LOUISE PENNY’S

Series Re-Read: A Fatal Grace

INTRODUCTION BY HOPE DELLON

I started working with Louise in October 2006, after the editor who had bought her first three books left Minotaur for another company. At the time, only Still Life had been published. A Fatal Grace was in bound galleys, and The Cruelest Month was a completed manuscript in search of a title.

Since I needed to read three books in a row, it was lucky that I loved them from the start. Although Louise had me from the acknowledgments at the beginning of Still Life, there came a scene in A Fatal Grace that gave me chills in a way that only the very best manuscripts ever have. (I describe that scene in the recap below.) I even remember where I was when I read it. In those days I had an hour-long commute on the train. I know that I started reading the galleys on the train on a Tuesday night, then continued on Wednesday morning, when we always have our editorial meetings. By the time I got to that meeting, I couldn’t stop talking about how amazing Louise was, except perhaps to ignore everyone else and keep reading more of the story.

When I’m asked what makes her books so great, I usually fall back on a quote from Emily Dickinson: “If I read a book [and] it makes my whole body so cold no fire ever can warm me I know that is poetry. If I feel physically as if the top of my head were taken off, I know that is poetry. These are the only ways I know it. Is there any other way?” That’s how I feel about Louise’s novels.

I believe I didn’t meet Louise and her husband, Michael, in person until Malice Domestic in Crystal City, VA, in the spring of 2008. By that time, Still Life had won many awards (including the Anthony, Arthur Ellis, Barry, Dilys, and New Blood Dagger) for Best First Novel, but not the Agatha; and we didn’t want to jinx anything by expecting her to win Best Novel for A Fatal Grace. I remember how thrilling it was when she did win—but what I had forgotten, until Louise mentioned it recently, was that the awards banquet happened to fall on my birthday. Now that she reminds me—and how remarkable for her to remember—I know that she and Michael insisted on taking me to lunch on that Saturday, and made more of a fuss about my birthday than they did about her chances of winning the Agatha. They were as warm and brilliant and funny as you might imagine from reading Louise’s books, and it’s been a joy to work with her ever since.

RECAP

Chapters 1-21: The first lines of A Fatal Grace foretell the death of the nastiest woman in Three Pines: “Had CC de Poitiers known she was going to be murdered she might have bought her husband, Richard, a Christmas gift….” The doomed CC has written a self-help book that prattles about love and enlightenment, even though she is actually like the Snow Queen from the fairytale who pierces everyone’s hearts with ice.

Meanwhile, in “the snow globe that was Three Pines,” CC’s 14-year-old daughter, Crie, has sewn her own chiffon snowflake costume for her school’s Christmas pageant, “to surprise Mommy.” She has been on a diet for a month and is sure her mother will notice soon. Except her mother doesn’t bother to show up.

Clara Morrow and her friend Myrna drive to Montreal, where Clara is dying to see the Christmas windows at Ogilvy’s department store that have enchanted her since childhood. She and her handsome husband, Peter, have been starving artists in Three Pines for years, although his precisely detailed paintings have finally started to sell. No one wants to buy Clara’s wilder depictions of warrior uteruses (!) and melting trees.

Hearing that CC knows important gallery owner Denis Fortin, Clara timidly asks if she would mind showing him her portfolio—which CC disdainfully throws in the trash. “Very annoying,” she says to her lover, photographer Saul Petrov. “Imagine asking me for a favor?” CC has much more important things to do: There’s a sale at Ogilvy’s and she wants to buy a special pair of boots made of baby sealskin with metal claws.

Clara’s joy at the Christmas windows is disrupted by a filthy pile of blankets that turns out to be a beggar throwing up. Disgusted, Clara hastens inside to the book launch for her neighbor, Ruth Zardo, the bitter but brilliant old poet whose friends from Three Pines turn up to support her.

On the escalators at Ogilvy’s, Clara passes CC, who says to the man beside her, “I’m so sorry, Denis, that you think Clara’s art is amateur and banal.” It’s a heart-stopping moment. Devastated, Clara shuffles out of the store and sees the stinking beggar she’d ignored on the way in. Impulsively, Clara gives a package of food she’s just bought to the bag lady, who grasps her wrist and says, “I have always loved your art, Clara.” Whoa. This was the moment when I started to feel as if the top of my head was being taken off.

A few days later it is Christmas Eve in Three Pines, with shortbread stars (Louise’s books always make me hungry) and carolers and a midnight service at St. Thomas’s church, where a child starts to sing with angelic purity. The singer is CC’s daughter, wearing a grotesque pink sundress but with bliss on her face. After the service, the whole village can hear CC berating Crie as a “stupid, stupid girl. You humiliated me. They were laughing at you, you know.” CC’s gutless father barely utters a protest.

When Saul turns up at the Bistro on Christmas, Myrna invites him to the community breakfast and curling match on the following day. It’s a perfect setting for the last job Saul intends to do for CC, who wants pictures of herself “frolicking among the natives at Christmas. If possible he had to get shots of the locals looking at CC with wonder and affection.” A pretty tall order.

Chief Inspector Armand Gamache of the Sûreté and his wife, Reine-Marie, make their first appearance in the book on the day after Christmas, when they have a tradition of reviewing unsolved cases. “If I was murdered,” says Gamache, “I’d like to think the case wouldn’t just sit unsolved. Someone would make an extra effort.” (I love this man.) Reine-Marie notices that one of the cases is new: There was a bag lady who had hung out at the bus station for years—but was strangled outside of Ogilvy’s department store on the day Clara saw her there. Astoundingly, a copy of Ruth’s new book, signed “You stink, love Ruth,” was found with the body.

Then the phone rings, and the duty officer for Three Pines tells Gamache there has been a murder. So much for a quiet Boxing Day. Within minutes Gamache and his second-in-command, Inspector Jean-Guy Beauvoir, are on their way to Three Pines, to investigate the very odd death of CC de Poitiers.

CC’s murder seems impossible: She was electrocuted at the curling match, in the middle of a frozen lake in front of dozens of witnesses. After Gamache gathers his team in the old railway station, Beauvoir recaps the only way CC’s murder could have worked: “A: she had to be standing in water; B: she had to have taken off her gloves; C: she had to touch something electrified; and D: she had to be wearing metal on the bottom of her boots.” Sure, nobody liked CC, but who hated her enough—and had the expertise—to pull off something like that?

Then a new team member arrives unexpectedly: Agent Yvette Nichol—”the rancid, wretched, petty little woman who’d almost ruined their last case”—apparently sent by the Superintendent of the Sûreté. Gamache is furious to see her, and knows that his enemies at Headquarters are still working against him.

With or without the unwelcome Nichol, the team has much to investigate: Where is Saul and what photos might he have taken of the curling match? Why does the coroner find excess niacin in CC’s body? Can it be possibly be coincidence that CC’s book, Be Calm, has the same name as the meditation center Bea Mayer, known as Mother, runs in Three Pines? After Gamache admires The Three Graces, Clara’s painting of Mother and the two other elderly women who are her best friends in Three Pines, she tells him about her poisonous encounter with CC at Ogilvy’s—and he quietly adds Clara’s name to the long list of suspects.

Chapter 22-End: Clues and questions and suspects continue to pile up for Gamache and his team. Having learned that CC de Poitiers, who claimed to be the daughter of Eleanor and Henri de Poitiers, invented both her name and her past (Eleanor de Poitiers, better known as Eleanor of Aquitaine, actually died in 1204), Gamache needs to find out who CC really was. Are there any significant clues to be found in the video cassette of The Lion in Winter that turned up in CC’s garbage after the murder?

Meanwhile, Gamache is astonished when Clara proudly shows him the Li Bien ornament Peter gave her for Christmas, which is exactly like the ball CC supposedly used as the basis for her garbled philosophy. The glass ball is painted with three pine trees, the word Noël, and a single capital letter, L. Was it the picture of the trees that prompted CC to buy the monstrous old Hadley house in Three Pines? Awkwardly, Peter is forced to confess that while he meant to buy Clara something for Christmas this year, he actually found the ball in the Williamsburg dump.

When Gamache meets Émilie Longpré—age 82, captain of the curling team, and one of Clara’s Three Graces—and her dog, Henri, on an early morning walk, she tells him about an encounter with CC at Mother’s meditation center, where CC arrogantly proclaimed that since she was calling her own book and company Be Calm, Mother would have to change the name of her center or perhaps close it altogether. After breakfast, the tiny Émilie gives Gamache & co. a curling lesson that convinces even Beauvoir, who has always scoffed at curling as a sport, that it’s a lot harder than it looks. And Gamache, who finally grasps what it meant when the 78-year-old Mother loudly “cleared the house” at the curling match, suddenly knows how the murderer got away with it.

The questions about CC’s mother keep circling back to the Three Graces. Do they know who the L of the Li Bien ball was, or could it possibly even be one of them? And what might 92-year-old Kaye Thompson, who was sitting next to CC at the match, have seen as she was murdered?

When Saul’s photos are developed, they somehow do not include any shots from the time of the murder. And as eager as Saul seems to be to start a new, better life in Three Pines, he still has one undeveloped roll of film that he hastily throws in the fireplace when Gamache and his team visit him at the chalet he has rented.

With the help of an idea from Clara about the discarded video, the case seems to be coming together, when a raging fire breaks out at Saul’s chalet, and the unlikely trio of Gamache, Beauvoir, and Agent Nichol try to rescue him. Émilie finally tells Gamache the heartbreaking truth about CC’s mother, and the Three Graces prepare to pay the price for what they have done. And then Gamache suddenly realizes there is one last horrible secret in CC’s family.

The book ends at New Year’s, with Reine-Marie’s first visit to Three Pines. Both of them know that the plots against Gamache are growing more sinister, but as they drive home:

In the rearview mirror Armand Gamache could see Three Pines. He got out of the car and stared down at the village, each home glowing with warm and beckoning light, promising protection against a world sometimes too cold. He closed his eyes and felt his racing heart calm.

“Are you all right?” Reine-Marie’s mittened hand slipped into his.

“I’m more than all right.” He smiled. “I have everything.”

FAVORITE QUOTE

Gamache says to Clara, “When someone stabs you it’s not your fault that you feel pain.”

Gamache: “I knew then I was in the company of people who loved not only books, but words. Spoken, written, the power of words.”

CONCLUSION

I am not sure how many times I’ve read A Fatal Grace, but I still find it as extraordinary as I did back in 2006. I think it’s magnificent on so many levels: as a complex and masterful detective story, as a glorious character study, and as an exploration of universal hopes and fears. I love that it can be hilarious one minute and heartbreaking the next.

I also love the way Louise focuses on the power of words, from the literal handwriting on more than one wall, to the hidden meanings of names like Mother, Elle, and Crie (what kind of parents would name a child that?), to the ways that words can kill or heal. I also marvel that someone like me, who is at least as much of a skeptic as Jean-Guy Beauvoir, can find myself wondering about such mysteries as lemon meringue pie.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. If the village of Three Pines truly existed, would you want to live there? Why or why not? How does Christmas bring out the best or the worst in any of the villagers?
  1. Who is your favorite character in the book so far?
  1. In Louise’s books I am always stopping to admire wonderful images or jokes or observations (or descriptions of food!). Were there any lines that particularly struck you in Part I?
  1. What do you think of Ruth’s idea that “most people, while claiming to hate authority, actually yearned for someone to take charge”?
  1. Gamache tells Lemieux, “All the mistakes I’ve made have been because I’ve assumed something and then acted as though it was fact.” Have you ever made important assumptions that turned out not to be true?
  1. What interests you most about the two murder victims, CC and the bag lady known only as Elle, and the way Gamache conducts his investigation?
  1. There are so many clues hidden in plain sight in A Fatal Grace, I lost count at 6 or 7 (all of which I missed the first time through). Did you spot any of them, and did you solve any of the various puzzles before Gamache did?
  1. What do you make of Gamache’s relationships with the different members of his team, from Beauvoir to Nichol?
  1. How do you feel about The Three Graces?
  1. Near the end, Gamache says, “This whole case has been about belief and the power of the word.” I’ll say. What are the ways in which words have power?
  1. Speaking of belief, what do you make of the apparent brushes with God: the beggar who loved Clara’s art (which Em maintains she had never seen); Gamache finding God in a diner eating lemon meringue pie; Em’s road worker with the sign saying “Ice Ahead”; Billy Williams, etc.?
  1. Do you agree with Gamache in Chapter 33 that “when you’ve seen the worst you appreciate the best?”

A Fatal Grace, Part 2

Clues and questions and suspects continue to pile up for Gamache and his team. Having learned that CC de Poitiers, who claimed to be the daughter of Eleanor and Henri de Poitiers, invented both her name and her past (Eleanor de Poitiers, better known as Eleanor of Aquitaine, actually died in 1204), Gamache needs to find out who CC really was. Are there any significant clues to be found in the video cassette of The Lion in Winter that turned up in CC's garbage after the murder? Meanwhile, Gamache is astonished when Clara proudly shows him the Li Bien ornament Peter gave her for Christmas, which is exactly like the ball CC supposedly used as the basis for her garbled philosophy. The glass ball is painted with three pine trees, the word Noël, and a single capital letter, L. Was it the picture of the trees that prompted CC to buy the monstrous old Hadley house in Three Pines? Awkwardly, Peter is forced to confess that while he meant to buy Clara something for


READ FULL POST

A Fatal Grace, Part 1

I started working with Louise in October 2006, after the editor who had bought her first three books left Minotaur for another company. At the time, only Still Life had been published. A Fatal Grace was in bound galleys, and The Cruelest Month was a completed manuscript in search of a title. Since I needed to read three books in a row, it was lucky that I loved them from the start. Although Louise had me from the acknowledgments at the beginning of Still Life, there came a scene in A Fatal Grace that gave me chills in a way that only the very best manuscripts ever have. (I describe that scene in the recap below.) I even remember where I was when I read it. In those days I had an hour-long commute on the train. I know that I started reading the galleys on the train on a Tuesday night, then continued on Wednesday morning, when we always have our editorial meetings. By the time I got to that meeting, I couldn’t stop talking about how amazi


READ FULL POST

AuthorHOPE DELLON was an executive editor at both St. Martin’s Press and Minotaur Books. Hope edited Louise Penny from 2006 until her passing in 2020.

387 replies on “Series Re-Read: A Fatal Grace”

Love the subtle, and not so subtle humor that so often appears. Thinking of one particularly funny scene at the end of chapter 24 with veggie bubble bath!

Anne, I love that too! Clara’s been enjoying what she thinks is a (for once) decent Christmas present from her mother-in-law, only to discover later that they were really dried soup-balls! (And thus, another “put-down” kind of present)

I was envying Clara enjoying an exotic sounding bath only to discover it was soup mix! Sounds like Clara was as much a favorite of her MIL as I was. Bet it came from the Dollar store too. I love Louise’s wit.

. Near the end, Gamache says, “This whole case has been about belief and the power of the word.” I’ll say. What are the ways in which words have power?

Well, since Nancy H., Donna, and Sharon Norris have been discussing Clara’s encounter with Clara, I guess I will add a bit to that, as part of looking at the power of belief and the power of the word. CC’s words have power, we see that, but sadly, she uses that power to undermine her daughter, her son, the three Graces, Saul, and in this case, Clara. Clara hears the words CC apparently is repeating second- hand from the art critic, Denis Fortin, and they are devastating to her. It’s only when she rouses herself from her “pity party” and goes to help the vagrant woman that she hears those words, ” I have always loved your art, Clara.” Those words have the power to snap Clara back into thinking positively about her art. I don’t know that it’s absolutely necessary for us to know HOW El might have seen Clara’s art. I think that’s one area Penny leaves undeveloped, but just because she doesn’t connect the dots for us doesn’t mean they weren’t there. As a reader, I know from what Penny has written about El is that she’s always had a restless spirit. All we know about her being in the front of the store at Ogilvy’s has been worked out by Gamache and the Graces. Even though they thought they had a pretty good idea of where she was, it’s not inconceivable that El could have traveled to Three Pines at certain times, incognito, before she became the bag lady in extremis. The fact is, she spoke words that were healing to Clara. I think of those cartoon examples of the person with the little devil speaking on one side and the angel on the other.
We all have choices to make, to go with either a negative or positive side of ourselves, and often those choices are influenced by the words that are uttered by someone around us.
Unlike Clara, poor Crie never had any balancing words to make her think positively of herself, outside of the fantasy world she built for herself. According to her father’s account, CC had it in for Crie from the time she was born. That means Crie was being spiritually and mentally assaulted from a very early age. Her father could have provided balance by giving her words of comfort, but he didn’t because he didn’t want to cross CC. Thus, words were weapons which CC used to psychically assassinate her own daughter. Crie finally came to the belief that her own survival depended on getting rid of her mother. Whoever made up the saying, ” Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me” had it all wrong. Bones can heal, but words which belittle us stay with us for a lifetime.

Must apologize to my fellow posters for a few glaring grammatical errors I caught in my last entry. That SHOULD have been “El’s encounter with Clara,” (it really wouldn’t have made sense for Clara to have an encournter with herself!) and , in reference to CC, her daughter and her husband, NOT “her son,”. All I can say is apparently my mind is not completely functional in the early AM, as I THOUGHT I was putting in the right words, but typing in something else. 🙁

Ha ha, Meg R., I didn’t even have ONE cup of coffee! Are you trying to tell me something??? 🙂

Nah, Jane. Just teasing. I’m one of those absolute dullards in the morning with a brain that doesn’t function for at least an hour or so after getting out of bed & having a cup of coffee. Occasionally a two cup day occurs! Been like this since my 20’s! – But am usually good to go until 1 or 2 am! :~D

It has been a few years since I first read A Fatal Grace, with many books in-between then and now. It is a tribute to Louise’s ability (or my denseness) but even having read the book before, I still couldn’t figure out who did it! Bits and pieces would come back, but up until the end I still wasn’t sure who who was guilty of the murder.(there was guilt in a few different areas; neglect, infidelity etc.) There is a reason for everything that is said and done in her books, if it’s not clear now it will be eventually. I am enjoying my re-read very much. Many things are making sense to me and it is easier to keep track of all the different characters.

1. Clues. I haven’t liked Peter from the very beginning of this series. I don’t trust him. I also don’t understand why Clara stays with him or rather puts up with him.
Louise does a great job of foreshadowing what is to happen further on in the series.
I love lemon meringue pie but I’ll never look at it the same way again!
Thank you Louise for being such a great mystery writer!

Off topic, but I’ve always wondered . . . Why is this book called Dead Cold In Canada and the UK, but A Fatal Grace in the US? Would this be the author’s choice, or the publisher’s? Is it due to copyright issues?

Marcy–I should know this, but in this case the U.K. and U.S. titles were set before I started working on Louise’s books.

I have never known copyright issues to be involved. In general, titles seem to be changed when a publisher, rightly or wrongly, believes that a different title will appeal more strongly to their particular market. In this case, I suspect that Minotaur in the U.S. felt that “Dead Cold,” which is a clever play on words in the U.K., would be lost on American readers because “dead” is rarely used to mean “very” here (except perhaps in the phrase “dead drunk”). There’s an interesting discussion of some of the issues in this blog: http://editorialass.blogspot.com/2009/07/why-do-british-novels-often-have.html.

Before the internet, different titles in different territories seemed less problematic because readers were less likely to come across the same book in editions published thousands of miles apart. Recognizing the increasing chances for confusion now that Facebook, blogs, etc., are seen all over the world, Louise has worked hard to ensure that all the Gamache books beginning with THE BRUTAL TELLING have the same title in the various English-language editions. (The editions never seem to have the same covers, however, as tastes vary so much in the different markets.)

4. What are the ways in which words have power? I think Agent Nichol’s word that she had changed had power. And she came through for Gamaste, who took her at her word. .

I have listened to all of the books, and am now ‘reading’ them in print for the first time. I had something funny happen this weekend. In the book, the team figures out that CC married Richard Lyon because of his name, and there is a remark that a person’s name can influence you based on your past experience with other person’s with the same name. This weekend I received a marketing letter from a real estate agent named Yolande and my first reaction was recoil! The only Yolande I have known is the fictional character in the first two novels who sells real estate.

I have always wondered what happened to Jane Neal’s house and her ‘Fair Day’ painting from the first book. They were so important, and there is no mention of what happened to them. We know in this book that Gamache and Beauvoir have emotional reactions when they must go to the Hadley House, and the Hadley House is a major location with changing meanings as the series go on. Jane Neal’s house seems frozen in time and it makes me a bit sad. I don’t think it’s neglected. I imagine that Clara and Gabri keep the garden up, that Myrna picks flowers from it for her extravagant arrangements, and that Ruth occasionally breaks into the house to sit in the kitchen and sit and remember her friend.

In terms of relationships I think that the talk Gamache has with Yvette about Uncle Saul is something that stays with Yvette and influences her actions in later books. She chooses not to believe it in this book, but I think it is something she turns over in her mind as the years pass.

In re-reading the books, it is fun to see little notes that become major players in later books. The cheese that comes from the abbey of Gregorian chanting monks. The mention that Peter is a Montreal Morrow. I had forgotten that the Three Graces painting has lyrics from ‘How the Light Gets In’.

Which book? I have listened to them all, and wondered this when I listened to “How the Light Gets In’

No, Peter & Clara have stayed in their original home. I guess these are loose ends that Louise can knit back in to a plot someday. (Yes, I am obsessed with Three Pines.)

POWER OF THE WORD

I was struck by the powerful quote that Gamache references from Gandhi,
‘Your beliefs become your thoughts
Your thoughts become your words
Your words become your actions
Your actions become your destiny.’

Words have the ability to:

Lift Us Up – El to Clara. “I’ve always loved your art, Clara.”

Cast Us Down – CC to stranger on escalator. “I’m so sorry, Denis, that you think Clara’s art is amateur and banal. So she’s just wasting her time?”

Wound – CC to Crie, “you’re a stupid, stupid girl,” . . . “Everyone was staring at you. You humiliated me.”

Heal –
“Ring the bells that still can
ring
Forget your perfect
offering
There is a crack in
everything
That’s how the light gets
in.”

Conceal – “where did you get it?” Gamache asked . . . “I forget,” Peter tried.

Reveal – “I used to dream I was popular,” said Ruth into the silence, “and pretty.”

We should not be surprised at the power of words. After all, “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.”

Now be still and know . . .

Words have power. Always. Watch a child who is told he is lazy or sloppy or clumsy or bad. Over time, that becomes his belief. Nobody has to say it any more because he says it to himself every day. Even when he becomes an adult, he can’t accept praise if it runs counter to his internal dialogue. And, for those who have not been broken by critical words (well placed), think of the warmth that comes from sincere praise. Think of the comfort that comes from being told you matter because of what you did for someone.

This series’ power comes from words: the images they evoke, the feelings they impart. The language, imagery and themes have resonated so that re-reading has been a joy.

Yes, yes! Just yesterday I said something to my 4 1/2-year-old granddaughter that I want to take back! While it was said in jest, I don’t think my face told her it was a joke on grandma. Damn!

1) I wouldn’t think of trying to outthink either Gamache or Penny, two plotting geniuses.
2) It appears to me that Gamache may be over his head with Nichole. She reminds me of one of those slippery veins that won’t take a needle.
3) Clara is a genius of instinct, and those three elderly women are together a beacon of joy to her.
4) Sometimes the word is just a way to seem wise when you are just guessing. Even Gamache is in the dark until the end for all his pithy comments, until more is revealed.
5) I don’t think it was ever explained how Elle knew who Clara was or that her art was admirable. Maybe I’ll catch a clue next time around. These are the first books I reread, and even listen to on audio books.
6)Worst and best are absolute terms. Gamache is talking about murderers and good people, and he has seen some dreadful things. Some policemen become cynical. The question is: is anyone really as good as Gamache, or is he and people like him a fictional invention?

I have been stewing ever since I finished Fatal Grace about Elle’s (the beggar) words to Clara. How had she seen her paintings, since their paths never crossed? Did I miss something, or was it left as a mystery? I can understand how Clara in her pain could hear these words as if from God, but I don’t know what possessed the woman to say them.
I am so,enjoying these re-reads. Only problem is,I can’t read Louise Penny this slowly.
I have long thought that if it were real, would visit Three Pines in a heartbeat and enjoy having coffee and a croissant with Gamache!

I think Penny leaves too much unexplained in order to be mystical, in this case so we will believe with Clara that Elle was representative of God. Presumably she could have visited her friends in Three Pines any number of times and have seen some of Clara’s pieces which she had for sale, but we are not given any indication this was so. Nor do I understand why Gamache thinks the man eating lemon pie was God. But then I may just be reflecting my personal doubt about the existence of God in the first place. Clara’s belief that she saw God when Elle spoke to her makes sense; Gamache’s vision less so. It is narrated as part of his trip to catch Arnot, but it’s not clear whether it was before or after he got stuck and might have died…I find the sequence confusing. Maybe I need to reread it again!

I don’t think Louise is leaving out explanations to appear mystical. In real life explanations aren’t tidily handed out for all things that happen. Most of the time we are left alone to reason things out for ourselves. Sometimes answers are whispered to us in ways that best fit our own individual stories. Clara reasoned that Myrna may not necessarily agree that God had spoken to her through the voice of a beggar. Gamache’s experience in the diner was his own individual epiphany.

Truth is truth but there ate many paths to it and we must each make our own journey to reach it.

I thought I typed “are”. I haven’t had breakfast yet so the “ate” may be very revealing. 😉

Donna, you are absolutely correct! There has been NO explanation for why/how Elle could have seen Clara’s artwork in order to make that comment. Is this just one of those things we have to accept as readers – like the road worker with the “Ice Ahead” sign, the fisherman with lemon meringue pie writing on the wall, Billy T giving Reine-Marie a piece of pie and napkin with note to Gamache? I agree with you – in that I want to know just how Elle could make that comment – but at the same time, I also enjoy the not-knowing mystery of it. Does this make any sense at all?

I don’t enjoy the supernatural aspects of the story. I don’t see the characters’s beliefs in a god add anything. Perhaps I’m missing it?

Nancy–I think it is less about what Elle actually said (who knows) and more about what Clara HEARD (revelation of her own inner knowledge of herself and her art). Just like the fisherman’s smile, the “Ice Ahead” sign and the mysterious utterances of Billy Williams, the presence and voice of God are inside us, and something outside us triggers an opening of a spiritual door that empowers us to hear / see / experience. I have no idea if this is a phenomenon of mind or supernatural, perhaps both. We experience whatever we experience through our physical being–so perhaps we are instruments occasionally strummed by music of the spheres, or perhaps our synapses ‘line up right’ from time to time. Saying dismissively ‘it’s all in our heads’ doesn’t cover the territory. Our capacity for mystical experiences, however generated, is a beautiful and wondrous aspect of being human.

I would not have considered reading these books again either, as someone else had mentionned but I would say I am enjoying them even more this second time through having finished the first two.
The writing is so rich and detailed. I love all the characters and love all the descriptions of the various relationships. I am especially intrigued by Clara and Peters relationship !
I, too would like to live in 3 pines. Can I eat and drink at the Bistro please and visit Myrna!s bookstore.

TWO STRANGE COINCIDENCES! :~D
Just got back in town late this afternoon – after Mom’s Day weekend with our ‘tribe” & 90 yr-old Mum. Haven’t had a chance yet to read intervening post since I was last on here, but will try to go back to late Part I & do so.

Two strange coincidences occurred today & yesterday. I finished reading last chapters there last night. Reached Chapter 35 as Jean-Guy and Lemieux are screaming at the hockey game on tv. Was hearing echoes of the same from my mum. She too was watching the New York Rangers playing our Pittsburgh Penguins for a spot in the Stanley Cup playoffs. Here I was – not only reading about the lousy NY team that Canadians were playing, but catching flashes of play as they literally pummeled the Pittsburgh players! (For anyone interested, they’re tied 3 games each. Next game on Tuesday decides who moves on.)

Then, I drove back to the ‘burgh on two lane highway from Mum’s city to 4 lane that leads here. Had been a rainy & cloudy night and early morning. All of a sudden, I could see blue skies peeking between rain clouds and a little sunshine! Drove around a bend – and there it was! I billboard with “Be still, for I am God” in huge letters – provided by some Lutheran church in that area!
For any other reader who may think Penny’s lemon meringue pie, a baglady art critic or a fisherman writing on a wall might be a tad of s stretch – the strangely unexpected does occur! (lol)

For Meg R, in re your comments about the hockey game your mother was watching, that reminded you of the game Beauvoir and LeMieux were watching in the book, and the billboard you saw that read, “Be Still and Know That I Am God.” It’s said that fiction imitates life, but the reverse can be true, too. We can read about something in a book, and then be more alert to finding something in “real life” that is so similar to something we just recently read. I think it’s because there’s a circular link between what happens in life and what the writer records. Louise Penny may have written those scenes in her book because she had experience herself with watching one of those hockey games(or being around male relatives or friends who were watching!) and also being somewhere that had a wall hanging, or indeed maybe a billboard like you saw, Meg, and that stayed with her. Writers, like the character of Gamache, observe. What they observe, they often use in their writing. Since they are part of society, it makes sense that what they record in their writing can still in fact be experienced by others, and that is what makes this kind of writing so relevant for readers like us. But I agree–If I’d seen that Billboard, I’d have had goosebumps, too!

MS. JANE: Haven’t we all experienced fortuitous happenstances like this at different times during our lives? Some we pay attention to and others we ignore or quickly forget. Just wonderful little gifts when we actually ‘see’ them!

Haven’t been on site except for hockey game billboard post. This week is really one of frenzy for me and I probably won’t get back to discussion until next book starts. Wanted to thank you for picking up the challenge & starting to track Ruth info. You’re a gal after my own heart. Some college prof or dramaturg – many, many moons ago – suggested looking for repeated patterns, images, parallel events, conversations etc. to more clearly figure out what an author/ playwright/ director etc. was doing with a specific piece —- that in the patterns a clearer picture could be found. Suspect that we both possibly read this same way. It’s funny, once you begin doing this, it becomes second nature! Thank you for your thought inspiring posts!

LINDA M. – A Thank you for looking into the derivations of our three graces names. That helped a bit to enrich our understanding of them. A brother-in-law introduced me to a new author decades ago. First line of his novel was, “As he faced the firing squad, Colonel Aureliano Buendias remembered that distant afternoon when his father took him to discover ice.” Immediately fell in love with G.G. Marquez, but was immediately hooked by that opening line — Why would a man basically named ‘ a golden good day’ be in front of a firing squad & why ice? Spent joyous days discovering the answers to those whys! So, Thank you Linda for adding name enrichments for us too.

LORY-JANE: You wrote that “I would have lots of rewrites before I could get my point across – I can better verbalize than write.” You initially so reminded me of my old students! Have to admit that I’m one of those folks who can’t do a perfect first draft that looks like a final version! I plod along like Beethoven, download what I think I want to say, look at what I wrote – and then go back and use the delete, cut & paste etc. to make submission make sense to someone else who would read it. Most of our heads go faster than our hands and first drafts seldom make sense to someone not in our heads! :~D Very, very few people can pump out perfect compositions like Mozart could! If you can speak it, you CAN write it! Don’t worry about ironing out last little wrinkles or about retying shoe lace. Get you thoughts down & share them! Your ideas are what are important. And — none of us are infallible! I erroneously typed in that CC’s husband must have been called Robert (& not Richard) some place & wrote that Clara (instead of Emilie) put on the record of the violin concerto after the reveillon. World didn’t end!

Really wish I could continue with rest of week’s discoveries and enrichment of ideas that everyone else brings to this. Family stuff (nothing of a disasterous nature – just time gobbling) has claimed the rest of this week. Hopefully, I’ll be able to return next Monday. – meg

I LOVE synchronicity. Very lovely experience for you–so glad you were awake to receive it!

I agree with Gamache when he says “when you’ve seen the worst you appreciate the best” . I think this is what makes Louise such a great writer; she has stated she writes from that experience. Experiencing sadness and loss can make you stronger; as Emilie says in Chapter 23, those of us who experience sadness and survive have a responsibility to help others; ” we can’t let someone drown where we were saved ” . We are all here to share each others’ burdens!

The more we reach out, the more success we have at throwing lifelines to others. We may never know when something we say, or do not say, may help another. Notice the comfort Clara felt when the begger spoke to her. El never knew what a difference she made.

I know your post was a long time ago, but I have just finished reading A Fatal Grace and must have missed something. I am hoping you or another reader can tell me how L came to be familiar with, and appreciate, Clara’s paintings.

Certainly it is easier to appreciate what you’ve had when things get tough. When everything is good, it is easy to become complacent. It is easy to take it all for granted and to let little irritations distract and bother too much. The number of times that it has mattered too much when the kids don’t put away their stuff or when something gets spilled or the dogs are crazily barking at a shadow across the street….. When difficult things happen, all of these irritations fall away. When illness, death, accidents and loss have touched my family we have become stronger. We pull together. We appreciate each other and become much freer with compliments and expressions of love. And we realize we are blessed.

If you live in a small community or are part of a group, in a larger community; I think you will always find people like the Three Graces. Maybe a different way to think about them is by searching for the different types of Three Graces that have been a part of one’s life and how they have evolved.

My mom lived on a street where three husbands died in one year and the women started doing things together. So their church called them The Three Musqueteers, but they were in the spirit of the Three Graces.

I am re-reading the books, and just finished”A Fatal Grace”. What I find interesting in the re-read is that I’m picking up on a lot of the threads that culminate in “How the Light Gets In”. I won’t say more here as I don’t want to put any spoilers here that could ruin the stroke of genius as that final plot played out.

Absolutely. I’ve re-read most of the books in this series more than once and am struck by how poems, ideas, characterizations, themes, etc. are interwoven so that it seems as though Louise spent years developing the outline for the series before she ever wrote the first word of Still Life.

Joan, I also am having a wonderful experience re-reading these books…I originally read them soon after they were published. I too picked up on the connection to How The Light Gets In…in fact I was surprised to read the lyrics in this book as I had not remembered they were in this early book. I’m really looking forward to reading the other books as they just seem deeper and better the second time around.

I do agree with Jane Frickler about Crie and the police not wanting to suspect a child. But Crie had more than enough reasons to commit matricide. CC had been the poorest excuse for a parent. She was cruel and made no bones about her hatred of her daughter. No matter what Crie did, she was never able to please her mother. And her husband was so inept and downtrodden himself. It made me wonder why CC had ever married him and what she had done to totally demasculate him.
The “Three Graces” — all through the book I wanted to see this portrait of the three. I have in my mind’s eye what it would be like but I still wanted to see this painting.
This book really sealed Peter’s fate in my eyes as a selfish bore! That he had to find a present for Clara at the dump just made me mad, I think I thought at the time I considered him an egotistical bore.
As with all mysteries, looking for the clues and red herrings is just a part of weaving the story. Louise is an expert weaver!! When the body of the old woman was found I began to wonder why this had any significance — how did she know Clara? What was her “back story”? What interested Reine-Marie in this obscure person who had died?
I was not that surprised by the epiphany Gamache had eating the pie. A long time ago I read a book by a priest I knew who claimed that Communion was not just at Sunday Mass, but in having toast and coffee with friends gathered around a table — this was as much of community as going to church.
As a curling enthusiast, even though older and with crippled shoulders, I can still participate at the curling rink. The role of the skip is vital — that person is the strategist for the team. It does not take strength but planning and being able to “read the ice” and finesse!

I don’t think it’s the choice of a gift from the dump that highlights Peter’s weakness, but that he doesn’t own it! Clara loved the Le Bien ball and would have loved that Peter understood that about her. But because he was sneaky about it he again showed his neediness.

I agree and disagree with Terry. Decisive, n’est-ce pas? Clara comments that “once again, Peter gave her garbage”. At this point, she was disappointed with where the gift came from, despite having appreciated its beauty. She might have felt better about it if Peter had been able to say that he found it at the dump (where he found himself, out of habit) and had been attracted by its beauty. In a way, he was saving something that obviously wasn’t garbage (unlike CC who had the “gift” of turning beauty into garbage). But, in my heart, I believe that Clara wasn’t ready to accept any gift from the dump this Christmas. In a year or two, it would be different.

I agree KB. I think she will eventually feel differently about the ball. The problem was that Peter wasn’t truthful. I also think intuitively Clara knew it was even deeper. The ball was beautiful, she’d appreciate it, but it also was free. Couldn’t he have gone shopping anyway? It was almost like “Whoopee. Something pretty! Now I don’t have to expend any more effort!” He seems to not know or care that, at least for THIS Christmas, the effort and luxury of shopping would have been part of the gift. I wondered if part of the cause was that the inheritance that made shopping possible was Clara’s and not his own.

I agree, I think it’s really more about the effort than the money, though the money IS a factor. It’s symbolic for Clara that finally they didn’t HAVE to pay nothing for their gifts, and she had a lot of joy in shopping. For Peter, it was simply a chore, and when he “accidentally”completes the core at the dump, he’s relieved. I think his Mother’s gift to Clara of a packet of drIed soup speaks volumes about where Peter comes from. I also think it speaks volumes of Clara that she has a generous enough spirit to assume it must be an exotic bath balm.

Linda, I agree with you that Peter’s probably (actually almost certainly) jealous that the money is Clara’s. Another theme that develops over the series.

As far as the Clara’s attitude about the Li Bien ball is concerned, I don’t think she would have minded about it being dumpster-found had Peter also taken the trouble to buy her something in addition. It was the fact that he wouldn’t go to that trouble when he had the money that caused her disappointment. I think this is the first severe crack in the marriage.

Peter is so much less than Clara deserves…that he would forget to buy her a Christmas gift…that he would intentionally make her doubt her worth as an artist…he cannot love Clara…the more I read of him, the more I doubt he is capable of love at all…his actions turn my stomach and make me feel so sad for Clara

I had thought that these books were pretty simple and have not considered rereading them. I was attracted to them because of the setting and because I like mysteries. These discussion have caused me to get the books out again and I have been rereading Fatal Grace so I can participate. I enjoy Gamache’s relationships with his team members, especially Jean Luc. I find him to be a perceptive boss who is able to develop those under his direction if they work willingly at the tasks they are given.

As far as the references to God go, I find that the most intriguing part of the book. I believe we can encounter God as we encounter people. All it requires is an open mind and heart.

That God is in the mundane and we brush against each other often is my truth. There are so many gifts that come at unexpected, but needed, times. Not always quotations, writings or spoken words. Sometimes there are symbols. Goodness exists. (One of my favourite reminders.)

Well, that is in the person who has experienced it. Anyone can be a naysayer, but the person with the experience knows how it felt to them. In this matter, I believe everyone has their own truth.

It depends whether one believes in the supernatural. I’m atheist, so I would see a happy guy eating pie. However, “believers” see a manifestation of their god because that fits their belief structure.

1. There are so many clues hidden in plain sight in A Fatal Grace, I lost count at 6 or 7 (all of which I missed the first time through). Did you spot any of them, and did you solve any of the various puzzles before Gamache did?

I will start at the beginning of Chapter 23, where Gamache is ticking off the number of clues he has to CC’s murder thus far: “Puddles of anti-freeze, niacin, The Lion in Winter, booster cables, Psalm 46:10 and a long lost mother. And that was only what he’d uncovered so far. CC was two days dead and what he really needed was an epiphany.”

I think from the beginning, it’s clear that with the different elements that caused CC’s death, it had to be premeditated. Usually the husband or other relative is the prime suspect, but in this case, Richard Lyon had an alibi from Myrna, who insisted she would have noticed if he’d left the curling game at any point. For some reason, Gamache and all the other investigators never seemed to consider Crie as a suspect. I wonder if that is just natural thinking on the part of police, as they generally don’t believe children are capable of such complex thinking or action, or if it was more that they felt sorry for Crie, and when you feel sympathy for someone, it’s really hard to suspect that person as capable of murder.
As Donna Leblanc wrote in her post, she suspected Crie as soon as she read that she was really smart in science. Of course, if Louise Penny had had Gamache suspect Crie at that point, the book probably would have been a lot shorter, and a lot less interesting. Sometimes it’s fun, as the reader, to think you’re ahead of the detective in charge of the case.

Gamache says at one point, perhaps to himself, that Crie was so abused, no wonder it ended in murder. The first time I read this I didn’t notice it, and it doesn’t even seem to have caused Gamache to consider Crie a suspect. In hindsight, a whopper of a clue hiding in plain sight!

But, as always, most of the clues are irrelevant. “Lion in Winter”, for example, is relevant to C.C.’s persona and self-delusion, but not to the murders, as is the name of her worthless husband. What I never understood was what caused Gamache’s realization by the lake that the Graces were covering up for the murderer instead of having themselves committed it. I thought this a weakness in the book. He makes these sudden jumps not wholly explained by the author, and in a later book he jumps too quickly and turns out to be wrong.

In rethinking his conversation with EM, he realized she had been surprised by the shoes with the cleats, which were necessary to complete the circuit of electricity…..a clue that she wasn’t aware of all the necessary components. I agree that that was a surprise. I had guessed it was the 3 women together. I had previously thought Crie might have done it, but even with her knowledge of science, I thought she was too young to think out and carry through with such a complex murder. How on earth does Louise Penny think up these complicated plots?

Sharon–I think Gamache’s realization by the lake is explained in Chapter 38:

“‘I thought it was the three women,’ Gamache admitted, sipping his wine. ‘They completely fooled me. But then I remembered those baby sealskin boots.’

“‘Wicked,’ said Ruth with a slurp.

“‘In her letter Émilie described the niacin, the anti-freeze, the booster cables. But she left out one crucial thing.’ Gamache had their undivided attention. ‘Had they done all the things they describe in that letter, CC would still be alive. In her letter Émilie didn’t mention the boots. But CC had to have been wearing the Inuit mukluks with the metal claws. They were the key to this whole murder. I told Émilie about them yesterday
and she was sickened. More than that, she was surprised….’

“‘I realized the women couldn’t have killed CC. But they knew who had…. According to Mother, Kaye saw it all, and what she didn’t see they figured out later. For instance, they didn’t see Crie slip niacin into her mother’s tea. But they did see her spill windshield washer fluid behind the chair. And Émilie saw her hanging around Billy Williams’s truck. None of these things meant anything at first but when Kaye saw Crie deliberately put the chair off balance, and hookup booster cables to it, her curiosity was piqued, though she didn’t expect murder. CC was concentrating on what was happening on the ice, of course, but when she grabbed the chair and was electrocuted Kaye knew at once what had happened….”

I agree that people sometimes think that children are not able to plan violence and execute the plan. I never suspected Crie because of the way she is described when Gamache first saw her – almost catatonic- and that we had not heard of her ever challenging her mother. She could not have a face to face argument with her mother as she was too fearful. She had to be in control with no possibility of CC responding.

I watched curling during the last Winter Olympics. I have pondered the believability of Mother and Em hurling granite stones down the ice, even if they are not famous for playing well. as a Norh Carolinian! I do not know if this would be probable. ca

Can any northerners assist?

Sorry for my poor typing. I am recuperating from surgery and my dominant hand is rather out of commission.

Curling is played by people of all ages and shapes. It is not impossible for Mother to clear the house with a roaring rock since she has weight behind her. Skipping involves the strategy behind the game so as long as Em is able to set up the rocks by telling her team members where to put them, she can skip.

Curling is a game of skill far more than strength. Remember the lesson Emelie gave – it was about balance, symmetry and follow-through. She advised not to push the stone, but simply release it. You don’t need to be strong to play well.

My husband and I were introduced to curling when watching the Canadian series “Corner Gas”. We had read references to curling in books and newspapers but had never seen it played . We enjoyed every minute we saw during the Olympics. Those who say curling is boring, as some comics have done, are wrong. I wish we could see matches here at home, but since home is in Georgia, USA, that doesn’t seem likely.

I picked up on Richard Lyon as soon as The Lion in Winter was introduced and kept waiting and waiting for the connection to be made public. I also suspected Crie when it was said that she was a whiz at science.
As a fat kid myself I squirmed everytime I read a discription of her and her appearance. I will put that into my personal file.
I particularly enjoyed Gamache’s interactions with Emelie in this book. Sensitive and believe able …. Well done, Louise.
For me these books are not re-reads….so I have not had time to ruminate over much time.
Only finished Fatal G late last night. Insomnia has its uses.
Namaste.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The owner of this website has made a commitment to accessibility and inclusion, please report any problems that you encounter using the contact form on this website. This site uses the WP ADA Compliance Check plugin to enhance accessibility.