The protagonist in any crime or detective novel follows the stereotype of being a male detective who devotes his career to catching the antagonist in hopes of validation from himself or others while learning a lesson on how to embody the unbreakable masculine persona. It is also important to note how the stereotypical crime novel strictly follows a good-cop bad-cop plot, without letting the reader develop a connection with the characters. Simply put, none of the characters have a specific exigence of committing to the role of being who they are, except just to be present. Along with rigid characterization, crime novels tend to incorporate a betrayal that is the inevitable turning point in the protagonists’ journey in which the protagonist gains more life experience and the relationships within the story change. Every author carries this plot differently, but most authors do not introduce the reader to a relatable character, protagonist, or antagonist.
In Stephen King’s crime novel Billy Summers, King introduces an invigorating perspective on the genre of crime, creating novels where the antagonists, who seem like “monsters,” are more human than the reader realizes. Slightly turning away from his horror and thriller roots, King introduces us to Billy Summers, a veteran turned assassin whose last job draws the line between himself and everything he knows, putting his own life and morals at risk. In other words, kill or be killed. Coming from a troubled past—from foster homes to the trauma of being a war veteran—Summers loses a sense of self after being a sniper in the Iraq War, becoming an assassin after a fellow veteran suggested the idea with the use of his “connections.” King establishes a classic “one last job” noir setting where the stakes skyrocket the moment Summers agreed to take the job, instantly entering menacing territory with ill omens, realizing that this job is the inevitability that will test him as a broken individual and his relationships. Summers’ closest relationship at the time was brutally tested, Summers being betrayed by the man he “trusts” most, his boss, Summers learning that he was supposed to be eliminated after his last case, his death being the planned parallel. Escaping his enemies while finding himself, Summers discovers that the unsuccessful planned assassination that awaited him, but to no avail, was a loose end on a deeper chain involving gangster patriarchy and trauma.
The uniqueness of Summers’ character lies within the fact that he is a master of faces and character, mastering how to develop as an individual while letting those he thought supported him believe he is an oblivious tool. While a top-notch assassin, establishing quite the thriller and giving a bold impression, Summers is relatable in a sense where he regains a sense of self and empowerment, understanding what kind of person he really is and who he actually wants to be. Ultimately, through betrayal and hurt, Summers faces himself in hopes of a better future. Ironically, humans are the monsters in the novel, for the emotions and purpose of each character become increasingly brutal and immoral. The beauty of the novel is that Summers depends on character development, causing the novel as a whole to depend on character growth. With that being said, to what extent do we as fellow roaming humans on this Earth, relate to a broken assassin?
Be First to Comment