Chaos Reading discussion

New short story by Stephen King available online vis The New Yorker:
A Death by Stephen King

First impressions?

I'm no sure what to make of that. It reads well but at its view it seems to be saying the death penalty is ok and that sits awkwardly with me

SPOILER ALERT!

Interesting reaction, Richard! I'm personally against the death penalty but felt like this story was all about the conscience/culpability of the sheriff. I don't think King could argue in favor of the death penalty with such a skewed judicial system and scant evidence... It's more like the town got lucky they hung the right man. It's certainly set in a time and place that has no qualms about capital punishment. Did you think Trusdale was innocent throughout the story?

What a tight little story! I agree, it wasn't making a case for the death penalty. It's easy to condemn frontier justice in books like "The Ox Bow Incident" (and an endless number of other westerns) where we ultimately find out that the hanged party was innocent. But what if he's not? What if we don't know, does that make the kangaroo court okay? "Only innocent people deserve a fair trial" doesn't work without a crystal ball.

Barclay is the only one who's right in the larger sense. The irony is that he condemns himself as being the only one who was wrong.

it felt like a cheat to me. we spend the story hoping the accused is innocent and then at the end we're shown "ha, he was guilty" which leaves a young girl murdered despicably and us left with the gross out gag that the recent australian movie The Mule (seriously check it out, it's beyond brilliant and like a Cohen Brothers movie back when they were good) did far better

I love king, he brings out the teenage reader in me every time, but this one felt tonally off to me

But the story of the innocent man hanged has been done to death (so to speak). I appreciated seeing the cliche subverted here. I also thought that the resolution was a clever way to economically show that he was guilty, as well as helping to make the additional point of the story that human behavior isn't always something you can comprehend logically.

You both mentioned two things that appealed to me about this story:
- How concise/"tight" it was (much more economical and controlled than a lot of King's writing)
- That it was a "cheat". The title refers to a singular death, which I assumed to be the girl who was murdered. The entire story makes you think Trusdale is innocent but for maybe two facts (his not being at the main house when he's found, which might just be something he does; and, his hat being at the crime scene).

Felt more like a vignette than something with larger aspirations.

I hadn't considered the title. I wonder if it would be too much of a stretch to say it also referred to a lose of idealism (as well as naiveté) in the sheriff.

Whitney wrote: "I hadn't considered the title. I wonder if it would be too much of a stretch to say it also referred to a lose of idealism (as well as naiveté) in the sheriff."

I don't think that's too much of a stretch at all.

I really liked the utilisation of the over familiar setting of the old west and its mythic implications to riff on very present concerns with how justice is done and seen to be done. I suppose the crux of the question being raised is can a form of justice, here the frontier type, that gets the (if you go along with the idea that the death penalty is a legitimate punishment option) right outcome because they got the right guy, or is that immaterial (I'm leaning this way) as the whole process has given up any moral authority as a result of being farcical and driven by agendas opposed to the strict principles of justice?

I love how King relishes indulging in old west imagery, sparsely but precisely placing sentences like this:

'A cold breeze kicked up, blowing the horses’ manes and flattening the grass in a wave that ran south.'

I like the way the story is left deliberately economic. We don't need the picture painted for us, we know it by heart, and King knows that also, and I think very effectively inserts an image there, a sensation there, just as a nudge into the world he's conjuring up. He also knows that his readers will automatically reference The Green Mile and its central theme of an innocent, uncomplicated man sent to death. Perhaps he is using this expectation also? as a means to lead the reader in a certain direction.

I haven't read much King but have heard tales of some of his writing being a touch flabby or venturing into extraneous territory. I agree with everyone who mentioned the word 'tight'.

There's a Scottish expression for how tight that story was that I'm dying to use, but I'm in polite company!!

Indeed, it wasn't exactly that the townsfolk knew he was guilty nor that the sheriff didn't- incomplete evidence either way. In what respect does it matter if he did kill the girl or not, given it was bias that decided his fate? Then did it prove the townspeople right that he did it, and should it sully the sheriff?

I am fascinated in general with how inculpable criminals (or people in general) are able to convince themselves that they are. There was the recent case of that MMA fighter "War Machine" (#) who badly beat his girlfriend, I think because he caught her cheating on him? Then his instant response (on Twitter no less, while on the run) was more or less "I wish I hadn't caught her, then I wouldn't have had to beat her"- trying to proclaim himself innocent of a crime he did commit? I get accused of going on tangents but those were my initial reflections.

Leo wrote: "There's a Scottish expression for how tight that story was that I'm dying to use, but I'm in polite company!!..."

Hmm, does it involve nuns? Or, part of a nun? Because that's just wrong.

I also went off on the mental tangent of how people deceive themselves, and also on the tangent of how trying to apply logical reasoning to human behavior is frequently futile. It made me think of this short Errol Morris film The Umbrella Man, where "logic" leads to a sinister conclusion while the reality is that people have incomprehensible motives of their own.

There is so much in this little story. Another thing it reminded me of is a quote from Elmore Leonard, which I can't find now, about how westerns were one of the most difficult things he wrote because the prose had to be so spare, with no wasted words. Probably made more frustrating by working in the days of being paid by the word.

Did Leo just call us "polite company"?!! He must have been referring to Richard :p

Marc wrote: "Did Leo just call us "polite company"?!! He must have been referring to Richard :p"

?

Richard wrote: "Marc wrote: "Did Leo just call us "polite company"?!! He must have been referring to Richard :p"

?"

That was supposed to mean you were the only respectable member on this thread, Richard. I was just giving the others a hard time.

Marc wrote: "Did Leo just call us "polite company"?!! He must have been referring to Richard :p"

Never mind, Whitney gets it ;D

It's interesting in this story because we don't really get a sense for if or how the killer justifies his behavior. He's painted as pretty slow and dumb. Human motivations never seem very clearcut...

Trusdale's name sounds a lot like "Trust Dale". I know that's a little bit of a leap, but picture me with my proverbial ballet shoes on and you can make it work.

My wife thought it was pretty stereotypical King to leave just a little doubt hanging... Sure he has the silver dollar but that still doesn't definitively prove he killed the girl.

Marc wrote: "My wife thought it was pretty stereotypical King to leave just a little doubt hanging... Sure he has the silver dollar but that still doesn't definitively prove he killed the girl...."

But enough to determine guilt in the mind of the sheriff, and likely enough to convince a jury in what most of us would consider a proper trial, as opposed to the token one offered in the story. Yet another layer.