Literary criticism
In the above article, Rupert Thomson criticizes the labeling of Capote's novel as "non-fiction". Not only was the ending, with Dewey returning to Holcomb and meeting Susan Kidwell again, fictionalized by Capote but Capote's attachment to certain elements of the case, like his friendship to Perry Smith, have made it difficult to label In Cold Blood as a truly non-fiction novel. But Thomson does go on to defend Capote by claiming that "Though [Capote] had prided himself throughout on his accuracy, he decided to break his own rules by providing a fictionalised ending..." Thomson explains that Capote did this most likely to comfort the readers and allow the readers to understand that "Life goes on". Thomson also goes on to point out that "in his deft manipulation of the facts and impressions that he had gathered, Capote's hand is there for all to see". This adds to the idea that Capote as an author and narrator is not very reliable because his sympathy is obvious to the reader and results in biased perspectives on the case.
We agree with Thomson that, although Capote claimed that he was not writing a crime story but instead "the story of a town", the novel itself spends very little time on the town. A few members of the town are brought up but it was usually only for input on their thoughts of the murder, the criminals, and the punishments they received. The majority of the novel is spent telling the story of how the murder was planned, what the criminals did after, and much backstory on the two criminals. To say this novel is not a crime story would be to deny its very essence. As Thomson points out, Capote was "exploiting classic crime-genre techniques in order to create resonance and heighten suspense". But this is to be expected. If Capote hadn't done this, the novel wouldn't have appealed to the vast majority. Also the the techniques he used made the story more entertaining and made the reader want to continue reading to find out what happens next. Overall, we hold similar opinions as Thomson but we feel that such measures were necessary when writing a non-fiction novel that will appeal to the public.
My group agrees with Thomson on many claims that he made in his article. We understand why Thomson believes that Capote's own thoughts and feelings were embedded throughout the novel and we believe that Capote was a biased author and narrator throughout the novel. This claim was most obvious when it came to Perry Smith. Throughout the novel, Capote mentions many aspects of Perry's character such as his past and struggles with his parents and his tragic childhood, but never goes as deep in detail into Dick's life. This could be because Dick was less cooperative with Capote when being interviewed then Perry was, but nonetheless we, as readers, felt unsure about whether we could trust in Capote's judgement. Thomson explains that the reason for this bias is most likely because "[Capote] discovered disturbing echoes of his own past life" in Perry's. They shared many experiences, such as being bullied as children and feeling like outsiders in the world. Some sympathy on Capote's part is understandable because he is human and it is difficult to have the author's feelings be projected onto his writing when he's writing a non-fiction novel. But to have it interwoven so obviously throughout the novel discredits his reliability, especially since "he prided himself throughout on his accuracy". As readers, we felt that some scenes were added specifically to influence the opinion one may form on Perry. Small details such as the interactions between Josephine, the wife of the assistant sheriff, and Perry make the reader view Perry in a positive light. On multiple occasions, my group felt sorry for Perry and the situation he was in because we felt that he was a good person. But because we knew of Capote's bias, we wondered whether we should truly feel sorry for Perry, or if that was what Capote had originally intended the reader to feel.
We agree with Thomson that, although Capote claimed that he was not writing a crime story but instead "the story of a town", the novel itself spends very little time on the town. A few members of the town are brought up but it was usually only for input on their thoughts of the murder, the criminals, and the punishments they received. The majority of the novel is spent telling the story of how the murder was planned, what the criminals did after, and much backstory on the two criminals. To say this novel is not a crime story would be to deny its very essence. As Thomson points out, Capote was "exploiting classic crime-genre techniques in order to create resonance and heighten suspense". But this is to be expected. If Capote hadn't done this, the novel wouldn't have appealed to the vast majority. Also the the techniques he used made the story more entertaining and made the reader want to continue reading to find out what happens next. Overall, we hold similar opinions as Thomson but we feel that such measures were necessary when writing a non-fiction novel that will appeal to the public.
My group agrees with Thomson on many claims that he made in his article. We understand why Thomson believes that Capote's own thoughts and feelings were embedded throughout the novel and we believe that Capote was a biased author and narrator throughout the novel. This claim was most obvious when it came to Perry Smith. Throughout the novel, Capote mentions many aspects of Perry's character such as his past and struggles with his parents and his tragic childhood, but never goes as deep in detail into Dick's life. This could be because Dick was less cooperative with Capote when being interviewed then Perry was, but nonetheless we, as readers, felt unsure about whether we could trust in Capote's judgement. Thomson explains that the reason for this bias is most likely because "[Capote] discovered disturbing echoes of his own past life" in Perry's. They shared many experiences, such as being bullied as children and feeling like outsiders in the world. Some sympathy on Capote's part is understandable because he is human and it is difficult to have the author's feelings be projected onto his writing when he's writing a non-fiction novel. But to have it interwoven so obviously throughout the novel discredits his reliability, especially since "he prided himself throughout on his accuracy". As readers, we felt that some scenes were added specifically to influence the opinion one may form on Perry. Small details such as the interactions between Josephine, the wife of the assistant sheriff, and Perry make the reader view Perry in a positive light. On multiple occasions, my group felt sorry for Perry and the situation he was in because we felt that he was a good person. But because we knew of Capote's bias, we wondered whether we should truly feel sorry for Perry, or if that was what Capote had originally intended the reader to feel.