Ms. Prose is a talented author. I thoroughly enjoyed the development of the story and the unfolding of the plot – until I got to the last couple of chapters and discovered the book’s intent was to redefine Truth and make Justice subjective.
The main character, Molly Gray, (a name ironic now that I realize it since she decides in the end that there is room for “versions and variations [of the truth], for shades of gray”), strikes one at first as a loveable albeit, quirky young woman. Raised by her dear grandmother, some of Molly’s ways are a bit old fashioned. The reader soon understands she must be on a spectrum and she is even described by other characters as “special”. She is quite OCD and a true clean freak. Her life then as a maid, as you can imagine, creates many delightfully humorous occasions for her to endear herself to the reader. When Molly is accused of the murder of a wealthy patron of the hotel, named Mr. Black, she finds out who her real friends are when they come to her aid. As a reader, the problem arose when –
***Spoilers***
In the last third of the book, Molly started referring to truth as “her truth”. My spidey-sense prickled. Isn’t Truth objective?
I lost all interest when, in the epilogue, the reader even gets a preachy diatribe from the author through Molly about how there is no absolute truth. Molly has come to realize that truth, and even justice, are subjective. It is in the last few chapters of the book that the reader discovers that Molly has committed a mercy killing of her beloved grandmother at her grandmother’s request when her grandmother could not have been more than moments from passing away from natural causes due to an illness. The reader also discovers that Molly has withheld the identity of the murderer of Mr. Black because she believes Mr. Black deserved to die. Based on Molly’s new philosophy, murder can be justified outside the laws of morals – in a grayer area.
This philosophy would have the reader believe that since there is no absolute truth, murder is justifiable. It would follow then that, depending on a person’s perspective, murdering another human being is justifiable no matter what. Their truth – their justice. Right?
Sure enough, Molly comes to this shocking conclusion – Those who are mistreated (even those who feel subjected) are, Molly concludes, given license to take justice into their own hands. Mr. Black was a rude, rich man who abused his wife – surely it is justified that, according to Molly’s new “subjective truth” theory, his murderer suffocated him in his inebriated state… even though his current wife had the financial and physical freedom to escape.
I don’t say “shocking conclusion” lightly. This shift for Molly goes against everything the reader was led to believe about her character, her obsessive fixation on order.
The hypocrisy that, juxtaposed to her obsessive, compulsive desire for order, she would commit murder or allow for murder is hard to swallow. Perhaps this sudden revelation of Molly’s unbalanced nature at the end of the book aligns with her disturbingly violent inner thoughts the readers notes from early on in the book. Thoughts such as: “I imagine a big red bucket of soapy water and pushing his bulbous head into it.” Or: “I want to gouge out her eyes” Or: “I imagine taking the fork and from my place setting and stabbing him with it” And many more disturbing ideations.
It’s possible that Molly’s imbalance began after she murdered her grandmother. That’s certainly when things seemed to begin to be in upheaval for Molly. Unable to pay rent, friendless, disturbing ideations, and withholding the identity of a murderer. Maybe her conscience couldn’t justify what she’d done to her grandmother and she cracked. She needed to justify, or “order”, her actions around a new philosophy.
In the first half of the book Molly tells the police detective that she disagreed with her grandmother’s idea that truth is subjective. Molly states then that she believes truth is absolute. But, for a girl brought up idolizing her grandmother, the grandmother who pressured her into assisting her suicide, perhaps Molly feels compelled to redefine truth and justice to rectify her guilt of participating in a mercy killing – a killing that should have horrified her orderly nature.
I was sickened by the philosophy Ms. Prose would have the reader swallow. I refuse to believe there is no ultimate Truth and that justice is not clearly defined – even if only to prevent utter chaos! Yes, mankind is responsible for upholding justice and, since mankind is not perfect, mistakes and deceit happen. Sometimes the innocent are marginalized and the guilty walk free. This does not mean that fundamental Truth and Justice do not exist. If we believe otherwise, we invite chaos.
If there is no absolute Truth, one can create their own truth and if there is no understanding of justice – well then [insert any heinous crime committed against another human being] is justifiable in the mind of the transgressor. Someone with their own definition of truth or perception of reality can decide that murder, theft, assault, or abuse is justified.
In closing, while the book started off SO GOOD, I cannot recommend it on moral grounds. I strive to live by the motto Esse Quam Videri – To be, rather than to seem. “To be”, necessitates the belief in a fundamental blue print for Truth which cannot be altered by perspective or societal trends. “To seem”, on the other hand, although quite vogue, is subjective and as futile as chasing after the wind.
E.A. Henson Books 