Finally, all are free to post spoilers as they will. sorry for making you wait. wow, what a great, complex story. I haven't gone back to look at my questions - but here are the answers to the ones I remember: the flowers - early on I thought these were probably being sent by Harriet still, but I did get swept away by the suspicions of the characters in the story that Harriet was probably killed in some brutal way. So I guess they weren't a metaphor. I kind of wish they had been mentioned a few more times in the story. the poly relationship - I liked how this was done. It's a fairly familiar attitude for me. What I don't like is the ending and the way Lisbeth was made to feel excluded. then again, she wasn't exactly forthcoming with her intentions in the first place, and at least knowing (much better communicating) what one's needs/desires are is pretty important to a multi-partner relationship. Then again, the disappointing ending that doesn't feel like a good ending is really only at the first third of the story.At the very end, Mikael mentions Aspbergers. anyone else think this is the case? Or is Lisbeth just a sullen girl who has gotten a bunch of crap thrown at her all her life?discuss!
pivitol moment.I think the two moments when Lisbeth took charge were pivotal for me, at least in terms of her character. Once when she got back at her guardian and again when she came on to Mikael and started their sexual relationship. There were different major turning points for each part of the story arc.I'm surprised no one else thought to look for more photos.
At the very end, Mikael mentions Aspbergers. anyone else think this is the case? Or is Lisbeth just a sullen girl who has gotten a bunch of crap thrown at her all her life?Too soon to tell. Obviously she's been abused, even if it's only been hinted at obliquely. To me, her antisocial tendencies smack more of PTSD than spectrum, but I reserve the right to be wrong.
Well, it's not like PTSD/abuse issues and spectrum issues are never comorbid. I think it's definitely possible from his description of her for a few reasons. First, that she neither recognizes nor buys into the social contract -- she doesn't acknowledge/understand the details of how people interact, and Mikael finds himself explaining pretty basic things to her. Second, she doesn't seem to see a boundary between friendship or enjoying someone's company and physical closeness. Granted, this is hard to differentiate from a healthy sex drive through most of the book, but it's a reasonable interpretation given her other relationships too. She might not have Asperger's, but it's largely water under the bridge either way. If methods to deal with Asperger's help her, then the label largely doesn't matter.
I think the thing that stood out for me was that as I was reading along, following Mikael and his relationships and the Harriet mysteries, there was a point at which Lisbeth goes from supporting/side character to an extremely important presence, and I remember thinking "So that's when he fell in love with her," meaning the author. I couldn't shake the idea that he started out meaning to write about Mikael and Millenium and Harriet and having Lisbeth be the sidekick, but that somewhere along the way she became the unintentional center of the book and the story he was telling. I thought it was kind of cool, actually. It made me like her much more, and not just because he suddenly seemed to like her much more. I get how that can happen when you're writing.
That's a cool way to put it. I spent most of the book thinking - so who's the central character in this book anyway? Is it more about Mikael or Lisbeth? I'm not sure why I felt like it should be one or the other. Because they were separate for so long, it was hard to think about the focus being their interaction.