I just started and abandoned another one of those serial killer novels. I don’t usually read serial killer novels, even though I am sort of writing a serial killer series. But really it’s more like an anti- serial killer series. However, The Silence of the Lambs is one of my all-time favorite books and movies. I teach it in my film classes, I analyze it in my workshops and workbooks. It and Red Dragon are the platinum standard of serial killer novels and probably the reason that I ever pick up any other serial killer novel to begin with. And those books are also the reason that I almost always abandon any serial killer novel almost as soon as I start it – often in disgust and horror. Because let's face it - nobody has ever done it like Thomas Harris. And most attempts are not just bad - they're probably actually harmful.It was Harris who mythologized the serial killer to classic monster status, although Stevenson’s Jekyll/Hyde, Stoker’s Dracula (supposedly based on the real-life Vlad the Impaler), and various depictions of Jack the Ripper were strong precursors. We are fascinated by the idea of pure evil in a human being. And because of Harris, the serial killer has become an iconic modern monster, like a vampire or werewolf or zombie (maybe replacing the pretty much defunct mummy!). Because with Red Dragon and The Silence of the Lambs, Harris did a completely brilliant thing. In the 1970’s Special Agents Robert Ressler and John Douglas of the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit (now called the Behavioral Analysis Unit) began a series of interviews with incarcerated serial killers to see what made these men tick and hopefully develop strategies for catching them. The agents, along with Professor Ann W. Burgess, compiled their findings into a textbook and started to train agents as profilers. This new department got a lot of press and media attention and a large number of authors jumped all over that research. But judging by the books that resulted, very, very few of those authors seem to have actually read those interviews.Thomas Harris, though, took the same research that was available to everyone, and used a combination of absolutely precise fact and police procedure and a haunting mythological symbolism to create those first two books (and then Hannibal sort of went off the rails, if you ask me…). The result was two of the best horror/police procedural blend novels ever written. The killers Jame Gumb (Buffalo Bill) and Francis Dolarhyde were both more and less than human. And Lecter, of course, is a mythic archetype of the evil genius.And then everyone jumped on the bandwagon and there are now hundreds of Lecters-lite, if you will.I love Harris’s first two books for their mythic resonance. But I have a real problem with the way most authors portray serial killers because it’s so incredibly dishonest. They romanticize and poeticize serial killers – portraying them as evil geniuses that play elaborate cat and mouse games with detectives and law enforcement agencies. Yeah, right. These men are not geniuses. They don’t leave poems at crime scenes or arrange their victim’s bodies in tableaux corresponding to scenes of great art or literature. They are vicious rapists who brutalize their victims because the agony of those victims gets the killer off, and a large number of them continue to have sex with the corpses of their victims because they are that addicted to absolute control and possession. That’s evil. But the serial killer subgenre as a whole has perpetrated a very unrealistic view of what these monsters really are. Most authors who write about serial killers don’t show the sexual correlation. They skirt around the issue of rape.The very worst ones write torture porn - sexualizing the violence, fetishizing women’s bodies, sexualizing the torture of women (conveniently ignoring the fact that many of these killers rape and torture and kill men and children as well) and basically avoiding portraying the pure horror of what these men actually do.I’m sure some authors (not the last group) have an honest desire to create an exploration of mythic evil to rival Harris’s books. I get that. But the fact is, most authors (and screenwriters and filmmakers) who write about serial killers are dishonestly romanticizing them and leaving out the unmitigated, repellent malevolence of these men.I can’t blame Harris for that. But sometimes I wish we could just say, "You know – the definitive serial killer book has been written. Twice. Let’s just move on from there, shall we?"
What can I say about this book that hasn't been already said! I believe I am one of those last ones to have read this book. And before anyone asks, No - I haven't seen the film either! Although, I have been told, multiple times by everyone close to me, including my husband that I should watch it for Sir Anthony Hopkins. Well, maybe another day, when I am not so chicken about watching movies in this genre.Coming back to the book - it was perfection in complete! I couldn't find fault with it and no it was not because I was in a generous mood or because it came so hyped but simply because it was perfect for me. I won't go much into the plot as it is old news to one and all. However, I shall concentrate on penning down a few of my thoughts, especially the feelings that flitted through me while reading this book.Firstly, and I have to be honest here, I was intimidated when picking this one up. Why you may ask and the answer simply was because of the hype, both around the book and the movie. I did not want to be the one to call it names, when all others raved about it and have me stoned in the center of the universe! :) Well, that was one feeling I lost immediately after I read the first few pages, which despite not being very promising, still held a certain intrigue that made me want to read ahead.Clarice Starling - I felt as if I was a part of her, was inside her head, actually thinking her thoughts and most importantly feeling her fears and emotions. She became the central part of this book to me (well duh she is the central part of the book)! However, when I say that she became central to me, I mean that she and I became almost one in these past few days that I spent reading the book. I felt her every loss, urged her in her every attempt, got bugged with everyone who portrayed a distinct lack of trust in her, rejoiced with those few who trusted her and seemed to encourage her. In short, I was her these past few days as I was reading this book.Dr. Hannibal Lecter - Am sure much has been said, written and discussed about this man and his role in this book and all others in the series. However, to me, he was the most fascinating character ever written about. I have quite a few favourite characters but this one will stay strong and remain etched in my mind, even when I move onto other books. The manner in which he talks to Clarice, the riddles, the almost teasing posers and everything about him makes me feel that he is the best negative character ever written about, who despite all the negativity has a lot of positive in him. I sound weird right? Well call me crazy, if you wish, but I couldn't help but fall into the spell cast by Lecter and I am as entranced as they come. What horrors await me for falling into this trap, I shall know only after I complete the series, till then I shall remain ensnared.Jack Crawford - I saw a marked difference in Crawford in this book and the previous one, Red Dragon. I believe it is because of his personal issues but still I missed the old Jack a little. I found him flustered and disinterested and yet somehow he was still totally on it; like the man he used to be. I loved how the author developed this character throughout the book. In fact, I loved the way the author developed each and every character, be it big or small. It made for a wonderful reading.The Plot - Serial killing with the FBI interested and a rookie trying to solve it. Doesn't sound like much right? However, when you have the above three characters, even a plot as simple as a serial killing takes the form of an epic, which will be remembered for years! Not one part of the plot felt unnecessary to me, whether it was the discourse on science or psychology or even the intricacies of the mind and thinking - they all made the plot stronger and more intriguing to read. I had a few issues with the end, especially in how pat it was and how movie-like it turned out to be but still I won't cut down a single star, for all those stars are definitely deserved by this spine chilling and thrilling tale.Do read it, if you haven't already! It is totally worth the time and effort.Am moving onto the next in this series. See you after I finish that one!
What do You think about The Silence Of The Lambs (2015)?
Another re-read of Silence of the Lambs, this time my favorite. Maybe it's because I'm more into the story and read them in the order of sequence and not popularity, I'm not sure, but this time around I found it even more fascinating than the first meet.Clarice is a likeable character. Her background melding with who she wants to be is an admirable one. She's given the chance of a lifetime, handed out by a man she admires, to step her foot firmly into the FBI. Without meaning to, she's sucked into the world of Hannibal Lecter, who spurs her on to uncover clues and solve the mystery of the serial killer the media calls Buffalo Bill. Her determination mixed with fragile ego was a realistic blend, and her internal backward insults when talking to people who don't give her enough credit was downright amusing.The character of Hannibal Lecter is larger than life, written so well on the pages I can see him clearly as the writer takes him through the motions. With class and culture, manners but enjoying cruelty with his words, the madman is interesting as he both torments Clarice and forces her to self-reveal. The heart of the book is their verbal warplay, the cautious pauses on her behalf, the strategic maneuvering on his.I'm surprised how much I felt for Crawford in this one; I think before he fell in the shadows and I didn't pay as much notice. He's an intriguing character from his haunting moments with his ailing wife, his detached involvement with Hannibal, to his almost paternal bond of Clarice.As a serial killer, Jame Gumb is twisted. Monstrous in mind and disgusting with actions, he absorbs just enough page time to be interesting but not enough to make it too much about him, to take the focus off the more fascinating areas of this book. And the escape with Hannibal is a tense, intelligently created one.With books like Hannibal Rising, I sometimes found Harris too dry and to the point, but here in Silence he shines, obviously having a lot of enthusiasm to make a multi-layered, psychologically twisted work - the combining of such different people already in various forms of power to those just coming into their own.I tried watching the movie again recently but turned it off after about 20 minutes. Too soon and I already missed some of the depth in dialogue the book held.
—Erin (Paperback stash) *is juggle-reading*
Thomas Harris è uno dei migliori narratori che io conosca e con questo libro l'ha confermato ancora una volta. Ho passato due-tre giorni di intensa lettura senza riuscire a staccarmi dal libro, lo stile è semplice e coinvolgente ma comunque curato e attento ai dettagli.Tuttavia ho preferito Drago Rosso e il motivo principale sono i personaggi.Ho sentito moltissimo la mancanza di Will Graham. So che tutti amano Clarice e anche io l'ho presa in simpatia, ma è troppo perfetta. Clarice non commette mai errori, non ha mai un attimo di cedimento, non ha punti deboli. Ha anche lei i suoi traumi infantili come ogni buon personaggio che si rispetti, ma li ho trovati poco approfonditi e nemmeno troppo influenti sul suo modo di essere. Anche questi agnelli che gridano, boh. Non è che ne risentisse più di tanto, al massimo dormiva poco bene. Will Graham invece era assolutamente, completamente e adorabilmente imperfetto e mal funzionante. Lui sì che era un gomitolo di problemi irrisolti e questo dava profondità e verosimiglianza al personaggio. Non nascondo le mie preferenze così come non l'ha fatto Harris: a Will non andava mai bene niente, a Clarice sempre tutto. Clarice ha perfino il lieto fine romantico, mentre Will si ritrova con la famiglia e la faccia distrutta. Inoltre non mi è ben chiaro perché Jack Crawford con Will sia rigido e severo, mentre con Clarice è dolce, comprensivo e paterno. Harris fa le preferenze.Un altro problema è il serial killer protagonista, che noi chiameremo amichevolmente Billy perché non mi ricordo il nome completo. Io avevo adorato profondamente Dolarhyde, nel Drago Rosso la lente è quasi più focalizzata su di lui che su Will Graham e il suo personaggio è indagato a 360°. Del nostro Billy invece sappiamo poco, solo quello che riferisce Hannibal e un riassunto della sua vita a fine libro. Nel romanzo è presente il suo punto di vista, ma questo non gli dà il minimo spessore psicologico. Non sono riuscita ad affezionarmi a lui, né a capirlo. Si è limitato ad essere un pazzo ossessivo. Credo che il tema della ricerca dell'identità potesse essere affrontato meglio.Hannibal Lecter è Hannibal Lecter e per quante atrocità possa commettere, io continuo ad amarlo, non ho nulla da ridire su di lui. Sicuramente la sua figura in questo secondo capitolo della saga a lui dedicata viene approfondito, ma io continuo a volerne sapere di più! Questo romanzo lascia molti interrogativi aperti, sui suoi scopi e sul legame che lo lega a Clarice. Infine ho da ridire anche sulla trama vera e propria: l'antagonista viene catturato per un puro colpo di fortuna e gli unici passi in avanti che ha fatto l'FBI li ha fatti grazie ai suggerimenti del dr. Lecter. Da soli sono riusciti a concludere poco o niente (ovviamente il grosso del lavoro viene fatto da Clarice) e anche la stessa uccisione di Billy, Buffalo Bill, Jame o come vogliamo chiamarlo, avviene troppo velocemente e per pura fortuna, francamente ho trovato questa cosa un po' deludente.So che questi sembrano davvero tanti lamenti e difetti, ma sono inezie rispetto al romanzo nel suo complesso, che ho amato. Thomas Harris ci sa fare e io non vedo l'ora di leggere Hannibal! Abbiamo un cannibale che vaga in libertà!
—Elisa
A rock-solid classic thriller. There are aspects that have aged of course. Books that are Firsts always do. But it's because they are first that they still seem fresh in their own way. Evidence collection techniques, knowledge about the pathology of serial killers, some of the technology, the sidearms of the F.B.I. and other technical details have changed , but this book is a classic and it still holds one's attention. In addition the idea of the brilliant serial killer has become a cliche in 2011 so Dr. Lector isn't as terrifying as he used to be. However the good doctor still has some bite (rimshot). Silence of the Lambs was one of the first of it's kind and it has aged well. Read it if for no other reason then to gain an appreciation of how influential it has become.
—Checkman
