You know, if you read this at a surface level, it might seem innocent and pretty normal. However, underneath there's something creepy, and I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that. The beautifully constructed photographs evoke in turn loneliness and subjugation, and the text itself tells us how Edith is so lonely, that she lets complete strangers inside the house and take over her life. Occasionally she seems to have fun, but then she gets spanked for doing a naughty thing. There's no one else in the world but them (and a couple of rude pigeons).

Is the doll an adult or a child? She lives alone, so she must represent an adult. But then the spanking scene becomes kind of kinky and strange. If Edith is a child, then it's equally odd that she would just happen to let two bears enter into her life. What the hell? Then again, having heard a few things about Wright's life I suppose I couldn't have expected anything less. After reading the biography I'm probably going to be even more weirded out.

Apparently, the interpretation of the story depends on the reader's background and age. For me, the pink covers are deceptive. Wright's world is sad and weird, but I think I like it just the way it is. Despite the length there's a lot of room for further examination on the next round of reading.

PS. Oh great, now Bette Davis in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? popped into my head. I think I've had enough of dolls for a while. Then again, I also feel like throwing my own giant blank faced bear to the balcony. Jesus.

PPS. To lighten the mood, here's a lovely Finnish animation about thin ice and a drowning bear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaoLkayPOUI

Osasin odottaa aiempien arvioiden perusteella Rougen ja Korpelan suhteen painottamista rikostutkimusten sijaan, joten siinä mielessä ei tullut mitään yllätyksiä. Dekkariksi tämä oli silti omaan makuuni vähän liian kevyt. Ajankuva vaikutti myös aika päälleliimatun hätäiseltä: kadunnimiluettelot sekä aikakaudelle tyypillisten asioiden ja esineiden maininnat eivät syventäneet tarinaa luontevasti, vaan pysyivät irrallisina heittoina juonenkuljetuksen ja dialogin seassa. Hatunnosto kuitenkin mielenkiintoisesta aihevalinnasta (moneen kertaan nähdyistä kliseistä huolimatta). 1920-luku salakapakoineen ja viinatrokareineen on ikuinen mielenkiinnonaiheeni, ja Suomeen sijoitettuna romaanissa on salaperäistä uutuudenviehätystä, joka varmaankin saa vilkaisemaan vielä sarjan toistakin osaa.

No niin, tässä on taas käytetty runsaasti infodumppauksia. Aikakausi on kieltämättä mielenkiintoinen, mutta odotan historialliselta fiktiolta ajankuvan luontevaa punoutumista itse juoneen. Nyt nuo erilliset tietoiskut kalskahtivat välillä museoesitemäisiltä. Ei esitteissä mitään vikaa ole, mutta fiktiossa tuollainen on lähinnä vaivaannuttavaa. Varsinkin kun tajuaa että jos ne siivoaisi pois, se ei mitenkään vaikuttaisi tarinan kulkuun. Toisaalta, itse mysteerin ratkominenkin oli hieman kuivaa, joten suuren tutkimustyön hyödyntäminen ei ollut se ainoa ongelma, puhumattakaan siitä ettei Heinon kirjoitustyyli oikein iskenyt.

I could have managed without the short and superficial chapters about other crime organizations and Mafia films (I'm sure there's not much new information in the latter, if you've seen even just a few gangster films), but the part about Mafia's women was much too short (especially because in Calabria women are still murdered today if they remarry, or do something else that the organization feels breaks the patriarchal order of the society).

Gasparini succeeds in peeling the glossy surface from the Mafia, but he could have taken a firmer stance on the issue of films and other media glamorizing its position in the society. It's worrying that some (or all?) who belong to these organizations feel like they're not murdering anyone per se, but instead handing out justified punishments that in their world are alright and needed to sustain the hierarchy. I wonder if the Mafia is much too rooted to get rid of it completely. Only time will tell.

An ok introduction overall, despite some problems construction-wise and with repetitiveness. For those in need of an in-depth history I would suggest turning elsewhere. There's also a slight mistake in the film section: films about organized crime did exist before the 1930s (Underworld [1927], The Racket [1928] etc.), but the exploits of real life criminals gradually made them more popular, making the 1930s the Golden era of gangster films.

Body horror in the dark corners of colonial Africa. The mysterious and moody suspense leads to a final revelation that is both disgusting and slightly amusing. I'm kind of hoping a campy 1980's flick exists that was inspired by this story.