Supernatural Fiction Readers discussion

Best-selling series author Jim Butcher was born in 1971 in Independence, Missouri, where he still lives with his wife and son. According to Wikipedia, his sisters introduced him to speculative fiction as a child, when he was sick with strep. That was the beginning of a lifelong interest; he decided on a writing career in his teens, and cites Tolkien, Lloyd Alexander and C. S. Lewis as major literary influences. Storm Front (2000) was his first novel, and kicked off his best known series, the Dresden Files.

Butcher acknowledges using Sherlock Holmes, Merlin, and Spider Man as partial models for Harry Dresden. I'd suggest that he probably also uses elements of the archetypal "tough P.I." type; what I've read here so far suggests a conscious blending of the urban fantasy sub-genre with the noir detective tradition. Harry's a far more winsome protagonist than, say, Hammet's Sam Spade, though; he's an accomplished master of the wisecrack, but he only dishes these out to people who actually evoke his ire, not instinctively or habitually to everybody.

As the urban fantasy genre evolved in recent decades, it tended to become somewhat heroine dominated (I'm speaking based on what I've read about it, not from very wide reading in it myself!), so that a male protagonist is almost going against the stream, an interesting reversal of the situation that exists in many types of fiction. Some of our members who are more familiar with the sub-genre might want to comment on how this book, and the series, fits into that wider literary context.

In reading reviews of this series here on Goodreads, one frequent criticism that I've noticed is directed at Harry's attitude towards women. Butcher brings that into the open early on, in this quote from Chapter 2 (Harry narrating): "Maybe my values are outdated, but I come from an old school of thought. I think men ought to treat women like something other than just shorter, weaker men with breasts. Try and convict me if I'm a bad person for thinking so. I enjoy treating a woman like a lady, opening doors for her, paying for shared meals, giving flowers --all that sort of thing." That could provide a fruitful springboard for quite a bit of discussion in this group, I'd imagine!

Like Faith Hunter in her Jane Yellowrock series, Butcher sets his tale in a major urban center (New Orleans in the case of the former, Chicago here). But Hunter is actually personally familiar with New Orleans, which makes it easier to use local color and evoke a sense of place. Butcher isn't a second City resident, and hails from out of state; so it's not obvious that he has any first-hand knowledge of his setting. As we get further into the book, maybe some members who are familiar with Chicago can comment on how well he does at bringing it to life. (I spent a month in Chicago in January 1979 --yes, I survived the blizzard of '79, which wasn't on my schedule when I came!-- but I'm nowhere near as familiar with the city as a resident or frequent visitor would be, and my experience is over 30 years old.)

With Goodreads' introduction, some time ago, of spoiler tags to hide comments that some readers might find to be a spoiler, it won't be necessary to create a spoiler thread, as long as we all remember to use the tags where appropriate. If anyone doesn't know how to do this, click on the "some html is okay" link right above the comment box.

One quick caveat: it's not a spoiler to say that early in this book, Harry's called in by the police to help investigate "a grisly double murder committed with black magic," since (at least in the mass-market paperback edition) that information is part of the cover copy. But when they say grisly, they mean it; be warned, the crime scene is not for the squeamish (though reading a description of it isn't as awful an experience as actually seeing it would be!).

Werner wrote: "Best-selling series author Jim Butcher was born in 1971 in Independence, Missouri, where he still lives with his wife and son. According to Wikipedia, his sisters introduced him to speculative fic..."

I love the noirish feel of the opening and the narrator's fresh voice. It's a great premise--a hard-boiled-detective wizard with a yellow pages listing. Using a mail carrier as a foil worked well to introduce us to this world.

Harry's attitude toward women is both sweet and condescending (I didn't like the "weaker" bit) but makes sense to me in the overall fleshing out of his character.

What is perhaps trickier for the author is Harry's pronouncement that "Women are better at hating than men" (22). Conceivably, since Harry is a wizard, he has more access to universal "truths" than do mere mortals, and a declaration assumes a different heft than an attitude. The other characters take this at face value (which means it's true?), but I would have liked some substantiation of this statement. When I consider my idea of ultimate hating, I picture unibombers or campus shooters or serial killers. Not many women among these numbers.

So, provocative question: Are women better haters than men?

Personally, I don't think women as a group hate more strongly than men (and they may actually, as a group, be less inclined to resort to violence to express it than males are, probably because of the way that they're brought up), though there's a lot of individual variation in both genders, and large numbers of individuals in both are pretty proficient at it. :-( Harry is thinking in terms of the stereotype that women are more emotional than men. They're certainly freer, in most cultures, to express emotion than males usually are; and there may be evidence that the female gender tends more to right-brain than left-brain dominance (not that a dominance on either side is any better than the other --just different!). But I haven't noticed that that translates into stronger hatreds on the distaff side. Actually, Harry's listeners don't take that statement at face value. Lt. Murphy calls him a "chauvinist pig" (though I don't think he meant it invidiously), and forces him to admit that a man could have committed the crime. (Murphy comes across as a strong, competent female character, BTW.)

The "weaker" observation, I think, simply reflects the fact that the "average" female has less upper body strength than the "average" male; if you plot both gender's scores for that on superimposed line graphs, they'll both show as a bell-shaped curve, with the top of the women's bell closer to the lower end than the top of the men's. But again, there's a wide individual variance; many women are stronger than some men, and some women are stronger than most men, which militates against the stereotype.

I agree that Harry's attitude is part of the fleshing out of his character; I don't see it as a condescending view --and, to a degree, share some of it, though I don't make a point of opening a door for a female unless I happen to precede her to it, and don't pick Barb flowers half as often as I should. (And I'm not against a lady treating a guy to a shared meal.) That's not an attitude born of a view of women as inferior, IMO, but the reverse; it's a kind of visceral, hardwired instinct in guys to recognize women as superior, almost a goddess --not because there's any rational case that they ARE that superior, but because that's usually how we relate to our mom (who, for a male infant, embodies his concept of "female") when we're very little, and psychologically the same instinctive respect transfers subconsciously to other females. (If that's true, exploitative, chauvinistic sexism isn't the psychological norm for healthy males; it's an aberration caused by our individual and cultural fallen condition.) That's at the root of customs like a suitor kneeling to his lady when he proposes marriage; a subject kneels to his queen, and there's no shame in acknowledging it!

All of that said, I have a problem with Harry's approach to it, in more or less racing Murphy to a door so he can open it for her when he knows she doesn't like that, and would rather open her own doors. For me, respect for a female would mean abiding by her wishes; changing behavior in the way that she wants would be the more practical act of courteous service. But that's just me! (Now, I'll hush up for awhile, and let the rest of you post!)

Werner wrote: "All of that said, I have a problem with Harry's approach to it, in more or less racing Murphy to a door so he can open it for her when he knows she doesn't like that, and would rather open her own doors. For me, respect for a female would mean abiding by her wishes; changing behavior in the way that she wants would be the more practical act of courteous service. But that's just me! (Now, I'll hush up for awhile, and let the rest of you post!) "

This would be it exactly. I don't mind a door held or a guy helping me with my groceries. But in my 20s I hated it when ever time I lifted a computer monitor to move it, part of my job, some skinny engineer would grab it out of my hands and do something with it even when asked not to.

Treating women with respect means listening to them. Sometimes holding doors is the right thing and sometimes it isn't.

I watched the shows and need to grab the book before commenting much. My husband keeps discouraging me as he says the further you get into the series the more you see Harry behaving in a sexist manner. Thinking of women based on looks & ignoring women who don't meet his definition of attractive.

To answer about men in urban fantasy it's a hard question. If we go by early definitions and include authors who have consistently written in the UF genre since the 1980s when it came into its own there are a number of men. The best way to find them is go through anthologies by Ellen Datlow . Just reading the reviews is fascinating as people who have been reading UF since the 1980s are usually not into the newer authors and readers who have come into UF post-Butcher are wondering why "so many non-UF" stories were in the anthology. The reviews are almost as much fun as the stories once you know the history.

When you talk about who is popular in the "new" urban fantasy it's pretty much Jim Butcher and Kevin Hearne for men. Others are trying to break in but all men get compared to Butcher so it's hard for them to break in. So yeah most popular UF today is women and its hard to figure out what is UF and what's PNR as covers are similar and many books are shelved on both. It's taken me over a year to figure out what the difference is since there can be as much sex in both which can be frustrating for readers who don't want a lot of sex as shelves, covers, genre, and reviews are frequently useless in answering the question.

True, I love opened doors, proffered flowers (ah, so sweet), gifted dinners, but I also like to offer. If I'm passing a door and a man is close on my heels, I'll hold the door for him, too.

Tasha, I like your observations that they key is to listen to the other person, in this case, women, and that Harry rushes to open doors when he knows Murphy hates it. I'm leaning towards the notion that this might be a flirtatious dance on his part, similar to the way elementary students will chase or tussle with each other and that means they "like" each other. Or going back further (even before my time), when boys would dip girls' braids in the desk top ink wells.

Overall, my impression so far is that Harry is a sweet-tempered guy with a strong ethical base, a tad naive about women. I think he "likes" Murphy more than he knows.

This is no spoiler (because I'm not far enough into the book to tell), just a speculation; but does anyone besides me have a hunch that the double murder and Monica Sells' missing husband case will turn out to be related?

Werner wrote: "This is no spoiler (because I'm not far enough into the book to tell), just a speculation; but does anyone besides me have a hunch that the double murder and Monica Sells' missing husband case will..."

I'm with you there...not from any specific clues in the book, but I often find it to be the case in non-paranormal detective novels that two cases/one sleuth come together in the end.

I'd like to open a question about the medley of secondary paranormal characters. In the first fourth of the book we have met a grumpy faery, a lusty air spirit, and a vengeful vampire. What do you all think of this mixing of sub-genres? My limited experience tells me that vampirism is a distinct niche, and I had sort of expected that wizardry would be the same.

Are you finding these secondary characters enriching or distracting? I'm also wondering if the author is sort of playing with form. Thoughts?

Deb, I personally find the inclusion of multiple types of magical characters in the storyline to be enriching. To me, it suggests a larger magical world lurking behind the visible one, brimming with a lot more vistas and possibilities than concentration on just wizards (or just vampires, or just werewolves, or whatever) would do. These secondary characters don't distract me from the storyline, because they're an integral part of it. (And I also think that Butcher draws them wonderfully!)

That isn't to say that I think fiction that concentrates on just one supernatural sub-genre is inferior; the concentration can produce a deep, rich portrait. (And in short fiction especially, the length constraints usually really require a tighter focus.) But I don't think there's an iron-clad convention in supernatural fiction that sub-genres can't be mixed. Both the Twilight Saga and the Jane Yellowrock series, for instance, blend vampire and shapeshifter themes.

Another aspect of the book that's interesting is the magical system. It's been said that fictional magic is of two kinds, invocational and incantational. In the former sort, the practitioner invokes living supernatural entities to use power on his/her behalf, either by appealing to or bribing Satan or by trying to blasphemously coerce or manipulate God's power on our own behalf. (That's the type of magic in view in the Old Testament command, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," which Harry quotes here at one point.) In the latter type, the practitioner simply draws on morally and spiritually neutral, impersonal powers or energies that are pictured as latent in the world, using innate talent and/or knowledge of how they work. That's very much the type that we have here, and I think Butcher uses it very creatively.

Has anyone noticed that there are quite a few elements drawn from actual traditional lore that are used here? Examples include the belief that evil supernatural entities can't cross water, the possible role of sexual energy in magic, the use of circles, the belief in the power in knowledge of someone's true name, the role of fragments of someone's physical person (hair, blood, etc.) in rituals of "sympathetic" or imitative magic, etc.

Hey, if I'm ever in Chicago again, I definitely want to eat at McAnally's. :-) (I don't usually eat at places that serve alcohol, but I'd make an exception in that case!)

Based on Werner's and Anthony's opinions, looks like I'm going to chime in with the minority vote concerning the secondary characters.

Let me just say I loved the first chapter. The wizard for hire with his own yellow pages listing was so fresh and fun. The dry Bogartesque tone and the film noir mood kept me spellbound. Humor was there, but it was of the wry, side-of-your-mouth delivery so evocative of the noir tradition. You could almost feel the mist rising from the lake or smell cigar smoke drifting from somewhere off stage.

Then enter the malcontent faery and Bob the air spirit. For me, the mood shifted away from the original premise. The narrator's subtle humor turned ribald, like something you'd find in a high school locker room.

Don't hate me, but I just fell out of the story.

With the vampire scene, however, I found myself once again engaged. I thought the author handled this exchange brilliantly. The mysterious femme fatale, the slippery subtext, the pervasive sense of danger--all brought me back to the tone and mood the author originally established. Plus, it was beautifully and dramatically rendered.

My conclusion--I found Bianca engaging but the faery and Bob distracting.

I'll grant that Bob and Toot-toot the fairy don't line up very well with noir tropes (whereas Bianca and, say, Bridgit O'Shaughnessy would probably understand each other pretty well :-) ). That didn't really bother me, because I wasn't insisting that the book be strictly just a supernatural parallel to classical noir. Bob's fascination with love potions did make me roll my eyes, but the ribald quality of some of the humor actually didn't offend me; I'll admit that I found the scene with Susan and the demon sort of amusing in that aspect. Of course, I'm a guy, though more strait-laced than some of the species. :-) (I know, those who find Harry sexist would say that implied gender distinction makes me as bad as he is, and I hasten to add that some females enjoy ribald humor as much as some males do! But I think the way the genders are socialized tends to create a cultural difference there overall.)

I finished reading the book yesterday; here's the link to my review, for whatever it may be worth in sparking discussion: www.goodreads.com/review/show/34121324 . I'll also share links to reviews from three of my Goodreads friends, at least two of whom are part of this group. One rated the book with five stars and another with one, so their impressions provide a broad spectrum to react to!

www.goodreads.com/review/show/72264649

www.goodreads.com/review/show/36631342

www.goodreads.com/review/show/115079076

Hi Werner,

I actually wouldn't have a problem with the ribald humor on its own. For instance, I'm a big fan of Sherman Alexie's Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian, which contains much bathroom humor and hormone-riven sexual asides. In that case, the scatological humor fits perfectly with the style, the narrator's voice, and what I perceived as the author's vision for the book. I guess I'm sort of a purist, and that's my problem. In my writing program we used to talk about how an author could do anything, set any rules, as long as the work remained true to the original aesthetic.

The second time Bob makes an appearance, I was into him. The situation of the mix-up with Susan is quite funny, and the character of Bob who fears Harry's wrath feels real.

I'll take a look at your review once I finish reading.

Hmmmm! October's about half over; and while we're having some lively discussion on this thread, so far it's been confined to three people. Quite a few more folks than that voted for this book in the poll (and not everybody who's posted here voted for it!). Of course, it's fine to take part by just reading the book and following the discussion, without joining in it. But I don't want anyone to get the idea that this is a closed discussion for just three participants!

Mike, you're a long-standing, ardent Harry Dresden fan; and I know that your silence isn't from any lack of eloquence, or of worthwhile thoughts! Do you have any insights that you'd like to share with us, from the perspective of someone who's read all of the Dresden Files books so far?

Earlier, Deb mentioned the possibility of a latent romantic attraction on Harry's part toward Murphy. I don't know where Butcher plans to go with that; I've read things in reviews of the later books that drop vague clues about Harry's love life (if any) but they're just that, vague clues. So I really don't have any spoilers to impart, even if I wanted to. Just based on what's here, though, I'd say if Harry were to develop a serious love interest, my guess is that it would be with Susan. But the question in his mind, and no doubt in most readers' minds, would be: does she really like him for himself, or does she want access to stories for her paper? (Or both? :-) )

This is a thread that I will continue to follow, but not actively participate in.
I have read the complete Dresden Files. I love the whole series, although some books are better than others.
I love the multilayer-plots of the series. With each book shedding a bit more insight into the overall series plot.
I wish I could go back to where some of you are right now and reread this series from a fresh set of eyes.
Enjoy these precious early days as you get to know Harry and the Gang. I am excited for you.
As I said before, some of the books are not as stellar as others, but hang in there and enjoy the ride. :-)

Thanks for the encouragement, Tammy! At this point, I'm definitely planning to continue enjoying the ride. :-)

Werner wrote: "Earlier, Deb mentioned the possibility of a latent romantic attraction on Harry's part toward Murphy. I don't know where Butcher plans to go with that; I've read things in reviews of the later boo..."

Hmmm...I'm still going with the latent attraction to Murphy. I think Susan and Harry are using each other in mutually beneficial ways. They each know what the other's agenda is, and I predict no one will get hurt. I think Harry views Susan as a fun diversion, and vice versa.

His feelings for Murphy matter much more to him. When he disappoints her, he suffers. At one point, he said she was his only friend. And that's sort of sad since I don't think she sees him in that same light. Should provide for some tension and growth as the series evolves.

Interesting thoughts, Deb; you might very well be right about this!

I apparently don't read as much into the books as all of you - lol. I finished this book quite easily. It didn't even enter my mind that the faerie and the spirit wouldn't belong in the world with the vicious vampire.

I must disagree with any romantic under tones with Dresden and Murphy, though. In the book, she comes off as not liking him in the least bit, to me. I think she tolerates him (IIRC) as he said, just because she has witnessed enough incidents that she HAS to believe that what he is saying is true. I actually found myself not liking the character at all. I thought she was unnecessarily surly.

I am definitely looking forward to reading the whole series.....if my library has them ;)

Brandy, I actually picked up the impression, after Harry threw up and passed out in her office, that Murphy did have a genuine regard for him, at least as a friend. She cleaned him up, got him home (and held his hand on the way), put him to bed, loaned him money without being asked, and even kissed him on the forehead before she left. She wouldn't, I think, have done any of that for someone she didn't care about.

That said, she was obviously very hurt that he kept secrets from her in the course of the investigation --to protect her, but she's not the sort of woman who wants to be protected that way. And she certainly can be surly, in spades. (view spoiler)[A good example is her going to his hospital room, after he sent her flowers, and throwing them in his face. The fallout from this investigation did affect their friendship; Harry noted that they don't joke together anymore, though they still work together. (hide spoiler)] It remains to be seen whether Butcher will have them achieve a fuller reconciliation later in the series.

Werner wrote: "I'll grant that Bob and Toot-toot the fairy don't line up very well with noir tropes (whereas Bianca and, say, Bridgit O'Shaughnessy would probably understand each other pretty well :-) ). That di..."

Hi Werner,
I enjoyed your review. I guess I missed the t-shirt caption. Can you hint at the character whose motivation you questioned?

I probably won't have time to write a review of this book, but I would give it four stars as well.

Interesting what you said about Divine names...I skipped to Grave Peril because it focuses on ghosts. There's a sort of angelic Michael in that novel who echoes some of your disapproval of Harry's language. Perhaps you will meet him in Full Moon. (I got the impression he had already been introduced.)

Deb, the character whose motivations I found murky was Linda (though I suppose the question there, to reprise Watergate, would be "what did she know, and when did she know it?"). (view spoiler)[It seems pretty clear to me that she had to know that Victor's sexually-based magic, which she was taking part in, was being used for homicide the night she had herself and the other participants photographed, for purposes of blackmail. By the time Harry first talked to her, if not before, she had to know who the victims had been; and one at least, Jennifer, was someone she counted as a friend. Yet she didn't tell Harry what she knew; then, later, she made an unaccountable about-face and offered to tell him. And her call to the police makes little sense. Did she just at that moment figure out that Victor might see her as a possibly talkative loose end? (She doesn't strike me as somebody who'd be that slow on the uptake where cynical self-protection was involved!) And why not tell the cops his name? DUH! Of course, I know that a classic trope of noir (and other crime) fiction is the witness who has something crucial to communicate, but is killed just at the moment before revealing it. (You'd think characters, by now, would recognize that making a delayed appointment to communicate that kind of info later is a one-way ticket to shortened life expectancy... :-) ). But its classic (or chestnut) status doesn't make it any less eye-rollingly frustrating and, sometimes, logically improbable. (hide spoiler)]

Yes, I see what you mean. Sometimes those devices are so clunky. I'm watching a detective series right now, and in one scene a character won't reveal something to the police while safe in a hotel room but calls from a pay phone five minutes later willing to talk. Of course, when the detective arrives, all he finds is a dangling phone. It's as if the authors need something to happen that the story does not quite warrant.

One interesting avenue of discussion that occurs to me, for those who were also familiar with the short lived Dresden Files TV series, is to compare the TV series with the book series (at least insofar as we know it from this book). What are some of the main differences, and which of the two do you like the best?

Whereas the TV series (at least in the first episode) depicted Harry as a casual womanizer, his print incarnation definitely doesn't come across that way, at least not in this book; and I appreciate and relate to his character much better as Butcher depicts it here. On the other hand, Bob in his TV incarnation (who was, as I recall, the ghost of a sorcerer bound somehow to the skull, not an air spirit) conveyed more gravitas and depth than his print counterpart. Lt. Karrin Murphy is an attractive woman in both media; but here she's on the short, stout side, whereas in the TV version she's tall and slender. Being cynical where Hollywood is concerned, I have to wonder if the casting of an actress whose physical type is totally opposite wasn't deliberate, and motivated by a cultural stereotype that short, stocky women with a weight issue can't possibly be attractive. Given that the latter description fits two of the most beautiful women I know (not just "beautiful on the inside," but physically beautiful too), I know that stereotype is a crock; but too many people, both male and female, don't realize that it is, and it's a shame to think that our visual media go out of their way to reinforce it, even to the point of misadapting their source material to pander to it. :-(

All in all (based on limited exposure to both), I'd have to say I prefer the print version. But that's usually my reaction when comparing a book with a TV or movie version!

Well, I was just given Storm Front as a "pick it for me" challenge for November, so here I go! (I've owned them all for a while, sitting on the TBR shelf right next to all of the Dune books and the complete Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy...)

Let us know how you like it, Amelia!

Well, I didn't love it. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it.

"Meh. Harry Potter meets Dick Tracy with a splash of vampires and smattering of smut.

Private Investigator-ish stories just aren't my thing. I'll have to read the next one to see if I'm interested enough to read the 9 books in the series I have...or if they're going to be donated to my local library."

My review. :/

Amelia wrote: "Private Investigator-ish stories just aren't my thing." That's fine; we're all individuals with different tastes, and literary discussion would be dull if we all liked/disliked the same things! I haven't read the second novel yet myself (hoping to get to it in the next couple of years --sigh!), but I'd say from the first book that the series is definitely a blend of noir P.I. fiction with the supernatural. So it's understandable that it's not exactly your cup of tea.

I have read all the Dresden File books to date, and I adore Harry, and his adventures. I did not adore his newest book into the science fiction genre. It was very boring,and weighty. way to much detail, and not enough adventure, Stick to the Dresden Files, Mr. Butcher, they are so much better...

I enjoyed The Aeronaut's Windlass