Stieg Larsson’s “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo” is currently No. 2 on Amazon. (The second and third books in the series are No. 4 and No. 1, respectively). So I picked it up.
It was an intriguing start:
• A hard-working journalist (Mikael) is sentenced to prison for libel.
• A scrappy young woman (Lisbeth, the one with the dragon tattoo) works as a free-lance private investigator.
• A business tycoon (Henrik) grieves the mysterious disappearance of his foster daughter (Harriet), decades ago.
I was sucked in. And late for work.
Around page 249, the story darkens. Lisbeth suffers a brutal sexual assault at the hands of her supposed legal guardian. Instead of alerting the authorities, however, she plots her own sick revenge.
Around page 318, the story darkens again. The disappearance of Harriet is unexpectedly linked to an entire series of unsolved, grotesque sexual assault / murder cases. The perpetrator justifies his evil behavior using Scripture references.
By this time I am more than halfway through the book. Question: do I put down the book in disgust? Or do I continue my investment in the likable Mikael and Lisbeth?
I am beginning to understand why each section of the book begins with a brief statistic on sexual violence against women in Sweden (the author’s home country). Presumably, Larssen is trying to bring attention to this important issue. Question: do we need this type of attention?
In contrast to the several misogynistic perverts profiled in this novel, Mikael is portrayed as a kindly man who treats women, even misunderstood women like Lisbeth, as human beings.
Nonetheless, Mikael’s relationships with women are distorted in their own way. He allows an ongoing relationship with his “best friend” (Erika) to end his marriage. (By the way, Erika is still married, but her husband is enlightened enough to not have a problem with her periodic hookups with Mikael).
During the course of the novel, Mikael becomes romantically involved with two additional women, at their insistence. Although he is unflaggingly kind to them, the relationships end in heartache – interestingly, only for the women. They are emotionally unable to share Mikael with Erika.
Mikael is also kind to his daughter, although without any sense of obligation. He admits being an absentee parent and a “poor” father.
Assuming that Larssen’s intentions were good rather than prurient (a big assumption), his story does not illustrate any realistic solution to the problem of violence against women.
First, women need men who are not only kind, but faithful. Men who are willing to shoulder their responsibilities as fathers and husbands. While Mikael gets points for not being a sadistic pig, he still wounds the women in his life. Deeply.
Second, women cannot fight violence on their own. Lisbeth’s revenge is a fantasy. Women must be encouraged to seek justice from the authorities, not discouraged. Women need to nurture strong support networks, not live in isolation.
Third, we do not need a graphic portrayal of psychotic abuse to understand it is evil. Entering the mind of the enemy, especially as a form of entertainment, can skew our perception of what is acceptable. (For example, Mikael comes off smelling like roses). What is the benefit of experiencing an imaginary torture scene in your head?
Feel free to share your thoughts. Meanwhile, if you are interested in the topic of violence against women, I encourage you to visit http://thesheepfold.org/victim/victim-overview.htm for a truth-grounded perspective.
It was an intriguing start:
• A hard-working journalist (Mikael) is sentenced to prison for libel.
• A scrappy young woman (Lisbeth, the one with the dragon tattoo) works as a free-lance private investigator.
• A business tycoon (Henrik) grieves the mysterious disappearance of his foster daughter (Harriet), decades ago.
I was sucked in. And late for work.
Around page 249, the story darkens. Lisbeth suffers a brutal sexual assault at the hands of her supposed legal guardian. Instead of alerting the authorities, however, she plots her own sick revenge.
Around page 318, the story darkens again. The disappearance of Harriet is unexpectedly linked to an entire series of unsolved, grotesque sexual assault / murder cases. The perpetrator justifies his evil behavior using Scripture references.
By this time I am more than halfway through the book. Question: do I put down the book in disgust? Or do I continue my investment in the likable Mikael and Lisbeth?
I am beginning to understand why each section of the book begins with a brief statistic on sexual violence against women in Sweden (the author’s home country). Presumably, Larssen is trying to bring attention to this important issue. Question: do we need this type of attention?
In contrast to the several misogynistic perverts profiled in this novel, Mikael is portrayed as a kindly man who treats women, even misunderstood women like Lisbeth, as human beings.
Nonetheless, Mikael’s relationships with women are distorted in their own way. He allows an ongoing relationship with his “best friend” (Erika) to end his marriage. (By the way, Erika is still married, but her husband is enlightened enough to not have a problem with her periodic hookups with Mikael).
During the course of the novel, Mikael becomes romantically involved with two additional women, at their insistence. Although he is unflaggingly kind to them, the relationships end in heartache – interestingly, only for the women. They are emotionally unable to share Mikael with Erika.
Mikael is also kind to his daughter, although without any sense of obligation. He admits being an absentee parent and a “poor” father.
Assuming that Larssen’s intentions were good rather than prurient (a big assumption), his story does not illustrate any realistic solution to the problem of violence against women.
First, women need men who are not only kind, but faithful. Men who are willing to shoulder their responsibilities as fathers and husbands. While Mikael gets points for not being a sadistic pig, he still wounds the women in his life. Deeply.
Second, women cannot fight violence on their own. Lisbeth’s revenge is a fantasy. Women must be encouraged to seek justice from the authorities, not discouraged. Women need to nurture strong support networks, not live in isolation.
Third, we do not need a graphic portrayal of psychotic abuse to understand it is evil. Entering the mind of the enemy, especially as a form of entertainment, can skew our perception of what is acceptable. (For example, Mikael comes off smelling like roses). What is the benefit of experiencing an imaginary torture scene in your head?
Feel free to share your thoughts. Meanwhile, if you are interested in the topic of violence against women, I encourage you to visit http://thesheepfold.org/victim/victim-overview.htm for a truth-grounded perspective.
No comments:
Post a Comment