Reading Response: The Virgin Suicides

“The Virgin Suicides” by Jeffrey Eugenides shows a unique way of writing a mystery. Because this entire book is only depicted through the perspectives of a group of boys that are acquaintances of the Lisbon sisters. So we only know as much as them which continues the mystery even when the book is over. But this doesn’t mean there aren’t supposed causes for their deaths. For example, the parents restricted them as much as they did even as they got older, triggered Cecelia’s death. The rest were practically hypocrisies and fell like dominos.  

There were lots of symbols that indicated the Lisbon girls’ being adolescentes unfortunately with the same restrictions. For example, they weren’t allowed to wear makeup even the littlest amounts while most teenagers were allowed to do such things. There were also multiple signs of rebellion which indicates the girls growing out of their restrictions. One of the girls waxed her mustache area but had to secretly because it was against her parents’ rules.

As I previously stated these girls got older but their restrictions remained. This is what I think caused Cecelia’s death. Cecelia’s bravery, I guess, to take that big step probably showed the other girls that they could do it too. That’s eventually ended up in every single sister committing suicide.

But then again this is just a theory. We don’t even know if this was murder. It could’ve been suicide out of a feeling of obligation. Or it probably wasn’t a mystery at all. And it was just suicide to escape their current lives.

Reading Response: One Two Buckle My Shoe

         Now that I’ve come to the completion of “One Two… Shoe” I’ve realized that I’m not exactly sure who the protagonist and antagonist is. And I think this was the author’s purpose. Because although I was sure in the beginning, that the kidnapper/ rapist/ murderer was the antagonist and Emily, the victim, was the clear protagonist, surprisingly now I’m not so sure. This leads me to think that a present theme in this book is that everyone starts out as an innocent person, but there surroundings affect who they become. So there’s a good little boy or girl in everyone, no matter how deep.

When George, the chocolate man, was little, he was a real mommy’s boy. He had his moments and got scared like the rest of us. Only, he would have vivid flashbacks of when he’d get locked in a closet because he was being an immature kid. George suffered mental torment from his mother and this appears to be the fuse for his constant murders. He copes in making little bays feel as helpless as he was at the time. Yet he still thinks of his mother as an angel. Now this kind of torture does not turn to drastic measures all the time, but with George’s obsessive-compulsive disorder it’s taken to extremes. So George only goes to these horrid measures to cope with his vivid past.

I think this theme is portrayed beautifully throughout this book. As George does not kidnap a little boy, he accidentally takes Emily instead. But he does not kill her and they actually form quite a unique relationship. Emily sort of plays the absent role of his mother once she figures just how vulnerable his emotional state really is. And once George sees this he comes to be fond of Emily and does not want to kill her, even when he has to because the police were closing in on him. Emily brings out this harmless side of him throughout the story, and even when he’s caught and the police rescue her, she still believes that he’s a good child, just emotionally scarred. With the last line referencing his obsessive-compulsive disorder, “One two three four five six seven, all good children go to heaven.”

As this book completely changes the stereotypes for murderers and kidnappers, it shows that everyone, even the murderer, was once a good little boy. And I figured this as I maneuvered through George’s complicated past.