Advertisement

Killer is like a blunt object: deadly, dull

May 10, 1993|By Gregory N. Krolczyk , Contributing Writer

Some call him Ghost, others John. He answers to either; neither is his name. He's uneducated, uncaring, unfeeling -- an end product of the abuses garnered in orphanages, juvenile halls, and prisons. Now he himself is the ultimate abuser, a remorseless murderer who kills simply as a way of making a living, even though he doesn't really have anything to live for.

Or at least he didn't until he met Shella.

He first met Shella several years back while she was stripping in a club in Seattle. They both knew, at first glance, they would always be together. But then he took a fall for manslaughter that put him away for three years, and when he got out she was gone.

Advertisement

Now, he needs to get her back. But short of searching every strip joint in the country, he doesn't exactly know how find her. Fortunately, an awful lot of people seem to want to help him . . . if he'll just do them one little favor.

Andrew Vachss' fans are in for a surprise or two with "Shella." First, it's not a Burke book. That is, it doesn't feature Burke or any of the other excellent oddballs found in Mr. Vachss' first six novels.

Second, "Shella" isn't very good. Now this isn't a surprise; Mr. Vachss has produced a couple of less-than-

sterling efforts ("Strega" and "Blue Belle"). The surprise is that what are typically strengths of his are, in "Shella," pretty weak.

One of Mr. Vachss' greatest strengths has been his characters. While they're not always likable, they are usually interesting. In "Shella," they're neither.

If John were himself a murder weapon (which, as the book goes, is what he ultimately is), he'd be the proverbial blunt object. Dull-witted, aimless and with no real personality, John is hardly the type for a strong central character. Yet in "Shella," he's not only the central character, but as the novel is written in the first person, he's also the reader's eyes and ears, meaning all perception is filtered through this rather stupid, dispassionate person. It's like looking at the world through a very dirty window: You can make out some of the stuff, but you know you're missing a lot. All in all, it's not fun.

Still, "Shella" could have been saved had Mr. Vachss created some interesting supporting characters.

But they're nondescript and unmemorable, hardly anything to induce reader involvement.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|