- This topic has 25 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 1 week ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
What flaws did you have issues with in The Grey Wolf? Are these flaws forgivable? Why or why not?
We never want to get too negative about books, we’re here to appreciate them. But we do want to acknowledge and explore all aspects of the books we discuss, as objectively as possible. Our philosophy is that nothing in life is perfect, but there can be beauty or a lesson to be learned in the imperfections.
-
What I have an issue with is putting Robert who is not a priest in the confessional because the priest on duty is too tired. I understand that priests get tired on a human level, but Catholics believe the priest acts in the person of Christ in certain sacramental situations of which confession is one. That action in the person of Christ is as sacred as the seal of confession. No priest would put someone in the confessional who could not give absolution because that replacement would not have the sacramental power to act in the person of Christ. To me, it seems that the act of absolution is trivialized and the sacred role of the priest therein. That’s why I do not find this flaw forgivable. There should have been some other way than the confessional for Brother Robert to find out about the plot to poison the water.
-
Nancy, I’m not Catholic, so that didn’t resonate the same with me as it did with you, but I totally respect your opinion on the matter.
-
-
I so thoroughly enjoyed this book that I tended to not think too hard about whether or not I thought something was totally feasible and just went along for the ride, admiring the creativity, but if there’s one thing that stuck in my mind that I thought was particularly stretching it a bit, it would be how Armand made the connection to the motivation behind why the religious singing trio developed their fondness for singing about the letter B. I grant you that perhaps they did indeed decide to watch Sesame Street to relieve their stresses when they were in school, but I didn’t think it was something that made a logical “aha!” moment. As in, “oh yes, of course! They must have watched Sesame Street together as adults for exactly this reason.” I just didn’t think that would be the first (and last) logical assumption to make.
Another thing that bothered me a bit is the timing between when Armand told Jean Caron to go to Hell and the rapidity of her response, managing to send poor Charles off to the apartment to break in within a very short time. Armand and Reine-Marie were in their backyard when Armand finally hung up on JC; they then walked over to the Bistro, and while there, received the call from their alarm security company which heralded the break-in. Armand hadn’t even had time to eat his pain au chocolat (which Rosa planted her beak into)! So was Charles with Jean Caron when she made the call, and then she immediately came up with this plan and sent him off to do it? And he ran off and did it, immediately, without discussion? Surely it would take some time to think about and plan all of this, let alone get there and pull it off?
-
Totally agree with both of your points. Also, in the confessional, I find it hard that Brother Robert would recognize Sebastian’s voice, but not the reverse.
As for the second point, that was so absurd to me. In addition to what you mentioned, how did they know the Gamache’s had a cleaner (that’s where they got the key), how did they know Gamache’s jacket would be hanging right by the door, and so on.
-
Yes! I had forgotten about that key. JC would have had to have had time to plan stealing that. So unless we haven’t seen the whole picture yet, that didn’t make total sense to me.
-
-
I agree with you Susan, and had the same experience when reading this book – I enjoyed it thoroughly and gave little thought to any issues. But reading the points here and in other threads, I find myself nodding and agreeing with each comment. I hadn’t thought about the rapidity of JC’s response and the plan with the key, but yes, that sequence of events doesn’t make sense.
However, there is one aspect of The Grey Wolf that I’m keeping in mind with some, not all, of these issues, which is that The Black Wolf may change the narrative still and that LP has reserved the right to do so with the cliffhanger aspect of this book. For example, the explanation is couched as a theory, with doubtful language attached. “You have a theory?” “I think this must be nuts, but I suspect he was the one in the confessional.” Ch. 46.
-
Yes, Katherine, I think you’re onto something with that. I do expect that we’re not done with all the surprises from this book just yet.
-
-
I agree, Susan. The letter B thread was a bit of a stretch for me. I’m always wary of cultural references to TV and movies because I think they don’t always “age well” as some readers might not understand the references either because of culture or age. Granted, Sesame Street is pretty well universally known but as you say it isn’t an assumption easy to jump to. I hadn’t put together that the timing of the action around Gamache’s apartment is off, but now that you mention it…it makes sense/no sense? 🙂
-
-
I also respect Nancy’s perspective here although I don’t consider it unforgivable for me. I am also Catholic although, full disclosure here, mostly in the mold of Armand and his relationship with the Church that Jean-Guy challenges Armand about. I would likely be more comfortable in St. Thomas’ than in quite a number of Roman Catholic parishes.
I have known individual priests who are arrogant, self-absorbed and unworthy of the trust and respect of the office. To be clear, they are a very small minority; most of the men who are priests are as human as the next guy but still live up to their vows and serve sincerely and well. I have also seen a powerful clerical culture that is willing to cover up for priests who have betrayed their vows and the trust of those they are to serve.
So, I consider this implausible but not entirely out of the realm of possible. In general, I still struggle to find all of the pieces and connections in the plot. I am uncertain if that is just me or if LP has used her editorial license to get us to a conclusion. In any case, I am enjoying the search.
I know I will learn more and find my reading informed by all the comments here and thank everyone who participates.
-
I absolutely enjoyed The Grey Wolf, but I do admit that I felt the whole angelica / chartreuse recipe plotline was a bit convoluted. Why, if there was such an urgency to the terrorist threat, would Jeanne and Dom Philippe drop such cryptic breadcrumbs, knowing time was of the essence, but forcing Isabelle to fly to Rome and France to figure out what’s going on? Gamache also has to venture far afield to Blanc Sablon. James’ reluctance to talk and hiding his maps, journals and computer made more sense because he felt like he was being watched and followed. Where he hid them made more sense too. I guess I can forgive Jeanne and Dom Philippe’s plan because they felt under threat too and their plan is in keeping with Dom Philippe’s world of monasteries and religious orders, but the logistics weren’t fully realistic. I still really enjoyed Isabelle’s adventures at the Vatican and at Grande Chartreuse.
-
On page 314, Valerie states that the Rousseaus (Dom Philippe and his family) “were people who solved their own problems. It would never occur to them to go to the police. If there was trouble, the police came to them.” I think this is why Dom Philippe drops “bread crumbs” for Armand and, when that didn’t work, he went to Jeanne, his niece, and they both went to Armand.
-
Yes, that’s true Nancy. Good point.
-
-
-
I picked something that was more of a puzzler for me rather than a flaw so it’s certainly forgivable. I am not sure I really understood why David Lavigne was involved in overthrowing the government. What was his motivation, especially given he was an expert in terrorism and a senior RCMP officer? His villainous turn was, of course, a blow to Gamache and yet another confidant and friend who betrays him, but I didn’t feel Lavigne was fully fleshed out so that I understood his actions. Anyone have any thoughts about him?
-
On page 395, Lavigne demands the notebooks that Charles had kept. So, there has to be something in the first one that reveals more information about Lavigne’s motivation for being involved in poisoning the water. I wonder if he was promised something from Lauzon for his participation.
-
Good point, Nancy – I think you’re right about that. Lavigne definitely wanted those notebooks, and seemed extremely motivated to get them— not out of desperation, as maybe a person under pressure to do bad things might be. Whatever was personally motivating him, he seemed to have no conscience about the right or wrong of it, and I assumed that he was going reap a great personal gain from the act. And the way he played and betrayed Armand seemed to me a rejection of the things that Armand stands for; he seemed to hold him in contempt for trusting him because he’d seen him do a good deed, and weak because he seemed to fall for Gauthier’s story. I think Lavigne’s motivation is going to turn out to be a thirst for power and a position of strength, and probably profit. Maybe we’ll learn more about him as a person in The Black Wolf.
-
Well said. That does make sense to me.
-
-
-
-
If I were to be critical of an aspect of the book it would be how some characters delayed reaching out to several other characters in ways that just seemed unlikely to me. Why would Gamache let his feelings for Jeanne Caron cloud his judgement so much that he doesn’t go to question her even after he realizes she has slipped the note into his jacket? Why does Dom Philippe see Gamache in Three Pines but instead of talking with him goes through an elaborate ruse with the cocktail? Those for me stretched plausibility but, obviously, LP wanted to draw out the suspense and if the conversations in either of these cases happened earlier in the book, it would have been a lot shorter. Minor quibbles really, as I overall enjoyed the book. 😀
-
I realize this is getting out over my skis here but I think it would be interesting to revisit this question and our answers after reading “The Black Wolf.” It is clear Armand, Jean-Guy and Isabelle are going to be following the leads in that second notebook and I kind of expect some of these loose ends are going to be connected then. Well, at least I hope so!
-
Excellent idea, Jane! And I do expect some of these questions will be answered….well, I hope so, too!
-
Let’s do it! We just need someone to remember and bring it up in November (spoiler alert: it won’t be me with my terrible memory!)
-
-
-
“Flaws” is a big word, and I think my comments are more in the category of “I wish that…”
One point is about substance, one about style. Substance first.
There are three central female characters in the inner circle: Isabelle, Reine Marie, and Annie. I want to know more about them. They mostly appear as team players and emotional support persons. And yet, it is clear that all three are, in their own right, fiercely intelligent and very capable. Reine Marie was featured more in The World of Curiosities, and Isabelle is stepping out of the shadows in The Grey Wolf. I hope this trend continues. I hope they get more agency.
Style: reading The Grey Wolf for the first time, I felt oddly stressed because I could not follow the plot line. I blamed it on being too tired when I was reading. I am now on my second read-through, and I noticed something that seems different from previous books and has me wondering if LP has a new editor. You know how young people, who have grown up with texts containing hyperlinks, tend to construct narratives differently? They read the main text, then click on the link, read a completely different though related bit of information, and then go back to the main text. Reading The Grey Wolf felt to me like the narrative contained hyperlinks. Example: Gamache gets on the plane, they fly into bad weather, and he recalls the meeting with his RCMP friend (that story of this important meeting being the hyperlink) and then we are back in the plane. The stylistic choice of inserting important information into the narrative as a retrospective made me feel like I was inside a mind that was literally losing the plot: slightly chaotic, disjointed, confused. Maybe that’s the desired effect. Gamache is struggling. I hope not. But I personally would want my editor to smooth out the plot a bit. Especially since it was, as noted by others, very complex. -
I have not seen this mentioned here yet, or maybe I missed the conversation where this might have been mentioned, if so, I apologize. My copy seems to have a flaw in editing, so this is not a big issue and doesn’t reflect the quality of the book, the writing or anything really. It seems to be a mistake, or to me it seems like a mistake. Did anyone else have a duplication in text in Chapter 21? On page 179, Armand and Jean-Guy are on the shores of the lake talking about blueberries and then the scene ends with “Tell me about the wolf.” The wolf. Then, on page 185, the scene is repeated and again blueberries and “Tell me about the wolf.”
Was this an editing error? Or something Louise did on purpose, and if so, why do you think she did this?
-
I know the passage you’re speaking of, and I assumed it was a literary choice and not an error. I enjoyed that back and forth narrative; it made me stop and think – “oh, and that’s what came before! and here we are at that same moment again, seamlessly melding together”. That said, I may be totally wrong, and it might indeed have been a mistake. If it was, though, it didn’t bother me, and I thought it worked effectively. There’s a lot of timing elements in this book, with simultaneous actions occurring concerning various characters. As I mentioned in another post, I didn’t think the timing of the break-in at Armand’s apartment was logical compared to the timing of the phone calls he’d been receiving. But I think overall the more chaotic back and forth narrative added to the tension and that suited this story very well.
-
I agree with you, Susan A, I think it was literary choice. I don’t think Armand was ready to tell Jean-Guy about the wolf the first time. But then, not sleeping and going outside to walk and think, a wolf confronts him and then Armand hears something bigger which he thinks is a bear. It’s Jean-Guy. So, I think then Armand is ready to tell Jean-Guy about the wolf.
-
Thank you Susan and Nancy. I respect and value your opinion very much. When I read this part, It confused me and took me out of the book with the thought that it was an editorial mistake (not a big deal to me at all). It’s so helpful to know your expert opinions on all the different aspects of the book. I will go back and read it again, now knowing that it was a literary choice and think about why Louise made this choice, which makes this book even more interesting to me.
I am not that familiar with not completely straight forward literary writing styles and I am reading another book right now that confuses me quite a bit (she has won the Pulitzer Prize, so the confusing sentences and passages are not mistakes, I don’t believe).
-
-
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.