I Don't Get It: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
There are popular books, and then there are popular books. Every so often there will be a novel that garners so much attention you can't escape it. The new "it" book of the moment. Every bookstore is advertising it, every person is picking it up, movies are being made of it. Da Vinci Code is a great example. At a certain point you start to think, "Well, I'd love to know what all the fuss is about." Recently, that seemed to happen with The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and its two sequels: the "Millennium Trilogy". So I gave GwtDT a read.
Honestly, I still don't know what the fuss is about. It is a fairly decent mystery novel, but certainly nothing special. Why did this book get such a passionate following?
Sure you've got your punky, sexually charged protagonist, Lisbeth Salander - and I get that promiscuous female hackers are attractive - but what is there about the mystery that elevates it above any particular episode of Cold Case? I don't read a lot of mysteries (or watch Cold Case), but I've got to figure the genre is littered with stories that are more gripping than this.
Not much happens. I kept waiting for there to be some excitement, something to justify the intense popularity this book seems to have found... but by the end when the pace finally does pick up it is over so quickly and results in so little drama, I found myself saying, "This is it?"
The problem, for the most part, is how the book is written. I remember being taught very early on to "show not tell" when writing fiction. All due respect to the late Mr. Larsson, but he almost never does this. This book feels like a report on what happened, rather than a story about it. Confrontations that have been building are never dramatized with dialog, but rather described clinically. "He make a joke and gave her a piece of his mind" rather than allowing us inside that moment by writing out the joke or the discussion. Later chapters that describe moments of peril diffuse any tension by starting with the protagonists safely out of harms way, and then flashing back to danger. What? Why should I be on the edge of my seat when I know the result?
I didn't think the book was terrible, just surprisingly mediocre. I am baffled by the amount of attention is has received. I started the second book, but just couldn't compel myself to continue. Can anyone explain the draw?
Monday, November 29, 2010 at 07:15PM
Reader Comments (13)
My thoughts exactly. While I was reading it, a friend asked what I thought of it to that point: "It's a description of a guy doing research punctuated by a few graphic sexual assaults." It's still waiting there on my Nook to be finished, but I probably won't go back to it.
Wow, Roy, your one sentence sums it up better than my entire post! :) Exactly it.
Agreed, but more importantly your website is actually awesome! I actually loved those Squarespace/jeffcannata.com award plugs even though Dan & Alex never played along.
I feel the same after watching the movie. I can't speak for the book though. A co-worker was raving about the books a long time ago, and I never go around to them. From her excitement they sounded excellent, but I just forgot about them. I then saw the first movie on Netflix Instant Watch and decided to watch it not knowing it was based on that series. It got excellent reviews on Netflix so I gave it a shot. It was ok, but certainly nothing original. Maybe I was bored and just didn't pay enough attention, but I feel that the actual murderer wasn't really fleshed out before the reveal and so it wasn't much of a twist for me. I know he was the girls brother, but why was it such a shock. Oh well. I did watch the second movie and it was horrible. I hear the third is much better. We will see. I'll probably watch it, but I have no idea why.
I found the book so boring, I couldn't even finish it. The movie only slightly more tolerable.
Didn't read the books, but my friend did and raved about them. Based upon her recommendation, I went see the 1st movie when it hit the local Laemmle's. I thought it was pretty good, but was hoping for it to be a ramp up to a better 2nd and 3rd movie. I was wrong. The intensity never really got ratcheted up... In fact, its a slow deflate. Though I enjoyed the 2nd movie, it was a letdown compared to the first. And just to be complete, I went to see the 3rd movie as well... A HUGE letdown. I was bored to tears... And then there's the very last scene. Talk about a massive WTF moment. I had to borrow the book to see if that's how it ended there too (semi-spoiler: Nope. Different).
I have to wonder if the prose got changed a bit through translation, and whether it affected how the author originally intended for the book to come across. Afterall, the series was a posthumous release, so the author may not have had the chance to re-read it in translation.
This also makes me wonder if translations in other mediums such as gaming or movies do alter the original intended experience.
Amen! I bought the trilogy from Amazon during last summer, intending to read this on the beach. It was so boring, especially at the beginning, I had to force myself read "just a few pages more".
I think it just gained momentum at the start and now it's the phase when everyone's buying it to see why it's so unbelievably popular.
Jeff, I think you nailed it with "I didn't think the book was terrible, just surprisingly mediocre". If a book or similar is going to appeal to a wide audience then it needs to be mediocre. Look at video games, which is more popular the unusual, inventive, thoughtful indie games? Or the mainstream, middle of the road game based on an already popular mechanic?
I did enjoy the books. Ravaged the entire trilogy in just a couple days. It appealed to me as a punky Harlequin romance does. There is just enough intrigue to keep you interested. The characters are just as fucked up as a "real" person might be, and there is sexy stuff in it. I think the popularity is based largely on the fact that women are primarily drawn to fiction. Of course these are just my zealous over-generalizations.
Another trilogy that is getting lots of draw and movie prospects is The Hunger Games trilogy. Give that a try as I think that is more deserving of a following.
I mean, when a book is described as Battle Royale meets Running Man, how can you turn away?
on
> I remember being taught very early on to "show not tell" when writing fiction. All due respect to the late Mr. Larsson, but he almost never does this.
isn't sherlock holmes just Watson 'telling' the story?
although i didn't read the book, I still agree with your view for the movie. Just a good rent...
I like how it played with conventions of mystery. Usually there are the techno thrillers and the Agatha Christie style but the first book combines them really well. The plot was interesting, and I wanted to know what was going to happen. As far as the hype, Nothing ever lives up to the hype. That's why it's called hype.