Tuesday, February 11, 2014
The Church of Dead Girls
The Church of Dead Girls
by Stephen Dobyns
Spoilers ahoy -- don't read this 'till you finish the novel.
Stephen Dobyns’ haunting story of a town ripping itself apart in the aftermath of children disappearing was a great read. The horror was subtle for the most part, although there was enough graphic descriptions of sex and violence (particularly toward the end) to keep a veteran horror reader interested.
There are, to my mind, two ‘psychos’ in this novel. The first, and perhaps least interesting of the two, is the primary antagonist, revealed at the novel’s conclusion to be Donald Malloy. I say uninteresting because of the rather cut and dried depiction of his insanity--at the end of the novel he has become quite unhinged (rather suddenly, I might add) and spills his whole story out in one great swoop. And it all fits together rather neatly. His pedophilia and deranged attitude toward sex leads him to fixate on hands, specifically the left or ‘bad’ hand (interesting side note: the Latin for left, sinistra, is the root for the English word “sinister”. There are lots of theories as to why this is: a popular explanation is that prior to the widespread use of toilet paper, the right hand was used for eating and the left for cleaning up waste). Several of his victims were simply people who knew that he had unusual sexual appetites. It was a little too simple for me. It reminded me of episodes of CSI, where the cop tosses off a casual explanation for the crimes and kind of shrugs. I expected a deeper pathology, particularly after that much build up.
The reveal that Donald was the kidnapper/murderer was disappointing not just because of the clinical way in which the madness was treated, but also in the way he abruptly becomes insane. Whereas previously he is a ‘professional man’ who seems perfectly able to go about his business and blend in with society, the moment the reader realizes he is the bad guy he becomes an irrational boogie man that literally carries body parts around with him and basically commits suicide-by-cop. I was left wondering how on earth someone that far gone could have remained hidden as long as he did.
The second and substantially more interesting disturbed character is the nameless narrator. I suspected him throughout the novel (and so did the other characters, which was fun). It was clear that the author was playing with the expectations of the reader throughout, and I very much wanted something to come of the little quirks revealed throughout the book about him. Ultimately I was very disappointed by the ending. His open admission of defiling the corpse of Donald was, in my mind, unnecessary. The line from the psychic who departed the city, saying the hand was now in “a jar among other jars” was brilliant. I literally stopped reading and put the book down for a moment to savor that one line and everything that it insinuated. If he'd stopped there it would have been fantastic. But to have the narrator admit that it was him shortly afterward ruined the effect.
The story of the novel really wasn’t about either of these two characters, though. The story was about the town and a host of other people who live there, told under the backdrop of these crimes. There was a lot going on in the book; too much at times. I agree with reviews that have accused the book of having too many characters and spending more time than necessary on description and exposition. The narrator was fun to read about, but seemed to have an encyclopedic knowledge of the town and its residents. Many scenes contained far more detail than the narrator could plausibly have heard from the other characters, particularly in scenes with characters who had an avowed dislike of the narrator (Ryan Tavich springs to mind).
All in all I enjoyed this novel. It was an interesting story, and well told. This is the first novel I’ve read by this author, and I will certainly read more of his work.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have to disagree with you. I think the town itself is the "psycho." To me, the actual abductions and murders of the little girls are fairly inconsequential. The story is about the breakdown of the fabric of society under sustained pressure. It's about the monsters inside all of us that are released amidst suspicion and fear. I think that's why the actual solving of the crime is treated rather off-handedly and why there is so much time dedicated to characters that are peripheral to the main mystery. The book is not about the crime but about how that kind of pressure can cause all of our "polite, public" facades to crumble.
ReplyDeleteTanya, I agree that the town mentality seemed to be the psychotic element. And like Brian, I also felt a bit let down by the ending. The real killers transition into madness was almost too quick to buy. One moment he was fine and the next he had lost it! Since we spend almost the entirety of the book amping up the town, getting them ready for their psychotic transition into mob mentality, maybe that was why seeing one man just switch didn't feel as satisfying? Not sure. I'll have to think about it.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I also agree with Tanya. Dobyns was playing with the notion of mob mentality, and in this case that mob was Aurelius itself. That's why towards the end there is almost a complete breakdown of society in search of the killer. Everyone acts as one for themselves. They're quick to point the blame to anyone, even among their own, that isn't them because that's what people need in a time of crisis: someone to blame. But since we're far removed spectators, we get to pass judgement on all of them and fear what it would be like to be among them.
ReplyDeleteMe too, I loved suspecting the narrator throughout. It was one of my favorite parts of the story. I rather hoped he was the killer, but it seemed too obvious.
ReplyDeleteDonald explaining everything was like a disappointing afterthought. And I do like Tanya's comment also. Ultimately the real psycho in this story was the town. Maybe that's why Donald was written so weak, to make that point.