Hello Gentle Reader
Many authors try their hands, at genre fiction. Some actually take the confines or the structure of genre fiction, and use it in their own unique way. For example Orhan Pamuk’s “The Black Book,” takes the detective novel, as its structural format. Though with Pamuk this simply a guise. Pamuk uses the mysterious disappearance as a structural format, on the most superficial elements, from where he decides to develop and indulge his preoccupations, obsessions and fantasy’s. What lies in the details however, is the stories, the individuals, and the landscape of Istanbul, and all its beauty. With such vivid detail, Pamuk had written an entertaining, and enlightening novel, that sprawled, but in an always enjoyable way. Sofi Oksanen’s novel “Purge,” was often hailed by western critics, as a new Nordic crime novel. The Nordic countries maybe full of crime writers. Novels about the frigid landscape, the pale blue lipped corpses, hair stiff with snow, and eyes frozen in place. That being said, they follow the traditional concept of a crime novel. There is a murder. The rest of the novel is spent, discovering the murderer, the motive, and delivering that swift and brutal justice. Of course in some instances this has changed. The detectives, these days, are poor pathetic creatures. Heavy drinkers, and graduates from the school of hard knocks – as the saying goes. They chain smoke, live in a rundown apartment building, their marriage has fallen apart, and they have resentful children. Their miserable lives, is only dragged along, by their career. Their sarcastic and cynical career. Solving murders, like some common, everyday hero. There’s almost resent in their choice of a career. But that is where Orhan Pamuk and Sofi Okansen differentiate from their genre compatriots.
Orhan Pamuk’s novel, “The Black Book,” offers no real clues, and no real chance for the reader to the solve the mystery. It is more of an exploration of the individual stories, and landscape of Istanbul; hidden with precision, under the guise of a detective/mystery novel. Sofi Oksanen’s novel “Purge,” may deal with the sex trade; and it might deal with crimes of another era, of family, and deceit and disloyalty. But that is about as far as it goes. Oksanen’s novel is socially aware. It discusses the sex trade, and the past soviet crimes, with an objective point of view. It presents it, as a cold dish of reindeer meat. You’re not quite sure what you are looking at, and even more apprehensive about eating it. Yet all the same you are forced with the brutal reality, of sociological issues, that go without notice; as well as the historical horrors, that we have been quick to cover up, in favour of our acts of valor and heroism. For what is history but a grand story, of villains and heroes?
Antonio Tabucchi’s foray into this same, experiment, was less, then what Tabucchi is capable of. As a reader, and perennial lover, of Tabucchi’s fiction, it seemed to be rather disappointing with this foray into, the crime novel. It lacked Tabucchi’s, more successful characteristics of his other works. It lacked his experimentation, his whimsical ruminations. The novel itself, felt . . . undeveloped like cold soggy eggs served with cold burnt toast. It did not have Tabucchi’s former way of doing things. It felt contrived, and superficial. It certainly appeared to lack serious depth. When “The Missing Head of Damasceno Monteiro,” is held up against the previous works of Tabucchi that I have read such as: “Pereira Declares,” also titled as “Pereira Maintains,” or “Its Getting Later All the Time,” or “Requiem: A Hallucination,” it felt as if Tabbuchi needed to write something, but was uncertain of what he was going to write, and decided to write a flimsy attempt at crime novel, with some judicial philosophical discussion and theories put in place.
Seasoned readers of crime fiction will read “The Missing Head of Damasceno Monteiro,” will be frustrated and disappointed with the novel. “This is not a crime novel,” will be their agreement. One in which I can concur. It’s marketed – if only loosely; as a crime novel. But make no mistake: it is not a crime novel. It’s a literary novel, attempting to utilize the crime novel, as attempt at, literary ventriloquism. A complicated, literary puppet show. In this specific case, it did not succeed. However, though in general the novel failed – Tabucchi is an author of the highest redeeming qualities.
Firmino is a journalist of literary ambitions working and living in Lisbon; as a special correspondent for a newspaper. He reports on murders, and crimes. Scandalous acts of violence that frightens and sadistically entertains us. These same acts, that require us to defend, prosecute and deliver judgement. However Firmino is not entirely, fulfilled with his work. At twenty-seven years old, he’s reported on enough homicides, and acts of barbaric sadism, that he would rather write a thesis on the Portuguese novel. Still Firmino is sent to Oporto, a provincial city in Portugal – which enjoys its tripe – which is not fish; as I had first thought. What follows is the novel. Yet it’s not straightforward, mystery novel either.
As a reader, we are well aware that the missing head discovered by the gypsy is that of Damasceno Monteiro – hence the title. This is the first stop for Firmino. He is to interview the said gypsy. Who according the back of the book, I thought was going to make, and leave a much larger impression then he did. From there, on out, he is assisted by Dona Rosa, the owner of the pension in which he resides, on this investigation. However Miss Rosa’s characterization is seriously lacking. She seems to be a woman of much higher quality and taste; and has an air of refined sensibility. That being said how she ended up running the pension, and her background is vague and seriously lacking.
However redemption comes with a large presence. A fat beacon of light. The entrance of Don Fernando, also known as Attorney Loton, because of his resemblance to the English actor Charles Laughton, offers great redemption the novel. This is classic Tabucchi. Don Fernando/ Attorney Loton; is that odd, quirky character, with the philosophical bent, that makes Tabucchi such a great writer; his ability to create a compelling character, with intellectual and philosophical pursuits, and not be pretentious or patronizing to the reader in the process. I Don Fernando/ Attorney Loton’s, shoulders to be broad and large, but I doubt they are broad enough to carry the weight of the novels failings entirely. However they are broad enough to hold up at least part of it.
The discussions that Firmino has with Don Fernando/Attorney Loton are stimulating and baffling. They range from Lukacs – a Hungarian Marxist philosopher; however it’s his literary theories that are of interest in this book; all the way to the Austrian legal and judicial theorist and philosopher Hans Kelsen. Continental philosophy is discussed openly and freely. At times, a bit baffling, but a welcome, back of what Tabucchi can truly offer, and deliver with exceptional skill. Redemption was sweet. Still however, the entire novel ended, on the most disappointing of ways. It does not, tie up nicely, but attempted to, only to do a loop backwards, and get tangled into a larger mess. As if information was handed out far too late, for it to even matter. Though the judicial system is known to be a long and complicated process; one in which a case can go on, unsolved, or unresolved for years – until an appeal on some grounds is made. This rationalization makes the ending, that more understandable, it felt forced and unnecessary. I know for a fact that Tabucchi could do better. In fact, I think this novel could have been better, but I think it’s execution was not planned appropriately.
Tabucchi had a lot that was working well in the novel: Don Fernando/Attorney Loton, the discussions between the attorney and Firmino; discussions of judicial philosophy, obscure literature, and continental philosophy were fascinating, if at times over wrought, as well as meditation on the legal process, and torture and dignity and humanistic tendencies. However, a lot worked against this work. The lack of characterization and background, the forced and awkward ending; details that appeared to be unimportant and could have been omitted; and it lacked the Tabucchi flare, that the author was capable of, and had been proven to be capable of, on many different times, with many different novels.
Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader
Take Care
And As Always
Stay Well Read
*And Remember: Downloading Books Illegally is Thievery and Wrong.*
M. Mary
