Analyze this, Dr. Lecter.
Jul. 19th, 2001 10:59 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rsadelleI read The Silence of the Lambs, the book, on Sunday. I was gravely disappointed. I found it to be neither frightening nor any more compelling than any other thriller.
Do those of you who have never read the book, never seen the movie, know that the interaction between Hannibal and Clarice is not the only focus of the story? I didn't. The other focus is on the search for a serial killer nicknamed "Buffalo Bill." Buffalo Bill kidnaps young women, drops them into a pit in his basement for some period of time, then kills and skins them. I read Kiss the Girls last year. Young women being held captive underground is not enough to hold my interest.
Part of my problem with the book is, I suppose, that the iconography of The Silence of the Lambs is too much with us. My reaction might have been different had I not had any expectations.
We all know the image of Anthony Hopkins, bound up and with a hockey mask over his face, saying, "Hello, Clarice," in his scariest voice. This represents for us the face of menace. Hannibal is, of course, rather menacing. He is a cannibalistic serial killer. But the Hannibal Lecter of the book is also warm, caring. All he wants out of his confinement is a window. He wants to preserve his own dignity. He wants the man in the next cell to be diagnosed properly and receive the proper treatment, and it seems he does it out of genuine concern for another human being, not merely to spite Dr. Chilton. He genuinely cares about Clarice; he's not just toying with her. Hannibal Lecter is far too human to be frightening. Perhaps that's exactly what's supposed to be frightening about him, but it's not. Cold-blooded killers who toy with the authorities chasing them make for frightening books. Warm-blooded humans who just happen to be serial killers and form relationships with the authorities do not. Hannibal, however, is not without his good qualities. The best pieces of the book are Hannibal's flashes of humor: "A census taker tried to quantify me once. I ate his liver with some fava beans and a big Amarone." "Frankly, I got sick and tired of his whining. Best thing for him, really. Therapy wasn't going anywhere. I expect most psychiatrists have a patient or two they'd like to refer to me." "When you show the odd flash of contextual intelligence, I forget your generation can't read, Clarice."
Clarice, too, is a disappointment. We all know that the Clarice of the movie is played by Jodie Foster. Jodie Foster is capable, organized, businesslike, grown-up. Clarice is not. Oh, she's capable enough, but Clarice feels very, very young. She's a trainee, not a full-fledged FBI agent. The emotional knowledge we have of Clarice centers around her parents, around how they were when she was a child, and around her childhood just after her father's death. Her relationship with Jack Crawford is very nearly a father-daughter relationship. She doesn't really know what she's doing. She stumbles upon Buffalo Bill's hideout almost by accident. She's a far cry from the capable, knowledgable, unflappable, Jodie Foster-like woman I expected.
The title, too, revolves around Clarice's childhood. I had hoped that it would refer to something biblical, silencing a flock, or even to Hannibal's predilection for human tongues. Its reference to Clarice's nightmares, which don't seem all that nightmarish as she tells them, is as much of a disappointment as the rest of the book.
Do those of you who have never read the book, never seen the movie, know that the interaction between Hannibal and Clarice is not the only focus of the story? I didn't. The other focus is on the search for a serial killer nicknamed "Buffalo Bill." Buffalo Bill kidnaps young women, drops them into a pit in his basement for some period of time, then kills and skins them. I read Kiss the Girls last year. Young women being held captive underground is not enough to hold my interest.
Part of my problem with the book is, I suppose, that the iconography of The Silence of the Lambs is too much with us. My reaction might have been different had I not had any expectations.
We all know the image of Anthony Hopkins, bound up and with a hockey mask over his face, saying, "Hello, Clarice," in his scariest voice. This represents for us the face of menace. Hannibal is, of course, rather menacing. He is a cannibalistic serial killer. But the Hannibal Lecter of the book is also warm, caring. All he wants out of his confinement is a window. He wants to preserve his own dignity. He wants the man in the next cell to be diagnosed properly and receive the proper treatment, and it seems he does it out of genuine concern for another human being, not merely to spite Dr. Chilton. He genuinely cares about Clarice; he's not just toying with her. Hannibal Lecter is far too human to be frightening. Perhaps that's exactly what's supposed to be frightening about him, but it's not. Cold-blooded killers who toy with the authorities chasing them make for frightening books. Warm-blooded humans who just happen to be serial killers and form relationships with the authorities do not. Hannibal, however, is not without his good qualities. The best pieces of the book are Hannibal's flashes of humor: "A census taker tried to quantify me once. I ate his liver with some fava beans and a big Amarone." "Frankly, I got sick and tired of his whining. Best thing for him, really. Therapy wasn't going anywhere. I expect most psychiatrists have a patient or two they'd like to refer to me." "When you show the odd flash of contextual intelligence, I forget your generation can't read, Clarice."
Clarice, too, is a disappointment. We all know that the Clarice of the movie is played by Jodie Foster. Jodie Foster is capable, organized, businesslike, grown-up. Clarice is not. Oh, she's capable enough, but Clarice feels very, very young. She's a trainee, not a full-fledged FBI agent. The emotional knowledge we have of Clarice centers around her parents, around how they were when she was a child, and around her childhood just after her father's death. Her relationship with Jack Crawford is very nearly a father-daughter relationship. She doesn't really know what she's doing. She stumbles upon Buffalo Bill's hideout almost by accident. She's a far cry from the capable, knowledgable, unflappable, Jodie Foster-like woman I expected.
The title, too, revolves around Clarice's childhood. I had hoped that it would refer to something biblical, silencing a flock, or even to Hannibal's predilection for human tongues. Its reference to Clarice's nightmares, which don't seem all that nightmarish as she tells them, is as much of a disappointment as the rest of the book.
(no subject)
Date: 2001-07-19 12:25 pm (UTC)2) Didn't you know that the plot of the book was Starling searching for Buffalo Bill? It's the plot of the movie as well, but people tend to forget it in the face of the way Tony Hopkins' scenes pretty much stole the show. If you want pure Hannibal-Clarice interaction, read/watch Hannibal. (August 21st it's rentable.)
3) Your criticism of Starling seems based on the fact the Starling in the book isn't the same as Starling in the movie. And I don't know how well you paid attention in the movie, but she stumbles upon Buffalo Bill's hideout by accident there as well. And movie-Clarice isn't unflappable, either. She cries after Miggs throws the semen on her, right after she sees Lecter for the first time. Watch her face in the scene when she has to examine the body from the river. There's shock in her eyes. She's calm and collected on the outside, but inside she's not. She just pretends.
4) What may not scare you (ie, Lecter), certainly scares other people. The reason I like Hannibal Lecter as a character is because he seems like a nice guy, intelligent, a little eccentric, dignified, maybe trying to put himself above other people - and he's a serial killer. He's the kindly doctor next door, he'll feed you dinner, but he won't tell you what's in it. Hannibal is the darkness inside us all, and that's why he's frightening to people. He's what people don't want to think about because they might have to admit they have some of Lecter inside themselves. Even people like me who can admit that find him unsettling.
5) Lastly, you said that "cold blooded killers who toy with the authorities make for frightening books" - I beg to disagree. They make for pretty predictable books, and they all start to sound the same after you read about five. Believe me, I know. And Silence isn't trying to be about that kind of killer. If it was, Hannibal Lecter wouldn't even be a character, and Buffalo Bill would be a lot different. Maybe you were trying to read it like it was that type of book, I don't know. The plot may be the search for Jame Gumb, but Silence is really about Clarice Starling, and all the rest, as Lecter would say, is incidental.
(no subject)
Date: 2001-07-19 02:29 pm (UTC)2, 3, 5. I hadn't seen the movie when I read the book. I just watched it today. I don't think I'd have been any less disappointed if I'd seen the movie, then watched the book. Regardless of what the reality is, I expect Clarice to be Jodie Foster-like because I know that Jodie played her in the movie. I expect the story to be a frightening thriller because that's the reputation it has. I expect Hannibal to be frightening because that's the way he's presented in our everyday culture. With something like The Silence of the Lambs, which has worked its way into our lives, it's virtually impossible to go into it without some sort of prejudice.
4. I think the movie ruined some of what's supposed to be scary about Hannibal in the book. In the movie, when he kills the cops, he enjoys it, he gets off on it. You can see how much fun he's having. In the book, the same scene is calmer, slower, more deliberate. It's all planned out, and it's done out of necessity, not pleasure. The movie makes him into more of a monster, more of something that's alien to most people. I get that he's supposed to be scary because he's mostly just a regular guy who just happens to be a serial killer, but I don't find him to be that scary.
5. I get that the book is supposed to be about Clarice, but I don't find Clarice interesting enough to sustain a whole book.
(no subject)
Date: 2001-07-19 04:38 pm (UTC)To each her own.