I’d have to call the book disturbing more than anything else. The inclusion of detailed scenes between the coach and Neil isn’t what bothers me. The sex is integral to the story and is necessary to advance the plot toward its conclusion. However, I’m mostly disturbed by the fact that Neil actually claims to have enjoyed being molested by a pedophile to the point of becoming a willing accomplice. Although he never admits it, the abuse obviously had a profound effect and is probably the cause for his thinking living the life of a hustler is a perfectly acceptable career choice. My concern is that by the end, Neil never recognizes the abuse as abuse. By the end of the book, he does admit his feelings for the coach were beginning to turn into "an emotion [he] had no adequate word for." We see from Brian’s problems from little league through high school that pedophilia has long-lasting and detrimental consequences. Yet, Neil, who does not fully understand this fact, is the last voice we hear.

marydell | February 17, 2003 12:45 AM

I haven't finished the book yet -- it's a very hard thing to read. I've had to stop a few times. The writing is beautiful, but it's gorgeous descriptions of boys being raped. I want to scream at the characters, I want to turn away. Jesus, it's difficult. If it weren't for the book club, I don't know if I'd finish it.

However, I plan to finish it tonight. Andy, I may be sending you my therapy bills....

Sarah | February 17, 2003 1:45 PM

Sorry you were freaked, Sarah.

Mary, the book's ambiguity is part of the reason I'm drawn to it. I like subtlety, although admittedly subtlety and non-obviousness is tougher to deal with considering this book's material. In the context of that ambiguity, I think the novel still takes an unquestionably strong stand against that which it relates; the horror of the scenes Sarah mentions alone makes a judgment about them; we don't need a character to lecture us that what we've just read about is one of the worst crimes imaginable.

For all its horror, the abuse's effect on Neil is certainly thought-provoking. Clearly he has severe issues: An absent father, an alcoholic mother, a need to be older than he is in order to care for himself. Thus, Coach and the men he pursues as tricks are likely all stand-ins for his father, his relentless pursuit to be loved by an older man. Therefore, for Neil, the abuse is about much more than just being violated, and it's a part of who he is in a way that it's not easy for him to pull it apart. Brian just covered it up and then was able to remove the cover; Neil grew around it and its branches became interwoven with his and now there's no difference. Maybe. I'm not sure.

Andy | February 18, 2003 12:16 AM

This book is anything but subtle. The detailed descriptions of Coach’s abuse are shocking and appalling. To make it even more horrifying, Neil spends the nearly the entire book thinking he’s in love with the man who played a major role in ruining his life. I agree that he is trying to fill a void caused by growing up without a father figure, but his total inability to come to terms with his path of self-destruction bothers me.

There are two main voices in the book. Through Brian’s story, we clearly understand that pedophilia is bad. He desperately tries to come to grips with it to the point of thinking he was abducted by aliens during the time that the abuse occurred. That much is clear. Through Neil’s story, we also see that pedophilia is bad because he ends up becoming a total screw up and a hustler. We can see it, but Neil never sees it except for that one vague statement at the end when he thinks his feelings for Coach might be changing.

The fact of the matter is pedophilia is bad, and I would have preferred closing the book with that being the last word. Heim is certainly courageous in taking on such a taboo subject, but he also has a responsibility to his readers and his characters to convey that message. I’d be more okay with Neil’s ambiguous feelings toward Coach if I had known that Brian, the boy who knows something horrible happened to him, ended the story for us. As it is, you kind of walk away with an idea that pedophiles hurt children, but maybe some of these children don’t really think they’ve been hurt all that badly.

Above the title on the front cover of my edition is a blurb from a New York Times review: "Wrenching…powerfully sensuous." Sensuous? To whom? Pedophiles? That blurb bothers me more than anything contained inside the book.

marydell | February 18, 2003 10:49 AM

Sarah, thank you for recognizing Andy as the cause of your therapy. BookBlog cannot be held responsible for the mental well-being of its members. No other warranty expressed or implied. In other words, don't bother trying to get money out of us since we don't have any anyway.

marydell | February 18, 2003 11:00 AM

Mary: Your deconstruction of the book's narrative is, as far as I'm concerned, exactly right. However I think you answer your own question: Why must the last word be that way if, as you write, "Through Neil’s story, we also see that pedophilia is bad"? We know it, and he starts to know it. Basically I'm wondering why you need the book to end with a proclamation of something that has already been proclaimed.

This seems sort of analogous (although maybe not) to independent film: Many indie films end on ambivalent or not-quite-definitive notes, even though their narratives reach conclusions. That tends to put off audiences who want their happy ending, their neat tied-up conclusion. It's messier but it seems to me to be more real, more like real life. If the book hadn't taken a stand on what happens that'd be one thing, but it does, it just doesn't do so at the very end.

About the New York Times comment, I'm not quite sure what that relates to, hopefully not the abuse. Maybe it refers to the relationships between the main narrators, Brian and Eric and Neil?

Andy | February 18, 2003 11:37 AM

Because: "As it is, you kind of walk away with an idea that pedophiles hurt children, but maybe some of these children don’t really think they’ve been hurt all that badly."

I’m not saying that I need to have neat and tidy endings. Life is messy and never ends up with a Hollywood Happy Ending. I simply would have preferred to have heard the last word from the character who clearly understands that Coach messed him up.

On the plus side to this book, the prose is beautiful. Unfortunately, all of the characters have the same beautiful voice but that didn’t seem to detract from my enjoyment while I was reading it. Multiple first-person narration is a good way to get around the problem of omniscient third-person narrative (which I find boring and insulting to the reader), since you get to know exactly what every character is thinking without being slapped in the face with it.

marydell | February 18, 2003 1:16 PM

Finished it today. Christ.

I got the impression that Neil started realizing just how bad Coach had messed him up when he was raped -- "I briefly drifted back [to Coach]. "Tell me you like it, neil, tell coach how much you like it." I'd told him so. had it been the truth, or just a stream of gibberish?" Then he can say it's going too far. But even then he didn't run, he still thought about getting the money.

Which brings me to what was one of the most revolting and/or heartbreaking parts of the book -- after Neil tells Brian everything, what he seems to feel worst about is not the violation, but the money. "I've owed you $5 all these years." jesus. I mean for fuck's sake, Neil, do you honestly think Brian cares about $5? You think that matters? But he did, somehow Neil did make it all about the money, I think we might be able to hope that he can snap out of that particular mindset after he sees Brian shred the money. But I don't know -- he may be too far gone.

Sarah | February 18, 2003 8:24 PM

I have read other books with shifting perspective/voices, and it can be an effective narrative technique. And I think the book worked better with us knowing what was going on vs. the "surprise" at the end. The important aspect of the book seems to be the characters more than the events. If we were making a movie and wanted that shock value at the end, I can see removing the Neil voice from the narrative until the end. But I think the book would suffer without the slow but obvious collision of two worlds at the end.

I am heterosexual and found the book to be distasteful. Not that all distasteful exercises are bad, but in this instance I do not see the benefit of working through the unpleasantness so I can better understand the experiences surrounding pedophilia. My imagination handled that for me many years ago. Finishing this book became more of a march than a jaunt - my wife was impressed I was willing to finish at all after describing what I had read so far.

Is it an honest book? I guess so, the events certainly seem plausible. Is it a moral book? Immoral, yes. What did it illuminate about the human experience? Our ability to lead ourselves and others into Hell itself for our own pleasure.

Note that I think this is a well-written book, especially for a first time author. That said, I cannot say I will ever recommend this to anyone. Let's hope Heim picks a different subject next time. Not necessarily fluffy, but please no more homoerotica.

Hunter | February 18, 2003 11:49 PM

First, and most importantly, please don't confuse "homoerotica" with graphic depictions of child molestation. I doubt you'd run into any homo who finds those scenes erotic.

Sarah, I agree with you about the $5. To me it felt just a device to introduce a metaphor that Brian could physically tear up as a way of sort of destroying the past that he'd held on to for so long.

To the larger points, I definitely understand where you're all coming from; this isn't an easy book to read. That's in part why I selected it. I would have had a huge problem with the novel if it had somehow even seemed to condone child abuse on any level; like Mary, I think that abuse of children, whether it's emotional, physical, or sexual, is quite possibly the worst crime imaginable. But I also don't want a preachy, sit com-style ending. Life isn't like that. No rational person is going to walk away from this book thinking that what they read about is somehow okay, and it's also abundantly clear that Neil (and, to much greater degrees, the other characters) recognizes what happened isn't okay; he has changed.

Andy | February 19, 2003 7:48 AM

But that's exactly my whole point. I don't think it is abundantly clear that Neil recognizes that he was abused. His feelings for Coach begin to change at the end, but we're never let in on to what. In addition, the change is primarily attributed to Neil seeing what the abuse did to Brian rather than any understanding of what it did to himself.

Giving Brian the $5 at the end only further illustrates Neil's inability to recognize the abuse. Yes, Heim probably used it as a symbol for Brian destroying the past, but I'd much rather have been witness to character transformation than ripping up money.

Hunter actually brings up another point when he categorized this book as homoerotica. Although most pedophiles are men with families, it's easy to mistake them as homosexuals because of the high incidence of boys being abused. Lots of recent press has been devoted to the scandals of Catholic priests. Add that to what the mainstream has heard about NAMBLA, and you've got the perfect formula for giving homosexuals a bad name.

The fact is, pedophiles are also attracted to girls but such stories do not get as much press since it's more shocking to read about man on boy abuse. In the media, the violation of a 12-year-old girl is more likely to be called rape than linked to pedophilia.

The erotic nature of Neil's descriptions of Coach's abuse is what's so disturbing about this book. He describes their time together as loving, going so far as acting like a jealous lover when Coach chooses other victims. It's disgusting to most rational people, but the author's intentions could easily be mistaken for desire to titillate rather than horrify the reader.

marydell | February 19, 2003 11:17 AM

I actually think it's a -- not good, exactly -- maybe admirable thing that the book ended the way it did. There is no happy ending because there can be no happy ending. If Heim had tried to tack one on, it would have been insulting to all that had gone before.

On the balance,I think its better to end with Neil's version, Mary -- I can't imagine how we could get inside Brian's head at that moment. He's not healed, he's not cured, he just finally knows that it's as bad as he feared. Neil is just waking up to the fact that he's been damaged, and we can finally see that.

Hunter -- I agree with Andy, I don't think this is homoerotica at all. The closest analog I can come up with is those who said the rape scene in The Accused, the Jodie Foster movie, glamourized rape. It didn't. It showed it without flinching, and it showed what a devestating effect it had on everyone involved. Anyone who can read/see those depictions and see the effects it had on its vicitms and still find the description erotic is a very, very sick monster. that's not to say monsters aren't out there, but I don't think this book will help create more monsters.

Sarah | February 19, 2003 11:32 AM

I stand corrected. I realized after I posted the comment that homoerotica was the wrong word for this writing. I just didn't have time to change it when I posted yesterday and the day's frenzy removed it from my thoughts.

I agree that the book would not work with a "happy" ending, although it could have been longer, showing us what happens now that both understand what really transpired at Coach's house that day. But I am ok with leaving it where the author did.

I also agree with the premise that this book would only have erotic appeal to those who have already gone down a very dark path - this is not a work that glorifies pedophilia and is going to convince someone to "give it a try."

I'll give you credit for coming up with a challenging book, Andy. Perhaps I need to rethink my May title choices ...

Hunter | February 19, 2003 12:31 PM

The book, "Mysterious Skin," is disturbing because it is so true to life. In many ongoing pedophile encounters you do see jealousy develop over time. Because the victim does feel "loved" or "special" it is usually more common when it is a girl being molested.
There might not of been the growth or recognition that the coach had messed him up but he was beginning to waken up and seeing it for what it was. A sick and sad thing and once the character realizes this, he will see that his behavior reflected his childhood. Accepting money and taking that as a token of love and affection. It began with the $5
As a survivor of a simular experience I can tell you that the story is very life like. An outsider might be able to see one thing but when you are in the situation, exspecially when it began so young, you cope and you deal with it the best way you know how. Sometimes the only way to keep it from driving you insane is by saying to yourself, "It's because they care." Yes, that is not the most healthy thing but when its all you have sometimes it's all you can do. This book is wonderful because it gives those of us who were told it is a secret a voice. It allows us to feel as though we are not alone. Sometimes the most subtle message is heard the loudest. Thanks for letting me share.

Dalles | April 21, 2003 7:02 AM

I just finished this book and since I'll hopefully be joining up here soon I thought that I would comment on it. It's the only one out of the archives (I think) that I've read other than the Harry Potter and It's been a year on that one so I'm re-reading it actually, (before finishing the others which I've just recently purchased.) Man I am just a bag of wind sometimes, let me discuss the actual book now.

What do you say about Mysterious Skin? I agree, many of the images found therein are quite disturbing. But I do find them necessary. I don't mean that outside of telling this story they are necessary, but for the purposes of telling this story, yes they are vital.

That being said, upon reading the first two chapters, I had already guessed the truth about Brian's missing afternoon and thought to myself, "I hope the purpose of this book isn't to discover that he too was moslested by Coach, because that will be a very anticlimactic ending." Au Contraire.

I agree with what someone has already said that this story isn't about the final revelation so much as the characters. In the end the final revelation doesn't matter. I am glad the story was told the way it was, with the audience drawn such clear lines to the truth about Brian's blackouts.

I found it an interesting parallel. Two boys with the same experience, both with absentee fathers, can find two very different ways of coping with what happened to them. Neil embraced it so much that he virtually erased the crime that was committed. To him, it wasn't a crime. Brian actually did erase it from his mind, shrouding the event in a mystery that would lead him to believe something quite the contrary had happened. To each of the characters for the majority of the book, it was as if no crime at all had been committed.

I've read books with alternating first-person narration in the past and not all have been as successful as this was. While I wouldn't want every book I read to be told in this manner, I think it does have it's advantages. It leaves little debate regarding the unreliable narrator. Would we trust Neil as a narrator alone?

Also, could you imagine how the story would have been told from just the perspective of Neil Or Brian? It wouldn't have worked in either way. We needed to see both perspectives to get the full scope of the story, nevermind the others.

On the fact that Neil ended the book for us:

I do not agree that Neil seemed, even at the end to think there was no problem with what had occured. Someone mentioned his rape in the bathroom and his thoughts turning to Coach at that moment, I'd like to cite that as the turning point for Neil's view of what happened. Not that his feelings about it can be resolved overnight. But his view was changing.

It's entirely possible that I'm just rambling now, but I'll continue, for what it's worth.

Throughout his hustling career, and even the assaults on the other boys his age when he was younger, Neil was remorseless. He was in it to get off and get paid and nothing more. And I don't think he saw a thing wrong with it. The only time he expressed concern about it was when he was afraid that Wendy would get upset with him over it.

But in the end, I think he knew that his life wasn't a normal one. I think he knew that the damage that Coach had done to both him and Brian.

The last line seals the deal for me.

"It was a light so brilliant and white it could have been beamed from heaven, and Brian and I could have been angels, basking in it. But it wasn't, and we weren't."

KC | February 22, 2004 2:20 AM