Question #4: Laurent Lepage

[[deleted user]]

What were your impressions of Laurent's storytelling and "crying wolf?" Did you feel Laurent's murder was handled with appropriate respect and sensitivity? Did Louise Penny deal with the effects of Laurent's death on his friends and family effectively?

[Susan]

What an interesting question. And one that has helped me "name" one of the things that I didn't like about the start of the book. I felt that the opening scene of Laurent (when you don't know he is a child) was disconcerting and out of character with what followed. I also feel that if a small child were murdered in a village, there would be much more outpouring of grief. Instead, people fixate on the big gun. This comes to a head when Clara visits Laurent's mother and father and realizes that no one is reaching out to them. So long answer to your question - no, I don't think it was handled realistically - it was more a foil for the plot of the gun and the plans for the gun.

[Susan]

Susan wrote: "What an interesting question. And one that has helped me "name" one of the things that I didn't like about the start of the book. I felt that the opening scene of Laurent (when you don't know he is..."
You gave me a whole new way to look at the elements that you mentioned, Susan. The opening scene was quite different from the rest of the novel. I went back a few times to re-read it as I got further along in the book. I found it quite suspenseful. It did go along with Laurent's reputation for making things up as the reader is not sure whether it actually happened or it was part of his play acting.

I agree that there should have been more grief displayed in the village. Perhaps the lack of grief could be explained by the fact that Laurent was a bit of a nuisance, but then shouldn't people have felt guilty as well? I do think Penny portrayed the grief of Laurent's parents very well - they did not cope well and their grief was raw. I found the grief displayed by Armand and Jean-Guy to be very touching and was sometimes teary when they thought about Laurent or the vulnerability of their own children/grandchildren. I think the humanity of Armand Gamache is one of the central reasons for the success of the series.

I wonder if the fixation on the big gun was because time was of the essence. The novel takes place over a very short period of time. The plans for the gun had to be found before they got into the wrong hands, so perhaps concern for that search displaced all else. It would be interesting to see how the villagers fare and recover from the events in this novel. I think the whole episode - Laurent's murder and the discovery of the gun - would be most upsetting.

[Allison]

I also found the opening scene, in which Laurent is trying to get away from his pursuers, a little disconcerting. Mostly because in the next chapter we find out Laurent is a boy and the pursuers were imaginary ones. It was a bit of a twist and maybe came too early in the book. Maybe I didn't like being fooled right from the start and so blatantly! It kind of threw me off, and I'm not sure I liked the way it was done. On the other hand, it pointed to the incredibly active imagination of the child.

I agree also about the grief of Laurent's parents as being very real, although I wondered if the townsfolk were avoiding reaching out to them because of the suspicions surrounding Al's involvement.

[Susan]

Allison wrote: "I also found the opening scene, in which Laurent is trying to get away from his pursuers, a little disconcerting. Mostly because in the next chapter we find out Laurent is a boy and the pursuers we..."

True - the down side of small communities can be that they can very easily share the same views and reinforce each other's opinion in a way that urban dwellers can't (because we have lots of neighbours and rarely talk to most of them!)

[Maureen]

Poor Laurent--I felt he was so badly treated. Misunderstood, mocked and murdered. Even Gamache, who liked him, ended up more concerned about the gun. I keep trying to remember if there was even a funeral for the child. (Had to take the book back and can't recall. )

I've enjoyed a number of Penny's novels but felt that this one was a bit too ambitious. Perhaps Laurent's character was meant to pull us more into the narrative but it didn't work for me. While the interchanges between Clara and Evie were touching, the brutality of the child's death was never really addressed.

[Allison]

Maureen wrote: "Poor Laurent--I felt he was so badly treated. Misunderstood, mocked and murdered. Even Gamache, who liked him, ended up more concerned about the gun. I keep trying to remember if there was even a f..."

Maureen, I couldn't agree more. Poor Laurent. I felt this throughout the novel. Laurent does have a funeral ... not particularly intimate as the priest does not seem to know the family well. Al tries to play his guitar, but cannot and Evie helps him back to his seat.

This story was all about the gun, the gun, and quite frankly I was not too interested in the goings on re. the finding of the plans, the interrogation of the serial killer, etc. The humanity, and the opportunities to explore it in greater depth, seems to have played second fiddle to the arms race. Like you, I was not pulled into this narrative: I felt the first half of the book was more interesting than the latter half, which just seemed to peter out and was actually a chore for me to read. Perhaps not the finest work by the author? Am I being too harsh?

[Maureen]

Allison wrote: "Maureen wrote: "Poor Laurent--I felt he was so badly treated. Misunderstood, mocked and murdered. Even Gamache, who liked him, ended up more concerned about the gun. I keep trying to remember if th..."

Thanks, Allison, for filling in the blanks for me! :-)

Penny's a fine writer and I did enjoy some of her other books, thinking here of Still Life and Bury Your Dead. She's wonderful at creating atmosphere and, as has been mentioned, Inspector Gamache is a memorable character.

I do agree about this book. She missed a chance to better explore the sorrow, anger and horror people would naturally feel for the murder of a child. In my recollection, the resolution touched only briefly on the murderer's actions and motivation around Laurent's death in the closing chapters.

Perhaps it would have been a stronger story had Penny not tried to pull in the big guns, the CSIS, and a long cast of characters, many of whom were a distraction, as was pointed out in the book! Sometimes simple stories are the most powerful.

[Allison]

Maureen wrote: "Allison wrote: "Maureen wrote: "Poor Laurent--I felt he was so badly treated. Misunderstood, mocked and murdered. Even Gamache, who liked him, ended up more concerned about the gun. I keep trying t..."

Yes, and "the death of a few for the greater good" was repeatedly cited throughout the novel. I could not help but feel that Laurent's death was one of the few. Even Antoinette's death and the impact on the community seemed trivial. I think, Maureen, you are correct in saying that the author was a bit too ambitious here, and the whole serial killer tie-in was a little much.

And what was everyone's take on Al Lepage? I'm not sure why Penny gave him such a dark past. Was it just to throw us off the trail? I think my favourite character was actually Professor Rosenblatt, not Gamanche (who I thought was rather flat in this)... perhaps a follow-up to this novel will be in the works, since young officer Cohen named Gamanche, while in the car with screaming, serial killer Fleming.