Reading 1001 discussion
This topic is about
Faceless Killers
BOTM Discussions
>
Faceless Killers - BOTM Nov
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
I didn’t find it all that surprising, probably because I am very familiar with the mystery formula from watching so many crime shows, including the British version of “Wallander” with Kenneth Branagh. I enjoyed that show, but I didn’t enjoy the book as much as I thought I would. Wallander is not all that likeable, and I know that itself is a cliché – the flawed but effective detective – but he does some things that are truly off-putting.
2. Rydberg describes the crime scene as being so grisly it was “like an American movie” [p. 21]. What does this comment suggest about the relationship between representations of violence for purposes of entertainment and real violence? What does it suggest about the differences between Sweden and America?
Most people only experience real violence through media, including crime novels like this one, so most of us would only have those fictional representations to draw on for comparison. It strikes me that he is referring to the violence in American society, not just in its movies.
As a side note – American thrillers and horror movies can be quite violent, but Hollywood certainly doesn’t have a monopoly on this. Sweden has a long tradition of gruesome “cabin in the woods”-type slasher films featuring ancient entities.
3. In what ways do the setting, an isolated area of rural Sweden, and the story’s first victims, an elderly couple, make the murders seem especially horrifying?
The assumption is that an elderly couple would be harmless, so why the need for such extreme violence? The killers don’t spare the couple despite their age, which makes them seem dangerous and possibly psychotic.
As noted above, Swedish horror films often use isolated settings, so maybe it has something to do with the country’s geography and/or terrain.
4. Before a press conference, Wallander has an attack of self-doubt. “I’m searching for the slayers of the dead,” he says, “and can’t even pay attention to the living” [p. 97]. What aspects of his life is he neglecting? Why does Henning Mankell devote so much of the novel to Wallander’s personal life: his strained relationships with his father, his daughter, and his soon to be ex-wife? What does this personal dimension add to the novel?
Personally, this didn’t add much to the novel for me. But when I’m watching crime shows, I am usually only interested in solving the crime, not in the personal lives of the detectives, unless they are particularly compelling. Henning didn’t provide enough background about Wallander’s marriage and parenthood to make me really care about his wife, daughter, or father. I gather this changes in later books, as you learn more about him. As it stands in this book, it seems just sketched in.
6. To what extent is this kind of intuition responsible for solving crimes in Faceless Killers? Where else does a hunch or sudden insight play a role in leading the detectives in the right direction? How does it help him solve the murders?
Literally every break they get is based on a hunch that Wallander has, like suspecting the ex-cop, or going to the bank to change money and following a hunch that the teller might remember other customers. Wallander even says, that relying on hunches is “An extremely dubious trait in a cop.”
8. Much of Faceless Killers? is concerned with the controversies surrounding refugees, asylum-seekers, and open borders in Sweden. What is Wallander’s attitude toward these issues? What does the novel, as a whole, seem to suggest about the tensions between Sweden’s liberal immigration policies and its growing racial tensions? How do Wallander’s erotic dreams about a black woman, and his daughter’s relationship with a black man, fit into this context?
The Boxall entry claims that the book takes a stand against increasing intolerance, and I guess in a way this is true, because the extreme xenophobes are caught and punished. But Wallander himself goes off about immigration, or at least the lack of immigration policy. He acknowledges that the murderers of the Somali refugee should be punished but says that “the immigration service and the government have to take their share of the blame.”
11. Wallander finds himself frequently knocked to the ground during the course of his investigations, nearly loses his job, gets slapped in the face, and refers to himself as both a “dubious cop” and a “pathetic cop.” When a fellow officer calls him “the hero of the day,” Wallander replies: “Piss off” [p. 107]. Is Wallander a hero? If so, how do his flaws and foibles fit into his heroism?
They call him a hero because he risks his life to save people in the refugee camp. In general, he is much more of a hero in the television series.
12. Looking back over the investigation with Rydberg, Wallander says, “I made a lot of mistakes,” to which his partner replies, “You’re a good policeman. . . . You never gave up. You wanted to catch whoever committed those murders in Lunnarp. That’s the important thing” [p. 279]. What were Wallander’s mistakes? Why did he make them? Is Rydberg right in suggesting that perseverance and will are more important than perfect police work?
Yes, perseverance seems to be just as important as almost anything else, although it helps to be intelligent and methodical about collecting evidence, interviewing witnesses, etc. Wallander is wrong about the killer at least once, but he doesn’t let that stop him from continuing the search.
1. In what ways is Faceless Killers surprising? What is unusual about its crimes and the manner in which they are solved? Why would Henning Mankell choose to make the novel about two apparently disconnected crimes? How do you think the refugees are portrayed? And why?
2. Rydberg describes the crime scene as being so grisly it was “like an American movie” [p. 21]. What does this comment suggest about the relationship between representations of violence for purposes of entertainment and real violence? What does it suggest about the differences between Sweden and America?
3. In what ways do the setting, an isolated area of rural Sweden, and the story’s first victims, an elderly couple, make the murders seem especially horrifying?
4. Before a press conference, Wallander has an attack of self-doubt. “I’m searching for the slayers of the dead,” he says, “and can’t even pay attention to the living” [p. 97]. What aspects of his life is he neglecting? Why does Henning Mankell devote so much of the novel to Wallander’s personal life: his strained relationships with his father, his daughter, and his soon to be ex-wife? What does this personal dimension add to the novel?
5. Wallander wonders why “almost every policeman was divorced. Why their wives left them. Sometimes, when he read a crime novel, he discovered with a sigh things were just as bad in fiction. Policemen were divorced. That’s all there was to it” [p. 27]. What is it about being a cop that would make marriage unsustainable? How does Wallander feel about his estranged wife? What do their interactions reveal about why the marriage failed?
6. To what extent is this kind of intuition responsible for solving crimes in Faceless Killers? Where else does a hunch or sudden insight play a role in leading the detectives in the right direction? How does it help him solve the murders?
7. Confronted by a case he cannot solve, Wallander is plunged into an existential crisis: “Somewhere in the dark a vast meaninglessness was beckoning. A sneering face that laughed scornfully at every attempt he made to manage his life” [p. 80]. In what way is Faceless Killers, and perhaps every mystery novel, about the need to assign meaning to a world that can appear random, chaotic, and meaningless? How does solving a crime restore, if only briefly, order to the world?
8. Much of Faceless Killers? is concerned with the controversies surrounding refugees, asylum-seekers, and open borders in Sweden. What is Wallander’s attitude toward these issues? What does the novel, as a whole, seem to suggest about the tensions between Sweden’s liberal immigration policies and its growing racial tensions? How do Wallander’s erotic dreams about a black woman, and his daughter’s relationship with a black man, fit into this context?
9. What specifics does the novel reveal about how police investigations are conducted? About the strained relations between the police, the press, and the government? About the connection between sudden insight and the dogged search for clues?
10. How important is Wallander’s relationship with Rydberg? What does Rydberg add both to the investigation and to the novel?
11. Wallander finds himself frequently knocked to the ground during the course of his investigations, nearly loses his job, gets slapped in the face, and refers to himself as both a “dubious cop” and a “pathetic cop.” When a fellow officer calls him “the hero of the day,” Wallander replies: “Piss off” [p. 107]. Is Wallander a hero? If so, how do his flaws and foibles fit into his heroism?
12. Looking back over the investigation with Rydberg, Wallander says, “I made a lot of mistakes,” to which his partner replies, “You’re a good policeman. . . . You never gave up. You wanted to catch whoever committed those murders in Lunnarp. That’s the important thing” [p. 279]. What were Wallander’s mistakes? Why did he make them? Is Rydberg right in suggesting that perseverance and will are more important than perfect police work?
13. At the very end of Faceless Killers?, as Kurt Wallander reflects on the “senseless violence” he has seen, he thinks about “the new era, which demanded a different kind of policeman. We’re living in the age of the noose. . . . Fear will be on the rise” [p. 280]. What does Wallander mean by “the age of the noose”? What changes and new fears does he envision? Have these fears been validated by the events of the decade since the book was first published?
14. Most Americans have a rather idyllic view of life in Sweden. In what ways does Faceless Killers? contradict that view? Is it disconcerting to learn that Sweden suffers many of the same problems—drugs, crime, racism—that beset the United States?