Tuesday, July 27, 2010

A further word on Dunnett

I have to make one complaint about Dunnett so far. I really hate how she resorts to the death of a pet to make a point about the cruelty of people or situations. In Book 1, an innocent hound gets it; Book 2, an innocent lapdog. Book 3 (I just started it) is the worst so far, with a lovely scene where the bad guys slaughter a large group of beautiful, affectionate cats right in front of the people who love them. Luckily I saw it coming and managed to skim most of the relevant paragraphs.

This is really pissing me off. I don't think it's just that this pushes certain buttons of mine. I'm also pissed off because I think it's cheap. It's lazy. There are all kinds of ways to establish that villains are cruel and ruthless and Dunnett is a good enough writer to do that without going for the easy way to make me cry. I suppose next it'll be kittens, or maybe baby otters.

I'll keep reading, but I'm pretty angry right now.

1 comment:

  1. How interesting. I've not particularly noticed the animal thing. Obviously the cats thing is pretty memorable, but I can't even remember the hound in book 1, and Willequin was well thought through and made the relevant point.

    I don't know if Dunnett ever kept Cats or Dogs, but she did have a fondness for Parrots, and a dislike of moths.

    ReplyDelete