As I was (finally) starting to read The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, which I had been warned gets off to a notoriously slow start, I was pondering whether I would have agreed to represent it if I had read it as a manuscript.
And, you know, if I were actually still an agent. Which I’m not. (Please, no more query letters!!).
And… honestly? I don’t know that I would have sent it out in its present form. That first chapter (note: the actual 1st chapter, not the prologue) is one of the slowest chapters I can recall reading in a book that’s extremely popular. It’s almost as if The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo became such a success precisely because everyone has at least a few friends urging them on with “No, I swear it gets better!!”
It does get better. And that banal, antiseptic chapter ends up serving useful purposes. But wow. Had this book not traveled its own unique path, for better or worse I can’t imagine it being published first in the United States with that chapter intact.
It’s about the characters
Now, I’m writing this having read only about fifty pages, which I think may actually be a benefit for the purposes of writing this post. I don’t know what’s to come in the plot and I have only had the briefest of introductions to the characters.
But already I feel like I have a sense of what would have kept me reading as an agent had I made it past that first chapter.
And it’s simple: These are extremely interesting characters.
But it’s complicated: The reason these are interesting characters is difficult to pull off.
Contradictions
What makes these characters interesting is that they are seeming contradictions. Lisbeth has all the outward appearances of a surly, irresponsible youth, and yet she’s wildly competent at her job. Armansky is simultaneously attracted to, vaguely repulsed by, and paternal toward Lisbeth. Blomkvist is buttoned up and seemingly honest, and yet he lives a cavalier private life and he seems to have been improbably set up in a conspiracy.
And why that’s difficult to pull off is that it’s rarely believable when characters behave in ways that appear inconsistent, especially when we don’t know them very well. When someone we know to be buttoned up is taken in for a scam, we’ll say, “Wait, that doesn’t seem right, I thought that guy was too cautious for that.” When someone who seems irresponsible and surly turns out to be wildly intelligent and competent, it feels like the author is trying to force something that can’t be real.
But I haven’t felt that way so far. These characters are immediately compelling because of the contradictions, not despite them.
The clinic
And, circling back to the beginning of this blog post, I actually think this is a case where the cold, detached, clinical prose, the same prose that nearly bored me to tears in Chapter 1, works to Larsson’s benefit.
Precision has an oddly reassuring effect on the reader because it completely hides the hand of the author. There aren’t literary flourishes in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, there aren’t artful similes, there aren’t moments that remind you that there was an actual author who chose the words you’re reading. It’s just facts, rendered straightforwardly. (At least, it should be noted, as it’s translated)
So ultimately: It’s believable. The prose doesn’t leave room for questioning because it’s so authoritative and airtight. It’s not the only way to make contradictory characters believable, but Larsson uses it for all it’s worth.
Not only that, but when you can pull off making contradictions believable the reader is prompted to ask questions that pull them through the book – Why is Lisbeth so focused and driven? Why was Blomkvist blinded?
We want to know which of the contradictory qualities we’ve seen in the characters will win out, we want to know how the characters ended up that way, and it makes for an incredibly engaging reading experience.
That’s where I’m at now, at least. I have to say there may be some genius in that tortuous First Chapter and the banality of the prose and descriptions. I believe what this author tells me, and these characters are more interesting because of it.
Need help with your book? I’m available for manuscript edits, query critiques, and coaching!
For my best advice, check out my guide to writing a novel (now available in audio) and my guide to publishing a book.
And if you like this post: subscribe to my newsletter!
I got that book as a Christmas present from my niece. Still haven't opened it. Don't plan on it. Too busy with other books.
I trudged through the first book. I don't really know why. I think I wanted to finish it before the Swedish movie came out? Maybe? Started the second one but put the series away for good when Lisbeth got fake boobs.
Good luck!
I had the same thoughts reading the first 100 or so pages of Dragon Tattoo. It does get better, but doesn't live up to the hype as far as I'm concerned. Maybe I would have felt differently if I had pictured Daniel Craig as the main character while reading…
I'm not going to say too much, because I don't want to give anything away, but for me these books (I've only read the first two) are all about the plot.
There are some good characters, but it's the plot that rules.
The writing is kind of like Swedish architecture and design: austere, yet functional.
I never finished the first chapter because of the boredom factor. I assumed it was one of those books that didn't live up to all the hype.
Great post. I haven't read this book yet but, of course, have had it recommended to me. I might give it a go some day. Loved the character analysis. Some stuff to think about.
Not I book I'll be attempting again anytime soon. I prefer to keep down the food I've eaten, and this one tripped my "ick" sensors.
Was this book translated from Swedish? I found the writing to be unmusical. In fairness to Larsson I haven’t read many translated books that are.
As for the rest of the book, I think Larsson lost track of his story’s boundaries and because of this the book feels overwritten.
I like Matt's description relating this type of writing to Swedish architecture.
Haven't read this book yet, but I agree that characters are what attaches me to a story. If I like the characters, I'll read a couple of chapters to give the story a chance. I do like some hint of the plot near the beginning of the story.
Aren't we all contradictory in some ways? We want this or that, but we know we shouldn't; duty calls, but temptation lures.
It makes writing enjoyable when we give these conflicting traits to our characters.
I never got to finish the first chapter because I got bored. I remember I kept asking myself why the heck it's so popular. I watched the movies and loved them! I guess it's one of those very rare instances where you say the movie is better than the book. I wish I had the patience to wait until the book got better.
This is why a lot of people couldn't get through the first chapter of FREEDOM.
I did and loved it…I love Dragon Tattoo as well. But it's love/hate with most people.
Now, WATER FOR ELEPHANTS depressed the hell out of me and I stopped reading that one. I want to read about old people in old age homes?
I enjoyed the movie, as well. Didn't even want to tackle the book after hearing so many reports re: pace drag, but now I'm curious. I think that there's a difference between deliberately constructed contradiction, and an author not knowing his characters and consequently being inconsistent as hell, then saying "well, people are conflicted in real life" as an excuse.
Loved your analysis, Nathan! You may have almost tempted me to read this – even though it sounds suspiciously like literary fiction – which I tend to avoid, because it makes me THINK.
Your post made me think in a good way, though. It sounds like the author was able to capture fascinating characters. Making internal contradictions believable – that is real skill. And I also loved your description of his authoritative style – confident to the point of invisibility. That's also exceptional skill.
Love reading posts from Nathan the editor. 🙂
I plowed through it because a friend pressed it into my hands. It seemed to me a book bookended by another book. The middle was great, the bookends dull. The same friend claims the next one is better. I doubt I'll read it, although Lisbeth is one of the best characters around.
I read this one, but had no desire to read any of the others. I didn't get the hype, and just felt maybe something had been lost in its translation. If it hadn't been for book club, I never would have finished the book.
Thinking back on it now, It was plot driven, the pacing often times racing once you got past the middle. The characters were hard to follow. And the names…oy!There were a couple of threads dropped, so it didn't truly stand alone. Also, there were one or two eye-rolling coincidences. Then it got all squicky. Yuck.
In truth, it felt to me like this was one of those suitcase jobs where the author packed everything, including the kitchen sink.
@spytower: I actually think a lot of the Latin authors translate well. Isabel Allende is breathtaking, for example.
But I know what you mean. I've read translations that seemed flat and wooden. I always wondered if it was a stylistic difference between cultures.
@Anonymous 8:31- they don't stay in the nursing home for long and it's a great story, again, because of the character and their drama/tension. Plus, once you meet the elephant, she is quite the character herself.
I was warned also about what a long intro the book had before it got meaty, and have to say, it didn't seem that way at all to me because I was drawn in by the characters immediately. The writing didn't bother me because I am quite used to reading translations of the Swedish and Icelandic mysteries that became so popular in the last few years. It is the last book of the trilogy that I found hard, but I won't say why because it might be a spoiler for those of you still planning the whole thing.
I got about 2/3 of the way through the book. Still wasn't motivated to finish it. I could see how it could have been a great story and I hear the dry, clinical tone is common in that genre in that country. Didn't do it for me though.
I don't remember the first chapter of Dragon Tattoo being boring.
The first book held my attention all the way through. It's different for everyone.
I was just so happy to finally have a really different female main character, someone who is damaged and not always pleasant.
Laurel, I think you’re correct. I read the Jarvis translation of Don Quixote and it’s fabulous. Certain languages, German comes to mind, are structured differently than English (Long sentences with the verb at the end). Because of this, works in those languages don’t translate well. This can contribute to a story in unintended ways. Kafka reads as strange and, in an unusual way, beautiful in translation with its long, uninterrupted blocks of text. More often than not, for me at least, it makes the writing ponderous or dull. Maybe that’s why The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo feels lethargic at it’s beginning. Maybe in it’s native language it has better rhythm and flow and thus feel “faster”.
As for slow buildups, Steven King has more than one book that takes its time getting off of the ground and, as far as I can tell, he’s been mildly successful. Is mildly the correct adverb here?
When I first started writing, I had a steamy love affair with similes and metaphors until I realized it wasn't really going anywhere. My engorged writing was like a huge public display of affection (ahem – I apologize for yet another simile). Now I realize that it is much more difficult to get together with tightly driven plots and intriguing story questions. Lucky Steig has adroitly pulled this feat off in this book. I give him full props!
Very interesting you mention how you might not have sent this book out in its present form. I read this in my book club earlier this year, and I thought the same thing, which made me wonder if the conventions in contemporary writing differ depending on the region/country. Do you think that's likely? I haven't read any other books from Sweden or Northern Europe, but I wonder if they all begin in the same sort of fashion–a slow start and build up–and the readers from that area have come to expect that. Perhaps they (or some) might find western books to be too, well, fast, or too immediate? Just a thought. I could be completely off the mark, but that's what we discussed in our book club. 🙂
To be as spoiler-free as possible, I thought the way the investigation unfolded was quite clever, and the end has it's payoff in regard to shock / thrill value (and ick factor, which it has in gross abundance, pun totally intended).
The main detractor for me was the back-and-forth between the story and back-story. It seemed as each new character was introduced, he/she entered the scene with 2-3 pages of back-story, and in most cases, that back-story had nothing to do with the actual story.
I think about 150 pages could have been edited out without sacrificing anything.
But I did finish it and I did read the second in the series, so that must count for something…
No matter how much people urged me to continue, I could not get past the start of Lord of the Rings. 100 pages into it and all they did was walk to the end of the road and stop to eat for the fifth time I was done.
I will have to implement a contradiction or two into my current work in progress.
@spytower: HA! I was thinking primarily of germanic language translations, myself, when I referenced the ones that seemed dry. Almost bleak.
And this King fellow…name sounds familiar 😉
I'm also surprised at how popular these books are. The beginning of Tattoo is definitely a drag, but it picks up. I found the tone appropriate and personally loved all the mentions of Swedish cities and specific locations, but I wondered if a lot of people would get bored with it.
The second book is definitely my favorite, and the only one of the 3I felt wasn't overly long. I think Tattoo could be tightened considerably and it would be a great read.
I bought it in June. I trudged through about 75 pages before realizing that, although I'd heard good things about how suspenseful the book was, I didn't care about the characters.
So I stopped reading it, and I haven't felt any impetus to start again.
Since then, I've spoken to three other people who read the book. Their reaction: "I wish I'd stopped at the beginning rather than trying to slog through it!"
I think that we have to remember that books don't become best-sellers because they're good books. They become best-sellers because people buy them, not because people finish reading them afterwards.
I'm with Heather that this is two books in one. There's a boring story about the libel suit, and stuck in the middle of it is a strong but gory mystery-thriller. Were I an agent, I would've passed after seeing the partial because it'd all be the boring libel suit.
Funny, though… I thought the translation was excellent. I didn't find anything that made me even slightly aware that it'd originally been written in Swedish.
For the third book, they even moved the apostrophe in the title of the American edition so that it was misplaced just like Americans would do. 😉 [UK: Hornets' Nest; US: Hornet's Nest]
I didn't care for the book, but I have to admit that Lisbeth Salander is one of the most memorable characters I've come across in a long time.
You've absolutely nailed exactly what I loved about the books. The characters are compelling.
Kudos to you, Nathan, for praising a book you would have turned down as an agent, I’m guessing because U.S. publishers wouldn't have bought the book, even though it went on to huge success. This is why self-publishing is such a wonderful opportunity for writers…or, in the case of THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, it was published outside the United States first. (I have a writer friend in a similar situation. He has an agent, is published and receiving top literary awards outside the U.S., but can’t even get an agent inside the U.S.) There are lots of simply amazing self-published books available right now, readers can find out-of-the-box novels that are going on to receive fantastic professional reviews and awards. Agents have passed on so many amazing books because the query letter didn't read well, the book didn't grab them in the first chapter…or, in many cases, the first paragraph, it broke too many rules, and so on. It's wonderful, I think, to have many different writing styles available to readers. In the past few weeks, I’ve discovered quite a few self-published books by Hugo and Nebula Award winners, an Aurealis Award finalist, authors published in Asimov’s Magazine, etc.. It pays, I think, to keep an open mind about books because, otherwise, every book you read fits the same old pattern.
It took me 60 pages to like it, but i also think it says something about the book that I continued reading. I wonder if somethings been lost in the translation to English. It seemed a bit bland. Once my head was tuned to bland translation I was away. I too loved the characters.
I thought all three books kicked ass. I liked that first chapter, when he just got out of court and he's been beaten.
But overall, the theme of those books is so strong. The whole feminist theme really stuck with me. Those have got to be some of the most powerful books I've ever read.
Also, Marilyn Peake's comment was really good!
Ah, but you're only on page 50. I would love to hear what you think of the book IF you finish reading it. I won't spoil the book for you, so I won't comment on either the characters or plot.
I will tell you that when I got to Chapter 11, page 221 of the book, I felt like I had been reading backstory since page 1. So I stopped reading, flipped to the end and read enough to determine that it wasn't worth my time to plow through to the end.
Hurry up and finish reading as much as you're going to, so we can discuss the characters and the plot. 🙂
Haven't read the book but I know I've read books where the narration is transparent like you describe. It's a style of writing that doesn't to draw attention at all to the writing. I wonder if that was intentional on the part of the author or just his particular voice.
It's a snoozer in the beginning. But it gets good, and yes, the characters are fascinating. I ended up loving it and appreciating how stylistically different it was from most books I read.
I agree with you about the beneficial effects of the clinical prose style. I actually really liked it (at least as translated). I've heard many people refer to it disparagingly, but to me it was kind of like Ikea-style prose – spare, streamlined, and functional, giving you the essentials at a fair price.
Interesting, not least because I am about to embark on reading the book (in Swedish) having first seen the (two of three) film(s). The films don't drag in the least but are very hard work in the nasty violence area, albeit, for brief episodes. Will be interested to see if the films and book match up – and after reading this I will do an English first 50 pages to compare with the original. But I think to be fair, he did die before these were published right? So he may have planned to edit the opener some more. Who knows!
I happened to read this series while taking some novel writing courses at my local university (focusing on commercial fiction), and I remember thinking, "These books break every rule I'm learning about how to write a salable novel!" I do think the entire series could have used a strong edit–there is much that is overwritten. It seems doubtful the books could have made it in the American publishing climate (at least the traditional industry). But the story and (especially) the characters are compelling. So I guess it's good for the Larsson estate and the series' thousands of fans that the books started out in Europe. Otherwise they'd likely be mouldering in a trunk or withering on Amazon.
ZOMG you're an agent? Can I send you a query? (j/k) 🙂
I wasn't planning on reading it due to my friends not liking it, but maybe I'll pick it up. I need help w/ character development.
Your 'inconsistencies' aren't though
I know a number of people who are 'irresponsible and surly turns out to be wildly intelligent and competent' – in fact surly almost *goes* with intelligent like chips and ketchup. There are exceptions, but the smartest people I know are the grumpiest, with very rare exceptions.
Buttoned up =/= equal 'impervious to scams' – anyone can get taken by the right scam,
Sorry, I love your posts, but this one doesn't make any sense.
(BTW I have not read these books, so I am only going by what you say. Intelligent people are often irresponsible – see the fine line between genius and madness.
Just because some one is irresponsible and surly doesn't mean they aren't damn good at their job or thicker than pig shit. Gandalf is surly, and not stupid. Captain Jack Sparrow is irresponsible and not stupid. Both are damn good at what they do,
Sorry – while I haven't read the books, your description shows no obvious inconsistencies. That would come in the writing. Your issue is with the characterisation and the handling perhaps. Not that these things cannot exist in one person. Because they can and do.
Anon-
People are like that, conveying that on the page and making it believable isn't easy. We don't walk around thinking, "Yeah, I don't believe that you're actually a real person," we do think that a lot while we're reading.