Note: The book reviewed contains graphic
depictions of violence and discusses other related themes only appropriate for
those over the age of 18. Also, take heed that there are some SPOILERS below.
Would you
kill one person to save five others from being murdered? That is the choice a
21-year-old Chris faces in an ‘experiment’ he has been ‘chosen’ to participate
in.
It is an
impossible choice. A choice, as Chris likes to remind a reader now and again,
one can hardly judge Chris for the way he goes about making it.
The premise
of Kill Someone is as intriguing as
it is horrifying and thought-provoking. Alas, while the concept of the story is
fascinating, its execution is more than a little elusive.
The writing
is loose, replete with rambling, repetitions, and digressions in the first
person POV. One short third person POV segment is thrown in for no apparent
reason, except maybe for the author thinking it would be cool to change the POV or
not knowing how to approach that part of the narrative through Chris’s POV.
The whole
thing felt a lot like a self-insert with some alterations – and that feeling
got only stronger after reading a rather lengthy afterword which was all too similar
in style to the novel’s narration.
And,
whereas the umpteen reminders not to judge Chris throughout the story were at
least somewhat in place, the same being said in the afterword sounded as if the
author forgot that Chris is, after all, not a real person, but his creation.
Speaking of
the said creation, it could use some more forethought, because Chris’s
character fell into the area of implausibility on quite a few points.
For
example, Chris thinks of himself as a kid
at the age of 21 (!) and he has never
been in a fight (even I, a chronically ill child, had been in a fight or two in
school). And even a decade later, despite his experience, he still behaves and
thinks much the same. What a missed opportunity to show character development.
His family
is living on a decrepit farm BUT Chris never mentions anyone doing any farm
work AND YET his family is well-off (enough for the parents to vacation in
Maldives?) Does not compute.
Additionally,
Chris’s parents seem to be keen on him being on the straight-and-narrow path
for him, but they are okay with him working for a call centre instead of going to college?
Then, there
was a very sexist matter of reducing five women to quintuplets, although that is not what they were, technically, but
triplets and two younger sisters. And the author either wasn’t bothered to do
the math or thought it was perfectly fine for them to be ‘very close in age’,
so close in fact that they must have been born within 24 months.
That is
right, three births (including triplets) within two years. Ah, men and their unrealistic
expectations. But, hey, it is just women, right, what else are we for than
popping out kids?
So, yeah,
that detail made me angry right at
the beginning of the book and it hardly improved much as it went on.
By 40 % of
the book I had a thought that maybe someone switched the word order in the
title, because what I was thinking was ‘someone kill me’.
Oh, yes, it was this book this tweet was about:
Oh, yes, it was this book this tweet was about:
Interesting how writing do-s & don't-s seem to only apply to 'stupid women' while a man gets critically acclaimed for 'breaking the rules'. pic.twitter.com/EBzat9c4V7— Jo Kay (@StrangeNewWords) March 15, 2017
At least
the resolution was somewhat sensible, when Chris figured out that he had the
option to choose a merciful solution. (Although, I forgot whether killing
himself was against the rules, because that was definitely an option that came
to my mind. But no judging.)
The ending
and the reveal of why Chris was ‘chosen’ for this experiment at least provided
some food for thought.
And here
comes a SPOILER.
Guilt-tripping
people into helping improve the world by forcing them to committing a crime
first is something I disapprove on principle, because wouldn’t it be better if
no one died and a person chose to do good without having to atone for something
bad?
On the
other hand, though, a question arises whether one person’s death could be an
acceptable price for the many other (perhaps hundreds, thousands) lives the
murderer would improve in trying to atone for their crime?
My first
instinct is to say ‘no’, but the answer is much more complicated than I can
come up with, at least not now.
Chris, at
least, found an answer which he could sleep with, which is also something.
Therefore,
the thought-provoking ending somewhat redeemed the book in my eyes, but it was
a shame that the rest of it was stylistically and narratively underwhelming and
felt not thought-through well enough.