The Girl Who Played with Fire question

Larsson, according to me was a man of open society. A society where a person's sexuality is as normal as being human.

May be his portrayal of characters was a bit aggressive. But he didn't use it to give the reader some pleasure for his/her senses. He wrote it to incite disgust about the character in the reader's mind.

I read the books without knowing anything about Larrson. It didn't impair my enjoyment of the books at all. I read the second book in a non-stop marathon session, not many books can make me do that. Those books works as fast paced mystery/thrillers and not as social commentary for me.

My first thought after reading the three books was the author is telling us that horrible crimes happen here (Sweden) too. Second, the theme of the female warrior seemed to permeate the books; 'valkyrie' kept coming to mind although the more proper term might be 'amazon'. Third, he didn't finish the series. Fourth, I completely missed the (overwhelming) importance of homosexual behavior (or maybe it's my memory since it's been a while since I read the books) to the stories.

ho·mo·pho·bi·a
ˌhōməˈfōbēə/Submit
noun
an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.

What does that have to do with these books or Larsson?

It's worth noting (because I think it helps answer the question a bit) that the real title of the first book is "Men Who Hate Women". So it's pretty clearly a social statement. The English translators and publishers decided that the title was too confrontational with all the anti-feminism in our society.

It's just a discussion board - no need to get offended. I think it's a valid question considering the graphic sexual violence in all 3 books.

But no, I don't think he was a dirty old man.

You guys pretty much mentioned everything I wanted to, so I'll just state my opinion in one sentence;
If there were more men like Stieg Larsson, the world would be a better place.

Great comments! Thanks!

My stand on this is that Larsson was a realist. If you read his bibliography during his life he followed a lot of cases related to violence against orphans. Also in the states we dont talk often about the sexuality as much as they do in Northern Europe (it was shocking for me when I came here) therefore except for the violence the sexual plot is not that unusual. Homosexuality is not a taboo and much more accepted than many other places in the world. I cannot really imagine that that was an underlining motive of Larsson. Yes in the book it was a big thing mainly because of the media and there were few bad apples but that is as far as I take it. And I think many of us were waiting for the love story to evolve to the end of the trilogy which is not really homo-whatever-love.
However, in a society built by social justice and equality, mistreating orphans is a slap in the face. I do believe that Swedish government would have gone above and beyond to keep such things from making it to the press. What better way to expose it than writing a world-class book and put it in such a good way.

I am pretty sure that Larsson had a history of studying and supporting women's rights and was a strong dissenter of violence against women. This trilogy is a statement to his stance on these social issues. The roles he gives women in his books was no mistake.

I think he is a good guy but to really judge him I have to go to Sweden and study men there because if half of the things in his books are true OMG
that's a horrible country :(

Larsson tried to convey his own past experiences i.e. when he was witness to a gang rape and all the disrespect that he saw agains women, so he wrotte a series of books where the homophobia was very much on the spotlight, the women-object thing.

He created a very strong female character, who at first is very masculine but it grows confortable in her womanly skin.

Summing up: he passed a message across that even though Sweden is a very much layed back country in terms os sexuality themes, that does mean that women are more respected.

Larsson died at the age of 50, so I don't know if he qualifies as a "dirty old man". He was very much inspired by his girlfriend, so I think the book has a pretty much feminist touch. (also liked by many women). The project started with a discussion what would have happened to Pippi Longstocking as a grown up. (L for Long/Lisbeth S for Stocking/Salander). I'd suggest the book(s) are more of a "social statement".

Yeah, I agree with Saurabh too on this. Afterall Larsson was fighting against allot of social issues like Neo-Nazis, Racisim, predujice against other social issues.

Having read all three books in this series, I don't believe he was a dirty old man. There is a lot of sex in his books, both good and HORRIFIC evil. However unlike a ton of books out there, it fit in the story. Nothing happen in these tales that to me felt shove in. I don't think a story with as powerful leading female character could have been written by someone that seen women as sexual objects.

I am curious. What did you read that suspect he was a dirty old man?

I find your question offensive. Have you done any research on Larsson?