Tainted Blood - Arnaldur Indridason

Tainted Blood by Arnaldur Indridason is the first book in the Icelandic mystery series featuring Detective Erlendur. I first encountered Erlendur when I read Silence of the Grave last year. It's the second book in the series, but all I could find at the time. I can't say enough good about this series, since I have been hooked since Silence of the Grave. I am so pleased that Tainted Blood is as good.


The book starts off quietly, with the discovery of a body in a basement apartment. After that, the mystery slowly builds as Erlendur and his team try to discover why the old man was killed. Erlendur is fascinating. He is an older detective, with a failed marriage behind him and lost touch with his children when they were little. One child has gotten in touch with him when the book opens. She is almost a failure, exactly like he is, personally, and like him, is very intelligent. It's not that Erlendur is a social outcast, far from it. He is part of the new breed of detectives in current mysteries, where their desire to solve a mystery takes them to places that precludes being able to sustain deep relationships. It's like looking into the human heart affects people, as it surely must: " You think it won't affect you. You reckon you're strong enough to withstand that sort of thing. You think you can put on armour against it over the years and can watch all the filth from a distance as if it's none of your business, and try to keep your senses. But there isn't any distance. And there's no armour. No-one's strong enough. The repulsion haunts you like an evil spirit that burrows into your mind and doesn't leave you in peace until you believe that the filth is life itself because you've forgotten how ordinary people live. This case is like that. Like an evil spirit that's been unleashed to run riot in your mind and ends up leaving you crippled."
This is the longest speech in the book by Erlundur. When I read it, it got me thinking about how mysteries and detectives have changed from the beginning of the twentieth century to recent times. Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett had heroes who were single, who commented on life because they were outside of it. They could go where no one else who was 'ordinary' could go. Investigating mysteries - crime - assaults on people - meant that you couldn't engage in ordinary life after. For a very long time this continued through detective series and mysteries, although there were exceptions - Tommy and Tuppence Beresford from Agatha Christie, Nick and Nora Charles by the same Dashiell Hammett - which were foils to the theory, but because they were a team, the sense of loneliness was not part of their story as it is when the detective is single.

I admire both kinds of detective series - Tommy and Tuppence are part of two of my favourite Agatha Chirtie novels, N or M, and By the Pricking of my Thumbs, but I have a particular preference for the plumbing of the human heart, for the sense of righting a wrong that restores some sense of justice in the world. The single detective in particular stands for morality, and Erlendur is Iceland's contribution to this form of detective story. Even though he has a failed marriage, he does get along with his team - although when we finally meet his boss, it is hilarious how he undercuts him, so Erlendur is no pushover or hierarchical, by-the-books detective either. There is a great deal of intuition, that essential key to great detective work. There is also what I think is part of the Iceland character, the inheritance from the old Icelandic sagas, the idea of fate and gloom. How could a people live in darkness, and snow, for much of the year, and not be somewhat morose and gloomy? I like Erlendur. He is quiet, forceful, persistent, and human. I enjoy how he solves mysteries, with doggedness, and the desire to discover why. There are no car chase scenes, no mobsters, no city in peril here. Just a quiet mystery involving a man who turns out to be much worse, a monster, and the crime committed years ago still ripples through lives in the current day, as crimes do. These are contemplative books on human life, not shying away from the twists in human nature, and I am becoming a very big fan of this series. I have gone out and bought the next two (after Silence of the Grave) that have been translated, to read in the new year as my challenges end.

This is also part of my Orbis Terrarum challenge, so I've now read 5 books in this challenge.

You might think this is not a big change from reading horror, but for me it is. I was thinking over this week why it was, and the conclusion I've come to is that horror often is unresolved, whereas in most mystery books, there is a resolution, a restoring of justice, peace, the balance.

Next up: back to RIP3, and The House of Dr Dee by Peter Ackroyd.

Suite Francaise by Irene Nemirovsky

What an extraordinary book. It took me a little while to get into, because at first almost all the characters are so unsympathetic, looked at with such a clear, cold eye, all their faults and shortcomings exposed, that it was difficult for me to know what I was expected to feel. Was there no character I could like? I enjoyed the details, the drama of the exodus from Paris, so I kept reading. And soon enough, characters to cheer for emerged- the Michauds, then eventually Lucile, and Jean-Marie, and even Bruno the German soldier.

The descriptions in the book, the settings, the people, overtaken by events, and then settling down again - it does feel like music, and that was her aim. She wanted to write the novel in 5 momements or stages, 200 pages each. Suite Francaise contains the first two parts, although she had notes for the other three and an ending in mind. The novel ends, of course, halfway through the story, and in teh story timeline, at the middle of 1942, which is when Nemirovsky was taken to the camps where she died. By writing the book in real time - that is, using real dates of the Occupation, she sets the novel in real time, and this adds an extra dimension to my (at least) reading experience, because side by side with reading the book I found myself thinking, it reads like the novel is happening as the war happens. And indeed, Nemirvosky wrote this novel very quickly, and it is astounding at how good it is for what is really a first draft with major corrections done by the author. It is a fascinating study of people, of historical events shaping lives and how ordinary people cope. This is a haunting and memorable book, and in the back of any one who reads this book are two things: one, this war between these people at this time really happened, and two, the author was killed at Auschwitz, a direct result of this war. It is one of the most stunning accounts of what life under the Occupation was like, in France, in small ways; because the French had their own society feuds that kept on, despite the German requisitioning of everything. The awfulness and pettiness of people is revealed, but also the human capacity to try to survive, and for even fewer people, to survive with dignity.

In the notes to herself, contained in the journal that this novel was discovered in, she writes: "The most important and most interesting thing here is the following: the historical, revolutionary facts etc must be only lightly touched upon, while daily life, the emotional life and especially the comedy it provides must be described in detail." This was her goal in writing the book what she hoped to achieve.
These are Irene's own words, written in her journal that her daughters carried around with them when their parents were taken away because they were Jewish. The girls went into hiding until the war ended, and only long after was the journal finally looked at and the novel discovered. Denise, the eldest daughter, grabbed it as they ran from the house because it was a momento of her mother, who was always seen writing in it.

There are places and events in the book that are written with such clarity that I think Nemirovsky must have put in events she had witnessed. There is a horrific scene in the beginning, when a train station is bombed by a German plane : "The glass roof shattered and exploded outwards, wounding and killing the people in the square. Panic-stricken, some of the women threw down their babies as if they were cumbersome packages and ran."
I had to stop and re-read that passage. It is horrifying and awful and terrible to imagine. The whole book for me was like that, filled with images that were reporting the war to the readers through the images in the book. There is a veracity to the events and descriptions that made me realize, that Nemirovsky must have witnessed herself these, or heard first-hand accounts. Her desire, though, wasn't to show the horrors of war; she wanted to write about the affects of war upon ordinary people caught up in the events. In chapter 29, she writes in a paragraph that seems to me to be the heart of the novel: "Important events - whether serious, happy or unfortunate - do not change a man's soul, they merely bring it into relief, just as a strong gust of wind reveals the true shape of a tree when it blows off all its leaves. Such events highlight what is hidden in the shadows; they nudge the spirit towards a place where it can flourish." When I read that passage, I marked it, which I rarely do in a fiction novel, but I knew I wanted to remember it. War, Nemirovsky is saying, doesn't change people. It brings out what was in them all the time. So the characters we meet at the beginning were always mean and grasping, layered with middle-class bourgeois attitudes, or more rarely, gentle and sweet.

As the novel progresses, we do meet more people, farmers, villagers, and the local gentry, and the effects of the German occupation on the village and people.


Nemirovsky doesn't play favourites: the French come across as lazy and whose first duty is to pleasure, which is what costs them the war with Germany. She doesn't go on about how awful life was except through the villagers complaining about food shortages, and in casual comments or observations from the characters, the shootings of people who break the laws, but done more as an aside, not the central part of the book at all. The Germans are given, surprisingly, good and bad characteristics also. I say surprisingly because it must have been the novelist winning out over the real-life precarious position she was in the whole time she was writing the book. The German who lodges with Lucile and her mother-in-law is an awesome character - he is close to noble, a musician who can't write his music because the drums of war have beaten the melodies away. He is well-bred, and polite, and thoughtful, and is close to an ideal hero, but not, because he is on the other side of the war. In contrast, one of his comrade in arms, Bonnet, is a sadist: "During the retreat of the French army, when he was in charge of taking the pathetic herd of prisoners back to Germany, during those terrible days when he was under orders to kill anyone who was flagging, anyone who wasn't walking fast enough, he shot the ones he didn't like the look of without remorse, with pleasure even." Again, this is a passage that I marked when I read it, because it is so clearly drawn that I wondered if Nemirovsky had seen someone doing just that, or heard about it. It almost reads as though she is getting revenge on the German occupation by writing the truth, and disguising it in the novel. This is part of what raises this book so high in my esteem. There is a ring of veracity in this book that is rare in fiction.

There is beauty and love in this novel, as well as hatred and seediness and greed and pity. This is a novel about people caught in a terrible situation. And it is gripping reading, and lovely in places, horrifying in others. I love this book, and it is one I will return to again and again.

This should also be required reading in schools - Grade 11 or 12, I would think. There would be much to discuss and learn from reading this book, and history would come alive, for a while. I don't know why the book is banned ( or someone tried to ban it), again the book list for the challenge is from here in Ontario, but it shouldn't be. This is one of the best fiction novels I've ever read.

Links: Marg
Charlotte

Orbis Terrarum Challenge

*sigh* thanks to http://raidergirl3-anadventureinreading.blogspot.com/
raidergirl3, I found this challenge on http://exlibrisbb.blogspot.com/2008/03/orbis-terrarum-challenge.html

exlibrisbb site. It is really interesting, and so, I joined. I commented to raidergirl3 that I must be really competitive! My automatic reaction is "hey, I can do this!". Since I've read 12 books so far this year (compared to many book bloggers reading 30+ already......more on this in a moment) I have to be careful. But, this is a really good challenge to expand where I read from. I was surprised that I had difficulty pulling 9 different country writers from my shelves. So, I am aware I do have a lack of wider reading, which is one of my goals - to read literature from other countries. So this ended up being an easy challenge to join. Here are the rules, as posted on exlibris' site:
- The Orbis Terrarum Challenge begins April 1 2008( you are welcome to join later) Through December 20th 2008.
- For the challenge each reader is to choose 9 books (for the 9 months).
-Each book must be by an author from a different nation in our world.
The bottom line: choose 9 different books, written by 9 different authors, from 9 different countries.
This is my list, subject to change, as if I can get a few more to fill some of my other challenges, I will add them to this one.
1. The Winter Queen by Boris Akunin (Russia, mystery)
2. The Iliad - Homer (Greece, classical literature)
3. Firewall - Henning Mankell (Sweden, mystery)
4. In the Time of the Butterflies - Julia Alvarez (Dominican Republic, fiction)
5. Dubliners - James Joyce - (Ireland, short stories)
6. The Shape of Water - Andrea Camilleri (Italy, mystery)
7. Morality for Beautiful Girls - Alexancer McCall Smith (Botswana, mystery)**** This should have been Tears of the Giraffe,which is Book 2 in the series and I want to read them in order. So Tears of the Giraffe is what I'm reading for the challenge. Added Aug 25, 2008*** Tears of the Giraffe read Aug 26 2008 - DONE
8. Suite Francaise - Irene Nemirovsky (France, fiction) - DONE
9. Exit Music - Ian Rankin (Scotland, mystery) - DONE

Alternates:
The House of the Spirits - Isabel Allende (Chile, fiction) - DONE
The Famished Road - Ben Okri (Nigeria, fiction)
Don't Look Back - Karin Fossum (Norway, mystery)
The Broken Shore - Peter Temple (Australia, mystery)
Tainted Blood - Arnaldur Indridason (Iceland, mystery) - DONE
Midnight's Children - Salman Rushdie (India, fiction)
The Bean Trees - Barbara Kingsolver - USA

So, you can see I love mysteries from other countries, which I've blogged about in a previous post. 5 are translated, 4 written originally in English. As there are other books I hope to pick up through the year, this might change slightly. Many of these are on my current reading challenges, so I'm not really adding too many more books to read!! Anyway, I love the idea of this challenge. I plan on joining next year's, and the year after's......I notice a distinct lack of Chinese, Japanese and Central and South American literature, and where is Australia? New Zealand? India? South Africa and the rest of the continent? More Europe? hmmmm, definitely I need to expand where I read from.

Thanks, exlibris, for holding this challenge! and raidergirl3 for picking it up. Both are really good book sites, by the way, that I read regularly (among about 20 that you can find at the bottom of my blog).