The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo - Review

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo by Stieg Larsson was overall an enjoyable novel. Filled with twists and turns it sucks you and grabs of hold of your imagination taking you along on the mysterious journey of main character Lisbeth Salander and Mikael Blomkvist. Lisbeth is a psychotic, keep-to-yourself computer genius. Left an orphan at the age of ten she is guarded and terribly misunderstood. Her short chopped hair and collection of piercings and tattoos, alongside her alternative lifestyle only helps but add more mystery to Lisbeth’s character.  Opposite her is male lead Blomkvist, a journalist who recently, after getting mixed up in a false allegations scandal was forced to resign from his company and lay low for a while. A father, divorced, and involved with his long time co-worker Berger, Mikael is a respectable and personable man. His character has much less mystery and suspense and that of Salander, but still it manages to create a balance in the piece in which both characters are able to exists in harmony in the book without seeming to forced. The characters are perfect for the roles to which they are assigned. Both weaving seamlessly into one another and it, without doubt, works.

The two meet when they are both assigned to work a case for a wealthy elderly man named Vanger who has asked them to solve the disappearance of his granddaughter Harriet who had done missing nearly fifty years earlier.  Salander, being the highly skilled hacker she is was perfect for the job, able to spy, research and pry into the lives of the Vanger family and their company in order to extract any information that may pertain to the case. Blomkvist on the other hand, is a journalist whose job is, yes, to dig up information and report about it he seemed to be far from murder investigator. Originally intending to turn down Vanger on his offer to research Harriet’s disappearance he is swayed by and offer he cannot refuse. Now while it all seems a little hokey it actually makes for a pretty good starting point. Two characters, both with different motives, backgrounds and personally agendas driven to the case that takes readers on a fast paced investigation that keeps you flipping pages to see what happens next.
           The novel’s primary plot is not so much unique as it just well told. There are hundreds of novels out there with a similar premise as that of Larsson’s however this book is told in a unique way. It has unique characters, and tiny little details that at first seem meaningless but all later blend together to create a full color 3-D picture that makes the book such a thrilling, and fulfilling novel. The style of writing in Larsson’s book is consistent and sharp. Precise sentence structure and voice only adds to the intellectual, mysterious themes of the book. Larsson’s choice of diction and delicate word play give it a clever, eerie tone. Long detailed descriptions paired with short, powerful dialogue, provides the proper right amount of information while not breaking away from his strict characterization of his characters.

Lisbeth and Dr. Reid

Dr. Reid, the crazy smart eidetic doctor from T.V.’s Criminal Minds is very similar to Stieg Larson’s Lisbeth Salander from The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Both socially awkward and terribly misunderstood characters struggle to blend into normal society while being highly intelligent. Dr. Reid is an eidetic criminal profiler whose job is to get inside the minds of some of the most terrifying killers in order to track and apprehend them. While Salander is an orphaned psychopath she is very technologically skilled and uses her hacking abilities to build profiles. While their skills, lifestyles and jobs are different their socially uncomfortable, and sharp minds allow them to be to in their fields.

A Clockwork Orange Book Trailer

MY TOP FIVE CHILDHOOD BOOKS

NON-TRUE NON-FICTION

In my mind to really be considered non-fiction the book has to be completely true. However, books that are based on a true story, but stretch the truth, or lie, are not bad either. But, should an author decide to exaggerate they are responsible for recognizing that their work has strayed into some middle realm between fiction and non-fiction. Not to say that it’s not okay, because half-truths can still make goods stories as long as it is made clear that the book is in fact a half-truth. When you make things up and claim it to be true you are essentially lying to your reader. When a person reads a touching story they believe to be completely honest, I think, it becomes easier for a person to get attached to the characters and the situation. It, for example in the case of Frey’s memoir, to know that there are good things like that actually happening somewhere in the world and that differs from a fictional piece, where the enlightening story is just an idea, not an action. It’s the “real” factor that makes a non-fiction powerful and when you lie about it you’re running a potentially good middle zone half-truth. I don’t think the label of true not-true is really necessary but if you claim you’re book to true it’s need to be true.

Who gets to decide what good writing is? Who should decide? Why?

            Today, the critics decide what good books are. They decide who gets what prestigious award, and who doesn’t. People listen to the opinion of the critics. They have the valued opinion in the eyes of the general public. However I think it should be the people who deiced what is worth what. Writing is generally subjective, and often times people can be deterred from a good book or turned on to one they might not normally take interest in all in the basis of a critics review. I think without the heavy hanging opinion of the critics over our heads we can judge a book on our own, instead of just passing it off because someone else says so. Now, there are plenty of commercial fiction books that do not deserve the critic’s raves, however some people just like a quick entertaining read every once in a while. They can be a fun refresher.

While I do not think that swapping out a book like Of Mice and Men for Twilight is appropriate. Everyone has their own tastes, however I think it is important kids read great literary works. Teaching fantasy and allowing kids to read things they want to read is important however there are things I think kids should be required to learn. It is an important part of being a well cultured individual. Literary fiction is still very much relevant to our everyday lives. The stories and morals taught in these works are on-going as are the literary techniques that make good writing. Just because a book is old, our seemingly outdated doesn’t mean there is not something to learn from it.

            While on the topic of non-fiction books I think it is important students be exposed to non-fiction works such as Freakinomics to help kids better understand the modern world and prepare them for reality. There is the right amount of literary, and non-fiction reading that I think needs to take place in order for a student to fully develop the proper reading skills needed to survive in this modern world. Reading is an important way for kids to be able to lean about and understand the world, literally and figuratively. Without reading kids would be very limited in their ability to adapt, and understand. Reading has opened the gateway for kids, and allowed them to explore things they could never imagine. Why would we not want kids to read?