This week I am sharing a book review of Stephen King’s The Green Mile. You may have seen the blog post: To Post or not to post. I talked about if I should post this review, I decided after much editing that I will.
Before I start I’d like to put out a trigger warning, in this post, there will mention Rape, Murder & Violence. This post will also contain spoilers.
Synopsis: Head Officer of The Green Mile Paul Edgecombe tells us of his time working in prison. A ward they refer to as The Green Mile, only dealing with prisoners on death row. The book's set in 1932. He tells us the stories of various men that walk the green mile: Del, Wharton, Chief & Coffey. In particular, John Coffey. A man who has the ability to heal which he helps the narrator, a loved mouse & warden’s wifey who is on death’s door.
The novel was a lengthy one of 430 pages, it had been a while since I read a book that long! It was originally published serially over 6 months when it was first released, I’m reading a single book with all parts included.
This is the second book I have ever read by King and truth be told it wasn't what I had expected.
My favourite character would have had to be Mr. Jingles the mouse, most of the parts with him were the best bits of the book. There was something that stuck out to me, I felt sorry for one of the prisoners: Del. He becomes quite a likable character with his cute little pet mouse but I had to remind myself that he did a horrible thing and hurt many people. It was very conflicting. His death is brutal, the electric chair is a horrible way to die but his death was even more horrific as a rogue guard Percy Wetmore decides to take matters into his own hands and makes the death more painful and gruesome than needed to be.
I tried to like the book but there were things I just couldn't look past.
First issue: I understand the narrator guard Paul Edgecombe had a UTI but there are so many unnecessary references to it. Every other paragraph at the beginning of the novel talked about his infection. I think that could have been toned down, it was very unnecessary. At one point he spends a whole page talking about his penis & the UTI- how it throbs etc. It felt very unnecessary and uncomfortable to read. During a pretty action-packed scene of Wharton entering the prison, he almost kills a guard and Paul has to pull a gun on him and low and behold talks about his penis in the middle of the scene. I understand the pain but at every chance given the narrator talked about his penis. Which I didn’t understand because he talks about his memory not being great and not remembering dates but he can talk about his penis hurting in every scene/page? He also later has the audacity to say this: like every awful pain it is forgotten. Clearly not Paul, clearly not.
I knew that John Coffey was going to heal him, I learned this from the film but I think it was overkill to mention it so frequently. I was relieved when Coffey healed him, in hope of it meaning there won’t be more penis paragraphs. After 141 pages and being healed he stops talking about the UTI as much. Although whenever any pain is mentioned he still refers to it even hundreds (literal) pages later and in every single chapter at least.
I somewhat understand that the book was released in parts maybe he talked about it so much to refresh the reader’s memory, not a significant detail really. Before the story starts he talks about editing the parts to create the book, King had taken parts out but how did he not feel the need to take out at least some of that excessive UTI/penis talk. I honestly think the book would have been shorter if he had taken it out, it would have lost easily by 10-20 pages.
With the repetition about the UTI, there were also many references to sex. I understand talking about the crimes and the necessity of referring to rape but there seemed to be an excess of sex talk. For example, when The Chief was dying in the chair it was compared to a man’s orgasm, which felt like a very inappropriate description. I had to stop reading at this point and walk away, I was shocked. A man dies in such a horrific way and you’ve somehow made it about sex? Make it make sense. The narrator talks about a memory of himself being a younger man and missing his partner, he says his head and heart missed her as well as his balls. Talking about his balls felt unnecessary and really takes away from the story. Something heavy-hitting would occur in the narrative then the narrator would mention sex, it was very weird to read.
The comparisons made in the book weren't great. The one I mentioned previously wasn't the only one that shocked me, there were more uncomfortable comparisons made as the book went on.
A character has to write a report on a prisoner and he describes and compares this process to be similar to rape. Yes, you read that correctly. You can imagine how annoyed this made me. It even made me wonder does this reflect King’s point of view? Does he think so little of a violent act? It’s disgusting. Also on this note, there is a horrific part in the story where we are being told by a police officer that Wharton assaults a very young girl, during this conversation they say it’s not rape because it wasn’t his dick he used, like what the fuck?! On top of this they give the assault a little nickname like it was some form of a game, I thought this was weird and gross. The whole ordeal makes my skin crawl. I understand that rape & assault are horrific experiences but at times I found the descriptions were overbearing. It could be argued that King did this to show how severe these crimes were but it felt too much at times.
The overall plotline, issues aside, was a really good one. It was interesting seeing the life inside of prison especially those on the green mile. Not sure how true the depiction is but it was a good storyline. I particularly liked the friendship between the guards, Paul and Brutus' friendship was enjoyable to read, I liked how they all shared the same dislike towards Percy but they respected each other.
I thought the ending was interesting with the narrator being in an elderly home, there was a dodgy care assistant Brad Dolan. I liked how the book showed that in most professions you can get bad eggs, not everyone has good intentions nor do they do their job correctly to protect the people in their custody. It was also enjoyable to see bad characters like Dolan and Wetmore get their karma handed to them, bad people shouldn't be able to get away with things.
Having reflected a few weeks or so after reading: what stuck out to me?
The narrator is a pervy old man obsessed with his own penis & sex. He encounters a healer John Coffey. John's story was so sad, such a pure soul. I almost cried when he was sharing about the pain hurting. His story was tragic.
I didn't enjoy the vibes I was getting from the book. The tones of sexism, racism, and homophobia made me incredibly uncomfortable. I didn’t feel comfortable reading slurs and them being used so freely. Before anyone says it was the sign of that time or it was used to show ignorance, I do not agree because when these slurs were being thrown around no one corrected them or said it was wrong? They just agreed and let it be. If you are showing something is wrong in a book you need to point that out. 'Sign of the times' is a stupid excuse that I won't accept for ignorance. King managed to depict how wrong it was to have bad eggs in the prison and care system, so why couldn't he make his characters stand up against these things too?
Finally, I don't think I will be reading this book again. Overall, not a great experience and if I'm honest I liked the film way better. Skip the book and watch the film!
What book do you feel strongly about?
Post a Comment