WOW !! and thank you HP !! It does make a great deal of difference in trying to determine her attitude to actually see her and hear her voice. The friend who told me about this originally (in the Books-A-Million) said something to the effect that the writer seemed really uncaring and tried to make light of what she did. (Then my friend said "she helped hit this woman in the head with a brick about forty times ! That sounds pretty serious to me.")
Props to Ian Rankin for hanging in there with the tough questions. I had the feeling that he was not satisfied, either. She tried to distance herself from what she had done (helped another person) when the diaries made clear that she had helped to plan it from the get-go. She seemed to be making excuses for herself (my parents' marriage was breaking up, we were getting ready to leave the country, Pauline would have committed suicide if I hadn't helped her, etc). Then it was I felt, I thought, I did my time, I would have suffered more if I had had to stay longer in jail. She never said a word about the poor woman and the rest of her family. She never said that she had held the brick in her hand, had put it inside the hose, had carried it, and had swung it to hit her victim enough times so that she herself was covered in blood. I had no feeling of real remorse, regret, empathy. No words to the effect that what she had done would always haunt her, and the feeling of guilt was still with her.
I felt that, in her mind, someone else had committed the crime. That someone had been convicted and punished, and now that was over, and she was no longer that person. Who knows what kind of psychiatric help she has had and how her treatment may have shaped her attitudes.
I watch lots of "true crime" on TV, and have seen criminals try to weasel out of what they have done, make excuses, etc. But I have also seen some who cried during their confession, expressed great regret, and said over and over that they would turn back time if they could.
The English are world-famous for their quiet reserve. And Americans have come to expect lots of yelling and screaming everywhere from the reality programs, which are staged, to real criminal investigations. I hope that in her heart of hearts, Ms. Perry knows and admits to herself that the crime happened and that she did, in fact, help to kill someone. She does, in fact, have to deal with it somehow to be able to live a useful life and continue to write, since she does have lots of fans and her writing is enjoyed by many. She has every right to that. But what happened in the past can't just be stapled into a brown paper bag and put in the back of the top shelf of the pantry.
Pauline, on the other hand, had a very different affect and demeanor. It has been years ago, but it seems that I remember still photos and reading an article, which would probably have been in our "People" magazine. Then, again, it may have been part of a television program. I remember her in a round, fenced area with her horses, all covered up, very shy, and seemingly ashamed. She seemed to be in a self-imposed exile, almost nun-like, working with her horses and did not seem to be close to anyone, family or friends. I felt sorry for her. The author of the article (or narrator of the program) gave the impression that the questions had been answered; now people knew where she was and what she was doing, and she should be left alone and not be bothered by the press again.
I still remember the way that I felt when my friend said she thought the author was Ruth Rendell. I felt horrified, unbelieving, betrayed. Some readers feel very close to the writers that they admire. They have come to trust them. I trust Baroness Rendell, although I have never met her or talked to her, and probably never will. I believe that her books tell us her story, and that is the way she prefers it to be.
I learned a great lesson some years ago. I read that James Brown had been arrested and was in jail, and I read about his crime. When I talked to my brother about it, he told me, " . . . . ., we've just got to realize that some of these people we idolize are not all nice people." My brother was able to find his address in jail and wrote to him often while he served his sentence. He committed crimes, and we knew about them. He still was a genius and a great entertainer. But he was honest.
This discussion has been great !! The movie remains one of my favorites, and both actresses did wonderful jobs with their roles. The real story stays with us, along with knowing the fact that there are aspects of it that we will never know. It remains a cautionary tale that should not be forgotten; and it's true that the truth is stranger than fiction.
Yodi
reply
share
tgrrrsss
14 years ago
It's certainly true to say there is a detached coolness about Anne Perry and I too felt there was an element of someone else/another time about it.
Regarding Pauline Parker well she seems a rather strange woman from the few accounts I've seen.
One curious point about her is this she seemed all too willing to have an animal put down without too much thought, she is devoutly religious but - many people have and continue to commit murder and justify it in the name of religion so I don't buy that too much.
By all accounts she's had a sad life and has paid more of a price than Juliet.
Curiously both women deny homosexuality but neither woman ever married.....
reply
share
MysteryReaderReturns
14 years ago
I agree with you, tgrrrsss, there is a detached coolness about Anne Perry. She's tried to push it under the rug & religion has helped, but I bet she wakes up every morning wondering why she did what she did as a teenager.
If you hate Jesus Christ and are 100% proud of it, copy this and make it your signature!
reply
share