Indian Killer

Rating:
Summary: Birds of a Feather
Review: As I read the first half of Indian Killer, I found that I was not that interested in the story. Maybe it was the soap-opera-like writing style, switching from person to person and setting to setting, that caused me to have a mild dislike for the novel. Never once was I able to fully experience things through the mind of one of the characters, because the next chapter would undoubtedly switch characters and settings in an attempt to portray things from another perspective. But, in the end, I think that this is one of the most endearing aspects of the novel.

The novel could be said to be an exploration of how racial perceptions would play themselves out in a particularly trying circumstance. In order to show how different groups of people would react, Sherman Alexie switches from character to character. The usefulness of this approach is that one immediately sees how a person's setting, history, and ethnicity impacts his or her perception of reality. Perhaps Alexie wrote the novel to explore, in his own mind, the motivations and perceptions of different people. In fact, while Alexie does paint people in fairly broad brushstrokes, he does consistently add fine touches and nuances to give characters more depth. Depth is very important because, in real life, people are multi-faceted and can often see things from different points of view. This is especially true for people who are torn between two different worlds, i.e. American Indians who must decide between being materially successful in a white dominated world and devoting themselves to preserving their cultural heritage.

This leads me to another aspect of the novel. That is that choices do not always present themselves in an objective manner. Each person perceives events differently depending on his or her background. As a result, decisions are based, not on objectivity, but on a subjective set of beliefs, experiences, observations, and morals. The only things that prevent total chaos are mutually shared traits between people. However, when there are two groups of people who do not share the same set of values, then distance, which gives rise to precariousness--a strange sort of potential energy--can often erupt into outright tumult.

Therefore, while individuals view things from a unique perspective, a larger trend is set by groups of people sharing what would otherwise be subjective points of view. Alexie understands that both of these forces are at work in the world, and he shows them both in his book Indian Killer. When I came to terms with his approach, I was then able to develop an appreciation for the book, and then I could not put the book down.

I wholeheartedly agree with the reviewer who stated that the book is NOT a murder mystery. While the book does draw you into suspecting different people, the end of the book takes a different turn. I urge anyone interested in modern Indian culture or who appreciates a good suspense novel to give this book a read.

Rating:
Summary: A good, and obviously misunderstood book
Review: Let me start out by getting the spoiler-free portion of my review out of the way. This is a dark take on modern city Indian life that I strongly recommend to anyone interested in the subject. And it is a huge departure from Alexie's earlier work. He has always dealt with the harsh realities of Indian life, but he used humour that Indians use to survive to great affect... and it was comforting for readers as well. That is largely absent here, and readers should expect an unsettling work. The least successful part of the book were the murder scenes, as they basically resorted to thriller cliches... however the rest of this book is not a cliched thriller by any means. Nor is it a whodunnit, as many people, who have apparently read the book, seem to think...

DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU HAVE NOT READ THE BOOK...

I am surprised that so many people think that John Smith is the killer. Sure Alexie seems to be drawing paralells between the two, but that is a common literary device and it doesn't mean that he is the killer. It serves the thematic material as well as providing a whodunnit red-herring. I think by the end of the book it perfectly obvious that in fact, he's NOT the killer. Alexie is not trying to make a mystery here, and he's perfectly happy leaving it up to the audience to decide, but the killer appears again at the end of the book, after John Smiths death. You could argue, I suppose, that it's John Smith's ghost, except that the killer bared the traits of a spirit during several of the murders (how do you think John Smith would have the ability to make himself invisible?). Alexie is hinting, I believe, that the killer is a vengeful spirit warrior, which is a very real part of Indian mythology... it's not all dream catchers and friendly spiritual stuff. But he doesn't draw any clear lines. If anyone really thinks that John Smith is the killer I suggest they reread the book.

Rating:
Summary: well-worth reading & more complicated than has been noted
Review: One of the aspects I really enjoy about this novel is Alexie's questioning of "evidence." Throughout the book, characters interpret each other and offer different solutions to the central mystery--who is it that is committing the murders and what is his/her motive? The kick is that Alexie maintains the suspense all the way through the book. I have to respectfully add that the Booklist & Amazon reviewers of this book have jumped to a conclusion that they can't prove. It is never clear that John Smith, the Indian adopted by white parents, is the same person as the killer. Since Alexie writes about identity so extensively and carefully, I'd have to say that the lack of evidence equating Smith to the killer is itself the point.

Rating:
Summary: Indian Killer
Review: Sherman Alexie's mystery novel "Indian Killer" grabs the readers attention from page one. One finds themselve looking over their shoulder while reading thinking that they may just be the next victim. The title of the book itself conveys a dual message to the reader making one reconsider who is commiting the horrible crimes inside the book. This Native American novel appeals to both male and female readers of all ages because it deals with controversial issues that are very much prevelant in today's society.
John Smith, an Indian raised white, yearns desperately for his lost heritage as he seeks to find his true identity. In Seattle John meets Marie, an Indian rights activist at the local university, who together grow inraged at the local people who try to act Indian such as writer Jack Wilson. Murders throughout the city are taking place which appears to be committed by an outraged Indian who leaves behind two owl feathers. The local bigoted disc-jockey creates a division amongst the whites and Indians. His programs incite violence and before long...the Indian Killer strikes again.
"The killer saw the fear in the white man's blue eyes. The man's fear inspired the killer's confidence. The killer slid a hand beneath the jacket and felt for the knife."
This novel will keep you on the edge of your seat just wondering who is murdering these innocent people. This is a great novel that not only stimulates the mind but also educates. I give it a big thumbs up.

Rating:
Summary: Second half lags
Review: The title INDIAN KILLER is a double entendre in that on the surface the novel is about a madman who is murdering white men in Seattle. On another level, the book is about a young Indian boy who is adopted by a white couple, effectively murdering his identity. Olivia and Daniel Smith try to do everything in their power to make sure that their son, John, learns about his heritage, doing research on Native American history and culture, having him baptized by a Jesuit Indian, taking him to powwows. But the adoption agency refuses to reveal his tribe, and John becomes increasingly alienated. When John is old enough for college, he refuses to go, opting instead for a job working on the last skyscraper in Seattle.
The beginning of the book is quite enjoyable as we meet a number of interesting characters: Marie, a radical student, who attends a class on Native American Literature to heckle the professor; her cousin Reggie, who had been expelled because he'd assaulted the same professor; Jack Wilson, a mystery writer who claimed to be an Indian (he's working on a novel about the Indian killer and he sees John as the human embodiment of Aristotle Little Hawk, his Indian protagonist). Almost everybody in the novel is either an Indian or a wannabe Indian.
The second half leaves a lot to be desired, as young white men take the murders out on homeless Indians, beating them with baseball bats. The Indians fight back, the whites retaliate. Seattle becomes a miniature Middle East. Alexie is also trying to have it both ways, lifting elements of the conventional mystery (The murderer is referred to as "the killer"; he could be just about anybody in the story) and also trying to make some kind of radical statement: the white man better watch out because the Indians are dancing. I enjoyed THE LONE RANGER AND TONTO FISTFIGHT IN HEAVEN, but this one needed a serious rewrite.

Rating:
Summary: Indian Killer - On Identity and Its Loss
Review: There are several elements that are central to this book. The first is John Smith - an Indian without a tribe and those tribal roots necessary to nourish him. He is raised by his loving white adoptive parents in an alien culture where his difference is clear. His lack of knowledge of his tribe is vital - he is painfully aware of this lack. He is not white - his parents have stressed his "Indian" heritage, but fail to grasp that a generic Native American heritage is insufficient to nourish him. Alexie is addressing here the very real homogenization which is part of the cultural imperialism that continues undermining the roots of Native Americans of all tribes. He is pointing out to us that Indians are not a monolith, but are separate tribes with separate histories and separate cultures...Jack Wilson is another character who bears reviewing. His desperate need to be accepted as a Native American and yet, his inability to perceive what it means to be a Native American illustrates many of the difficulties white people have in relating to Native Americans...Hold a knife, blade down, and what is the shape that you see? How many stones are in the knife of the Indian Killer - what part of the country are those stones associated with? All of these are important.

Sherman Alexie has written a subtle and complex work - you can't skim it and hope to mine its riches.

Rating:
Summary: Not light reading
Review: This is a beautiful and frightening book. I read it on the advice of a friend who knew that I had some Indian ancestors. In recommending the book, the friend asked me, "Were you taken?" He said "Indian Killer" would make me angry, and it did, but not in the ways I expected, and frankly, partly at Sherman Alexie.
His poetic voice and uncompromising, zero-sum philosophy -- Assimilate or die -- are its best points, and feel absolutely true. As a newspaper reporter, I used all the time to cover stories about adopted-out Indian kids who ran away from their white parents. I'd fight to get some context into the story, then pray that the kid finally made it to whatever he considered home.
John Smith is not the killer -- he can only feel pain, not inflict it -- and in this realization at last, we're given to think, becomes the "true Indian" he has always wanted to be.
The book is best when it's in John's head, especially his fantasies of his birth mother, his "real" life denied him on the reservation. Alexie mocks the idealism of John's fantasies, but shows great compassion for his need. It's wonderful, assured writing. The worst is the misogyny. Women are betrayers, like Dawn, the Crow who has the gall to bob her hair. Their sexuality is frightening. Marie, the activist, has wonderful anger, but it becomes subordinate to her work, necessary to the plot, as the Sandwich Lady. Finally, Alexie's best woman swallows her rage to hand out food.
I liked how characters speculate on "the real killer," rather than confront their own race pain and rage -- sort of like O.J. on the golf course. There is wonderful, if a bit talky, satire on literature and media: You don't mind a few punches to the ditzy white kid who goes backpacking with $300 in cash and a Jim Harrison novel.
(Hint on 'the real killer' -- The owl taboo is Navajo -- the tribe Alexie says tribeless Indians tell other Indians they are -- as is the knife. And what faith manifests itself in human sacrifice?)
The middle of the book, the police-procedural part, sags. The language flattens and his protagonists -- Marie, brutalized Reggie and especially John -- cede the stage to plot points and lesser characters. I started wondering about John. If his mental illness is congenital, as some think schizophrenia is, doesn't it undercut Alexie's premise? Alexie says John hears voices, but what do they say? John goes to psychiatrists: what do they tell him? Why , for God's sake, doesn't he ever get angry at his adoptive parents?
Sadly, in real life, men with John's extremity of fear all too often don't attack men. They attack women. Finally, what does Alexie's philosophy say about America's millions of (genuinely, not like the fools Mather or Wilson) biracial, triracial people? Or those adopted-out kids who are so lost? Is there any hope?