To: ALL Date: 10/03
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 6:36 PM
PARIS TROUT by Pete Dexter
Reading this book is like taking a swim in dark murky water.
You can't quite see what you're in, but you can sure imagine
monsters and things that might want to take a bite out of
you. Dexter did just enough foreshadowing to make the
happenings seem ominous, but not too much to take away a
sense of suspense. I can't help but think that maybe PD's
idea for this book came out of his imagining what it would
be like if a bona fide nutcase, like the kind of people who
take Uzis into post offices, was a powerful moneyed citizen.
Where does a society's responsibility lie? At what point
does protecting the town's richest most powerful man become
suicide? Is there a point where protecting the weakest in
our society is in the society's self-interest? Why does the
town let Paris get away with so much? Is it a function of
place, of time? Could this tragedy have happened in
Massachusetts, say? It seems to me that this is a
modern-day Greek tragedy, with all that deadly hubris, greed
(what all else was there in Greek tragedy?), odd
relationships with mothers, power-hunger, and plain old
lust.
I'm starting discussion sooner than I said, but this is a
short book, and I was anxious to get some feedback. Sherry
=============== Reply 1 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/03
From: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Time: 7:58 PM
Novelist Pete Dexter Discusses his Life and work, All Things
Considered (NPR). 21 Jan 1995.
JACKI LYDEN, Host: Pete Dexter is a novelist known for
writing. with an economy of words.
dark. moving tales about people who live in small towns.
often in the South, who've incredible
capacities for good and evil. One of his earlier novels.
paris Trout, won the National Book
Award. His new novel, The Paper Boy, draws on his own
experience as a newspaper man. In The
Paper Boy, two reporters one.
a cautious soul; one, fast and loose with the facts pursue
the story of a wrongly convicted man
eventually obtaining both his release and a Pulitzer
Prize.
Dexter. who is 51, worked on newspapers .for over 20
years and writes a weekly syndicated column from his home on
an island outside Seattle.
He described what made him decide to be a newspaper man:
PETE DEXTER. Novelist: What actually happened was I found
out what work was about. You know.
I was working construction in Florida back in 1968 and once
I saw what that really meant, you
know, what a shovel did. I was walking home- I walked past
the Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel and
looked in there and there were- it was air conditioned- it
was about 95 outside and real humid,
and indoors it was air conditioned. And that was the year
that all the secretaries were
wearing white boots. And boy, I wanted in that office so
bad. And I went in and filled out an
application and in those days you could get hired. I mean
wanting to be around white boots was
enough of a reason to be a reporter.
JACKI LYDEN: And if you spelled things right on the
application, huh?
PETE DEXTER: God. I couldn't spell; I still can't. But it
was- and I sort of stumbled into it
that way. And it was the only job I ever had up until that
point where I felt like I had
anything to do with what I was doing, if that makes any
sense.
JACKI LYDEN: Yeah, I think it does. It means- because I
think that's what happens with the
characters in the book. There are two brothers here Ward and
Jack James. Ward is the
reporter. but Jack's the narrator. And they grapple a lot
with what it means to be telling
other people's tales and. how you report that without
interpreting it. There's another reporter
here who is everything the reporter Ward would not want to
be- a guy who's kind of fast and loose..a sort of tom
wolff-style journalist, I suppose you could say.
Pete DEXTER: Well, except, you know. I think Tom Wolff was-
is honest and that what he's
giving you isn't disguised as something else.
people that i've known in the newspaper business who- who
will always put aside the substance.
it comes to a choice between that and style, style always
wins.
And the guy in the book is closer to other
to be continued...gail..hp
JACKI LYDEN: You've got a line here that I think
encapsulates this perfectly.
one interested in how newspaper reporters find their stories
=============== Reply 2 of Note 14 =================
To: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Date: 10/03
From: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Time: 10:53 PM
JACKI LYDEN: You've got a line here that I think
encapsulates this perfectly. You say. 'No
one interested in how newspaper reporters find their stories
should imagine that the compass
needle is reset each time out. What they find attractive
doesn't change; only where they find
it.' And you know, for you, it's not in boardrooms and it's
not in corporate offices. It
seems like it's in the back roads and swampy places.
PETE DEXTER: Yeah. I mean, that's part of where I go. But
it- I mean. especially, as a
novelist particularly, and actually as a re- I was never
really much of a reporter. I'11 tell
you about my history as an investigative reporter. I walked
into the Philadelphia Daily News
one day, before they made me a columnist, and a fella who I
did not get along with which is
to say anybody in management there told me that they had
discovered a- a Nazi war criminal
living in Kensington. which is a- you know, white collar
part of Philly. And they wanted me to
go over there and check it. I mean, this was- they gave me
the guy's name and said he was a
Polish war criminal. And I said, Well. who is this guy? I
mean, he's 80 years old. What do
we know about it?' And they didn't know anything, except he
was supposed to have been a war
criminal. And I didn't want to do it. I mean, I have no idea
whether this guy is, you know,
gonna have a heart attack. I had no idea if he's, you know,
ever been in Poland. And I
essentially just don't like to bother people- much. But they
said. `Go do it.
And so I went out to Kensington and knocked on the door and
it was open, you know, like in a
movie you knocked and it actually came open. And nobody
answered. And I stuck my head in
there and I said, `Are there any war criminals in here?' I
was with a photographer, you know,
so that I- I had a witness that I 'd followed this story.
And their weren't. and so I went back
and I said, 'Nah. he's clean.' And the managing editor
called me in and told me, first of all.
this guy tried to get me to call Poland. He said. `Have you
even called Poland?' I said. You
know what time it is in Poland? We don't even have a town in
Poland. We don't have a person
to call in Poland. We don't know a phone number in Poland.'
And he- and he- you know, he
walked out of the room. And then they called me in to the
managing editor and said, What
bothers me about this is that you surrendered on this
story.' And right there we figured out
that I was not gonna be Bartlett [spl and Steele [sp], who
are the prime who are the best
investigative reporters. I think, in newspapers in America.
JACKI LYDEN: When did you start writing your first novel?
How old were you then?
PETE DEXTER: I was 38.
JACKI LYDEN: And living in Florida?
PETE DEXTER: No, I was in Philadelphia.
a drug story and gotten hurt-
What had happened is I'd- I'd gotten into a mess over
tbc..to be continued.
=============== Reply 3 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/04
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 12:00 PM
Sherry: What first interested me about this book and what
caused me to nominate it for the slo-mo list was its
examination of evil in a modern, southern town. We have
previously spent some time thinking about the problems of
evil in the context of relatively remote settings -- the
south of the 1920's, 19th century Texas and Mexico, etc.
It seemed to me that some evil up close and personal might
be kind of nice....
Dick in Alaska where we apparently have no evil, at least
any worth writing about
=============== Reply 4 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/04
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 12:06 PM
Dick,
The evil is not in all the usual places, either. It gets
spread around, so many of the characters have a certain
amount of culpability in the eventual outcome. One question
I had, not a deep philosophical question, but more of the
garden variety "huh?" type question, is this: what in the
world did Hannah see in this man? Why did she marry him? And
a lot gets left out--left to our imagination. What was the
connection Paris had to his mother?
Sherry who always seems to have many more questions than
answers
=============== Reply 5 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/05
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 1:32 AM
Sherry: The motivation for Hannah's marriage to Trout is a
little obscure. She was middle-aged and lonely; successful
as a woman could be in 1957 Georgia (I'm guessing at the
year, but based on Bonner's Korean War service it's close)
and she wanted something more out of life. The best I can do
beyond that is two quotes. The first is from a scene where
Hannah is sitting in a drugstore thinking about her
relationship with her husband:
"She had been careful all her life until she met Paris
Trout, and marrying him -- she saw it now -- was reckless
and she was punished for that too." A good Presbyterian
girl, you can see.
And, the second quote is from later in the book when she is
meeting with Bonner to discuss a divorce from Trout:
"I came into marriage late, Mr. Bonner," she said. "I was
forty-four years old and left a career which I had devoted
myself to with some success for many years. I did not marry
for security, I gave it up. It was a wager I took which I
cannot begin to explain, except to say that the reason may
lie in the excitement of the wager itself." Well, she sure
got some, didn't she?
Finally, on Paris' mother, I think she is just the
connection with his remote humanity -- the time when he
actually could love or be loved as a human being. I was
powerfully reminded of Bernard Cornwell's portrayal of
Obediah Hakeswell -- an insane sergeant in the British Army
who is a character in several of his Richard Sharpe novels.
Hakeswell mutters to himself, actually carrying on
conversations with his mother, whom he last saw when he was
12 years old as a London street urchin. He was hanged for
theft, but survived because he was so little (couldn't break
his neck you see) was cut down by an uncle, and fled into
the army. He became screamingly insane over the years but
clung to the image of his mother (even to the point of
stealing an officer's portrait of his wife, and hiding it in
his shako to provide a visual image of his mother.
Periodically he'd take off the hat and talk to the picture,
reassuring it that 'e was a good boy, 'e was -- chilling and
effective). Trout, like Hakeswell, spiralled into madness
over a period of time, and the twisted relationship with his
mother constituted a withered umbilicus to a time when,
perhaps, he was still human.
Dick in Alaska, off to bed
=============== Reply 6 of Note 14 =================
To: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Date: 10/06
From: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Time: 10:13 PM
JACKI LYDEN: Physically hurt?
PETE DEXTER: Yeah, it was like one of the more famous
street fights in the history of that
town and that town's got a history of street fights. We
ended up on the street with like 30
guys with baseballbats and I- yeah. I had some- a lot of
brain damage and broke a leg and
nerve damage and lost a bunch of teeth and stuff. And one of
the things that happened from
that was it changed the way things tasted. I mean, for
instance I all of a sudden be- I never
could eat fish until then. Now, I- to this day. I love it.
It also changed the way alcohol
tasted to me. It made it taste very bitter and kind of acidy
and I mean to the point where I
just was- too much trouble to drink and I just didn't enjoy
it any more. And suddenly having
an extra, you know. 20-30 hours a week with nothing to do, I
sat down and started to write the
novel. And that's how that happened.
JACKI LYDEN: Wow, you may be one of the few authors who's
personal life is more interesting
than some of the lives in your books.
PETE DEXTER: Yeah. I don't mean to say by that, though, that
like, you know. I quit drinking
and it- it turned me into something good. Because there is a
scene, in fact, in The Paper Boy
about a guy who's swimming out of the ocean and- and the
narrator's actually swimming in the
ocean and swims into some jellyfish and is stung and has an
allergic reaction and almost dies.
JACKI LYDEN: It's an amazing scene.
PETE DEXTER: Well that happened to me down in the keys in
Florida, maybe 20 years ago. And
when it was finally over, the doctor told me that if I
hadn't been drinking when that happened-
and we'd drunk about two six-packs of beer this- I mean,
each. If I hadn't been doing that, he
said I'd be dead, because that slowed down the allergic
reaction. So, I mean. I'm not saying
that everybody should quit drinking, especially if they- you
know, want to go swimming in jellyfish..
JACKI: Do you think that you would have been the kind of
writer you are if you hadn't
lived as hard as you obviously have I mean, it seems like
you're using all those- all those
long nights?
PETE DEXTER: NO- I- well. I haven't used 'em all, believe me
tbc
=============== Reply 7 of Note 14 =================
To: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Date: 10/08
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 4:25 PM
Dear gail,
Thanks for these posts about Dexter. What an interesting
person. I am a bit confused though. Did I miss something?
I can't quite understand what started the fight where he
broke his leg. Did I skip over a post?
Sherry
=============== Reply 8 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/08
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 5:04 PM
Hi, Sherry: I just started PARIS TROUT last night, and I
agree it's a dark swim indeed (no pun intended)
Also, narrative-wise, does this sucker MOVE, or what?
I'm in awe of the consistency of Dexter's bleak,
take-no-prisoners style that he's able to maintain
seamlessly through changes of time, place, character, etc.
Heck of a writer.
I'm noticing that women who are drawn to unsavory guys are
a recurrent theme for him; remember the woman in THE
PAPERBOY who was a death-row "groupie"? Would you say she
has anything in common with Hanna Trout, besides her poor
choice in men? Dale in Ala.
=============== Reply 9 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/08
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 6:50 PM
Dick: I really enjoyed your note. It occurs to me to wonder
how someone in the legal profession would rate Seagraves'
performance, strictly as an attorney, based on the events in
PARIS TROUT.
Mainly, I'm surprised that the option of withdrawing from
the case occurs to Seagraves very fleetingly, and seemingly
not at all seriously. Trout seems to me the ultimate
nightmare of a client, squared or cubed. As for myself, at
least two dozen times in the first half of the novel, I'm
wanting to shout to Seagraves that he should (1) wish Paris
all the best and (2) immediately get the **** out of Dodge,
maybe take a long vacation until everything blows over.
Does Seagraves' acquiescence to this *most* bizarre chain
of events result from (a) a feeling of professional
obligation because he's Trout's attorney of record, or (b)
an unwritten code of ethics in a town of this size which
says, in effect, that we're all in this boat together and
you must dance with the one who brung you? Or some amalgam
of the two?
Dale, who remembers that when dealing with an impossible
corporate client circa 1983, my then-10-year-old son
overheard me telling my woes to Mary and remarked, "Dad,
sometimes you just gotta cut your losses."
(PS: Your quote of Hanna speaking to the divorce lawyer
left my head spinning..."My marriage was a wager I cannot
even begin to explain..."
Who of us, reflecting back on our lives, can't find many,
MANY wagers which made sense at the time but which we now
cannot even begin to explain?
Maybe this is part of our culture's continuing fascination
with the whole legal process, in which people's decisions of
years, or decades, ago are put under a microscope for the
second-guessing of a contemporary and hyper-rational
audience?)
=============== Reply 10 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/08
From: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Time: 7:26 PM
Sherry, you make me truly curious about this book which you
wanted the SLO-MO to read. Can't wait to get started on it.
Ernie
=============== Reply 11 of Note 14 =================
To: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Date: 10/08
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 7:32 PM
gail & All: Please indulge a random thought, here, seeing as
PARIS TROUT has rattled my emotional cage, big-time...
It seems to me that the major difference between "popular"
fiction, popular movies, melodrama, etc., and the type of
"literary" writing that wins a National Book Award (a la
Dexter's PARIS TROUT) is that the latter *bothers* us,
*disturbs* us, works *against* stereotype and assumptions
and expectations, whereas the former shamelessly takes any
technical shortcut to reinforce same.
For example: in PARIS TROUT, when Hanna Trout is first
realizing the magnitude of the crime her husband has
committed, she is passing through a black neighborhood and
tries to imagine him shooting two women inside one of these
houses. Hanna says, matter-of-factly, that she *could
picture it easily.* In other words, all the contributing
factors have been scattered in the back of her mind these
years, but she has denied them, as we all deny aspects of
our loved ones and ourselves that we don't want to deal
with, but when facing a crisis it all comes to light.
Compare this to the standard movie-of-the-week treatment
of the same scene: to wit, an innocently hysterical "No! No!
NOOOOO! Not my husband! This can't be happening!"
It appears that popular art forms are subtly geared toward
reinforcing our self-comforting assumptions of black and
white, right and wrong, I'm a victim who had no part in
this, etc., etc., while literary ones try to tell the truth
at whatever cost.
Another "literary" treatment of this subject, though very
different in style than PARIS TROUT, is the greatly
undervalued (IMHO) novel by an Alabama writer named Madison
Jones: A CRY OF ABSENCE, published at least 25+ years ago.
It's the story of a prominent family in a Southern town who
learns that their teenaged son was involved in a racial
murder.
The title, I think, is taken from a poem by Fugitive poet
John Crowe Ransom: "A cry of absence, absence in the
heart!" Hopefully Cathie or Jim can set us straight on the
source...
Dale in Ala.
=============== Reply 12 of Note 14 =================
To: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Date: 10/08
From: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Time: 9:21 PM
JACKI LYDEN: Got a few left?
PETE DEXTER: Let me- yeah. I- there's more left than used.
But it-i think that you can't learn from things like that.
And it has to- I mean, the stories are
one thing, but what
it does for you, more than that. is give you a little
perspective. So you know what it is
after- you know what it is to come real close and then not
be killed. And you know what it is
to be scared and not- you know, and get out of it some way
or another. And so you see somebody
else who's in an entirely situation, you know- the husband
has a heart attack or somebody gets
in a car accident and is badly scared and even if that's not
being in the street with 30 guys
~with reinforced steel and baseball bats, that's as scary to
them as the other thing was to you..
So you can- you know, you can immediately understand
what's going on in that person or
that character's mind. And yeah- I think that's- I think
that's been helpful.
JACKI LYDEN: Pete Dexter, author of the new novel The Paper
Boy.
And for this evening, that's All Things Considered.
All Rights Reserved.
Copyright 1994 National Public Radio.
gail..hp..a passionate reader reporting from hot weather in
san francisco..our INDIAN summer...
=============== Reply 13 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/09
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 8:37 AM
Dale,
When I was reading PT I thought how different this was than
your normal everyday potboiler. I guess we are drawn to make
these comparisons because there are many elements
reminiscent of the genre...a murder, a good (sort of) guy, a
bad (very, very bad) guy, an abused wife. But the
made-for-TV version would have stopped at the end of the
Paris trial. He would have been hauled away in handcuffs
cursing made-for-TV curses. Everyone would have felt
justified and no one would have had to question their own
lives. Aside from being a rip-roarer of a story, sweeping
you along, making you ask what in the worlds going to happen
next, this book makes you examine more than Paris Trout. It
makes you examine the very fact of community. It makes you
ask under what conditions can a man like this not only live,
but thrive? If a man like this can thrive, make money hand
over fist, command so much fear that no one wants to arrest
him even for murder, make supposedly upright people consider
that the obvious fact of murder might be justified and
overlooked, then who is responsible for the outcome?
An interesting plot device, and one differing from most
books, is to have one of the main characters, Carl Bonner,
introduced more than halfway through the book. Did anyone
find this surprising? Annoying? Of any significance?
Another question I have---what about the fox-biting
incidence? The little girl who was murdered seemed to have a
sense of clairvoyance or some mystical abilities. Did this
serve any purpose other than make her a kind of
sacrifice/victim symbol?
Do you think that this scenario could have happened only in
the South? I have my own opinions, but I'm curious what
others have the say.
Sherry in cool cloudy Milwaukee
=============== Reply 14 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/09
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 8:42 AM
Dear Dale,
I just noticed your question about the groupie in THE
PAPERBOY. Well, I haven't read that book yet (should I add
it to the mountain?) Hannah's attraction to Paris is one
that has me stumped. But in a way it doesn't bother me that
I don't know exactly why she was attracted. One reason I
like this book is that there is obviously a story there
before the telling, if you know what I mean. This is, what
Sara would call, "a slice".
Sherry
=============== Reply 15 of Note 14 =================
To: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Date: 10/09
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 8:45 AM
Dear Ernie,
Please join us in reading PARIS TROUT. Richard Haggart was
the one who nominated this book, so give him the credit or
blame.
Sherry
=============== Reply 16 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/09
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 9:46 PM
Dale: I'm getting so far behind in my reading, writing and
posting it's pathetic -- but to quick respond:
1. The sad truth is that having an unsavory client isn't
grounds for withdrawal; after all, the system recognizes
that the great majority of these folks are criminals and
guilty as hell. It follows that they're not very nice. Also,
lawyers tend to develop qualms about their clients about the
time the trust account runs dry; judges know this and are
reluctant to allow cream skimming.
2. I can't recall the story well enough to be positive, but
I think Seagrave suspected, but wasn't sure, that Trout
had been engaged in misconduct with the jury, etc. Suspicion
of wrong-doing will never be grounds for withdrawal.
Got to run -- more later, I think, if family and business
ever let up.
Dick in Alaska, on the run
=============== Reply 17 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/09
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 11:58 PM
Hi Sherry,
Last night before going to bed I read the first chapter
(ROSE) and today I'm into HANNAH. I'm very much saddened
but also mesmerized while reading this book. What struck me
was Rose's lack of opportunity to "blossom". She never
really was loved or cared about until just before her
tragic death. The minister at her funeral picked up on this
when he asks the Lord for forgiveness for not taking
better care of her. And now Hannah... that's a Heart Full,
too. More later, Sabrina
=============== Reply 18 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/10
From: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Time: 2:28 AM
This is the book that made me cry. I'm hesitant to re-read
it, 'cause I detest being manipulated. Usually I'm immune.
Especially at movies, because the manipulation is generally
so blatant I get too annoyed to tear up - just sit there
fuming while the rest of the women in the theater sob, and
the men blink fast. But Dexter successfully manipulated me
with this book. So, fess up. Any other cry-babies in the
house?
Theresa
=============== Reply 19 of Note 14 =================
To: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Date: 10/10
From: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Time: 9:07 AM
greetings THERESA..
i usually am good for a good many tears..but this book
didn't elict any..perhaps this topic has been explored too
many times before....don't get me wrong this book is a
'MOVER'...it rolls...and it is a very good discussion
piece...i just can't believe my memory is finally working at
this late date..and i don't find it terrible original..
enjoying the discussion as usual....
gail..hp..a passionate reader and major lurker
=============== Reply 20 of Note 14 =================
To: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Date: 10/10
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 9:57 AM
Can't say I cried Theresa. Although I'm more likely to LIKE
a book if it gets a real good cry out of me. I know what you
mean about the manipulated cry. The kind you get angry at
yourself for crying but do anyway. I cry at everything. I
cry mostly if something moves me, not necessarily if I'm sad
at something.
I didn't find this book manipulative. It seemed a pretty
straightforward story, not one that tried to twist your
feelings one way or the other.
Sherry
=============== Reply 21 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/10
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 11:31 AM
I thought Dexter's writing in the early part of the book was
much more evocative and moving than later, when the story
moved out into the white part of the town. I thought he did
a very good job of capturing the vulnerability and
helplessness of the black community, living right on the
edge of white indifference and rage. When those two worlds
collided and the little girl was killed I was moved, not to
tears, but a kind of sick astonishment. Later, when Trout's
madness (the town's madness?) spilled out of the black
community and finally struck some white guys (he was just a
good old boy with a rough edge on 'em, as long as it was
blacks and women gettin' whacked) there was a sense of
inevitability. Despite the fact that Seagraves (and men like
him) were substantially responsible for allowing Trout's
madness to bloom into violence, there was no emotional
satisfaction in his death. In that sense, I thought the
ending of the book was flawed, or at least unsatisfying --
no resolution of the underlying conflicts that gave rise to
the story. Although that was perhaps Dexter's point.
Dick in Alaska,
=============== Reply 22 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/10
From: VMMN97A FELIX MILLER Time: 11:44 AM
Dale,
I agree that books like PARIS TROUT work against the
expected, conventional fictional treatment of serious
subjects. This is not a work of spiritual uplift, anymore
than KING LEAR is. I am impressed by the inexorableness
(is that a word?) of evil working itself out to the
less-than-reassuring end. I can't say conclusion, because
there is no neat moral to be drawn here. Evil just is, you
don't tie up the consequences in neat packages.
One of the disturbing facets of this book is the
complicity, if only passive, of the civic and business
leaders in Trout's evasion of justice. The feeling you get
is primarily one that the business folk think Paris is bad
for business, giving the community a blemish; he is simply
acting in bad taste.
Also central to the reaction of the community, however, is
the fact that Paris' victims are black. There would have
been a much different reaction if they had been white.
I think also there is an element of fear in all the
townspeople when they contemplate Paris. He is the dark
force that most folk keep chained belowstairs in their
deepest well of unconscious. Seagroves is several times
terrified by Paris Trout, just in fairly ordinary settings
and conversations.
Does anyone else think that Paris Trout is Jason Compson
with a psychosis? I think that the obsession with business
and the feeling of isolation are similar. And the fixation
on the mother is reminiscent of Jason's ambivalent and
furious attitude towards his mother. If Jason had not been
the one sane character in TSATF, he might have turned out
much like Paris Trout.
regards from the mountain, Felix Miller
The two tragedies of life are not getting your heart's
desire, and getting your heart's desire. 10/10/96 11:31AM
ET
=============== Reply 23 of Note 14 =================
To: VMMN97A FELIX MILLER Date: 10/10
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 12:46 PM
Felix: As usual, a pungent and highly cogent comment from
the mountain. I was intrigued by the comparison to Jason
Compson -- is there a view in southern culture that business
makes the soul grow colder? Some vestige of 18th century
England, that trade is vulgar? I think I've seen traces of
that in the readings, but am not entirely certain. If so,
however, that would explain some of similarities of feel
between the characters: those in trade have to deal with
folks that others can pass by. Why I guess it would make a
body crazy, wouldn't it?
Dick in Alaska, where he's late for work and the phones are
now ringing here at home. sigh.
=============== Reply 24 of Note 14 =================
To: VMMN97A FELIX MILLER Date: 10/10
From: ACCR69A JOSEPH BARREIRO Time: 3:22 PM
Felix and all - Sherry commented in her opening note that
this was a short book; it really isn't (300 + pp in the
Penguin paperback edition), but as several have noted, it
rolls along like a runaway train (a metaphor I believe
Harry Seagraves used to describe Paris). I read it over a
two day period. It was hard to understand why Trout
had never before in nearly sixty years lost his grip; you
are led to believe that he is being overcome by a mental
illness which disintegrates the veneer of acceptable
behavior that regulates most people in a community (this
after he has in a murderous fit overstepped the bounds of
that behavior and impulsively committed an irrational act
that he immediately and from then on continually
rationalizes in terms of a business decision) - in the car
with Sheriff Fixx (what a name) it appears that he is
experiencing blackout type losses of control before he
reasserts self-restraint ("...he remembered his feelings in
the car when he was right on the edge of blowing the chin
off Edward Fixx It was different from the way he'd felt
shooting the girl. When he'd gone after her, the anger
blew into him from the outside."). The fact that he is
capable of the type of behavior he inflicts on Hannah when
he knows that he needn't restrain himself is the evidence
of the mean and evil core nature he had apparently
successfully suppressed for many years. The expansion of
his paranoia and fear of poisoning could be symptoms of
debilitating mental illness (the county asylum is a
recurring referent).Perhaps the mental instability is the
natural result of the repression of his true nature over so
many years and some type of explosion was inevitable. I
couldn't get the picture of Dennis Hopper as Trout out of
my head the whole time I read this, so I had to rent the
movie to achieve a sense of consummation. In case you're
not aware, this was a made-for-cable movie (Showtime) back
around 1990 and has since been released on videocassette.
I saw it back then, but didn't recall most of the details.
It stars Hopper, Barbara Hershey and Ed Harris. Pete
Dexter also wrote the screenplay. It follows the novel
fairly well as might be expected, but some large parts are
left out (though really none of the important parts) and
characters are integrated or eliminated (Ward Townes is
subsumed by Carl Bonner, who becomes the D.A. in the film,
Seagraves is a widower). Inexplicably some scenes are
changed (Hannah Trout visits the clinic instead of
Seagraves to view Rosie's condition, Hannah moves in to the
hotel instead of Paris) and the ending is altered in a way
that makes it somewhat less satisfactory to me. Of course
some things are difficult if not impossible to show in a
film: Rosie's sense of the ownership of time ("Rosie
Sayers could not tell time, and her sense of it was that it
belonged to some people and not to others. All the white
people had it, and all the colored peole who had cars.");
Seagraves' discovery of the experiential nature of sexual
orgasm ("He had been thinking about Mrs. Trout all morning,
the way she had held him still and focused on the mechanics
of his own release - a feeling that had been going on
inside him for thirty, thirty-five years - in a different
way.") What makes the movie is Hopper's great performance
as Paris Trout - he is definitive in the role, even
underplaying Trout's essential madness to just the perfect
degree. The supporting cast is adequate to good - Hershey
does just fine but I never felt Ed Harris' portrayal
of Seagrave to jibe with the book. I would grade the movie
a B, Dennis Hopper a solid A. Joe B
=============== Reply 25 of Note 14 =================
To: ACCR69A JOSEPH BARREIRO Date: 10/10
From: KGXC73A GAIL SINGER GROSS Time: 7:27 PM
greetings JOSEPH..
this film was in the theatres prior to CABLE.. if i missed
something..oops..if not you have it on good authority it was
in the theatres....
gail..hp..a passionate reader...some times i am not to be
trusted as the mental filecabinet rearranged material..
=============== Reply 26 of Note 14 =================
To: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Date: 10/10
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 11:07 PM
Dear Theresa,
I was moved to tears by the loss of Rosie's life. This was
not typical for me. Few books make me cry. I think it was
the issue of her wasted life and how trivial it was to
Paris as if she was an object rather than a human being who
had suffered enough already. Sabrina
=============== Reply 27 of Note 14 =================
To: VMMN97A FELIX MILLER Date: 10/10
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 11:07 PM
Hi Felix,
I agree with you about the the significance of FEAR in this
story. This is what I felt when Rosie encountered the fox,
it plays out in Hanna's interactions with Paris and in
Seagroves'. I sense that Hanna found the dark side of Paris
intriguing and was drawn to him for his reason. She got
more than what she bargained for. I kept being reminded of
truly one of my own personal mottos--Stay away from EVIL
people, especially devils in disguise. I agree with those
that have said that Paris had this dark side that had not
been obvious until this time. I think he's psychotic AND
evil, two characteristics that do not always exist together.
Sabrina
=============== Reply 28 of Note 14 =================
To: ACCR69A JOSEPH BARREIRO Date: 10/10
From: VMMN97A FELIX MILLER Time: 11:23 PM
Joe,
Your point about the significance of the ownership of time
as a defining characteristic of racial and social class is
so central to the relationship between black and white in
the book that I wonder that I didn't include this in my
post. What a telling comment on the powerlessness of a
subjugated class. And how subtle the comment on time also
being the property of blacks with cars. You get the whole
picture of black-white relations there. Great post.
Felix Miller
=============== Reply 29 of Note 14 =================
To: VMMN97A FELIX MILLER Date: 10/11
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 9:39 AM
Hi To All,
This book is continuing to evoke strong emotions in me.
Now, I'm experiencing rage over the Paris Trout's of this
world--EVIL MURDERERS! I liken him to the AVENGERS in the
inner city these days who kill innocent bystanders and say
ITS BUSINESS with no respect for human life. I shivered
when Paris said he would do again tomorrow.
In another point, Dexter is eloquent in his handling of
childhood emotions and experience in this black community.
The McNutt child's testimony was moving...and real...
"tears the the size of marbles rolled down her cheeks". It
spoke a lot about culture. For example, just like that
family, it has been important for me for my boys to have
their own personal Bibles. I didn't know any one else
like Dexter noticed this phenomenon. Its just what is
done in my world. What about the collective community
identity? When Rosie was killed, "we thought we was all
going to die," she said."
Gail, you mentioned this story being told before, nothing
new. What are the other books you are referring to? I NEED
to read them for further catharsis
Sabrina, being emotionally charged this AM
=============== Reply 30 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/11
From: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Time: 10:00 PM
I just finished PARIS TROUT last night --wow, thank you Dick
for suggesting this very powerful book. This book had been
recommended to me earlier by a friend, but I put off reading
it because of its dark theme. However, I found the story so
interesting and the writing so fine that I really enjoyed
it.
I am interested in hearing your opinions of Harry Seagraves.
According to his tombstone, "HE WAS OUR BEST AND OUR
KINDEST." In many ways, I think that he basically was a
decent man and perhaps that is why his acquiescence in
Trout's evil was so disturbing to me.
Dale, you asked why Seagraves kept defending Trout. Dick
certainly made a valid point that once he had started it was
difficult to quit, but I think it is very valid to question
why he took the case initially rather than turn it over to a
junior partner. There is a chilling scene in this book where
he makes a cross over Rosie's name when he hears she is
going to die, and quickly changes it into a dollar sign.
Seagraves was afraid of offending the town's elite who would
unquestionably stand by Trout because he was white and rich.
He was bothered by Trout's obvious guilt, but that did not
stop him from participating in the bribe of a witness,
trying to suppress the pictorial evidence of the crime,
telling the sheriff to forget he ever heard initial
statements of Buster and Trout, and fabricating a tale of
dangerous gun toting black people threatening to kill his
client.
Or is that just the way the game is played ? Hana advises
him to drop Trout as a client and tells him, "You can't
separate what you do one place from another." Seagraves
replies, "I have to...I'm a lawyer. "(p. 203) Does anyone
else find that statement very disturbing?
Ann
=============== Reply 31 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/11
From: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Time: 10:00 PM
Sherry,
Interesting question about why Hana married Trout. Do you
suppose part of it was that she was tired of being an "old
maid." Back in the 50's I think that might have been an
important consideration. In many ways, I thought that Hana
was the moral voice in this book. She repeatedly suggested
to Seagraves that if he got Trout off the hook he would be
responsible for what followed. Trout was, of course,
convicted in spite of Seagraves, but his sentence of only 1
to 3 years for the murder of a child was preposterous and,
of course, he never served a day.
At the end of the book, Dexter suggests that Hana pitied
Trout and even dreamed about trying to help him. In light of
his horrible brutality towards her, I found that idea
difficult to accept. What did you think?
As for the mother, Dick may well be right that she was his
last link to humanity, but the thought certainly occurred to
me that she also might have been largely responsible for the
narrow, money- obsessed person he turned out to be.
Although I'm sure the bond was very tight, I don't know that
he liked her. The scene where he visits her at the home
while she is having a bath is certainly unsettling.
Ann
=============== Reply 32 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/11
From: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Time: 10:02 PM
Dick,
You found the second part of the book less compelling than
the first half. I would have to agree, but I thought it was
because it was difficult for Dexter to maintain the dramatic
tension. It was obvious almost from the start that Trout
would explode again, this time turning his rage against the
white citizens of the town. They would pay the price for
letting him get by with his crime. However, Dexter put in so
many false alarms that in the end it seemed a bit anti-
climatic that only 3 people were killed. Trout almost killed
Hana, he made lists of all of his enemies, he almost killed
the sheriff , he left his car in front of the train, etc.
Overall, however, this book was one of my top reads for
1996.
Ann
=============== Reply 33 of Note 14 =================
To: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Date: 10/11
From: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Time: 10:03 PM
Sabrina,
I shared your feelings about Rosie, a child who felt God
must have made a mistake because she was too young to die. I
thought Mary McNutt was also a wonderful character. I loved
it when Seagraves told her at the trial that the jury would
decide what happened and she replied, "They don't decide
what happened...It's already done. All they decide is if
they gone do something about it."
Ann
=============== Reply 34 of Note 14 =================
To: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Date: 10/12
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 0:16 AM
Ann: There is another aspect to my differing views about the
early part of this novel and the later parts -- there was a
sympathy and empathy Dexter had with the characters (poor
and black) in the early going that I found terribly
compelling. When the novel moves on, the characters seem to
become progressively more two-dimensional and shallow.
After the first third of the novel I thought I was in the
presence of a great writer; by the end, I thought it was
just a damned good novel with some very arresting ideas. Was
the change that dramatic, or was it just me? Whatever the
reason, the characters and events that coulld make a reader
weep lived -- and died -- in the first 82 pages. Did Dexter
change his pace intentionally, or was it a creative failure
of a kind?
Dick in Alaska, just full of these questions
=============== Reply 35 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/12
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 0:32 AM
Hi Dick and Ann,
How do you interpret the sexual themes in the middle of the
novel? I'm referring to the encounters between Seagraves
and Hanna and Bonner and his wife. Are these men being
characterized as being repressed as compared to Trout's
lack of of control over his sexual and aggressive impulses?
Why are the women taking control? Sabrina, wondering what
your thoughts are about this
=============== Reply 36 of Note 14 =================
To: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Date: 10/12
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 10:51 AM
Sabrina: Frankly, I didn't think the sexual aspects of the
novel were all that successful or interesting. I guess
Dexter was using the failed personal lives of Seagraves and
Bonner to point up the hollowness of the white southern
community (oh so proper on the outside, oh so evil and empty
on the inside). So what about Hanna? For a woman who was
some variety of old maid until she was forty, and then spent
her bridal years being raped and sodomized by a smelly old
psychopath, she has a pretty health sex drive doesn't she?
Exactly what she and Seagrave offer the story isn't all that
clear to me -- the possibility of redemption, perhaps? Or
maybe Dexter was sending a signal to his significant other
about the twists and turns he'd like to see in THEIR
personal life. You never know about these writers -- they
lead such rich inner lives!
Dick in Alaska where it's snowing to the beat the band, but
things will be fine in just six short months
=============== Reply 37 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/12
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 9:44 PM
Hi Dick,
I thought there was some significance to the sexual
encounters that I was not grasping. I like your ideas,
especially the view that Dexter may have been giving hints
to his wife. That's funny! Along with the shallowness of
Bonner and Seagroves it seems that he was alluding to some
lurid craziness in Hanna. That may be how she hooked up with
Paris in the first place and got more than she bargained
for. Just a thought. Initially, until those scenes, I
thought of Hanna as being the conscience in the story,
taking Rosie to the doctor, going to her funeral. I think
he presented her as being an emotionally complicated
person. I find her interesting. I understand why he put her
in the story. I have a bit more to go before I finish the
novel. I hope to chat with you more about PARIS TROUT
later. Thanks for responding. Sabrina
=============== Reply 38 of Note 14 =================
To: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Date: 10/13
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 0:15 AM
Sabrina: The more we discuss Hanna, the more interesting she
becomes, as a character. As Trout's wife, Hanna has meaning
in the story; she is vulnerable, and marries him for reasons
that are never made entirely clear, but have to do with her
need for something other than mere normalcy in her life.
Perhaps, she needs love -- her interest in Rosie is the
interest both of a decent human being and of a childless
woman who wishes her life had turned out differently. She is
incomplete, at least in the context of the time and place
(and at the same time is very modern: a career woman, with
money, goals and a good deal more on the ball than any man
in the story), and seems to be seeking
something else. Curious that her interest focused on the two
men in the story who are most likely to be termed 'evil' --
Trout and Seagrave. She seems to be a woman who places
herself with dangerous men, for reasons that are never made
clear, and indeed, perhaps cannot be clear. Her detachment
during sex with Seagraves was unnerving; speaking only for
myself, I couldn't do well under such sterile and clinical
conditions, yet Seagraves, just another middle-aged guy,
seemed to manage nicely. Perhaps I'm jealous. In the
meantime, do you suppose Mrs. Dexter wondered who Hanna was?
If I had written that book, MY wife would want to know.
Dick in Alaska, where it is still snowing, but big deal
=============== Reply 39 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/13
From: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Time: 10:09 PM
Sabrina and Dick,
Interesting discussion you have going regarding the sexual
parts of this book. Dick, you suggested that Hana's choice
of men suggested she was attracted to danger. I guess I
didn't see Seagraves as dangerous per se (mostly he
impressed me as weak), but I did think that it was extremely
risky of her to be having an affair with the lawyer of her
abusive husband. I kept expecting Paris to surprise them
with a gun, which definitely added to the underlying
tensions of this story. Did you two notice how many times
Hana was crying during the love scenes with Seagraves? She
didn't seem to love Seagraves -- he was more a case of
"whatever gets you through the night." In a small town, I'm
sure there weren't many candidates.
I found the description of Trout's sexual abuse of Hana very
upsetting, as was Seagraves confession that hearing about it
aroused him.
What did you think of Carl Bonner? I got the definite idea
that Dexter didn't much like boy scouts.
Ann
=============== Reply 40 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/14
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 1:38 AM
Dick & All: I'm back home and have finished PARIS TROUT. I
found it to be one of the most wrenching, disturbing, darkly
humorous, haunting, and tear-inducing novels I've read in a
long time. (Yep, I cried, big-time.) For my money, Dexter's
mastery of contemporary regional dialect is up there with
McCarthy, Higgins, James Lee Burke, etc. PT is definitely my
most-admired fiction of this year. The National Book Award
panel chose well, I think.
As to Sherry's question of whether this is a "Southern"
novel, I believe the same story could take place anywhere in
the world--though the figures of speech wouldn't be as
good.
In other words, I think the central focus of Dexter's book
is not so much racism (which is everywhere, in all its
guises), but the way racism manifests itself among "good"
people: i.e., where do we draw the line between *individual*
and *collective* responsibility for what happens in a
community?
That said, I think PARIS TROUT could happen anywhere, but
only in a town of a certain size (as could SNOW FALLING ON
CEDARS, WINESBURG OHIO, MIDNIGHT IN THE GARDEN OF GOOD AND
EVIL, ad infinitum) because that particular societal
structure is where the gray area between "individual" and
"collective" becomes so wide and so gray. That size of town
is anywhere, and everywhere.
I've preached to workshop audiences, for years, that the
stereotype of small towns being narrow-minded and
intolerant, versus big cities being diverse and accepting of
strangers, is absurd: clearly, the opposite is true. Anybody
who grew up in a small town knows any number of respected
local citizens (albeit with severe mental problems) who
would be forever institutionalized if they visited the city
25 miles away.
In a BIG city, "they" and "somebody" should do something
about the outrageous behavior of such-and-such. But in a
SMALL city, "they" and "somebody" are yourself and your
neighbor, and there's hell to pay.
It also seems to me that PARIS TROUT keeps honing in on
the huge contradiction between *reality* and *ideals*--the
way we behave, versus the abstract standards we aspire to.
He makes this split outrageously clear in many scenes, not
least of which is the nightmarish Centennial costumed trip
via train, during which the pillars of the community dress
as historic figures while getting very drunk and acting very
irresponsible and silly.
That theme keeps going through until the end, when young
Bonner decides to sprint upstairs, unarmed, to face a
heavily-armed psychotic, with the express purpose of
protecting the psychotic's mother; but with everyone already
hearing gunshots, it's a foregone conclusion the mother's
probably already dead.
Yet while Seagraves is trying in vain to grab Bonner, a
female mainsay of the town says proudly, "He was always the
bravest of the brave!" Well, yes, but in this case I'd say
that the bravery was outweighed by stupidity. Was it ever
thus? Comments welcomed.
All in all, a disturbing and though-provoking book. And I
heartily recommend Dexter's subsequent novel THE PAPERBOY.
He doesn't make it easy to read his stuff, but the trip is
worth it. Dale in Ala.
=============== Reply 41 of Note 14 =================
To: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Date: 10/14
From: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Time: 1:45 AM
Hi Sabrina. I think what moved me most about Rosie's death
was that her life had really just begun, in a sense, when
she found someone who cared for and about her. I still
think Dexter was manipulating the reader, but it worked on
me.
Theresa
=============== Reply 42 of Note 14 =================
To: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Date: 10/14
From: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Time: 1:56 AM
I thought Hanna and Seagraves demonstrated aspects of
general societal acquiesence to people like Paris Trout.
After all, what was the real basis of Trout's power? Why was
the town so accepting of his behaviour? What did he really
add that was beneficial to the community? Even if the white
community was complacent in accepting the power dynamic
between themselves & the black community, if anything Trout
messed with the status quo. I think that is why Dexter
showed Hanna as an independent woman - she didn't marry
Trout because she had to. She had other options. She went
willingly. Has anyone read Hannah Arendt? She addresses
this issue, but I can't remember a specific right now. TATS
=============== Reply 43 of Note 14 =================
To: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Date: 10/14
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 11:48 AM
Ann: I didn't feel Seagraves was especially weak or evil (at
least not actively) so much as he was the ultimate
pragmatist. He spreads his anti-boat-rocking philosophy
throughout, telling Bonner at one point "You got to learn
not to push something that won't move." And the case could
be made that if he'd taken Seagraves' advice the story would
have ended differently, with Trout safely exiled to the
federal pen. Maybe not.
On the other hand, I think there's often a fine line
between pragmatism and evil. Hannah Arendt's writing on the
subject, as Theresa points out, shows that evildoers at such
a level as the Nazi war criminals generally did their work
against a pragmatic, business-as-usual background, rather
than being the snarling monsters we've come to expect in the
movies. Just another busy day at Dachau.
Despite all Seagraves' shortcomings, he really grew on me
thoughout the book. He would have been an ideal choice for a
companion to go fishing or have a drink with, I'd think:
funny, smart, self-deprecating. In some ways he disproved
Hanna's contention that "you can't separate who you are from
what you do."
I started off liking Carl Bonner, too, but his tight-a**
ways quickly came to grate on me. No, I don't think Pete
Dexter made Eagle Scout. (I loved Bonner's wife, though.)
On the subject of Hanna's sexual abuse and Seagraves'
embarrassed confession that it aroused him, I agree it's
disturbing but I don't think it's that unusual, or
necessarily a gender thing. I've read articles and essays by
women who were very discomfited to find themselves sexually
aroused by spectacles of violence--a boxing match, or a
bullfight--which their conscious mind found revolting.
I don't know what it means, except that our primal,
internal "levers" of desire, pain, fear, etc., are much more
closely connected than we can understand, or would like to
believe.
Dale in primal Ala.
=============== Reply 44 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/14
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 6:50 PM
Dear Dale,
You've answered just about all the questions that I remember
asking. And I tend to agree with you on all points (aren't
we civilized). I was trying to put into words that
particularly human phenomenon that Ann, I think, was
disturbed by--Seagraves' admission that he found the tales
Hanna told him about her sexual abuse darkly erotic. I
agree that there is a real dichotomy in what people allow
into their fantasy life and what they have a comfort level
with in their physical life. I think it is one of life's
many paradoxes, and a big reason we tell stories--to
acknowledge that part of ourselves which is attracted to
violence, yet keep it in check. It was extremely risky on
Seagraves' part to admit to Hanna how he felt. I think his
affair with Hanna was an outlet for that part of himself
that had secrets, that was sick and tired of keeping up that
"reasonable" persona that he had backed himself into in the
community. His wife was portrayed as a very one-dimensional
narrow-minded traditional small-town girl. He didn't appear
to have enough energy to try to have a real inner life with
her.Their marriage just seemed like an extension of a high
school romance that was inconvenient to disconnect from.
There is almost a tangle of tragedies here, one on top of
the other, with no clear pattern as to what caused what.
That is why I think PARIS TROUT is almost Shakespearean in
scope. No one escapes from the tragedy.
Sherry in beautiful fall weather
=============== Reply 45 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/14
From: FAVB99B JANE NIEMEIER Time: 9:57 PM
Dale, I have to disagree with you about your view of small
towns. (BTW, I read PT some time ago and decided not to
reread it because I have too much to read right now). I
have told you that I grew up part time in Indiana, in a town
with a population of 5000. During the summer, I spent my
time in Gabon, Africa, so I had a broader view of the world
than most children. Plus I moved to Indiana when I was ten
after living in Georgia, Kentucky, Brazil, Idaho, Oregon,
Washington, Brazil (again). You can imagine what a shock it
was when we moved to Indiana from Brazil. I might as well
have just arrived from Mars. I also remember seeing a youth
group arriving from Fort Wayne. One of the children was
African-American. A boy from my church stood outside and
threw rocks at the bus calling the other boy a chocolate
drop. I have a very bad memory of my time in Indiana
because of the reaction towards this boy and towards me.
Jane who prefers a larger town.
=============== Reply 46 of Note 14 =================
To: FAVB99B JANE NIEMEIER Date: 10/15
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 9:16 AM
Jane: I realized after posting my note that I'd hopelessly
over-generalized about the small town situation. The dark
side of small-town folks is that they're very supportive and
tolerant, as long as you're "one of them." They can be hell
on strangers, though, which your story verifies.
On the other hand, small towns sure don't have a monopoly
on prejudice and xenophobia. Judging from the headlines,
incidents such as the rock-throwing are just as likely to
happen in New York, Los Angeles, or Miami.
Dale in Ala.
=============== Reply 47 of Note 14 =================
To: VMMN97A FELIX MILLER Date: 10/15
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 12:13 PM
Felix: Enjoyed your note. I think Dexter did a great job of
depicting the fearsome effect that Trout had on people. In
interviews I've seen with people who've confronted human
evil, a common thread is that they feel a mixture of
revulsion and terrible fear--even when, as you say, there's
no logical information to base it on. Maybe it's a primitive
thing, our fight-or-flight kicking in at a level so
instinctive it's below our rational thinking process.
I think Dexter also pulled off the difficult trick, on a
technical basis, of dipping into the workings of Trout's
mind at rare and odd moments and showing how far gone he is
mentally without belaboring it or undercutting the suspense.
Tough, tough balancing act.
I agree PT is Lear-like in many aspects. Hard to come away
with any hopeful nuggets of insight into human behavior.
Powerful book.
Dale in Ala., who is grateful to Dick for nominating it,
but wonders if it had anything to do with "trout" being in
the title...
=============== Reply 48 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/15
From: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Time: 8:35 PM
Dale and Sherry,
Well, I considered remaining tactfully silent, but that is
really my nature as you have all probably figured out by
now. I'm afraid I am just not willing to let Seagraves
off the hook that easily. Agreed that what made him
interesting was that in many respects he was a likable guy
who had a lot of decent qualities. Yet, I still find his
behavior evil, and I am not willing to excuse it because he
was just playing his assigned role in the American judicial
system.
First of all, I have a lot of problems with the current
state of the American legal system. I know intellectually
that even the worst criminals have a "right" to a defense
lawyer, but it bothers me that trials have turned into
adversverdana contests, in which the primary purpose is
winning the game rather than discovering the truth about
guilt and innocence. What has happened to the concept of
justice? I like to think it wasn't always that way, but
maybe I am deluding myself. When I took the tour of
Williamsburg a few years ago, the guide explained how
colonials chose jurors who knew the accused because they
could make more intelligent decisions. Now, in high profile
cases, lawyers go out of their way to find the most ignorant
people possible because they are not supposed to have any
preknowledge of the case. Defense lawyers use every trick
and technicality in the book to keep obviously guilty people
out of prison. What bothered me most about Seagraves' role
in this book was that he represented so much of what is
wrong with our legal system.
Second, I think that Seagraves went way beyond any
obligations he had as a defense lawyer by attempting to
repress evidence and participating in the bribe of a
witness. After all, we are talking about the totally
unprovoked murder of an innocent child. And let's face it,
if that child had been white, even though she had belonged
to the poorest echelon of whites, Trout would have been
quickly put behind bars because everyone would be wondering
if they or their loved ones would be next. Because she was
black, the whites put her in the category of "other" and did
not see themselves as threatened. Her life was considered
valueless. Seagraves himself knew that what he was doing was
wrong and that is why the image of Rosie haunted him. His
own death at the end of the novel was his payment for his
"sin." In that sense, I must agree that this book bore the
hallmarks of a classic tragedy. In real life, of course,
things are not nearly so neat.
I agree that you could set a story like this outside the
South of the 1950's , but the prerequisites would be a
victim from a completely powerless group, a group considered
so alien by the power structure that they cannot identify
with it.
Sherry and Dale, I think I understand what you are saying
about eroticism often being connected to violent images. I
can understand it more when we are only talking about
fantasies. But when your real life lover is explaining how
she was brutally sexually abused and you tell her that you
can't help seeing something erotic in it, I find that rather
jarring. At the least, maybe he could have kept this
knowledge to himself? As for the untouchable Mrs. Seagraves,
retired beauty queen who apparently had not done anything in
the least interesting in the last 20 years, it sure isn't
hard to understand why Seagraves found a need to escape from
her and her "mama kisses."
Ann, waiting for Dick in Alaska to come to the defense of
the American legal system and apologizing in advance if she
has been too intemperate.
=============== Reply 49 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/15
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 11:21 PM
Dick: Getting back to Hanna--
She continues to intrigue me. What do you make of this? In
the last section of the book, she cannot say that she wants
to be "loose of Paris" in response to Seagroves' concern
that she continues to be emotionally tied to him(Paris).
Her reason for the connectedness: "I may be stumbling in
the dark too and he might be down there with me". Does she
feel that she has an underside that is evil and psychotic,
explaining her attraction to him? There is something about
her nature, including her "sexual detachment", which makes
me question her sanity. I hope Mrs. Dexter did not read
this book or maybe she's one of the characters Sabrina
=============== Reply 50 of Note 14 =================
To: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Date: 10/15
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 11:21 PM
Theresa,
I agree with you totally about the loss of Rosie. Dexter
did a great job of letting us get to know her. I was so
happy when she was SAVED from the fox, her home life, the
man that took her away...Then,to lose her life so
tragically was awful. Oooh, and that death scene with Jesus
coming to cover her with a blanket...one of the most
memorable scenes in my recent recollection. Happy Reading,
Sabrina
=============== Reply 51 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/17
From: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Time: 1:35 AM
PARIS TROUT
I finished reading PT earlier this evening and have just
finished reading the notes. First, I cry more than anyone I
know, but htis book did not make me cry. What it did do
was bring to the surface my own frustrations over the Paris
Trout's of the world. This book is a little different from
my usual choice of books, and despite some of the things I
didn't like about it, it kept my interest and it (and the
notes posted on it) give me a lot to think about.
While I, too wondered why Hanna hooked up with Trout to
begin with, I am also wondering why Trout hooked up with
Hanna at his advanced age and as tight as he was. At the
beginning of the book it was suggested that perhaps he
needed somebody to talk to in the absence of his mother.
This makes me think that there is something more to his
relationship with his mother. There was a description of a
family portrait with his mother's hand on his shoulder as
if there was a secret between them and the father was
looking straight at the camera (blind to whatever it was
that was going on?). I thought this technique to suggest a
possible situation was interesting, not that he is the
first author I've seen do this, but it is a fad now to
analyze family relationhips by studying family snapshots.
I'm wondering what the deal was with Trout's car on the
tracks during that silly train ride party? Was it a
coincidence? Had his car stalled? Was he trying to kill
himself? At first I thought it was intentional because he
knew the *town* woudl be on that train. But later it
appeared he was oblivious to the town's birthday
celebrations.
Also, what ever happened to the policeman, Bo Andrews,
after he walked Trout to the Stocks? Why did he not
continue with his arrest of Trout? As for that scene, I
found it silly other than as used as a metaphor. And isn't
ironic that Trout got into more "trouble" over not paying
his taxes than for killing an innocent child.
I didn't find the book to be so much about evil (though I
certainly found Trout to be evil). BTW, I thought that
Hanna, while better than most in this town, was not
completely guilt-free. To me she, too, had blinders on
until Trout killed Rosie and then she took them off.
Someone had mentioned the scene after the shooting where
Hanna says, yes, she could imagine Trout doing this. But
back to my point, I didn't find the other main characters
in the book to be evil. I found them to be like so many
people in any community anywhere in the U.S. even today in
the 1990's (though not as far as the openess of the
racism). I think people have a tendency to feel that there
is nothing they can do so why bother. I am sure I am
guilty of this to some degree in my own community. I think
the question is where do we draw the line. What is and
isn't our responsibility? Much attention is given to the
white people in the community who fear Trout, but put up
with him--let him continue living there. I could be wrong,
but it appears the black people continued doing business
with him as well. Do any of you think Rosie's mother was
evil even though she talked of fearing the devil? Maybe it
is a person's own fear of *evil* that eventually makes him
evil? I think Paris Trout was paranoid all his life. And
I think paranoia has a snowball effect.
As for Bonner, I liked him in an auntly (my nephews are
nearing his age) sort of way. I think if given the time he
would have matured. IMO, it's not that Dexter doesn't like
boy scouts, I think he was just making a statement about
how a young hero of sorts can go on and just be average.
Bonner was just trying to deal with that. cont.
=============== Reply 52 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/17
From: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Time: 1:36 AM
PARIS TROUT
cont.
I also liked Seagraves. I just don't know why he didn't
just come right out and tell Bonner, "look, Trout carries
loaded guns. He's Dangerous!" instead of beating around
the bush. I also agree with Dale that Bonner and Seagrave
were both stupid in the end. I saw it coming for Bonner,
but not for Seagraves. An author's error or are people
that stupid in real life?
Dale, I think you have a good point about the small
town/big city misconceptions. I have some thoughts on
this, but it is late and I should be getting to bed.
On a humorous note,
I have to confess that throughout the entire book I
pictured Kathy Bates as Hanna. Then something in Joe's
post made me think, (not seriously, though) hey maybe Hanna
(Kathy Bates) was poisoning Trout. She married him to kill
him slowly and get his money, but he ended up killing Rosie
in the process and that made Hanna feel guilty.
Finally, what do you think Trout did with all his money? I
tend to think he burned it, but maybe he didn't and
wouldn't that make a great sequel? A young black woman
finds the money years later...
Jean--who is up past her bedtime
=============== Reply 53 of Note 14 =================
To: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Date: 10/17
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 9:00 AM
Dear Jean,
I was also wondering what happened to the money. I think he
destroyed it too. That was the only way to make sure no one
found it and he knew he wouldn't need it again--not that he
actually ever needed it in the first place. He used it more
as a way to wield power over people than as an exchange
medium. I agree that I don't think that Seagraves or Bonner
or the town were evil per se, but that sometimes denying
that evil exists or putting up with it leads to just as much
trouble in the long run. I hadn't caught the mention of the
family photograph. I know there felt like there was
something spooky going on between him and his mother. Sherry
=============== Reply 54 of Note 14 =================
To: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Date: 10/17
From: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Time: 10:48 AM
PARIS TROUT
I woke up this morning with a strong feeling I should jump
on here ASAP and clarify some of my statements. In
addition to the many typos I am finding, I see I strayed in
my paragraph about evil. I want to point out that I don't
think that the actions of the characters being
discussed, Paris Trout aside, are to be accepted because
that was the time in which they lived. I just don't think
their actions made them *evil*. I have also realized I put
my own blinders on in regard to Seagraves. I found myself
liking him, but I just now remembered that he *did* make a
pay-off to Buster. I don't understand that action. I
think he regrets that decision. I don't think that makes
him evil. As far as why he would defend Paris Trout in the
first place: well, I often wonder how anyone could be a
criminal defense lawyer. But then again, if I was
incorrectly charged with a crime I would want the right to
be defended and to be defended well. I would want my
lawyer's tactics to be legal, but I'd want him to do his
best. And my right to that defense means that real
criminals get that right as well. Despite my lack of
knowledge of the laws of the law and the fact that I
question and don't always understand the tactics of lawyers
or the ins & outs of the judicial system, I still feel this
system is better than some of the alternatives. But that is
really another bag of worms.
I also see this novel as a straightforward story about a
Southern town in the '50s and the inequities and
injustices of the time. Underneath the surface we
can discuss why and what, etc.
In addition, so many of your posts seem to stay focused
within the scope of the novel, while I feel I tend to start
connecting everything in terms of my own experiences and
end up side-tracked.
Before we throw stones and just label
these people as evil, we should take a look at our own
actions in our own communities. Do we know of anyone in
our community who we know to be drug-users or drug sellers?
Or maybe there is just a rumor that so & so does this sort
of thing? I probably have more in my neighborhood, than
any of you have in yours (or yours are just more discrete),
but what do you do about? (I'm not talking about guys
selling drugs to kids or major drug dealers here.) Or
change it to any other illegal activity you can think of.
Big or small. Ticket fixxing?
Jean--getting side-tracked once again and probably diggin
herself in deeper
=============== Reply 55 of Note 14 =================
To: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Date: 10/17
From: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Time: 10:49 AM
Ann, I agree with you that if Rosie had been white there
would have been a totally different reaction from the
townspeople. But do you think Seagraves would have still
defended Trout if the girl had been white? And even if the
girl had been white, Trout would still be entitled as an
American citizen to a defense attorney. Also, maybe I am
being idealistic here, but I think in terms of the judicial
system I think we are in a better state today than we were
in the fifties. I think it is FAR from perfect and we have
probably picked up some new bad things along the way, but
for the most part I think things seem better. I look
forward to hearing Dick's opinions on all this lawyer talk.
Jean who should be cleaning or reporting drug dealers or
something
=============== Reply 56 of Note 14 =================
To: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Date: 10/17
From: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Time: 7:38 PM
Hi Jean,
You made some very good points. Every time I think about
Seagraves, I come up with a different opinion. But then that
it the mark of a good book, don't you think ? The author
really makes you think and the there is a lot of ambiguity
in his work.
Trout himself is not ambiguous. I think we would all agree
that he is downright crazy. Anyone who believes that it is
moral to kill someone over a bad debt, particularly someone
only peripherally related to the debtor, is not operating
with a full deck. I doubt if any of us empathized with him
much.
However, Seagraves is different. Dexter purposely made him
very normal and, in many ways, sympathetic. For that reason,
I think he is a far more interesting character. Your point
that he was merely doing his job has a lot of validity.
However, I found Rosie's murder so horrendous that it was
hard for me to imagine myself trying to defend her murderer.
And perhaps my reaction to Seagraves was an outgrowth of
that failure of imagination. Buster Dexter and Trout talked
to the policeman after the murder and told him what
happened, but Seagraves instructed them all to forget this
conversation ever took place and came up with a totally
invented scenario for the trial. For this and other
reasons, I felt that he went beyond what was required of him
as a defense lawyer and acted unethically.
I also felt that the power structure of the town deserved
to share some of Trout's guilt because they chose to ignore
the fact that bribery kept him out of prison. As you pointed
out, it is always easy to look the other way, and I might
very well have done the same. But that doesn't make it
right. There are sins of omission as well as those of
commission. (Golly, I didn't forget all those years of
Catholic religion classes after all).
You brought up a really interesting question that I had not
considered much-- why did Trout marry Hana? Dexter
described him as a man who did not like to be touched, so I
didn't think sex had much to do with it until I got to the
sodomy scene. Originally, I thought he was just looking for
someone to work in the store after his mother became
incapacitated, but I think you are right that it was
probably a lot more complicated than that.
Yeah, and what did he do with all that money? He never spent
any of it, so it wasn't the money per se that attracted him,
but the power it represented. I could certainly see him
burning it all up.
Ann
=============== Reply 57 of Note 14 =================
To: TQWX67A ANN DAVEY Date: 10/17
From: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Time: 10:43 PM
I'd have to label Seagraves the "evil" character, rather
than Trout. Trout DID evil, but he was also nuts - way, way
round the bend, so far gone he had no chance of finding his
way back. I don't 100% buy into the notion that would
excuse "crazy" people from culpability for their sins.
Trout was culpable, but he had gone beyond being able to
effectively govern his own actions. Seagraves definitely
had not. He had full control of his actions. He had
opportunity to do right, and he made a free (and sane)
choice to do wrong. I don't think we can excuse him by
saying he was merely fulfilling his role as an attorney.
His actions went far beyond any duty he owed to his client,
He wasn't even in a moral gray area. He was just plain
wrong, and I think he damn well knew it. Not that I believe
this sort of thing doesn't go on in real life, but that is
what makes Seagraves so frightening. He was the voice of
reason, even a rather humanistic voice, and yet he
facilitated evil. He went quite a bit beyond just allowing
Trout to happen (which we all do, every day, in many, many
ways. We'd collapse if we took on every evil act in the
world). So, to use a term I cannot stand, Seagraves was the
co-dependent. Why, I still can't fathom.
Theresa
=============== Reply 58 of Note 14 =================
To: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Date: 10/18
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 12:23 PM
Theresa: I think your view on Seagraves is quite right. He
is representative of the community view: the people who have
compromised on moral issues for so long, in so many venues,
they no longer can distinguish between civil accomodation
and outright surrender to evil. Someone earlier mentioned
Hannah Arendt in the context of this book, which I think is
right on the money -- 'the banality of evil'. It wasn't
Trout the monster who was responsible for the crimes in this
novel; it was the community and city fathers (no mothers
here) that allowed his greed and racism to fester and turn
to genuine madness without any check or restraint. Little
Rose was the victim; everyone else's wounds were largely
self-inflicted.
Dick in Alaska, at the end of yet another monstrosity of a
week
=============== Reply 59 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/18
From: FAVB99B JANE NIEMEIER Time: 9:45 PM
Hi all,
I mentioned earlier that I have been lurking here because I
read PARIS TROUT several years ago and decided not to reread
it. After I read the book Tom N. and I rented the movie.
Dennis Hopper played Trout, Barbara Hershey was Hannah, and
I don't remember who played Seagraves. DH and BH were
great. Has anyone else seen this movie? Jane who also had
a difficult week at work.
=============== Reply 60 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/19
From: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Time: 2:21 PM
Sherry, I finally got into the book and am very impressed
by Dexter's writing skill. The writing is ominous and this
agrees with your original note. I am glad that this book
was suggested since I would not have read this book
otherwise. I would have given up because of the realism,
or morbidity (???). I have seen and experienced too much of
it to enjoy reading about it. But I will bravely continue
on looking forward to the discussion. Ernie
=============== Reply 61 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/20
From: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Time: 2:40 PM
Sherry, I started the book with apprehension as I may have
written in an earlier note. But getting to the middle of it
I am not only pleased to read it, but am terribly impressed
by Dexter's writing skill. The theme is old of course. The
people in power vs. the powerless. Right vs. wrong, but the
presentation is great. I am trying to say that I am pleased
that you suggested this book. Ernie
=============== Reply 62 of Note 14 =================
To: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Date: 10/20
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 3:56 PM
Dear Ernie,
I'm glad you are joining us in reading PARIS TROUT, but you
can thank Richard Haggart for the suggestion.
Sherry
=============== Reply 63 of Note 14 =================
To: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Date: 10/20
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 5:20 PM
Hi, Sabrina: I've been pondering your note about Hanna's
puzzling behavior in not being able to completely break away
emotionally from her husband, despite the horrible violence
he's done, both to her and to the girl and woman he killed.
I'm still puzzled, but I did remember a casual
conversation I had with a psychiatrist friend once, in which
he dropped a quiet bombshell by saying somewhat offhandedly
that "The ideal basis for a relationship, of course, is
love. But under certain circumstances, two people can be
bound just as tightly, if not more so, by hate. The only
thing a relationship *can't* survive is indifference."
I'm wondering if Hanna couldn't move past the sad "bond"
of hating Paris Trout, into the indifference that would have
afforded her at least some sense of freedom...and if so, how
is this phenomenon reflected in the *non*-romantic
relationships of our lives--our partners, supporters, and
opponents (and combinations thereof)...in business,
community life, church, etc.?
Whew. Heavy, heavy. Any enlightenment appreciated,
Dale in sunny and cooler Ala.
=============== Reply 64 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/20
From: KDEX08B RUTH BAVETTA Time: 7:04 PM
Just finished my second reading of PT. I must say I found
it just as puzzling this time around as the first time I
read it a year or so ago. It's a hard book for me to
fathom. I didn't find a single character I felt I wanted to
empathize with. Even Rosie left me cold. Granted, she was
a sympathetic kid, but I didn't get to know her well enough
before she was knocked off. No tears, here, although I can
be a fountain of them sometimes. Perhaps Rosie wasn't real
enough to me because she wasn't real enough to the author,
just a device to start the ball rolling.
Sure, Dale, hate can be a bond. Anything can be a bond. We
can even create bonds out of nothing. Or we can be stuck
with bonds of our own making which have no undoing. As long
as we have children, we have a bond to our ex-mates that
prevents us from ever closing the door entirely.
Who was it that said they thought that Hanna was reacting to
the mores of the time, in that a woman wasn't worth anything
unless she was married? I think they were right on the
money. There's a self-loathing which Hanna exhibited which
could be a reflection of the fact that not only was she
unable to "catch" a man until she was 44, but that she
pulled in a pretty lousy specimen at that. Thankgod the
days are receding in which a woman was evaluated by society
in terms of her man, rather than in terms of herself.
Ruth, celebrating fall with a glass fresh cider from Oak
Glen, just up (literally) the road a piece from Red.ands
=============== Reply 65 of Note 14 =================
To: FAVB99B JANE NIEMEIER Date: 10/20
From: ACCR69A JOSEPH BARREIRO Time: 7:41 PM
Jane - That was Ed Harris who played Seagraves. I did
make mention of the movie earlier in this thread (back on
10/10). I thought Hopper was excellent, Hershey good,
Harris merely present, but I didn't see any of the
ambiguities of either Harry's or Hannah's characters
written into their parts(screenwritten by Dexter by the
way). What was the significance I wonder of all the lead
actors' names beginning with H? The precis from my movie
guide: ' 2 1/2 stars. Pete Dexter's bleak tale on 1949
Georgia gets first-cabin treatment but remains as
inexplicably pointless as his novel.' A bit rough off the
cuff dismissal, non? Joe B
=============== Reply 66 of Note 14 =================
To: ACCR69A JOSEPH BARREIRO Date: 10/20
From: KDEX08B RUTH BAVETTA Time: 8:45 PM
Anyone but me curious about the guy's name? I mean PARIS
TROUT is not your everyday moniker. No mention in the novel
of its derivation or significance. Are we supposed to make
something of it?
Ruth, inclined to agree with the inexplicably pointless
thing
=============== Reply 67 of Note 14 =================
To: KDEX08B RUTH BAVETTA Date: 10/20
From: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Time: 9:39 PM
Ruth: I too was somewhat taken with the name 'Paris Trout'.
but just assumed it was more of that southern color stuff.
However, recall that 'Paris' was the son of Priam & Hecuba
(late of Troy fame) and Hecuba had a dream that he would
bring disaster on the family, so she dumped him on the
mountain side. However a pesky shepard picked up the
abandoned child, and raised him up to, ultimately, bring
disaster on his family by running off with that Greek bimbo,
Helen. Frankly, that's a pretty far stretch, but I guess you
could make it work if you were in an English III class
someplace.
Dick in Alaska, where we've got plenty of mountains,
unaccountably bare of small children
=============== Reply 68 of Note 14 =================
To: ZRPD32A RICHARD HAGGART Date: 10/20
From: FNMN56E LYNN EVANS Time: 9:42 PM
I thought it was a French fish.
=============== Reply 69 of Note 14 =================
To: KDEX08B RUTH BAVETTA Date: 10/20
From: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Time: 10:09 PM
Ruth, While I find Rosie's murder a horrendous act, I, too,
felt that Dexter used her as a device to get the ball
rolling.
Jean
=============== Reply 70 of Note 14 =================
To: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Date: 10/20
From: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Time: 10:09 PM
Ann & Theresa,
I have been reading for years without the benefit of
discussing in such detail the books I've read. With each
new note I have more to think about. I am getting so much
more out of this book because I get to "hear" so many
intelligent insights into the book and, therefore,
into life itself.
First, Ann, I, too, have vague
recollections of Catholic religion classes! I'm
beginning to think that Dexter did a good job of making me
like Seagraves. I was caught up in his charisma when I had
just completed the book. Now I am remembering more and
more things he did that I didn't like in addition to his
unethical behavior. Nothing like having the "finest" of
the community passing out on your kitchen floor. And
then, that he told Hanna that the abuse with the mineral
water bottle aroused him.
Theresa, you have a good
point about the culpability of crazy people and that
Seagraves was actually more guilty.
Since evil seems to be the topic of choice on CR, I
thought I'd mention a picture book about good and evil I
had just recently checked out of the library for myself.
It is GOOD GRISELLE by Jane Yolen and handsomely
illustrated by David Christiana. It is about the appealing
forms the devil takes to try to tempt us and the hardships
of life that try us. It didn't catch my kids interest, but
I enjoyed it.
Jean
=============== Reply 71 of Note 14 =================
To: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Date: 10/21
From: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Time: 0:05 AM
Well, Jean, if you think we have been obsessed with talking
about "evil" on CR, just wait until you get to the next
book: PERFUME. Evil without a doubt.
Sherry
=============== Reply 72 of Note 14 =================
To: WSRF10B SHERRY KELLER Date: 10/21
From: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Time: 1:34 AM
It's been a couple of years since I read this book, but I
still seem to have a lot to say about it! Contrast Seagrave
with the woman who "rescued" Rosie. She had a lot less
power, but when confronted with evil, strode right on in and
snatched up the child. She wasn't as interesting a
character - if conflict = "the story" there wasn't much of a
story there. I agree that Rosie was just a story-telling
device - and it might have made for a more interesting story
if Dexter had given her a bit more character - and made her
more of a player in her own life. I realize he needed the
most helpless of the helpless for his plot (and who more
stereotypically helpless than a female, black, child in
the South) but she a bit too depersonalized (if that's even
a word).
Theresa
=============== Reply 73 of Note 14 =================
To: KDEX08B RUTH BAVETTA Date: 10/21
From: KFBC86B JEAN MILLER BELL Time: 9:21 PM
Yes, count me in as curious about the name. When I worked
for the software store, I had a young customer (high school
age) named Paris. I can't remember his last name. This
kid was a sweetheart though--nothing like the Trout
variety! I can't remember if he told me how his parents
had come up with that name. Of course, in my son's
pre-school a few years ago there was a London, Kenya and
Asia. Speaking of unique names, the female cashier at the
grocery store yesterday was named Clover. I had never
heard that used as a first name, but I kind of like it.
Jean
=============== Reply 74 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/23
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 0:33 AM
Hi Dale,
I'm not sure if I perceived Hana as hating Trout, per se.
Their relationship was certainly CHARGED. I think she was
ATTRACTED to him as if to a magnet. I'm not sure that she
understood why just like we can't comprehend it. Seagroves
picked up on it though. I find that there are certain
people that I am attracted to, positively and negatively
and then some people that to whom I respond with
indifference. Very interesting thoughts to ponder. Sabrina,
basically agreeing with you but offering to profound
enlightenment
=============== Reply 75 of Note 14 =================
To: NDKB53A THERESA SIMPSON Date: 10/23
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 0:33 AM
I just want to say again that Rosie really evoked feelings
in me. I think Dexter did more with her than he really had
to in order to use her as a plot device. He presented her
as being an emotionally neglected child if not abused child
with the accompanying fearfulness, gullibiltiy,
neediness... I once knew an abused child who died in a
horrible accident. I remember having the same feelings I
had about Rosie. How unfortunate it was that she would
never have the opportunity to live a decent life. Although
I agree that she was a plot device, she was an important
part of the book for me. Sabrina, who continues to be
afraid of dogs and rabies shots
=============== Reply 76 of Note 14 =================
To: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Date: 10/24
From: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Time: 3:10 PM
I have something to add to the puzzle of Hanna and Paris's
marriage made in heaven. One of my college acquaintances, a
girl my age told me that she had just met the guy she must
get married to. She explained that he is the exact opposite
of her brother who is brilliant, cultured, etc. etc., She
found it impossible to have a physical relationship with
someone other than the opposite of her brother. Strangely
enough many many years later I did run into her once more.
I asked her the usual questions about family, kids, etc.,
Yes, she was still married to the same guy, had grown kids,
had her own business (real estate) and seemed happy as can
be expected. What can we make of this??? Ernie
=============== Reply 77 of Note 14 =================
To: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Date: 10/25
From: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Time: 4:19 PM
Hi Ernie,
My question is, What is your woman friend's
personality like? Is she the opposite of her brother
(cultured, brilliant)? You have to wonder about someone who
chooses lovers using a brother as a reference point.
However, it SEEMS that she has led a happy, successful
life. People are so interesting. Sabrina
=============== Reply 78 of Note 14 =================
To: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Date: 10/25
From: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Time: 4:41 PM
Hi, Ernie: Fascinating, that this woman was intent on
finding a mate who was the *mental* opposite of her brother;
somehow I could see a physical opposite easier, though for
me both concepts raise the question of whether she'd
experienced incestuous impulses at some level and was trying
to quash them..."protesting too much, methinks."
Then, too, there's the old saying that we all want to
marry the emotional equivalent of our fathers/mothers, or in
any event what we idealize them to be. Have you found this
true in your professional experience, or is it an
over-generalization?
Dale in Ala.
=============== Reply 79 of Note 14 =================
To: TPRS02A SABRINA MOLDEN Date: 10/26
From: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Time: 7:33 PM
Sabrina, I knew her when we were both grad students at the
University and she was rather a nice person. To come to the
point she may have been in competition with her brother and
set herself high goals. But she essentially lacked
interests in what she was doing, taking psych courses or
whatever. She was befriending guys in school but it did not
seem of a serious nature. She may have related to males
better than to females. When I met her again many years
later (more recently) she still seemed attracted to men and
achievement. I did not get a feeling of warmth or
intellectual interests. She may see herself as a success
and she is in a way, but not in the same way that I would
see success. There is something impersonal or superficial
in the way she relates. Ernie
=============== Reply 80 of Note 14 =================
To: MXDD10A DALE SHORT Date: 10/26
From: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Time: 7:41 PM
Dale, Of course there was an element of incest- fear in her
choices, that's what it was all about. A discussion with
my supervising profs went along these lines. A most
unfortunate problem, due perhaps of having been to close to
the brother or having competed with him from an early age.
I have heard it said that we either pick a spouse like our
parents or the opposite. There is a lot more to it than
meets the eye. There is a professor named Buss who wrote a
good deal about mate selection and prediction of selection.
I never quite understood exactely what he had to say. But
there is a good deal of work done which has to do with
finding the "best bet" for reproducing success. Another
thought, at the Israeli communes or Kibutzes, kids reared
together rarely if ever find each other attractive or get
married. There is an innate mechanism in man against
in-breeding which reduces reproductive success in the long
run. Ernie
=============== Reply 81 of Note 14 =================
To: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Date: 10/26
From: DHGK37A ERNEST BELDEN Time: 7:59 PM
Dale, just had a power outage and was taken off line in the
middle of a sentence and of course don't remember what it
was. Just wanted to say something along the line that I
can't visualize myself living in the type of society that
Dexter describes. Ernie
To: ALL Date: 11/06
From: NCSH82B BARBARA MOORS Time: 9:49 PM
PARIS TROUT--the latecomers.................................
Just finished PARIS TROUT last week-end and have been
mulling it over and reading your notes ever since. Am
really glad you nominated it, Dick. As Ann said, I never
would have read this otherwise and the writing is
outstanding. The true kernels of greatness are in the
beginning, before Rosie dies, I think...as Dick said.
However, the whole book leaves me pondering various
characters and reactions.
It's interesting to me that Paris is not the one who
keeps me thinking. He is somewhat one-dimensional in his
evil qualities and ever worsening mental illness. The real
interest here, for me, is in those who react to and
interact with him.
I'm finding that Hanna's character is leaving the
strongest impression on me. I've always been interested in
women in this century, prior to the 70's, who chose to
or simply ended up moving in a non-traditional direction,
without a man. They seemed to pay in a myriad of ways,
psychologically, for their direction...and probably would
have, just due to their upbringing, even without the
comments of others. I'm sure that Dexter meant to imply
that Hanna was a woman with strong sexual needs who had
simply found herself successful, organized, a bit
intimidating...and alone. Along comes Paris Trout, in
whom, on the surface, she saw strength, some similar values
(remember that they both believed in wasting nothing and
hard work). At 40, she took the gamble and decided not to
analyze and organize for once...and just take the
chance. What a tragedy the gamble becomes.
I'm not sure why she retains that attachment to Paris
after he so totally abuses her...I couldn't decide if it
was supposed to be her own bit of self-hate or if she
retained her connection to the vision of Paris she first
saw...or what. As I read on in the book, I thought back a
number of times to that image of her taking charge of Rosie
and taking her to the doctor when Rosie comes back to
Paris' store. That woman was the person Hanna was prior to
Paris Trout...it made what she let herself in for even
sadder.
Seagraves seemed to me to be the king of
rationalization...cursed with the ability to see what was
happening, but feeling unable to get out of his role of
being the person who is trusted by the town to represent
those with money. By the time, he realizes just how bad it
is, he's accepted the case and is beyond the point of being
able to withdraw. One thing I've learned from watching my
husband who does some criminal law is that it's not always
as easy for a lawyer to withdraw from a case as you might
think. Beyond that, he seems to have become this awful
sad mish-mash with relatively little strength to match his
intelligence and sense of kindness.
Carl Bonner and his wife seemed underdeveloped and sort
of irrelevant to me. I think Dexter must have wanted to
contrast this adult Eagle Scout with Paris Trout's evil,
but it just didn't work somehow for me.
In any case, this is some reading that won't leave me for
a while. Great recommendation, Dick. Barb
|
Pete Dexter
I thought Dexter's writing in the early part of the book was
much more evocative and moving than later, when the story
moved out into the white part of the town. I thought he did
a very good job of capturing the vulnerability and
helplessness of the black community, living right on the
edge of white indifference and rage. When those two worlds
collided and the little girl was killed I was moved, not to
tears, but a kind of sick astonishment.
Dick in Alaska
I agree that books like PARIS TROUT work against the
expected, conventional fictional treatment of serious
subjects. This is not a work of spiritual uplift, anymore
than KING LEAR is. I am impressed by the inexorableness
(is that a word?) of evil working itself out to the
less-than-reassuring end. I can't say conclusion, because
there is no neat moral to be drawn here. Evil just is, you
don't tie up the consequences in neat packages.
Felix
I thought Hanna and Seagraves demonstrated aspects of
general societal acquiesence to people like Paris Trout.
After all, what was the real basis of Trout's power? Why was
the town so accepting of his behaviour? What did he really
add that was beneficial to the community?
Theresa
|
