Confidence is Key - At What Cost? Final Wrap Up.

Truman Capote was boasting about In Cold Blood being the best crime novel of the decade before he had even written a single word of it. His innovation of the nonfiction novel has transcended nearly half a century, remaining a terrific influence on writers and readers alike. Typically, in my own experience, I would have called bullshit upon hearing this claim without any actual evidence to back it up. Yet here I am scratching my head and contemplating how Capote could have possibly known the powerful force that become hailed as one of the best crime books ever written. This is especially peculiar to me because originally Capote had set out to write nothing more than a magazine editorial on the paranoia experienced by a community that has experienced a traumatizing tragedy. Did he have similar hopes and expectations of fame and fortune with the expose? Or did this new braggadocio come with the new idea of fleshing the piece out into a full length novel?

            At this point in his career, Capote had already written Breakfast at Tiffany’s, which is still a pop culture phenomenon, being alluded to in literature and music and movies to this day. Topping the success of that story was not going to be an easy feat, especially when shifting genres so drastically. His partner in crime, (pun fully intended), Harper Lee, only ever wrote To Kill a Mockingbird, and was so discouraged by the thought of failing to produce another critically acclaimed masterpiece, she never published another work again. However, after In Cold Blood, Capote would not release much more than collections of short stories which never even came close to even vaguely reminiscent success. What did he lose? Was it the willpower to repeat the research, writing, and revising process? Or was it the courage to take the risk? What did he gain? A deeper, darker knowledge and understanding of the human mind and heart and how it works and what happens when things are out of sorts? Did he see something in himself that only Perry Smith could have showed him – was it something any of us would have ever wanted to see? Capote always did remark about how similar they were to the other: “it’s like we both grew up in the same house – I walked out the front door and he walked out the back” (Infamous). I wonder what they were doing in that house together – possibly taking the lives of four innocent family members in the middle of the night in Holcomb, Kansas?

Capote had always been intrigued by crimes and those who commit them, and considering his homo-erotic relationship with Perry Smith I am wondering if he had fetishized the psychopath. This may have been the reason he allowed himself to grow so close with the inmate on death row – insatiable curiosity. This doomed relationship would mentally disrupt Capote and never allow him to return to the “normal” (well, normal for him, anyway) life he had enjoyed prior to excavating the details of the case and the men behind the madness. Karma is a bitch, and this could be a stretch of logic, but could his ill-fated romance with Perry have been his penance for getting involved with the story in the first place? Once he demanded lengthening the project and extending his stays with both Hickock and Smith, the future was decided. The domino effect would play out over the next several years, ending in heartbreak and leading to alcoholism for Capote. He would eventually die due to complications of his coping mechanism.

Love is Blind?

     One thing we're all admittedly fascinated and confused by is Truman Capote's "alleged" affair with Perry Smith. We "have reason to believe" that Truman bribed and bargained his way into the cells of both Hickock and Smith, but that he continued these gestures of generosity and kindness in order to maintain not only his research with both but a romantic relationship with Perry. Guards at the prison supposedly accepted sums of cash in order to go on breaks and take walks so that the two could have alone time together. Apparently, every single correspondence Perry was allowed was addressed to "Friend Truman" and signed "Your amigo, Perry". 

     I am wondering how much of a factor time played in the development of a relationship - I mean, it's only crucial to the development of an overall person, after all. Is it possible to "forget" that someone committed  a quadruple homicide in cold blood long enough to fall in love with them? Each artistic portrayal that I have seen thus far has very similar artistic perspectives concerning the first moment that Truman and Perry lay eyes on each other - when Perry is getting out of the police car and being walked inside the courthouse after arriving from the point of arrest in Las Vegas. As he is limping along accompanied by guards all around, surrounding by the watching eyes of the masses of people standing silently, simply observing the killers: Perry and Truman's gazes lock and hold. This mysterious moment is utterly ambiguous and therefore frustrating - what are they thinking? What are they seeing in each other in that moment? How are they judging each other? Do they at all realize the future about to unfold before them? Basically, I just want to know, was the attraction instantaneous? Not necessarily love at first sight like Romeo & Juliet, but you know what I mean.

     Truman spent a great deal of time with Perry over the course of five years - getting to know him, but for what purpose? Was it always research for the book, or research for bonding? How many of those sessions were personal visits? Was there ever even a distinction or did the two always meld together?

     Then there is the idea of change. Perry slashed a knife across Mr. Clutter's throat and then put four bullets into the four members of the family, how sympathetic can someone so lacking in sympathy and empathy be? Or could he transform over the course of five years? In general, people like to believe in second chances and the power of positive change in a person's life; that they are capable of doing it provided a motive and the willpower to achieve that goal. In this case, we almost don't want to believe it's possible, but does that necessarily mean that it isn't? Based on the book, one could make an argument saying it most certainly is possible to "regain humanity", but the fact of the matter is that Perry never does - contrary to the novel's ending, he does not apologize. How could he have changed his ways and learned to love Truman, but missed the lesson on the error of his ways?

     I also wonder about balance. Hindsight is 20:20, but at what distance? Near or far sighted? Personally, I believe it be the latter. When first reading the book, I marveled at how well Capote balanced the stories of the Clutters, the people of Holcomb and Garden City, the investigators and prosecution. However, now I am seeing that Capote's original goal seemed to have been lost. His initial idea for his New Yorker Magazine article was to understand how a small, tight-knit community would be affected by the horrific tragedy. That seems to be lost after the second section - the community he was originally so concerned with barely has a voice. I also used to defend Capote - I didn't understand where people were seeing the partisanship towards Perry. I naively believed that Dick was such a despicable character with such apathy and nonchalance that his story was told fairly and authentically as he would have conveyed to the author. Now, I'm not so sure - was Dick unjustly crucified for Perry's benefit? Simply to provide contrast via means of juxtaposition to an extreme? 

     It's times like this when I wish I had been there - just living during that time to follow the case and the release and reaction to In Cold Blood, but maybe also as a fly on the wall, so we could know once and for all what really went down during those five years. Then again, that could get real awkward real fast, so perhaps it is better not to know...

That's a Wrap!

                Overall, I’ve really enjoyed this book club project. From reading the novel, to the blog posts, to the final presentation, I feel like I’ve gotten a clearer and better understanding of the book itself. In Cold Blood can be very dense at times, and the way Capote writes the novel can also be very complex. Having the blog posts every week to sort out my thoughts on the events of the book was very helpful, as well as being able to read other people’s perspectives. When there was something I was confused, or was just having a hard time keeping up with the events of the book, reading it in simpler terms of the blog was very beneficial.

                In our final presentation, we put Capote on trial as an author. His inclusion of Perry’s apology, which had been proven as false by Dewey who was present at the execution, caused us to question everything else Capote included in the novel. Discovering all of the different allegations against Capote, like hiring the lawyers for Dick and Perry, and that Harper Lee may have been a coauthor as opposed to just a research assistant, and the fact that he included the psychiatrist’s diagnosis of Perry which was never actually stated at the trial was really interesting. I was skeptical from the beginning about whether or not the book would actually be factual due to Capote’s involvement in the lives of everyone for almost six years. He became close to Perry, Dick, Dewey, and countless others, that it is my opinion that it was not possible for his to remain unbiased.

                There was also the matter of his relationship with Perry, which has been confirmed on several occasions. It is no secret that throughout the novel he tries to gain sympathy for him by including his background information, and of course, as aforementioned, his fabrication of Perry’s apology. By the end of the novel, and especially afterwards I found myself seriously questioning Capote, and judging the book overall, which I never would have done if I was simply just reading the book; the blog posts and project made me consider other things as well.

                In Cold Blood helped me confirm my opinion that no book can ever be presented as strictly fact. Someone has to have done research and been involved, and people cannot be trusted to leave their opinions out and remain unbiased. Therefore, though Capote claims to have pioneered this new journalism or creative nonfiction, I do not believe it can necessarily be called nonfiction. Unless it is a list of pure facts, I would be hesitant to put it under the genre of nonfiction, especially after reading this novel.

                

Final Thoughts on the Final Moments

Well, this is the end. The book is finished. I'm sitting here struggling through my thoughts on the ending, as I'm trying to write this. I have a lot of mixed feelings about it. I'm not going to get all emotional and all that, but there was quite a lot going on in this last part.

Dick and Perry were finally executed. They were left to hang on April 14, 1965. The final two scenes of the story were extremely chilling for me. The first being that we are brought into the warehouse where the gallows are and we see the execution for Detective Dewey's perspective.

This man is uncomfortable and disturbed by just about everything that he sees that day. He is upset by the idle and casual chatter that the other detectives engage in before the two men are led in, the hangman's restlessness over what seemed to be an execution that was taking too long for his liking, and even Perry's final parting words.

But I don't entirely blame him in the case of the latter. Perry apologized for the murders. He even says that it is probably too late and almost inappropriate, but she still apologizes. I don't know how many of you were expecting the man who killed four people to say "I'm sorry", but he did. I literally have no idea what to think. Is it sincere? Why is he saying it now? Would he have said it if there were different witnesses present at the execution? So many questions that I don't have answers to that I wish I had.

I'm a little shocked by how the entire book ended after that. I expected that the last scene we, as readers, were going to be presented with was a focus on one or both of the men hanging or one of the characters other thoughts as they presented their final thoughts about the case or the family or the murderers themselves.

While we do get a little bit of this, I wasn't expecting to see a reflection on all of this in a recalled memory for Dewey's past. He remembers a time when he went to visit his father's grave and he also ran into Nancy's childhood friend, Susan Kidwell. They shoot the breeze for a bit and before we can get any possible information about any residual feelings for the Clutters, Susan runs off in a hurry as if she is late for something. Dewey is then left to watch Susan dash away and reminisce about what a lovely young lady Nancy would have grown up to be.

To me, it seems like one of the main focuses of this book from the start and throughout a good part of the story was to present to the reader the tale of how the Clutter family was murdered and the surrounding case of the murderers fate. So this seems like an unsatisfying ending if that was the whole point of the book. We really don't have a clear way of knowing anyone's final residing thoughts on the Clutter family murders. Sure it's peaceful to think of how the wheat sways in the wind, but I wanted hear some final parting words. No big hurrah I was looking for I guess.

Overall, would I recommend this book: I honestly don't have a clear answer in this moment. I'm at home right now and my parents have walked by and seeing how I'm done, have asked how I like the book and I just don't quite know how to feel.

While the entire story and the way this was told was extremely riveting and fascinating, I don't know how I feel about the focus on Perry throughout the whole book. Does Capote have some type of bias toward Perry and is he trying to show something with this particular highlight on him? I have no idea why he decided to put this into the story, and I'm struggling to figure out what exactly he was trying to accomplish by doing this.

Trial Troubles

I found that there were quite a few things that surprised me with regards to the trial in this section.

First of all, I can't believe that the physician that diagnosed Perry and Dick to see if they could be diagnosed as insane didn't get to share what he found. By law, the only way the doctor could answer the question that was given to him was by a yes or no answer. A properly formulated question by the prosecutor in this case was enough to hide some of the information.

Both of these men's actions could have been excused by some very elaborate explanation of their mental processes. This might have been enough to sway some of members of the jury's minds and this could have possibly been enough to get these men out of a serious sentence. But the doctor did not get a chance to explain his diagnosis and the men were eventually found guilty.   

I was also surprised that Perry's old friend, Don, from the army came to support him in this case. These men only knew one another for a short period of time and had not talked for years, but for some reason Don felt like he had to travel miles in order to be there for his old friend. Their relationship is almost romantic in nature. Reunited after so many lost years or something along those lines.

Just the fact that Perry tells Don when he visits his cell that he should just kill himself right then and there while Don was still there, so that way he could die next to "somebody who cares about [him] a little bit", is one of the strongest lines in the book for me. It's so desperate and longing. It breaks my heart. I guess that's my sappy side coming out.

I also wondered for a while why the last section of the book was called "The Corner". The case was coming to a close and each of the previous sections summed up what was the major point or idea presented in that section and I knew kind of what to expect in each section before I even started reading i.e. "Persons Unknown" or "Answer". So I was very confused as to how this title was going to fit in.

The result of the trial was that Dick and Perry were found guilty and they were sentenced to death. They were taken to Lansing and they were to stay there for six weeks until they are to be hanged or as the prisoners call it, "gone to the corner".

*Ding* Light bulb. Mystery solved.

I wish I could accurately set up the moment where the section title makes sense in this blog post like it was done in the book. It was actually very chilling.

As if being put to death wasn't bad enough, (whether or not this is a fit punishment or sentence is not what I'm arguing) there almost seems to be a bit of a sick joke going on here.

These men are to be hanged on Friday the 13th, one minute after midnight.

Friday the 13th, the day of ultimate superstition and bad luck. How ironic.

And one minute after midnight. So the second the clock ticks around to the 13th, their lives will be ended. This is much more suspenseful than being hung at 4:00 in the afternoon per say. I'm surprised that this ended up being how their sentence worked out.

Last blog post coming up soon. Resolutions to follow, I hope.

The End...

For time’s sake, I’m going to wrap up the last two sections of the book into one blog post. The Corner is the final piece of the novel in which we find out information about the trials of the two men and their convictions. As you could have anticipated, both men were put on death row, or “The Corner” as it in referred to (clever title Capote).

                What I felt was most interesting to read about these sections was the way both men handled their jail time. Dick was perfectly calm, smoking and reading erotic novels and Perry just wrote in his journal. While they both had thoughts of escape, as any person would being locked in a room, I found it odd that neither really protested their predicament. Even when they were sentenced to death, Dick said he accepted his fate and has no hard feelings, and while Perry is against it, he apologizes. These were not the reactions I was expecting.

                Also, Capote continues to tell the story the same way he has throughout the novel: only giving the information through the descriptions of the characters, careful not to tell it through his words. However, there is one moment in the novel when Capote does implement his own opinion. During the trial, the psychologist on the stand is cut off from saying something, and Capote fills in what he believes she was going to say, and that is that Perry was a paranoid schizophrenic. Now, in some cases, people who are deemed insane, or who were unfit to make their own choices during a crime are sometimes given a different sentence than if they were not prescribed this way. No one will ever know if this was the case for Perry. However, it is clear that in this instance, Capote was still trying to gain the reader’s sympathy for Perry, as he had more subtly throughout the rest of the book. In this way, I agree with Kelly below when she feels slighted by Capote. He wanted to write the honest truth about a case and remain as unbiased as he could, but he was unable to do so because of his relationship with Perry. He slips up and with this he alludes to all of the other times throughout the novel where this is the case. How can he be trusted as an author is he was a player in the game?

                Overall though, I did really enjoy this book. While all of his claims and insights may not be trustworthy, Capote does an excellent job of telling the story and keeping the mystery alive throughout. To be honest, I believe both men got what they deserved for their crimes, and am glad I know the whole story of what happened to the Clutter’s on that fateful night. 

Looking Back...

I cannot help but wonder how much did Truman Capote's relationship with Perry Smith taint his telling of the story. The gruesome details of the crime scenes do not seem like they were in any way altered to better the appearance of their killer. The backstory of Smith mirrors the portrayal of his partner, Dick Hickock's. Family, childhood, adolescence, were all covered in equal share without preference or imbalanced weight of importance.

It's different to know that Capote and Smith had a homosexual relationship and affectionate bond than to actually see it. I was aware of the affair before starting the book, and I kept looking for evidence of bias and unfairness towards one of the convicts versus another - I couldn't see it. The only way I personally figured out that Perry would be the one was because I found him more attractive than Dick. Seriously that was my reasoning. I asked myself which of these two men I would rather be with and the answer was simply Perry - he was more human. Could this possibly be a result of Capote's depiction of the man behind the monster? Yes I will accept that - but Dick seemed, well, like a dick, and I believe that he was as much in real life as he became immortalized in this writing.

However, once I saw the movie, I was scared. I felt like I had been lied to. I felt like Capote had fooled me - led me to believe that I was safe and then taken me along for a ride of vulnerability. I saw the homo-erotic nature of the tension during conversations between Smith and Capote as they were portrayed in Infamous, and I see so much of Capote catering to Smith's needs and wants as they grow closer. Allegedly (although this is not shown in the film), Capote used to bribe the guards to take a walk so that he and Smith could have alone time together. How can you possibly be neutral when there is sex involved?! I'm disgusted, personally. Perhaps this is how the people of Holcomb felt when this avant-garde writer came into town, asking questions and expecting them to let their guard down for a stranger. I feel played. Is this natural?

Honestly I'm scared that if I read the book again I will find traces of partisanship everywhere. That each x and o will bleed with hugs and kisses and longings for Smith - that I will become angry with Truman for deceiving me, hurt because I trusted him to tell me the truth, much like Perry did throughout the film. I want to think that the only injustice committed in the 343 pages of the book are confined to the final few pages. I know that this is probably way too optimistic. I feel like Truman took advantage of the fact that this material fascinates me - that I wanted to get inside the head of a sociopath.

On the other hand, I could be taking this way too personally and getting all emotional and offended for no good reason. I highly doubt that I am alone in my feelings, but perhaps they are exaggerated. I just felt so invested in something that was inevitably shattered. Can anyone validate or disqualify these stirrings?

Times - Are They A Changin'?

Most people these days have a severe case of "big mean world" syndrome - because of what they see on TV and read in the newspapers, they firmly believe that the planet is a cruel, miserable place of horror and macabre. To a point, who can blame them? It does surround us - it permeates through most of the messages we are bombarded with on a daily basis.

The discussion I want to start is - how recent is the development of this illness? Have things always been this bad, or have they only gotten that much worse in the last few decades? This book offers testimony to support the claims of the former case.

This relates back to my post concerning how relatable the characters are - the fact that Herb, Bonnie, Nancy, and Kenyon lived in Kansas in the 1950s does not disconnect the reader from them in any significant way. To this day, there are still neighborhoods where people feel safe enough to leave their doors unlocked at night. There are still communities that have the same intensity of trust in their neighbors as Holcomb did prior to November 15th, 1959. There are still psychos lying in wait, and there are still serial killers with multiple homicides under their belt looking for their next victim.

Dick and Perry are a dime a dozen - their motive is cheap: money. It's so common and unoriginal. Two embittered, uneducated low lifes who had given up on the society that had given up on them so long ago. Dare I call them cliché? They seem to be - considering that most criminal profiles include a variety of synonyms for the aforementioned character traits and personal qualities. It is always some version of the same sob story - a victim of circumstance and a perpetrator of unspeakable, terrible deeds.

I am wondering if anything has changed - or has it all just stayed the same, in different places with new peoples? It seems to be an ever-repeating cycle. No matter how many innocents are slaughtered in their own bedrooms and basements, people will still leave their doors unlocked. Is this optimism foolish? Considering my mother would have a heart attack any time she learned I had left the door unlocked after coming home from school, to me it seems so. I have never not locked a door behind me - it is second nature, not necessarily paranoia. But if asked to leave a door unlocked, I do admit a bit of anxiety of the unknown and unexpected, which means that the lock does offer me some comfort.

Some argue that as technology gets better and forensics more accurate, crime rates will drop because all of the "bad guys" will be caught. Is it possible we're nurturing sociopaths? There is strength in adversity, and I can bet with a large degree of confidence that I am not the only person in this class who has debated how to commit the perfect crime and get away with it - we've all watched enough CSI to know how to do that. Think about it - had it not been for that boot print, Dick and Perry may never have been convicted, even if it was found out that they were guilty. They left no witnesses alive - they left none of the shotgun shells behind - they left no prints or traces. Anything that remained of them was commonplace and indistinct, i.e. the chord used to bound the Clutter family. They were that close...

An Appropriate Time? SPOILER ALERT...kinda

I am trying to stick with the original theme of my posts – time. From setting to passage to conceptual notions, I have been writing about all the different aspects of “when” of In Cold Blood. It’s frustrating at times and a lot of what I would like to say is rather off the topic (as you can tell from my enthusiasm in class, I am absolutely in love with this book). But I like working within the restraints – the best diamonds are produced by the most intense crucibles, right? Yea that’s another way of saying “sorry the next four blog posts from me are going to be done rapid fire this evening because I am so far behind”.

Anyway – my question is regarding the sentimental and controversial ending to the book. Is there ever an appropriate time to fabricate any portion of a nonfiction work? The two scenes I am speaking of in particular literally are the last three pages of the novel. First and foremost is the infamous Perry Smith apology. I fell a little behind in my reading and had only like ten or twenty pages to go before my dad gave me the film, Infamous, the story of how Capote wrote the book, which I decided I could not wait to watch. I viewed it with my boyfriend that night, and when it came to the actual execution scene I was white knuckle gripping the arms of my chair. I had no idea how things panned out at this point, so I was on the edge of my seat.

Honestly, I feel like Capote’s attempts to direct Smith to apologize were completely out of line. It tainted his credibility for me hardcore. I thought it robbed the work of its essence – its honesty. Love is a powerful emotion, and it makes a man do many strange and crazy things, though, and for Capote to have so willingly compromised the integrity of the rest of the work in order to possibly save Perry one last shred of humanity is absolutely insane. A shadow of doubt looms over this novel just as shadows of doubt had lingered over Holcomb, Kansas in November and December of 1959.

Several things are wrong with this, though. Capote literally begs for Perry to apologize, and yet is unable to see his sentence carried out. Truman himself is ignorant to exactly what happened at the gallows that evening from the time Perry ascended the stairs to the time he fell through the trap door. Yet he was present to see Smith say nothing – no apology, regardless of his lover’s pleas. But it still wound up in the book. How do I know this? I immediately ran to my book bag and finished reading the story. Sure enough, there the fiction was, because Capote invented it. He created this memory that most people reading this book will accept without thinking as fact. Why would you believe it not to be? The book is, after all, a work of creative nonfiction. I’m glad I saw the movie, or else I wouldn’t have ever known.

Secondly, and secondarily, is the scene including KBI Detective Dewey when he meets Nancy’s childhood best friend, Susan Kidwell, in the cemetery at the Clutters’ graves. It never happened. This was purely imagined, and I seriously wonder for what purpose. What ends do these means serve? I really didn’t see the last scene as too crucial to the plot – it didn’t wrap anything up. At this point, all the tension created by the plot had been resolved, so what does it mean?

My title basically poses the question “is there an appropriate time to include fabricated events in a nonfiction story?” I’d like to hear your thoughts. I hope that you have already been able to collect my two cents worth, given the tone and diction of this entry.

Then & Now

One thing I just want to do real quick is take a step back and realize how far we have come in less than half a century. Think about it - the communication, the transportation, the culture, the very nature of a crime, the science of forensics - it makes you wonder "what if" which is a damn near useless question to all those who do not consider themselves imaginative, creative, or artistic.
But seriously appreciate this with me - has anyone else taken a forensics course of any kind? Or just watched a ton of CSI and other dramas of the like? The house was cleaned within ninety-six hours of the bodies being discovered - the protocols for first responders and the detectives and investigators were very different and lax compared to the current standards. Modern technology would have definitely found traces or prints or something that might have led to a sooner capture of the two perpetrators. Cell phones could have saved the Clutters - the internet could have spared the KBI a lot of false leads and gained them a wider national or even international audience to assist in the apprehension of the wanted men.
Honestly, as I was reading I kept imagining a movie in my head. One thing I was a huge fan of is that even though the setting is distinct, it is easier for the reader to relate and connect to. I did not feel any significant distance of time separation between Nancy Clutter and myself. I did not label the behaviors of characters as oddly old fashioned and removed from the present. I wish that someone would have the guts to make a movie out of this book - not the story of Truman writing it - but the three parts, like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings or Twilight (there girls, are you happy?) Have the setting be as present as possible without rendering the plot implausible, ya dig? Give it a modern edge but stay true to the "facts". Guaranteed box office smash right there.

Unlikely Partners

I don't want to say I didn't expect this, but more so I wasn't thinking that this would happen, but Perry actually showed some mercy and sympathy toward the Clutters. 

I guess I expected someone who was capable of killing four people in one night to be some kind of psychopath, but Perry is a real person like us deep down. I'm not condoning the murders, don't get me wrong, but I expected them to be crazier than they were. 

Dick definitely went a little mad. Especially after they got to the house and found that the safe they had hoped to find was not there. Then again, if I traveled hundreds of miles to find something that wasn't there at the end, it would drive me pretty batty too. 

I'm interested in the difference between Perry and Dick. Dick didn't seem to show any type of care for the Clutters. He completely removed himself from any type of feeling for the Clutters. Perry on the other hand, found himself pleading with Dick to have mercy on them. Perry was the one who tried to make the Clutters more comfortable. He tucked Nancy into her bed, he put a pillow under Kenyon's head, he laid Mr. Clutter down on a spare mattress in the basement, all out of empathy. 

Yet, Perry admits to having the snap judgement after they had killed the Clutters about wanting to kill Dick. Dick had talked about how there would be no witnesses, and he was a witness after all. 

It's so strange that Perry seems to care less about his partner who has helped him and has his back for so many years over this family that he planned to rob and murder if the need arose. 

The sad part of this is, at the end of this. All they got out of this was between forty to fifty dollars, and god knows how many years in jail after all this has been decided. Perry probably wouldn't have gone through with the murder at the end of the day, and he just went along with what Dick was doing. I wonder if his course of action would have been different had he been acting alone. Maybe not, but I can't help but wonder since Perry and Dick seem to have completely different interactions, feelings and morals in this situation. I wonder how they ended up as partners too. I would think Perry would have known that he wouldn't have the guts to kill someone and that was part of Dick's plan all along. I can't imagine going along with something like that when deep down you can feel that it's not right. I guess we'll never have these answers, but I can't help imagining what was going on in their minds. 

As a side note: I lied when I said this was the last section. There is one more (I think?) called "Corners". Sorry! 

Some Clarity....

Big Surprise! Not.  I mean, seriously, who would have ever guessed that one murderer would rat out the other? It was bound to happen eventually, people like that can never be trusted, even to their "partners." Dick's name actually has meaning now, because that was cold snitching on Perry like he did. He basically told the police that it was all Perry and Dick did none of the killing. Throughout the storyline, the dynamic duo are portrayed as besties, amigos, brothers for life. It is clear now that, for Dick, it was just an act and he just needed someone to frame. It's not like we really know that this was his plan all along, but it is definitely the best possibility.

From the beginning their relationship was a little strange. What else would you expect from two murderers who were just released from jail. They had strange nicknames like "Honey." I don't know about any of you, but I don't know any guys that are friends and call each other things like that. They would never live it down. True, there was no one else around that could listen to them, but still.

I mean, hey, maybe Dick just panicked and told the police whatever just to save himself. I know that if I ever went crazy and killed someone with my absolute best friend (hypothetical of course), I could never bring myself to blame it all on them. I would either never confess or say that we both did it. That's just cold. 

When Perry finds out for sure that Dick has confessed, he follows suit, but admits he killed the family. It becomes clear now that the actual motive was robbery. Rumor had it that Mr. Clutter kept a lot of money in his safe. Clearly Perry and Dick were not the sharpest tools in the shed, who would commit a bigger crime to leave no witnesses to a smaller one? Their logic had clearly escaped them. Maybe if they had not committed the murder they would have never been caught. Just wore some masks, tie them up, steal the money, and get the hell out of there. I clearly no nothing about robbing anyone, so that is just a shot in the dark, but it definitely seems like the road more traveled.

Keep Reading!

The Perry/Dick Saga (Not Coming to a Theater Near You)

I'm ninety percent sure someone touched on this at some point in one of their blog posts, but I couldn't find the post I was looking for from a merely skimming over the past few entries. But there has been a bit more development in this area in these forty pages.

I'm talking about the relationship between Dick and Perry. Obviously, everyone knows by now that they are the killers (if not, you should probably read every single entry the contributors of this blog has ever posted). What I wonder about is how their relationship could be considered "intimate".

Let's look at it this way, they are traveled hundreds of miles across quite a few states together. Someone once told me that the best way to get to know someone was to travel with them. They were good friends before they even set out on their Clutter murder/ robbery heist to begin with, but I guess that's expected when you befriend someone in jail and remain close allies during and after one another's jail time.

They are partners in crime here. They trust one another enough to expect the other to help in the heist. Seems like a pretty close and intimate bond there. I don't know if any of my friends will do that for me, but then again, I didn't meet them in jail.

I get that they are good friends, but I don't call any of my friends, "Honey", like Dick does to Perry. These burly, strong, jailbirds don't seem like the kind of people who would be comfortable with calling or being called by this nickname.

I'm not suggesting that these two have any type of sexual relationship. I can't prove that. But their relationship's dynamic takes a bit of a nosedive in this section.

They are caught by the police here. I guess we all kinda knew that this was going to happen eventually, but I did not expect Dick to say what he did.

He told the detectives that Perry was the one who actually killed the Clutters. He was just assisting.

Low blow.

I guess it's not that far-fetched considering these are ex-criminals who are still on parole, but I didn't expect this from these two.

I wouldn't do that to someone I called "Honey". Even if Dick meant it ironically, it still shocked me. My mouth literally dropped open when I read that.

Since Dick admitted to both of them being at the scene of the crime and one of them committing the murders,  Perry was left to explain how and why they came across the Clutters.

I haven't read the whole tale yet, but the most I can tell you right now was that the motive was robbery. Floyd Wells, Dick's friend from prison had told Dick that Mr. Clutter had a safe in his office with around ten thousand dollars in it usually. It seems that they killed because they didn't want any witnesses to the crime. It seems kind of ironic to cover up a crime by committing a bigger one, but I'm not a master thief either.

Stay tuned for more.

Still a Mystery...

Well, I’ve finally reached the best part of the book where we actually find out what happened in the Clutter home that night. Dick and Perry were caught when a police officer spotted their car license plate in Las Vegas. The two are taken in for questioning, under the pretense that it is for the bad checks that they had been cashing all over the place. While first being questioned, both appear confident, not realizing the seriousness of their predicament. Their questioning slowly leads up to their visit to Fort Scott, and when the accusation that they committed the murders is brought up, both are shaken up.

                What I find truly interesting about their questionings is that Dick confesses first when Perry has been portrayed as the most guilt-ridden of the two. Dick does after only one night of being in the cell, but when the evidence of the matching footprints is brought up placing him in the house, he claims that Perry is the only one who did any of the killings. Perry, on the other hand, only confesses when he is one hundred percent sure that Dick as done the same. I would have thought that Perry would have cracked as soon as the murders were mentioned considering his thoughts have been completely been preoccupied of this notion since it happened. The only reason he does is because Dewey mentions the murder of the black man, which is something that only Dick knew, so he knew that he told them everything.

                The actual night went like this: they went in looking for a safe that they believed to be there. When they couldn’t find it, Perry wanted to leave but Dick wanted to question the family, so they tied each of them up and Dick even contemplated raping Nancy, but Perry was adamant against this. Perry stated that after this, he shot the two downstairs, and Dick shot the two upstairs. Which one of them was telling the truth is hard to say. I always imagined that Dick was the only one with a killer streak, given that he did not have a guilty conscious whatsoever, and Perry was terrified of being caught because he didn’t want to do it at all. However, it would actually make sense if Dick didn’t do any of the actual killings and Perry committed them all, which is why Dick could be so carefree of the whole thing; he wasn’t the one with blood on his hands.

                Capote is still leaving little mysteries, even when the murderers have been caught and have confessed, and the events of the night have been revealed. He’s careful to present them solely in the eyes of the men who were there, and not to speculate at all. All that the police had to go off of was their confessions, which is also was Capote had to work with, therefore what happened that night can never really be known for sure by anyone except for Dick and Perry. It’s entirely based on their words. It’s really frustrating because I just want to know what really happened, but Capote wanted to be as real as he possibly could when writing this novel, and the truth is that you never really know what happens in any given situation unless you are there. In this situation, Dick, Perry, and the dead Clutter family are the only ones who will ever truly know what happened. 

Finally Some Answers

I’m actually really enjoying the Answers part of the novel, because it provides exactly what it is titled. The pieces are beginning to come together on Dick and Perry’s motives for their murder, and how they ended up in Kansas to begin with. Dick’s cell mate Floyd Wells is the one who fed him the false information about the Clutter’s fortune. It’s interesting because even though he is the one who started the whole thing, when he receives word about the Clutter murder, he reaches out to the authorities and confesses. He even admits that he never thought that Dick would go through with it. I find this to be so intriguing, the minds of criminals and that some of them are all talk. It just turns out that Dick isn't one of them.

                With the help of Floyd, another KBI again, Harold Nye begins to close in on the case, visiting Dick’s family and finding out that he and Perry were near the farm the weekend of the murders, and he even sees the possible murder weapon leaned up against the kitchen wall. Detective Dewey is very excited about these newfound suspects, that he even hesitantly shows his wide, feeling confident in the new findings.

                Even with all of the evidence and confessions stacked against them, Capote still manages to present the information in such a way that the reader is still not sure how, when, or if these two men are going to be caught. A manhunt has begun to take place, and Dick and Perry are ignorant to the whole thing, although Perry is still a nervous wreck. It doesn't help that Dick returns to cash hot checks all over the state of Kansas, leading Dewey and Nye directly to him. The suspense is killing me to find out how these two murders are actually caught, and how long it will be dragged on for. Knowing that they did it, but not knowing how they are caught is truly keeping me captivated, and I admire Capote for that immensely. Answers has proven to be my favorite part of the book so far, and I can’t wait to learn the rest of them throughout the rest of the novel.

All the Pieces are Coming Together

Ah, finally. Some answers. Maybe that's why the title of this final section is called "Answer" anyway. On a personal level at least I found this section of the book a lot harder to get through than before. The forty pages I read for this entry serve as the sucky part of a CSI episode where they are stumbling around trying to find some type of lead. Except this time, there is no witty or funny dialogue and there isn't the handy added advantage that comes with having a hour time slot to solve a crime; every clue they find develops the plot and moves the story along in some way. Basically, we are seeing all the dead ends that these poor detectives find. More true to life than a TV crime show, but also more boring. I guess that's the trouble nowadays, but that's for another type of blog post (and probably blog) entirely.

We still don't have a clear connection of Perry and Dick to the Clutters just yet. What we do have is an account from a man named Floyd Wells. He was in prison with Dick and he worked on the Clutters' farm. Dick became interested in the old man's money and well, I'm sure you guys get the gist.

Money seems to be the motive. Floyd told Dick a lot about the Clutters' including, how to get into the house, where money was kept, that sort of thing. But it still doesn't make sense that money was the only motive. The only thing that appears to be taken from the house was the radio. Nancy's purse was left alone, as was everything else, so why all the trouble?

We know Floyd Wells pointed the detectives in Dick's direction. They seem to be hunting the right guys, but they have no proof that can point to anyone, even the guys that committed the murder. I guess that's what the other 143 pages left in the book are for.

Another thing that has gotten to me as I'm reading is what the hell Dick and Perry are doing. They were going to go to Mexico, but they couldn't find a job that paid well enough, so they headed back to the states. That part makes sense. The part that doesn't is why they are headed back to Kansas, the epicenter of a seventeen statewide watch for these men is happening. Seems like a bad idea to me, but I guess it's true what they say, the criminal always returns to the scene of the crime. Maybe this will prove true and they will return to the farm. That would be a plot twist.

A Biased Opinion

When doing research for the novel we learned that Capote has a special relationship with Perry, some even rumored that it was a romantic one. In Part 2 of Person’s Unknown, it entirely revolves around Perry’s background. Based on the information that we’re given, it makes Perry seem like an innocent person who just lost his way due to circumstances beyond his control. These circumstances that Capote talks about are the divorce that Perry’s parents went through, but lots of kids go through their parents getting divorced and they don’t end up committing murder, so this is really no excuse. He also includes the letter that Perry’s dad wrote about him that glorifies Perry as a normal person. However, this letter cannot be taken too seriously considering it was written to the jail as a plea to get Perry on early parole.

The letter is introduced as Perry is sorting through his boxes of belongings when he and Dick are on the move and he has to decide what to keep. What’s interesting about this is that as someone who is constantly traveling and on the run, you would think that he would pack like that. Instead he carries old letters and dictionaries, and I think Capote includes this is the text because he wants to show that Perry is more than just a murderer, but someone with a conscious who thinks about other things. People claim that Capote made Perry the more guilt-ridden of the two, and tried to humanize him more. Incorporating this information helped him to do that. However, I don’t buy it. To me, a killer is a killer, and I don’t have any sympathy no matter how much information Capote wants to include about him. It’s also contradicted by the fact that he doesn't include anything about Dick. I feel like if he wants to humanize one, he should do it for the other. He’s too biased in this sense. He may do this later, but as of now he has only done so for Perry.

You may think I’m heartless because I don’t have any sympathy for Perry, but I believe that people have control over their actions, unless deemed mentally unstable. From the information that Capote has included, especially Perry’s guilty thoughts after the murder, he was in complete control of his actions; his only mistake was following Dick. Capote’s presentation is biased because of his investment in the murder and his relationship with Perry, so I feel I can’t really trust the information he includes. I’m interested to see how he presents the rest of the murder, and the people in it.

The Itty Bitty... Murderer?

Welp. I caught myself having strange feelings toward Perry. No, it's not what you're thinking. I was sympathetic toward him. I know. What? This guy is the murderer!

Let me explain. We are again brought back into the lives of Dick and Perry. The men plan on heading back into the states when they can't find work that pays well. Because they are travelling, and this time without a car, Perry is basically forced to sort through the box of belongings that he kept in the back of his truck. They can only carry one suitcase and photographs and maps do not help to make the load lighter.

Perry sorts through his memorabilia and he comes across a piece his father had written about Perry himself. It goes back into his childhood where we see him as a boy who struggled in an unofficial custody battle between his parents. Because of this he moved around a lot and he was picked on in school for being a "new kid".

I could just imagine short, stocky little Perry getting picked on a beaten up by the older kids on the playground and I felt so bad. I wanted to be there defending Perry. I actually stopped for second as I was reading. I couldn't believe that I actually felt bad for him. A murderer.

It's actually pretty cool that Capote portrayed Perry in this manner. Throughout this whole book I seemed to forget that both Dick and Perry were actual people underneath the hard-boiled, murderous exterior. Since we still have no idea what the motive for the Clutter family murder was, it's really hard to comprehend and formulate a third-person type of perspective about these two men's characters. All we know is that they have committed murders, have been in prison and care very little about what crosses their path.

We can at least begin to see the inner workings of Perry's family which include the struggle and the animosity between him and his sister Barbara and the fondness he shows toward his dad.

There may not be a motive yet, (but hopefully more information will be revealed in the section titled "Answer") but we at least have a better understanding as to what has shaped Perry and his past.

I'm curious if the reader is going to get this kind of perspective with Dick as well. So far there hasn't been much of a focus on the inner-workings of Dick's character, but I wonder what Dick's position in this murder has been. I wanna know his past and I want to know what makes him tick.

Basically, I wanna know the motive. Right now. I will probably rant about that for every blog post I have to make until it happens and I'm sorry, but I just wanna know. I need to understand these characters.

The Investigation Continues...

This was supposed to be posted yesterday but I accidentally saved it to my drafts instead, so here it is now. Whoops. In the next section of the novel, Person’s unknown, Capote continues to switch between the happening in the town and the adventures of Dick and Perry. He aligns it so that the investigation of Holcomb is happening while there is an almost investigation of Perry. Perry is feeling guilty about the crime and can hardly eat, while Dick goes out of his way to hit stray dogs on the road and is continuing on in his daily life. We find out that Perry lied about murdering a black man, as does Dick. We are slowly learning that Perry never really felt comfortable about the whole thing, and really only did it to impress Dick. In doing so, Capote presents him as the follower and is guilt-ridden, reflecting their rumored relationship.

                While this “investigation” is happening between the two murderers, the investigation in Holcomb is at full force, Dewey, the lead investigator, receives calls day and night from the citizens of the town hoping to be a part of the capture of the murderer. He didn't have a lot of evidence to go off of aside from a bloody footprint, and his lead suspect was cleared due to a polygraph test. The "tips" that he gets from the people don't lead anywhere because they care more about finding any person who did it, than the actual culprit.

It's really interesting to read about people who have never experienced something like this before, and to see their reaction to the crime. They are paranoid and scared, yet at the same time they love having something actually happen in their small town, and become obsessed with the murders. They are willing to watch one of their friends be framed for it and don’t think about the consequences of accusing an innocent man, just as long as they can blame someone for it. Also, Dewey believes the murderers to be friends of the Clutter’s because he thinks they knew the layout of the house. As readers, we know this to be false because they were random victims of Dick and Perry, but the fact that Dewey came to this conclusion makes one wonder how Dick and Perry made it look like this.

Dewey’s involvement in the crime resembles Capote's in a way because he becomes almost obsessed, to the point that his wife is getting annoyed with all of the phone calls and papers strewn about the house. Capote, too, was very much involved with the murder and it took six years of his life. Whether this was really the case, or if Capote purposely exaggerated Dewey’s character to put himself in the story is unknown, but there is definitely a correlation between the too. It will be interesting to see how the witch-hunt continues within the town, and how Dewey continues with his investigation.

Nobody is Safe

So after a long night of revising my review portfolio, changing my "How did I get here" paper,and  reading really long articles about murdered playmates, I decided to give up and read "In Cold Blood." That, my friends, is procrastination at its finest. I am finding it difficult to put this book down because of the suspense Capote draws you in with but, after reading for about an hour, my current fascination, "Breaking Amish" came on. So me being the responsible student that I am put all homework away and started watching reality television.

Aside from that, "In Cold Blood" is gettin' juicy. It's hard to actually write about this book in sections because it really doesn't have any chapters, so bear with me. As of right now, at this very moment, I am reading about the hunt for the killers. Like the "Death of a Playmate" article, "In Cold Blood" is reading like a mystery. Although we know that Perry and Dick are the killers, Capote is trailing us along like we are part of the community unbeknownst to who actually did it. Because of this, both the reader, and the townspeople acquire a sense of paranoia accompanied with fear that murderers could be walking amongst them.

Like I said in my last post, the small town dynamic is a huge recurring motif. This idea presents itself again in the most recent pages of my reading. Seemingly every FBI agent and police officer are covering the investigation of the Clutter's. When they believe to have a suspect, townspeople rejoice in the idea that the killer is found. However, when said suspect is cleared, officers immediately start searching for new suspects. Rather than completing a thorough investigation, citizens of Holcomb and investigators would rather declare a murderer than actually finding out who it really was. Everybody living in town is scared shitless of the idea of a murder occurring in their small town, therefore declaring somebody the criminal (even if its not true) provides them with a sense of security.

Not sure if anybody has mentioned the fact that Capote is switching from the town of Holcomb and their story, to Perry and Dick while on the run. I like the fact that although both stories are separated by great distance, he is still able to complete the story on both ends. Currently Dick and Perry are somewhere in Mexico I think. What's interesting is the dynamic between the two. Perry confesses that he was surprised that he had actually been able to go through with the crime. In my opinion, this is the first sense of guilt or fear we sense from the murderers. As many of the posts on here have said before, Capote garnered a relationship with both the criminals during the interview process. This type of guilt/fear presented might be Capote attempting to make the two perhaps more relatable. He wants us to see these two in the same light he did. 

What Next?

So far in "In Cold Blood," the obvious has happened, along with a few surprises. From the very beginning, we all knew that the Clutter family was doomed, but the way it happened was quite a surprise to me. After the gruesome murder, they had pretty much every police officer and F.B.I agents investigating the case. When Rupp was cleared due to a polygraph test, a lot of people were dissappointed. In my opinion, their main concern was just finding someone that they thought did it, not the real killers. This would be much easier.

To my surprise, they came up with the conclusion that the murders tried to set it all up to look like a robbery gone bad. The only problem with Perry and Dick's plan was they really stole nothing of value. They took a small radio and whatever little cash the Clutters had lying around the house.

Though the killers made this silly mistake, they left behind little evidence. The only thing connecting them to the incident is, when the police took a picture of the mattress, the flash revealed a footprint with a distinct diamond shaped pattern on the bottom. Obviously, anyone could have these shoes but maybe, if they can find enough people, they will come up with a match through the process of elimination.

Motive for Murder

This book started off by focusing on the Clutters lives with the occasional look into Perry and Dick's lives. I feel like I should have foreseen a slight change in the focus now that the Clutters are dead, but I guess that's the immersiveness of this story. 

We are of course seeing and hearing more from the townspeople and their theories on the matter, but we are starting to see the nitty-gritty details of the crime start to surface.

Al Dewey, the head investigator for the case, is nearly as confused as everyone else is. He wonders why Mrs. Clutter and Nancy were tucked into bed after they were tied up? Why Kenyon had a pillow under his head and why Mr. Clutter's body was found on a mattress box? Dewey's main theory is so they could be more comfortable before their inevitable death. But why? Who would want to commit murder so bad, but try  so hard to make their last moments so peaceful?

The signs pointing to Dick and Perry as the murderers is pretty obvious now. Especially with Perry's mention of "do[ing] what we did". I can't help but sit back and try and be the investigator on this case myself. I see no connection between these two men and the Clutters and I see no motive for murder. I can see that they want to go to Mexico really bad and make a lot of money, but that doesn't seem to fit into the murders. As the investigators have said before, there was not a whole lot in the house that was disturbed,  which rules out robbery as a motive. If Dick and Perry wanted money, they would have taken more from the house or they would have targeted someone who actually carried cash on him, unlike Mr. Clutter. 

I've also begun to wonder why they want to go to Mexico so bad, out of all places, and whether or not that has anything to do with the murders. 

My super sleuth skills also have me questioning why they took Kenyon's radio and what I believe to be Mr. Clutter's binoculars. They kept the binoculars, but pawned the radio for a couple bucks almost immediately after. Again, if the motive for the murder was robbery, why are they selling only a few items?

Overall, these men are confident enough to think that they can escape being charged for murder and I'm curious to see the development in this conflict between them since they do end up getting caught in the end. They did a very good job of hiding the evidence. No shotgun shells left behind, few fingerprints. The only thing that Al Dewey was able to find was a footprint. 

I want to know what is going to be the clue that leads the investigators to these men since I see very few possibilities and leads. 

Damn you Capote!

So I've been reading a lot of this book lately; partially because it's really getting good, and partially because I want to get this aspect of "homework" over with. (Just being honest.) But I'm going to try to stick to the 40 page blog posts my group initially enforced. And since I'm a wee bit behind everybody else, what I have to say might simply be repeating fellow group members posts. Oh well.

So let me just start by saying that Truman Capote is an absolute genius. I am seriously lacking any creative ability, so to read a "novel" constructed in the way Capote uses is actually pretty cool. It's easy to get lost in this book because you essentially forget that it is non-fiction. For instance, he uses townspeople's testimonies as his dialogue, which for some reason, I find fascinating. 

In an earlier post, I mentioned that Capote's sense of writing was slightly boring. I now understand (because I have read further in) that the setup of the first forty or so pages is completely necessary. It creates a great suspense that you usually can't find in books. When the murders actually happen, Capote fails to go into great detail. Instead, he creates a scene, using locals reactions as the reveal. Even though you know who the murderers are and how they murdered the Clutters, you still get that great sense of mystery, encouraging continuous guessing and questioning. 

Like several of my fellow group members have mentioned before, the idea of the "traditional, American" family during this time period is a dominant motif that seems to continuously present itself. Capote focuses a lot on the locals of Holcomb and their reactions. Their fear is extremely present in the idea that the murderers could be walking amongst them in their small town, which clearly puts everybody on edge. This directly relates back to how and why Capote doesn't reveal the murders to the full extent initially. He is essentially placing us in the book, providing us with the same sense of fear the townspeople had.

It gets more interesting too...

Time & Travel

One specific aspect that leaves me scratching my head is the amount of mileage covered by Dick and Perry at any given time in the book. Perry reports the sum of all travel is upwards of ten thousand miles - my jaw dropped. I could hardly fathom anyone bouncing around so much in such a short amount of time as a month and a half, which for some reason sounds like a shorter span of time when you say "six weeks". There are a few reasons for this: 1 is that I have access to my own personal vehicle as well as infinite options for public transportation across land, sea, and air and I barely leave the 25 mile radius of my hometown where I lived the first eighteen years of my life. 2 is that I always hear horror stories about hitch hiking and yet they do so flawlessly and are able to move around so much by means of the generosity of fellow travelers. 3 is that distance and time seemed completely irrelevant to the impending doom that awaited Perry and Dick and I think that this was thanks to the juxtaposition of the perspective of the K.B.I. agents - because of the fact that this is a true story and we know the outcome, it feels to us like they are just shy of cracking everything wide open even though the text tells us that the trail to the answer "who-dun-it" has all but run cold. However, simultaneously, Capote characterizes and tells the stories of Hickock and Smith with such sophistication and skill that the audience almost cheers for them, able to somehow nearly forget the atrocities committed by these, pardon my language, seriously fucked up individuals. Another idea concerning time and travel is how this book has transcended time - hailed as one of the first and still the best of its kind. Not only is it still read for entertainment as well as laying the foundation for a creative nonfiction genre, it is still heavily debated and discussed as more comes out about the writing and researching (wink wink nudge nudge) of the book are revealed - not to mention the issues of inserting personal imaginings into real life events.

Better Late than Never

So I wish I had some amazing story to explain why I have failed to write more than one blog post, but sadly, I don't. I have been busy however: work, classes, midterms and disney channel Halloween movies have been consuming my time over the past couple of weeks causing my lack of attention to the blogging world. I apologize.

HOWEVER, I have made time to really delve into "In Cold Blood," which I am finding fascinating. High school english classes have really deterred me from what I like to call "englishy books." The amount of unnecessary analysis that is required to pass high school english classes is absurd. (MAYBE the blue curtains don't represent anything! MAYBE the author just likes the color blue!) Therefore, I was reluctant on starting "In Cold Blood." This reluctance didn't go away too quickly either. The first forty or so pages were rather drab...As a reader fully knowing what is going to happen, the style of writing Capote initially uses makes the read a tad boring. The anticipation of the murders, or rather the climax of the story, is dragged on and on while Capote describes what the Clutter's had for breakfast the day of their murder. But obviously, this is where that whole creative non-fiction aspect comes into play. What novel have you ever read that jumped immediately to the climax? This particular type of style though, does make it difficult to read. I found myself skipping pages frequently in hopes that the action would be on the next page. Because of this, it's really reminding me of "Crime and Punishment" by Fydor Dostoyevksy. I remember reading every other page of that book hoping something remotely interesting would happen. (Nothing ever did.) 

So what's so fascinating? This may seem contradictory, but the same ideas that make this book so boring, are the same ideas that create my fascination. When I was choosing "In Cold Blood" for my book club choice, I did a lot of background information searching. In earlier posts by this group, we talked about Capote's research on the two murderers, and a possible infatuation with one of them. It is believed that Capote became very "close" to Perry and Dick. I feel as though this "closeness" is portrayed within the beginnings of the book. The descriptions of both the Clutter family and the two criminals really allow the reader to get to know the "characters," almost in the way that Capote knew them. This aspect has me most intrigued for what is to come in the rest of the book.

What I like so much about "In Cold Blood," is that it keeps me guessing. I love that he is able to keep me questioning something I already know. Hopefully these questions are answered as I keep reading. 

Time - There Never Is Enough Of It

This post is not so much about the book as it is about my frustrations with the fact that there are only 24 hours in the day, and so much of my sixty minute intervals dedicated to sleep, hygiene, food, classes, homework, and my jobs. I am absolutely addicted to this book - I would say I can't put it down, but alas I sadly have to all too often. I still have yet to finish it but I am ahead of schedule for the forty page weekly intervals that my blog group originally agreed upon. I just couldn't help myself.
Also, I get so lost in the reading process that I plum forget to find myself time for the blog posts. But don't worry, when I am all done with this thing, they will be flooding in. I have so many ideas, so many questions, so many strange stirrings and sensations that this book conjurs up as the story progresses.

A book has not had this effect on me in a while - only a handful of works have been so profound within my mind. The most easily relatable notion is omething along the lines of what we'll call the Harry Potter effect - where as soon as you get your hands on a book, you find a space to read where you won't be disturbed for hours or if you're skilled enough even forgotten for days so you can charge through the novel in blissful peace. You lose all track of time and simply flip pages until you reach the back cover, and then get all depressed that the experience - as captivating and entrancing and hypnotizing as it was - is over.

Why do books have such a power over us? Why do we ignore the passage of times when we can observe the shadows on the walls dancing and changing with the coming and going of daylight? Why do we put aside sensations of hunger and fatigue and soldier through something that takes so much effort and self discipline? Is this masochistc - the way we disrupt our lives, destroy our sleep schedules, deprave our skin of sunlight and our stomachs of sustenance? Or is this sadistic - the way we plow through the story and its messages at a pace that brings the final words upon us all too quickly?

I love this book - I hate that I don't have more time to read it - and I will try and be more timely with posting my blogs and responding to ya'll.

Who Done It?

Throughout the novel, Capote continues to write from the perspective of the townspeople by including only relevant information that the people know, adding nothing that was discovered or inferred after the time period.  He completely skips the murder scene, jumping right to the next morning with a knock on the door from one of Nancy Clutter’s school mates. He does this as a way of prolonging the suspense of not knowing who the murderers are (though it’s pretty obvious that Dick and Perry are), so no one was there to witness it as no one was left alive. For this reason, there isn't anyone at this point who knows what happened, so the reader doesn't either.

                Rather, Capote attempts to unravel the events of the murder with the reader by including the reactions of the people of Holcomb. Everyone becomes a suspect and is trying to figure out who did it and why. There really isn't anyone who had motive, and very few people pass through town, leading them to believe it must be friends. The Rupp’s, their closest neighbors, become prime suspects, and there is speculation of Dick and Perry.

Capote does a nice job of captivating the reader by almost making them feel like a citizen of Holcomb because we only know as much as they do. We’re trying to figure out the murderers and what happened as they are, and we feel the paranoia of watching our backs, not knowing who is a friend or an enemy. It’s interesting to see the reactions of the people in a small town where everyone knows everyone else, so to have something happen like this is shocking to all. Capote wants this factor to be evident by turning the story over dominantly to their reactions instead of just a play-by-play of what happened. He makes it interesting because we have to actively read and participate by trying to figure out what happened, and see how the story plays out. 

So Far

  The Clutter Family enjoys a normal morning in Kansas while, across the state, Dick Hickock and Perry Smith get ready head over to their quiet little town and murder an innocent group of people. Capote takes us into the investigation with the police and the suspects. Before that, though, we travel with Smith and Hickock in their Chevy sedan across Kansas for a little while. When the arrived in Holcomb, it was a desolate town. "They skirted the northern rim of the town. No one was abroad at this nearly midnight hour, and nothing was open except a string of desolately brilliant service stations."

 Basically everyone is in question, seeing as though no one had the motive. The whole town of Holcomb is thrown into chaos and disbelief of this atrocity. Even Bobby Rupp was a suspect but he was cleared when he took a lie detector test.

Speculation and Accusation

Well, I'll say it. Spoiler Alert: the Clutters are dead. It took about sixty pages, but it happened. And in a rather grisly manner too. Graphic Material Alert: I knew ahead of time that they were all shot point blank in the head with a shotgun, but I did not know that each of them had been tied up before their brains were blown out. And the macabre picture of the youngest daughter's blood splattered all over her white teddy bear  is not a pleasant one.

Capote has decided to make note of a very interesting dynamic that developed in the town after the Clutters were murdered. Everyone became a suspect. Since there were so few clues left behind, everyone had to watch their back and keep an eye out and winder if they were next in line. The owner of a local cafe in the town, Bess Hartman had heard someone say that everyone was so anxious and paranoid because "All we've got out here are our friends. There isn't anything else". Few people actually pass through the town and most likely would have no motive for murdering the family, so it almost would have had to have been someone in the town.

The daughter's boyfriend Bobby Rupp was called in to be questioned. Was there some type of secret conflict there?

What about Alfred Stoecklein? A man who lived about a 100 yards from the Clutter family house. While he seems to have an alibi, it does seem awfully suspicious that he didn't hear four shots from a shotgun fired and he seems to have thought a lot about the wind direction and the location of the Clutter's barn that would have helped to deflect the noise.

Capote poses the question to us in the eyes of the towns people. We get a very strong sense that it was the characters Dick and Perry that did it, but there is no solid, in your face type of proof that screams "They are the murderers. They did it", in a clear, black and white manner.

But it also doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that the two prison convicts one of which had traveled 800 miles in the past twenty-four hours and the other who could be seen soaking his boots in a tub of warm, red-colored water were the ones involved.

Capote has left us in a sea of questions and wonders. What will be the next clue be and where will it be found? Who will be suspected because of it? What will become of the townspeople whose lives are now in quite a clutter (ba dum tiss)

The Who (Not the Band)

*A bit of a disclaimer is needed here. I meant to have this posted last week, but there was a bit of confusion and it did not and I'm posting this now because Professor Smith said that she wanted me to. So the information and details here in this post is going to be a bit old. Sorry for the confusion.*

I guess you guys can already tell that this book is about the murders of the Clutter family members based on reading the rest of my group members’ posts. Herbert Clutter, his wife, and two of their kids were shot pointblank and there were few clues left behind. In fear of spoiling the ending I won’t say who the murderers are. That’s the downside of looking up background information on the internet, right there.

            What I can give you is a reason as to why Truman Capote started writing this book. He heard about the four murders of the Capote family and he decided to travel to Kansas to write about the crime. At the time, no one knew who the murderer was. They, like everyone else were left in just as much mystery. Capote and his fellow author and friend, Nelle Harper Lee, talked to residents and investigators alike reporting on the crime.

The murderers were arrested six weeks after the murders and Capote spent six years working on the book. It became the one of the first works in the “true crime” genre. What is unique about this novel is that Capote looked at both the lives of the two parolees who committed the murders, the lives of the victims and the effect this had on their community. This is what makes this novel so unique from the rest and what helped it to pave the path for other non-fiction novels. 

Oh, the Irony

There are so many different way you can go about writing a novel, or really any piece of work, but with a murder that list is even greater because the content is already so rich, you really can't go wrong. However, I especially love the way that Capote has chosen depict the Clutter murder.

He begins simply by describing the morning of Herbert Clutter, innocently eating his breakfast and going work like any normal day. Then, he shifts to the two murders, and describes their day eating breakfast as well and acting perfectly normal. Capote continues to do this, quickly shifting between each side, slowly giving us a recap of the day’s events.

                What makes it interesting though is the fact that we as a reader know what’s going to happy, Perry and Dick are going to kill the entire Clutter family, and yet we’re reading about them drinking coffee and making cherry pie with their neighbors. He gives no indication of anything about to happen, and in fact makes it rather boring to read. He does this though to put the reader in the family’s situation. They have no idea of what’s to happen, so that’s how Capote wants the reader to feel. He makes it as innocent as possible to show the irony of the situation that we all know, yet no one else does. He makes it so that we’re just going through the day with the Clutter family, or with the murderers, yet we already know what’s going to happen and it’s a frustrating thing, especially with the mindless mundane tasks that each are performing. You want to be able to tell them what’s going to happen and to either get out or do something important, yet all we can do is read the descriptions. Capote wants the reader to feel helpless, just as the Clutter’s did on that fateful night.

Surprise Alert!

Upon actually getting a chance to crack the binding in the book, finally, I was actually surprised to find out how the book was written.

I knew it was going to be about the murders of Clutter family. I knew that Truman Capote had conducted interviews other local residents in the town and had looked into the actual evidence on the case. What I did not expect was an in-depth look into this family's life.

This book reads like a story and not like a man who is merely reporting on the murder he researched. We learn about who each character is, what makes them tick, their fears, wishes, habits and views.

We are also learning about another side story with two characters named Dick and Perry. They were in prison and from the lengthy description about their tattoos, they seem like tough guys who mean business. I'm guessing they are the murderers (I know I mentioned that I already read online who murdered the Clutters, but I don't remember their names and it seems safe to judge that these two side characters that can wield guns seem like likely suspects).

As of right now, all we know is that the day we have read about thus far is the last day that the Clutters were seen alive (ah, what a perfect way to leave all you readers hanging. But at least we have the same amount of knowledge for once and you know I'm not being a jerk and holding out on you).

Capote has found a way to keep the reader hanging off of every moment. From learning about all the nitty-gritty details about these people's lives I kept wanting to read on almost for the sake of understanding the characters. It's almost like hearing some great gossip or getting to open up someone's brain and see how they truly operate. Either way it's fascinating.

On top of this, Capote sometimes puts little cliffhangers at the end of certain paragraph breaks to make sure you aren't getting too bored or wondering when everything is going to be revealed. He tricks you into thinking that there is going to be some sort of answer in the next section, which there hasn't been. It still kept me reading and like a fool I thought, "maybe this paragraph". I was wrong every time. Maybe soon I'll be right.

Timing is EVERYTHING

The first forty pages of the novel provide a great deal of context for the "exceptional happenings" that are to take place later on in the story. Capote does this in such a manner that the reader does not realize just how much information about the time frame in which the book is set, because the period comes alive as if one is residing within it alongside the characters.

Firstly, this is a decade that precedes "Leave it to Beaver", so it is setting the stage for the golden age of the nuclear family. The unit in and of itself - the closeness and amount of respect is crucial, for the juxtaposition with the events of the narrative make it all the more horrifying.

Secondly, the issue of masculinity is prominent, especially with Mr. Clutter and the two perpetrators, Perry and Dick. One must work to earn his own, and then fight tooth and nail to keep it and prosper, or simply attempt to take it from another who has gone through such processes and then flee to Mexico. At the end of the day, it is all about monetary value equivocating to manhood. This is the ultimate goal, for better or worse, of our main characters.

Thirdly, the great depression has just ended. Granted, this theme ties into the previous idea, however, it holds weight all its own. During the recession and the second world war, fraternity and community were upheld to levels like never before. This is why the crimes that have yet to happen in the book have such an impact on the town of Holcomb - the contrast is, much like the passage of time in the pages, like day and night.

Where?

I just bought this book and it might be hard to write a whole blog post about where it took place, but I'll try my best.


Truman Capote wrote the novel In Cold Blood about a murder in 1959. The murder he wrote about took place in a small town called Holcomb, Kansas,which is located on the country-side, a place where people felt safe and could sleep sound at night. In the very first paragraph Capote says, "The land is flat, and the views are awesomely extensive;horses, herds of cattle, a white cluster of grain elevators rising as gracefully as Greek temples are visible long before a traveler reaches them."

Capote includes where the victims spent their time at places like school and work, like any good writer would. By doing this, the author creates a vivid picture in our minds of what life was like in the small town of Holcomb before the tragic murder that no one could predict took place.

Capote takes the readers on the journey of the victims, the Clutter family. He takes us to Mrs. Clutter's doctors appointments and to school with their children. He shows the aspects of life that the killers had no way of knowing, making people wonder how anyone could commit those gruesome crimes to anyone, especially to a family they did not even know. The novel also describes the house before, when everything was normal, their everyday lives and how it was just ripped out from underneath of them in a place that was supposed to be comforting and safe. Capote captures the essence with vivid description of where the family was and how everything changed in their "safe haven."

The Why Factor: Inspirations and Impact

Truman Capote spent his whole life writing; from the time he was eleven until his death.  He has written elitist novels before like Breakfast at Tiffany’s and wanted to write something different, something meaningful. As Abby mentioned below, his next dream was to write “an epic nonfiction novel.” What first sent him in the direction of the novel was a 300-word article in the New York Times about the murders of the Clutter family in Kansas. He knew just from reading these words that there was a deeper story behind this and he was going to be the one to reveal it, resulting in one of the most popular novels of all time.

                Capote spent the next six years interviewing the residents of the town, including the two murderers, taking over 8,000 pages of notes, resulting in his novel In Cold Blood. He discovered why the murderers chose this family. Apparently a fellow inmate told them that the Clutter family had valuables stored away at the house, which turned out to be false.

                That covers the why he wrote it and why the crime was committed, but there’s also the bigger question of why this novel still has such an impact on the world when it was written, and why is still does today. At the time of the murders in 1959, America was in a time of economic boom still reminiscent of the end of the Second World War, and it was full of close-knit families like the Clutters.  Never was a murder like this more unexpected, especially to such an upstanding family. This ensued paranoia and discomfort to people all over the world, making many aware of the horror that could happen to anyone for no reason at all. Capote gripped onto this idea in the writing of his novel, publishing it and creating what is now known as crime genre, inspiring many other authors to do the same.

There has also been speculation that Capote had an intimate relationship with one of the murderers, Perry Smith. He has been depicted as the more guilt-ridden and sensitive of the two, which may also have motivated Capote in writing the novel; he may have tried to redeem Smith in a way, if they were in fact involved. Nothing has been proven of course, but the rumors do exist.

                There is no doubt, however, that no matter the reason for why Capote wrote the novel, it sparked a reaction from people. Whether it be fear and awareness in people, or inspiration for writers everywhere, Capote managed to successfully write and epic novel, one that will be talked about for many years to come. 

The Whatsies: Part 2 of 5

So, as Kelly already stated, we're going to tackle this first time blog post as a way to let everybody else know what this book is all about through the basic five questions: Who, what, where when, and why?

Considering I have yet to buy the book, nor do I know too much about it, I'm taking this blog post as an opportunity to not only inform others, but myself. My knowledge of this book simply extends to discussions we have in class within our groups, so bear with me. 

The history of "In Cold Blood" essentially starts in Europe, before the tragic events this book is actually based on, even happen. Our author, Truman Capote, skipped college and moved across seas. He began writing short stories and novels, and made himself an important figure in film and stage. After writing "Breakfast at Tiffany's" he decidedly got bored with his work and moved back to the States. It was at this time he had hoped to write, and I quote, "An epic nonfiction novel."

That "epic" novel is "In Cold Blood." His idea behind the story came from a small newspaper article detailing the gruesome murders of a wealthy farmer and his family in 1959. Capote and his BFF Nelle Harper Lee (which is pretty cool) traveled to Kansas soon after looking to research further into the crimes. After almost six years of interviewing residents, investigators, and of course, the two murderers, "In Cold Blood' was released.

So what happened? Herbert Clutter was a devout Methodist, and wealthy farmer, widely respected throughout the community. Richard "Dick" Hickock and Perry Edward Smith were two ex-convicts informed by a fellow prisoner (claiming to be a former Clutter farmhand) that the Clutters secretly kept cash and other valuables stashed away on their property. From here, Hickock and Smith hatched a plan to commit a robbery and leave no witnesses. In November of 1959, the two convicts entered the Clutter home while the family slept, and to no avail, found nothing. Turns out that guy back in prison had lied...jerk. With that, Hickock and Smith murdered Herb Clutter, his wife, and two of his children. Brutal.

This book was the first of its kind during that time period. It has been regarded as the pioneering work of the true crime genre and some critics consider Copote's work to be the original non-fiction novel. In Cold Blood  is said to be paced at a slower rate, allowing Copote to detail each person related to the crime, supposedly, to build suspense. He wanted his novel to fell so much like a fiction novel, people forgot it wasn't. 

Should provide for an interesting read...

~Abby Barufaldi