Maybe Aristotle had it wrong

Title: The Litigators

Author: John Grisham

Progress: 50%

Platform: Kindle

Amazon Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

NYT BS Hardcover List: #1 (debuted at number 1)

Book 4 out of 107

The surprising yet the inevitable. That’s what we are supposed to to do. We are supposed to surprise out audiences, shock them, make them see something they didn’t expect to see, feel something they didn’t see coming.

That’s what Aristotle said anyway. Maybe he was wrong. You look at The Litigators at the top of the best seller lists, and you have to think maybe A-dog was drinking a little too much of that sweet, sweet Greek wine.

Aristotle said that dramatic action should strive be completely surprising yet seemingly inevitable. He also said men had more teeth than women, and apparently didn't take the time to actually count. So, what the hell did he know anyway?

Here’s the thing about The Litigators. So far, every character has behaved exactly according to the script of a stereotype. They have done exactly as expected, said everything you would have expected them to say. Even supporting characters seem taken from some big book of handy stereotypes. And in fact, some of these stereotype I find insulting.

Here’s the run down…

Wally, the greedy street lawyer who literally chases ambulances and was born almost completely without scruples.

Rochelle, who is black (as Mr. Grisham points out), the lazy, cantankerous, office manager who complains as soon as there is extra work to be done.

DeeAnna, the sexy golddigger who is clearly having sex with Wally because she thinks he might come into money thanks to the big lawsuit against a popular cholesterol drug.

The gang of black men (Mr. Grisham points out their blackness) who surround an expensive car and acting in a threatening way until chased off at gun point.

And there is David, our hero, the stressed out, over worked legal drone who broke away from the big, hellish law firm to join up with the low rent law shop that makes barely enough to stay open. David is a lawyer with a heart, who just might do the right thing one day, in the face of long odds and big temptations.

The list could go on. Every character we meet is predicable, straight out of central casting, spouting exactly the lines you expect them to say.  

This book is like someone cut pasted characters and scenes from other Grisham novels to make a new novel that is almost parody like to pointing out the weakness of all his earlier books without borrowing any of their strengths.

In a good book, including some of Mr. Grishom’s, a character will do something quite surprising, make a decision you weren’t expecting, and spin the story in a new direction. When done well, that unexpected decision will also make perfect sense, will seem to fit well within that character’s make up, and somehow seem quite logical. And yet, we never saw it coming.

That’s the way character’s come alive.

For instance, when Lisbeth sleeps with Mikael in The Girl With The Drgaon Tattoo, it seems to come out of the blue, pleasantly shocking Mikael and we readers. Even more surprising, revealing and funny was how once she was finished with him, she hoped off and went to bed without a thought. Great scene, surprising, but also perfectly believable.

Lisbeth has a hard time with relationships, empathy, simple human communications. She likes Mikael, she has a physical need, and he can ease that need. In her mind, the equation is simple and she does she sees as the logical thing without ever considering what Mikael might need or want. That’s typical of her major character flaw and it takes three books for her to figure that out, and even then, doesn’t quite come to terms with it.

That kind of revelatory scenes isn’t going to be happening in The Litigators. Sad to say. But here’s hoping I’m wrong.

What have we learned? Entertainment needs surprise, and I find myself supremely unsurprised with The Litigators.