Scan barcode
A review by andrea_lachance
The Bee Sting by Paul Murray
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
A study on the inevitability of a family spiraling out at an increasingly fast pace, as the world falls apart around them.
I'll be thinking about this book for a long time. Murray not only uses the structure of his novel to show to physically quicken the pace and increase the feeling of inevitability and dread, but also uses motifs and shifting pov to unpack one of his central themes; perception vs. reality, and the lies we tell ourselves and others. Embodied by the false title "The Bee Sting" and the false framing of the novel in its summary. The bee sting never even happened, and the real point the question the summary poses "If you wanted to change the story, how far back would you have to go?" is rendered absurd and pointless."You look back at the past and you can't tell where exactly you went wrong... is it everything?... your whole innocuous life, has it all been leading up to this moment? ad if it has, what does that make you?" (601)
The book begins by posing a question - what would possess a man to kill his family, and why? "what kind of man would do such a thing". And unfortunately, the last line is the answer."It is for love. You are doing this for love."
I think Murray brilliantly ties disparate stories and ties theme elegantly together as the novel reaches a break-neck conclusion. It feels like everything is falling right into place as the characters reach an inflection point of being ripped apart. Everything comes together. The black dogs, the red and grey squirrels, Rose's prophecy, Dickie's shame, Imelda's desire to start again, the flood at the end of the world, the bunker that should be a safe haven. And the first line of the novel returns with chilling foreshadowing.
Murray also focuses on climate change throughout the novel and how it seemed to indicate a coming apocalypse. Cass is concerned with the climate, their town has a catastrophic flood after a dry season,Dickie's lover Willie is a climate activist, Dickie is doomsday prepping. And then at the very end of the novel, a deluge of rain that seems apocalyptic and prophetic is the cause of the inevitable tragedy of the Barnes family brought back together.
God, Murray just brings all these wonderful little callbacks at the end, and it's mind-blowing. I will be reading more of Paul Murray's work, because wow. There's so much to unpack in this book.
Yes, I was a little worn out by around page 500, complaining to my friends that this book didn't deserve to be shortlisted for the booker prize. But by page 600 I realized I was dead wrong.Some people won't be able to get over the lack of punctuation and dialogue tags. Maybe they've never read Sally Rooney or Cormac McCarthy. Maybe they don't understand that there is a reason these stylistic choices have been made (reflecting the character's mental state i.e. Imelda's racing thoughts, Dickie's internalization of the things he should say but doesn't, creating ambiguity between what is said and unsaid). Something about how people can't read a book that intentionally removes punctuation and choose to create strawman, bad faith arguments just reallllly gets to me
I'll be thinking about this book for a long time. Murray not only uses the structure of his novel to show to physically quicken the pace and increase the feeling of inevitability and dread, but also uses motifs and shifting pov to unpack one of his central themes; perception vs. reality, and the lies we tell ourselves and others. Embodied by the false title "The Bee Sting" and the false framing of the novel in its summary. The bee sting never even happened, and the real point the question the summary poses "If you wanted to change the story, how far back would you have to go?" is rendered absurd and pointless.
The book begins by posing a question - what would possess a man to kill his family, and why? "what kind of man would do such a thing". And unfortunately, the last line is the answer.
I think Murray brilliantly ties disparate stories and ties theme elegantly together as the novel reaches a break-neck conclusion. It feels like everything is falling right into place as the characters reach an inflection point of being ripped apart. Everything comes together. The black dogs, the red and grey squirrels, Rose's prophecy, Dickie's shame, Imelda's desire to start again, the flood at the end of the world, the bunker that should be a safe haven. And the first line of the novel returns with chilling foreshadowing.
Murray also focuses on climate change throughout the novel and how it seemed to indicate a coming apocalypse. Cass is concerned with the climate, their town has a catastrophic flood after a dry season,
God, Murray just brings all these wonderful little callbacks at the end, and it's mind-blowing. I will be reading more of Paul Murray's work, because wow. There's so much to unpack in this book.
Yes, I was a little worn out by around page 500, complaining to my friends that this book didn't deserve to be shortlisted for the booker prize. But by page 600 I realized I was dead wrong.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Homophobia and Rape
Moderate: Alcoholism and Gun violence
Minor: Animal cruelty, Animal death, and Gore