The Dinner (Dessert & Digestif)

Salutations friends! Can you believe this is our last blog post? We have come a long way with this book, and I must say I am left quite unsatisfied with the ending (I was hoping for some Matthew Gray Gubler action towards the end). I did not expect Michel to be held accountable for his crimes, too idealistic a thought with a book so grim, but I would have liked to know the rationale of why he committed the crimes he did. I was also hoping to know what condition Paul had that he passed on to his son.

None of this happened.

Claire has successfully met my predictions of being a closet lunatic - maybe even exceeded them. Her true nature is exposed when the families are discussing their sons future’s. Serge refers to what his son and Michel did as murder, whereas Claire sees it merely as an accident. She proceeds to blame the homeless woman who her son killed by saying, “But she was lying in the way, Serge. I mean, she could have gone and slept in the hall at your house” (Koch 231). What Michel and Paul did would make for an excellent case of second-degree murder. In law we learned that in order to prove a crime occurred, mens rea (the guilty mind) and actus reus (the guilty act) must be established. Claire suggests there was no mens rea apparent by stating it was an accident, but this is a highly implausible statement. What reasonable person would not have the knowledge that lighting a gas barrel could cause someone bodily harm? Her victim shaming is also quite comical and forced, as a rational person is likely to go somewhere else if there is someone blocking them from an ATM. Not hit them repeatedly with large objects and light them on fire. Claire's parenting reminds me of this case that occurred last year in the United States. A psychologist testified that the accused committed his crimes because of his upbringing, similar to why I believe Michel also did.

Paul quoted a famous Tolstoy line in the beginning of the novel that talks about happiness within families. This theme reappears when he says, “The look and the smile [Claire] gave me now were part of our happiness. It was a happiness that could survive a lot, that outsiders couldn’t come between so easily” (Koch 249). The Tolstoy quote (refer to blog post #1!) outlines that happiness can only be achieved when every possible failure has been avoided. Paul and Claire are choosing to support each other's deranged selves because they know one riff in their relationships will cost them their happy family image. They cannot risk confessing the crimes of Paul as this would break apart their family.

Claire’s character surprised me the most in this last part. She seems to have devised the perfect crime. From making an alibi for her son, to denying he did any wrong, Claire is the perfect criminal herself. What astounded me the most however, was her almost approval of Michel ‘eliminating’ Beau. She says, “I told Michel that he should try to talk reason to Beau. And if that didn’t work, he should do whatever seemed best. I told him I didn’t need to know what that is” (Koch 271). Claire is basically letting her psychopathic son go full reign on his cousin. Later on we can assume that Michel did indeed kill Beau, as he comes home with bloodied fists and Beau is missing.

I was quite desperate for some action in the last part so I was making up all sorts of crazy scenarios. When the waiter was talking to Paul about his children, I was sure there was going to be a reveal on Michel’s hidden twin sister or something the likes of that. The waiter says, “ I have a son too. He’s only five. But still, sometimes I’m surprised by how much he looks like me...I also have a daughter. She’s the spitting image of her mother” (Koch 279). As we know Michel is quite similar to his father, it is then only right that a daughter be similar to Claire. When Paul went to look in his wife’s drawer, I was certain that he would find the birth certificate of Michel’s twin sister, but alas, the paper only confirmed that Michel had received whatever condition Paul had.

Overall, I think this was an interesting read and would recommend it to others. I am quite upset at the author however. I believe more insight should have been given on the reasonings of each character, as they are all so uniquely crazy. Maybe a chapter each dedicated to a character’s perspective on what occurred? Let me know in the comment section what you all would have liked to seen in the book, and if you enjoyed it or not! I wish you all happy dinners absent of psychopathic children and pan-wielding brother’s! So long friends, it has certainly been a time blogging!

Works Cited

Criminal Minds. “Matthew Gray Gubler.” Giphy.

Hanna, Jason. “'Affluenza' Teen Tentatively Gets 2 Years.” CNN, Cable News Network, 14 Apr. 2016, www.cnn.com/2016/04/13/us/texas-affluenza-ethan-couch/index.html.

“I Expected More.” Giphy.