reviewed

Cards on the Table | Agatha Christie | not reviewed

Sad Cypress | Agatha Christie | not reviewed

Body Double | Tess Gerritsen | not reviewed

Hallowe'en Party | Agatha Christie | not reviewed

The Silent Patient | Alex Michaelides | not reviewed

Red Dragon | Thomas Harris | not reviewed

Sherlock Homles (1st book). A Study in Scarlet. The Sigh of the Four. The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes | Arthur Conan Doyle | reviewed

The Silence of The Lambs | Thomas Harris | reviewed

Hannibal | Thomas Harris | reviewed

Hannibal: Rising | Thomas Harris | reviewed

I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream | Harlan Ellison | not reviewed

The Thursday Murder Club | Richard Osman | reviewed

The Chalk Man | C. J. Tudor | not reviewed

upcoming

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 15 | part 4

'The Silence of The Lambs'

Thomas Harris

Additional story elements

Learning more about Thomas Harris's inspiration was interesting. Got to know what served as the foundarion of his previous book, 'Red Dragon', and Hannibal in general. At first it felt like the story lost it's authenticity, because not all characters were made from scratch. Harris used the personas he saw and implemented them in his story, filling the blanks. But honestly? That's exacly how writing works. Yes, humanity has this wonderful things called 'imagination', hense people can construct things that didn't exist before. But such stuff alwaus takes its roots into person's brain. Nothing that appears on paper is made up from nothing. People use something from their experience and then tweak it in wonderful ways until it turns into art. And I'm all here for it, actually.

Now, talking about 'The Silence of The Lambs' specifically. I enjoyed how concequential and technical the whole story is. There is no fluff.

The majority of time, dialogues were a pleasure to read, too. Very well constructed. They keep the 'busy people working and need to exchange information' vibe. Also, there is NO fakely curated yapping. Apart from some clunky parts where in 1 dialogue line from one topic to a completely different one. Loke that time when entomologist (?) guy talked to Clarice, started with the bugs and ended on 'I'd like to get to know you better'. A period is not enough of a separation between those 2 contextually different things.

It was a bit confusing when author used many technical words. I was unfamiliar with a bunch of these, but it was managable. Book remarks and Google exist for a reason.

Flashbacks and visions only show necessary parts for reader to get a bit of understanding. It appeals to me much more than extra details people usually love to add into stories. It also keeps the curiosity high.

The depersonification is shown subtly yet nicely. It's in the words author used. In a way the killer thought of his victims as 'it'. In a way Crawford has to detach himself from his wife's body.

Clarice's 'romance choices' didn't feel forced. Every character was someone we got to know, at least briefly. They had connections with Sarling and there were brief mentions of men's or Clarice's interest/disinterest.

On, and... I love how this story has elements of humor. Enjoyed every subtle irony added in there. Hannibal's note alone is true comedy. Lecter literally left a riddle to police after escaping. And surely they had to decode it. But Hannibal did all that just so he could call Chilton sh*t. Deserved. Also funny.