True Crime Studies: An honest review of In Cold Blood
I know it seems redundant to review In Cold Blood 54 years after it’s been published. The Withering Heights of true crime books, everyone has most likely heard about it by now though there are many who have yet to read it. I believe everyone should crack it open at least once. It’s largely credited as being the founder of the true-crime genre, making it a classic and one of the pioneers of literature, although I am not one to praise any novel just because it has the word “classic” attached to it. I think people should know more about it other than its status.
Truman Capote changed the literary world forever when he published In Cold Blood in 1966. It details the murders of the Clutter family in 1959 in the small farming community of Holcomb, Kansas. The four victims, Herbert Clutter, his wife Bonnie, and their two youngest children, Kenyon and Nancy were found dead in their house one morning with no obvious signs of robbery or any clue as to who did it. There seemed to be no motive.
In Cold Blood shares the last few hours of their lives before it gets into what the story is really about: the two deeply disturbed men responsible, and honestly…I expected something more. With the kind of reputation that this book has I expected something other than what felt like a two-hour special of Criminal Minds. I know In Cold Blood is more or less the first of it’s kind, so when compared to more recent true crime wonders like Helter Skelter, Devil in the White City and Columbine, it’s a slight let down. But read without expectations, and it is a phenomenal piece of true crime literature.
Hickock and Smith
Perry Smith and Richard “Dick” Hickock are the murderers of this story and one doesn’t have to be there with Capote to know that he had conflicting feelings about them. The beginning of the novel talks much about the Clutter family. Enough to make readers mourn their deaths when it happens but much like how they died, the Clutter’s cease to exist once their hearts all stop beating. Capote drops them as if they never existed, further enforcing the “in cold blood” feeling the crime created when it first happened.
A crime of seemingly random chance. It’s that randomness that truly fascinated the public. “Of all the people in all the world, the Clutters were the least likely to be murdered.”
There are really two narratives in the novel. The confusion of the crime itself and that of Perry Smith. There’s a whole story about the creation of In Cold Blood that claimed Truman Capote became very attached to Smith while interviewing him. Almost too attached some might say, and the novel pretty much confirms this. The amount of time Capote spends on Smith is astounding, even the worst bits are spun in a sympathetic light. He spends pages and pages detailing Smith’s childhood, personality, and motivations while hardly a few paragraphs are saved for Hickock. (Not that I blame him because Dick was truly a dick.)
Make up your mind Capote
By focusing on Smith and his dark, damaged mind, it keeps the shock and pointlessness of the crime front and center. If Capote focused more Hickock it would have taken an entirely different perspective. Smith was harder to pin down and apparently had the capability to do good, which in fact was the alleged point of In Cold Blood. Capote was supposedly trying to humanize the Clutter’s killers, but in all honestly, the novel jumps around too much to make it believable.
Capote added in details that were unnecessary and then dropped them just as quickly. He goes too deep into trivial facts and not deep enough into important ones. He shows so much of Smith’s upbringing, painting him as a victim of his own mind and society, but then throws in a detail that disregards all of that. Then there’s the story of Hickock, the one who instigated the crime in the first place, who Capote doesn’t even try to reform in the reader’s eyes. (Again, I don’t blame him). A psychopathic pedophile rapist who admits that he only robbed the Clutters because he wanted to rape 16-year-old Nancy. (He never did by the way. Smith stopped him before he got the chance.)
Jammed back race to the finish line
The final section of the novel is where it struggles to stay afloat. Smith and Hickock are arrested and sentenced to death but Capote doesn’t stop it there. He doesn’t even skip ahead and show their execution. No. He spends several pages discussing their eventless life on death row. He even goes as far as to introduce some of their neighboring murderers and their life stories. Lowell Lee Andrews a.k.a. “The Nicest Boy in Wolcott” and spree killer buddies George Ronald York and James Douglas Latham. They appear in the final section of In Cold Blood and stick around as if they had been there the whole time. All the while, Smith and Hickock go on, unconcerned about their approaching death date.
Verdict
I was honestly expecting something more chilling than what I got. Over the years, I’ve heard many rant and rave over the sheer cold brutality featured in Capote’s novel, the stuff of nightmares. Maybe it’s because I grew up obsessing over serial killers and read too many books detailing their twisted crimes but what was featured In Cold Blood feels like a combination of attempted psychology and point-by-point descriptions of true-life events but not enough of either. There is also an incredibly long section that deals strictly with their trial that feels a bit redundant. It’s used to include the public perception of them, their reactions to the public, their confessions, and their psyche evaluations but Capote crams everything together as if he was rushing to the finish line.
The true strength of In Cold Blood lies in its style. A true crime book that’s written in the form of a novel starting with a prologue, withholding the gory details until the very end, and ending with two men hanging from the gallows. Despite my complaints, it’s very good.
(3.5 / 5)
Book Reviews
What Feasts at Night: An amble through Romanian folklore.
“Salt on the floor, threads on the walls, and iron under the pillow.”
Sword Soldier 2: What Feasts at Night, a review.
Published in February 2024, What Feasts at Night is the second book in T. Kingfisher’s Sworn Soldier duology. If you’re curious, you can find my review of the first installment, What Moves the Dead – a chilling reimagining of Poe’s The Fall of the House of Usher – here.
What Feasts at Night into Romanian folklore, weaving a tale that grapples with PTSD and the enduring impact of trauma, or what our main character calls ‘soldier’s heart’.
The Plot.
In What Feasts at Night, Alex Easton returns from his unsettling encounter with the Ushers and sets his sights on a quiet retreat to his Galacian cottage. Accompanied by his loyal companion, Angus, and his faithful steed Hob, he arrives to find the caretaker mysteriously deceased and the local villagers shrouded in fear and silence. Undeterred, Alex presses on, enlisting the aid of the superstitious Widow Botezatu to prepare his home for the arrival of his friend, Eugenia Potter.
As the story moves forward, the tranquility of the cottage is disrupted, and a sinister presence begins to cast its shadow. The Widow Botezatu’s son, Bors, begins to exhibit the same disturbing symptoms that the deceased caretakers suffered through. According to his mother, these symptoms align with the terrifying legend of the moroi.
Highlights.
Including the traditional Romanian folklore was a real highlight of this story. This is not limited to the presence of the shape-shifting, nocturnal moroi. Kingfisher has also included various superstitions from this region believed to ward off evil, such as weaving red thread and placing knives beneath pillows.
As a sworn soldier, Alex Easton has played his part in many wars. Kingfisher mentioned ‘soldier’s heart’ briefly in What Moves the Dead, in this installation we are able to see how this trauma response affects Alex. There is a beautiful insight into trauma that should not be left out of any review of this book.
“I sometimes think the fundamental disconnect with civilians is that they think the war is an event, something neatly bound on either end by dates. What anyone who’s lived through one can tell you is it’s actually a place. You’re there and then you leave, but places don’t stop existing just because you aren’t looking at them. The war’s still there. I don’t live in it anymore, but it’s right over there, just on the other side of… I don’t know.” (87)
Drawbacks.
In comparison with the first installment of this series, What Feasts at Night lacked peaks and troughs, feeling like a slow and steady amble to the final scenes. Although Kingfisher manages to pack her pages with atmosphere and a sense of foreboding, there is a lack of solid action here until the last few pages of the story. For those who enjoy a slow burn, this will not necessarily be a drawback, but I have grown to expect a certain level of movement from Kingfisher’s stories and found it was missing here.
The Final Take.
My love of T Kingfisher is no secret. I find her stories engaging, atmospheric and generally a little brain bending. However, What Feasts in the Night is perhaps my least favourite of those I have read. The plot was a little slow and the characters lack luster. I did still enjoy this story, in particular Kingfishers take on PTSD. I cannot say that this is an original idea but traumatic experience as a place rather than a time period is one that really makes sense to me.
There are whispers that suggest this series might grow into a trilogy next year. I, for one, am looking forward to seeing what kind of trouble Alex Easton gets into next.
(3 / 5)
Book Reviews
What Moves the Dead gives depth to Poe’s most famous tale.
“The dead don’t walk. Except, sometimes, when they do.”
The first of T. Kingfisher’s Sworn Soldier duology, What Moves the Dead was published in July 2022. Shortly after the novella won the 2023 Locus Award for Best Horror Novel and was nominated for the 2023 Hugo Award for Best Novella, this story is Kingfisher’s version of Edgar Allan Poe’s ‘The Fall of the House of Usher’. It offers depth and insight into the original characters and plot of Poe’s short story.
The Plot.
What Moves the Dead is a modern reimagining of Edgar Allan Poe’s classic tale, “The Fall of the House of Usher.”
The story follows Alex Easton, a sworn soldier who receives a disturbing letter from the sister of his childhood friend. Summoned to the isolated Usher mansion, Alex finds the once-grand house in a state of decay. This mirrors the deteriorating health of its inhabitants, Roderick and his twin sister, Madeline.
As Alex delves deeper into the unsettling atmosphere of the mansion, he encounters a series of inexplicable occurrences. Strange noises echo through the halls, eerie lights flicker in the darkness, and wildlife in the surrounding environment does not act as it should. As Madeline’s condition worsens, Alex begins to question the nature of the mysterious illness afflicting the family. Is it a physical malady, or something far more sinister?
Highlights.
Although What Moves the Dead follows the same storyline as ‘The Fall of the House of Usher’, Kingfisher’s version has the advantage of length. As she says in her author’s note, Poe’s story is just too short. Kingfisher names previously unnamed characters and provides them with more complete personalities. We get dialogue from Madeline and the doctor which offers answers and reasoning for the mysterious illness that the Usher twins are suffering from.
What Moves the Dead also provides a much more thorough description of the house and the surrounding natural environment. This becomes important in the identification of the Usher’s illness. We are also gifted an extra character, one Miss Potter, who definitively identifies herself as the aunt of the great Beatrix Potter who was known to be interested in mycology- the study of fungi.
Drawbacks.
In Kingfisher’s fictional country,Ruritania, the local language uses over 7 pronouns (ta, tha, than, var, ka, kan, va, van). Some of these are used only for sworn soldiers, others as a gender-neutral way to refer to children. A lot of time is spent explaining these and the reasoning behind each. I enjoyed reading this, but then was disappointed when none of these pronouns were really used in the book itself. The time that Kingfisher spent setting this up, I thought it would be a larger part of the story, but it had no bearing on the story at all.
The Final Take.
Is it wrong to consider a retelling or adaptation superior to a classic? I don’t have an answer for that. However, Kingfisher had gone above and beyond Poe’s original story, providing depth and insight where Poe only left questions. I will never eat mushrooms (in particular the long thready Enoki mushroom) again with complete peace of mind. I look forward to reviewing the second book in this series, What Feasts at Night.
(4 / 5)
-
Movies n TV7 days agoFreak Out, a Rocky Horror Memoir by Jennifer Weigel
-
Movies n TV5 days agoDexter lives in Original Sin, And In the Beginning
-
Book Reviews6 days agoDepression + Apocalype = ?: This Is Not a Test Book Review
-
Movies n TV4 days ago
Christmas Crime Story, A Nonsensical Holiday Romp
