untangling-thoughts

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 17 | part 3

'Hannibal: Rising'

Thomas Harris

Japanese literature

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 is 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. 11.07.2025]

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

upcoming

Hannibal: Rising | Thomas Harris | reviewed

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

[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.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 15 | part 3

'The Silence of The Lambs'

Thomas Harris

Regarding Hannibal Lecter

Might be wrong, but. I don't think Hannibal fully respected Clarice. At least, not until he learned about her reason to keep going. About screaming lambs. Yes, it's a hurting memory, so Lecter satisfied his desire to see someone squirm and suffer. But he also learned something about Claris that made him respect her. Wouldn't say a lot. But just enough to help her out, and not visit her after he escaped (it is implied that people Hannibal visited were not doing well afterwards).

And like... before the lambs were mentioned, Lecter was so disappointed that Clarice's story with a bind horse ended happily. After she was done telling him about it, he immediately asked whether Claris's step father forced himself onto her. No filter whatsoever. *Sigh*.

The scene of Hannibal's escape. Surely, I don't not know what was going on in author's head. Yet after reading it, I'll dare to assume thar this scene is a reminder that Hannibal was, in fact, a monster.

Throughout the 'Red Dragon' book, as well as half of 'Silence of the Lambs' Lecter is portrayed as this highly intelligent advisor, that speaks in riddles and toys with people. Meanwhile FBI hold onto each of his small admissions as a savior thread.

Readers also get to 'hear' so-called legends of Hannibal's past deeds. Not only that, he is also surrounded by trinkets that remind us of his danger: a mask, a straightjacket, barricades to distance visitors feom Lecter's cage. But we never truly got to see his atrocious actions actions firsthand. Because of it, the reader would likely start sympathising with Hannibal.

But the escape chapter serves as a reminder. He is, in fact, a monster. Who likes to bite people and be cruel. I respect his brain, yet his actions can't be justified.

Hannibal was highly intelligent. There's this initial mist of mystery that surrounded him. He knew things other didn't. He was tricky and liked to dig into people. Learn what made them tick, what was still hurting within them. Wouldn't be a bad trait if Hannibal haven't done it to see people suffer or to hold power over them.

Not only that, Lecter was highly perceptive. Plus, people constantly talked about his smarts. That only puts him higher on a pedestal in reader's eyes. But basically he was just a man who:

knew a lot in psychology. Sometimes mad3 logical guesses. Half of the time he was right;

was smart, yes. Can't take that from him. Good at making conclusions from observations. Planned far, far ahead;

had a good sense of smell;

used to be a therapist AND consultant regarding some maniacs (court cases?)

So basically, Hannibal met crazy people, or learned about their existense, and then just let them be. There was a line in some chapter that vaguely meant this: God knows how many psychos he set free by doing so.

And like... that's it. He just didn't forget important info about those maniacs, so later on Lecter could toy with FBI in a manner 'I know something you don't, hehe'.

And suddenly all that mysterious aura dissipated. Surprisingly, that does not make him any less intriguing. Logical backup for his knowledge actually only makes Hannibal more realistic.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 15 | part 2

'The Silence of The Lambs'

Thomas Harris

Regarding side characters

Crawford. Someone who got to be an important character for the second time. Still nice. Smart, sensible, gets the job done and does everything for it. We got to witness him being a good leader once again. His familial tragedy only made him more human. Crawford's care for his sick wife, his grief when she died, his memories resurfacing... theh all seemed real. Not overly expressive. Human, and in his character. I could properly sympathise, which is rare. Because yeah. I can see the depth of your feelings, man.

Chilton... well, I can only call him a greedy STUPID F*CK. This disaster of director literally blew up the whole plan of getting the info out of Lecter. Just because he wanted to be the one who he talks through. To be the one who gets famous and praised. What an idiot... he should've realised by that time of Lecter's impisonment that Hannibal did not want to reveal any truthful info to him. Also, Chilton's disgusting hate-speech to Lecter about FBI, Clarice and Crawford was screaming 'idiocy and ignorance'. Kind of waiting for Hannibal to pay this dr. a visit.

Now, about the killer. The reader was slowly eased into information about the maniac. This way learning about him felt natural: we got to see his persona and cues on psychological reasoning behind 'sick' behaviour. There is no sudden 'the killer is the butler we've never heard of!' vibe. And while some explanations are left behind the scenes, I didn't feel that there was anything missing from the picture. Author revealed just enough.

Also, I must notice that both 'Red Dragon' and 'The Silence of The Lambs' are about a maniac who was traumatized as a child (which, of course, is a common cause of unhinged behavior) and was obsessed with transformation. One wanted to get to perfection in becoming the red dragon. The other one wanted to be like his mother.

2 guys from botanical center (?) weren't that important, but even in that little of 'book screen time' they had, they appeared human. It was also pleasing to see people deeply invested in their job. What caught me by surprise is how easily they could figure out the type of insect Clarice brought them. From millions of species they deduced it to 2600 just within a few hours. If it's actually possible because of vast knowledge, then I'll let it be. Actually impressive?

Bonus: I loved how these guys used a BEETLE to mesure time while they played chess. They just turned the beetle around and let it walk.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 15 | part 1

'The Silence of The Lambs'

Thomas Harris

Regarding Clarice Starling

Was planning to read this one after 'Red Dragon', but had to take a small break to read a tome of Sherlock Holmes adentures. Anyway, got to this one fairly quickly, and it didn't disappoint. As expected.

The main character pick is very interesting. We don't get some typical detectice or FBI agent. It's Clarice Starling. An agent in training. Practically like a student. It appears to me that she's like a threadball that represents several things at once.

Clarice:

has no status in FBI. She's not an official member;

has a farming-like background. A girl who got into the city after living in a small town. The way she can easily change accent also reflects it;

was born in a family with a lot of kids. It's not mentioned in the book much, but such background does add psychological coloring;

lived in a foster family (uncle and aunt), then in orphanage. Adds accent on Clarice being on her own. A touch of individualism and independence, so to say;

was a woman, living in 90s and trying to climb a career ladder.

Throughout the story, Clarice got to deal with a lot. As a simple trainee, she held onto every opportunity like it was a saving thread. She often was disregarded and indirectly disrespected. I've lost count of times she was interrupted during talking. Starling was even forgotten in a car once.

Intentionally or not, she was treated not nicely. By Crawford who initially didn't pay her much attention. By Chilton who was being a d*ck. By Hannibal who attempted to dominate the majority of their conversations (know-it-all + I'm-better-than-you vibe). By reporters, stand-by cops ('she's not as pretty as she thinks she is'), senator Ruth and Krendler. Even Catherine, the one Clarice came to rescue, yelled at Starling and cursed her out while Clarice was literally trying to save her. Girl, they didn't deserve you.

This woman worked hard the whole time, trying her best to showcase her abilities. Hell, she managed to jam a search of some car in her stuffed study schedule. And she only had 1 hour per day for it! Clarice was hard working, smart and collected. She stood her ground when it was needed. She handled social situations firmly but cleberly. Because it was about her survival in that working field. In the harsh world that didn't care about her. Honestly? She deserves respect.

There are moments when Claris used old memories to redirect her emotions. They are well executed. No unnecessary details or overexplanations. The reader doesn't get the full picture, but that's the whole point.

In such a way is handled information exchange between characters and the author 'talking' to the reader through descriptions and flashbacks. We get to see just enough to catch the vibe or piece the picture together. We aren't told that Mepp is Clarice's friend. It can learned from their interactions. We aren't told that Clarice is being disregarded. It's shown in the way people talk to her, or about her. What they do to Starling.

There are a few moments where Claris gets an 'insight' into people. Like a few cops (?) that stood nearby a place where she went to examine a body in West Virginia. All those descriptions of Claris seeing their childhood or small habits. They aren't literal. I think it's a methaphor. She caught their vibe. And she knows what it implies. Countryside-like, village/small town life. So we get few glimpses into the associations her brain generated. Same with Chilton. He told Starling about having only 1 ticker for a play, or something. And Claris caught the implication. She didn't consciously analyse the situation. Her brain did sped-up conclusions. And she got to figuratively see Chilton in his house, where everything screams 'loneliness'.

[untangling-thoughts]

whim no. 1

There is something about clouds before heavy rain. They always have such saturated dark colour. It's pretty, in a way. Sun might still shine, there might be no wind yet, no thunder heard from distance. But you look the other way, and those heavy coulds catch your eye. When you see them, you know that the rainfall will be strong. The clouds have this kind of quiet intensity (with occasional rumble).

I've tried multiple times to take a picture when I saw this kind of weather. Unfortunately, photos never reflected a true richness of colours. It is upsetting that a simple camera lens can't properly capture the atmosphere. Such a wonderful sight often got lost.

[untangling-thoughts]

book no. 14 | part 14

The summary of 'The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes' (tome 1)

Arthur Conan Doyle

After finishing all the stories, I can say that, well, it was good.

Sherlock is a great character with calculative mind. It's pleasant to watch his chain of thought unravel, and his conclusions were logical, which is nice. He also feels alive, not just a flat cardboard. Holmes can has different sides to him - humorous, skeptical, enthusiastic, melancholic, the one that likes debates, irritative, amused, disgusted, scared or worried. While I was somewhat critical of the way each story was written, Sherlock remained consistently good, even in his failures.

Although there were some moments when his assumptions were a big stretch, or ignored any other possibilities that also had the right to exist.

Conan Doyle used the same method almost everywhere - info dumping through a character. Yes, such thing brought clarity, yet it felt very unnatural. I had to look past the parts that felt fake, so I could concentrate on the essence of each story. The more I read, the better execution had become, but even the last stories in the book felt a little uneven because of explanation execution. Eventually I just accepted it as a writing technique.

Also, after having all the 'adventures' marinate in my head, I noticed that Conan Doyle uses some unnamed 'character role distribution'. Tell me if I'm wrong, but to me it seemed that:

If it's a young man up to ~30 years, he's more limely to be accused of the murder. Yet he always end up to be a good guy. Some of those even rescue or defend their loved ones.

In case it's a man in his 30s-40s, he's more likely to be someone lowkey pathetic or at fault of small crimes (stealing, scamming, etc)

When it comes to men in their 40s-50s and higher, they are more likely to commit murder or do something shady.

If it's a young woman, she's never a murderer, but is most likely a scammer or a trickster of sorts. Even that one who stole an item, as Sherlock explained, was influenced by a man.

One of somewhat displeasing aspects was that Conan Doyle consisently mentions 'female gut feeling' what is oh so special. As well as women having his soft nurturing aura, or them being able to speak some 'womanly soft words' that are capable of calming down people etc. Like, what are you even talking about dude... I'm smelling some bias.

In my opinion Sherlock Adventures is a good book that is suitable for gen Z or just modern people in general. Because majority of the stories are laconic and fit people's short attention span.

I wasn't sure whether I'd want to buy other tomes with Sherlock's adventures at first. But by the end of the first book, I can surely say that I'm going to purchase at least one more. Out of curiosity. To see whether there are any more interesting stoty plots.