In Jo Nesbo's The Bat, policeman Harry Hole finds the love of his life, talks her into serving as bait for a serial killer, and is shattered with grief when she becomes a victim - a grief not much compensated when he kills the killer, successfully stopping his chain of murders thanks to her sacrifice.
First in the series, the story pretty much sums up Harry's character and entire future.
He will over many books again and again sacrifice everything that and everyone who matters to him to get the bad guy.
Not to mention numerous informants and witnesses with whose lives he will buy such victories.
Would you put the life of your mother, wife, or child at risk because only that provides the best chance to save many lives by stopping a serial murderer?
Not a chance in Hell I would do that.
Do you approve police putting innocent civilian lives at risk to improve their chances, thus cutting the risks to more numerous, other innocents?
Do you trust the accuracy and honesty of such proferred justifications?
Are you confident they aren't sacrificing innocents, not to the greater good, but only to success?
The bookshelves and TV schedules are packed with cops who do such things.
Often, those priorities are presented as personally costly, even self-destructive, for the cops.
But the political, public policy question is not raised, presented as annoying or stupid interference in necessary police work, or dramatically subordinated to the personal losses of the cops making such choices.
Jo Nesbo's novels are no exception.
And they are very good, by the way.
I'm a fan.
No comments:
Post a Comment