Devil in the White City – A Crapload of Creative Nonfiction

After reading Devil in the White City, I feel as though my work this semester was just a scratch on the surface of becoming a writer. Let’s face it. I am not attempting to become a writer in any way shape or form, and thank God, because otherwise, this book would have put me into my place. Reading DWC was definitely an experience. Its genre and style were both unique, and took some getting used to… but once I got into the swing of things - such as the juxtaposition of plot, and the shock-factor of the simple and dry explanations of graphic murders- it was eye opening.

 I can totally see the value and the strengths that Creative Nonfiction, as a genre, can have on a piece of literature. Several of these techniques we have been discussing all semester, and have been ‘attempting’ to work them into our own writing. I say attempting, because it’s a joke to think that I have even come close to replicating the skill and thought that has been put into this work. I can’t imagine how many hours were put into DWC.

Obviously I cannot take the role of a critic of DWC, as I am in no way a writer, but instead of “grading” the piece by the standards and requirements of Creative Nonfiction I myself have been graded on, I think I’ll take a stab at showing how DWC presented me with some ideas about how it should be done.

The key points of Creative nonfiction are as follows: Dialogue, Research, THE TRANCENDANT TRUTH, scene by scene construction, and style (figurative language, showing vs. telling etc), all of which are components of DWC

Research: Research, research, research. Information about architectural history and techniques of the era, Burnham’s and Holmes’s early careers, how Chicago won the right to hold the fair, The exhibitions of the world fair, the sheer amount of numbers and statistics (what the fair grossed daily, overall) – the list goes on and on. In fact, there are 33 pages of teeny tiny font dedicated entirely to listing Burnham's sources! Burnham seemed to enlist any type of material possible in order to produce as accurate account of the stories of Burnham and Holmes as he possibly could. Other than official records of weather, court cases etc, Larson drew on the personal letters and journals of his characters in order to find and deliver their true voice to his audience, creating depth and honesty withing the book. 

Dialogue: I can’t help but think about it. The hours it must have taken Larson to pull quotes out of letters, memoirs, journals, diaries, searching for the character’s own voices which could contribute to the story. I was actually shocked at the sheer amount of dialogue. Clearly the work has paid off. To me, the dialogue was part of the reason that stopped me from throwing the book down the trash chute down the hall.  Without the dialogue, the story would have been bland, and would have felt forced. It would have read like a textbook. I’ll be honest – it was difficult enough to wait out the anticipation of the setup of DWC – the construction of the World’s Fair and Holmes’ torture castle, but the Dialoge kept me awake – it seemed realistic and added life to the story.  The dialogue between Holmes and other characters was the most intriguing, as his creep factor increased with every deceit, and every charm he laid on to further his schemes.

Transcendant Truth: This portion is a great follow up after a description of the extensive research done by Larson. Although research has contributed invaluable details to the story, there has to be SOMETHING that isn’t taken directly from research. I understand that Holmes had a journal, and many people wrote letters and articles during and after Holmes’ schemes had reached the public. Is it possible that Holmes’ accounts in his diary / memoir are embellished? Fabricated? I wouldn't trust him for one second.  And the scene in which Holmes chloroforms Emmeline Cigrand? The vivid description of her struggle, Holmes’ satisfaction, cannot possibly be taken directly from his writings. Even if people write in their journals information that shows how their mind works, Larson would be using creative license when writing that Holmes’ smirked after killing a victim, or felt emotional pleasure as he listened to the screams of his victims. In the end of the book, Larson states that in order to describe the scene of Emmeline’s death (as seen in the quote below) he used testimony of the effects of chloroform, thus presenting readers with the transcendent truth. With the use of research, Larson was able to enhance scenes and create a more detailed and hard hitting story-line.

Style:  (148)The following passage pretty much sums it up. The language of DWC is not simple. This is not a typical history book version of the events of the World’s Fair, nor is it the typical presentation of the facts of the case of several murders at the Hand of H. H. Holmes. The language is painstakingly chosen. Every now and then I catch a phrase which seems perfect, such as the way that Olmstead’s description is given with words associated with plants and gardening (I touched on this in a previous blog post!) Take a look:

“Then came the inevitable, reflexive disturbance of muscles, like a dream of running. She released his hand and cast it away with splayed fingers. Her feet trembled as if tapping to a wildly beating drum. His own excitement rose. She tried to pull his hand away, but he was prepared for this sudden surge of muscle stimulation that always preceded stupor…slowly the energy left her, and her hands began to move in slow arcs, soothing and sensuous, the wild drums silent. Ballet now, a pastoral exit”

I could pick apart each phrase in this passage, but it would take me years to elaborate on the obvious dedication that Larson put into each and every word choice, each and every scene chosen to illuminate Larson's picture of the good and evil of the World's Fair. Everywhere you look Larson uses METAPHOR. DESCRIPTION, IMAGERY - the main ideas that we have always discussed in class. 

If you have gotten nothing else out of my blogs this semester, my friends, let this post give insight on Devil in the White City, a great example of the Do's of creative nonfiction. 

Super Freak

Herman Mudgett.

Aliases: 

Dr. H H (Henry, Howard) Holmes,  

Harry Gordon

Wives:

Clara Lovering (had one son with Holmes) – Abandoned.

 Myrta Belknap (had a daughter with Holmes) lived separate from Holmes, eventually understanding that he would never return to her.

Georgiana Yoke – married to Holmes with Minnie as witness.

Note:  All wives were married to Holmes at the same time as he never divorced before moving on to his next “love”

“Affairs” :

Emmeline Cigrand – convinced by Holmes to work at his pharmacy as a stenographer. Gassed in Holmes’ private safe.

Julia Connor – stolen away from her husband Ned, who ran Holmes’ pharmacy. Holmes had seduced Julia from Ned, who was forced to accept the pharmacy in place for his wife. Murdered as a result of a botched abortion which Holmes had promised would allow her to “awaken to the prospect of a new life as Mrs. H. H. Holmes”

Minnie Williams – engaged to Holmes and toured the fair with Holmes and her sister Anna. Both sisters were murdered.

Habits:

• Practicing on cadavers during medical school,

• Digging up and selling dead bodies to the medical school in order to have the money to pay for his education,

• Charming unsuspecting women to their deaths,

•  Conning others for monetary gain (opening multiple businesses, writing checks in false names, taking out life insurance on those who were about to become his victims, etc),

• Murdering victims via gas in an airtight space or via chloroform,

•  Practicing medical experiments on his victims,

•  Making profit from the skeletons of his victims,

•  Increasing the difficulty of his schemes (thus increasing his pleasure with his ingenuity and skill).

The Holmes portion of Eric Larson’s Devil in the White City is a show stopper. The details of the Chicago World’s fair, while interesting seem eclipsed by the monstrosity of Holmes. While Burnham is working at building both his reputation, and the reputation of Chicago with his work on the World’s Fair, Holmes’ work, while in the shadows, overshadows Burnham's within the text. While reading Larson’s work, I can’t help but think of what will happen in the next Holmes’ section, even as I am reading about the grandeur and vivacity of the World’s Fair.  

I can't even begin to describe the creepiness of this character, but even more interesting is the way in which Larson paints the drama and creepiness of this unique character. To feel the drastic change in tone and atmosphere from a Burnham chapter to a Holmes chapter, you'll have to read it for yourself.

Reviews on a book I have already read

   Well, I did it. 

    I finished the Devil in the White City, and I must say that I enjoyed it quite a lot.  As a writer, Larson was able to make it seem as though I was reading fiction.  He took a true event and made it personal; made it so that I actually loved some characters, felt bad for some, and completely despised others.  Without giving away too much detail of the ending, seeing that I want you (whoever may be reading this) to actually read this book, I will let you know that, unlike some books that leaving you guessing, questioning whether or not one thing happened, this book ties up quite nicely.  I also was a fan of the prologue and epilogue, bringing the book into a full circle by the time I read the final word on the last page.
   Each storyline was brought to a close by the end of the novel, which is something that I can fully appreciate.  With multiple stories going on at once, one story could get thrown on the back burner and forgotten about, but not here.  Larson finds a way to creatively, and factually, tie up all the lose ends, teaching the reader what happened during the days after the fair while also make it feel as though one is reading fiction.  Bravo sir, bravo.
   All in all (and trust me I know this will sound cliché) this book has taught me not to judge a book by it's cover, no pun intended.  When I started this project, I was dead set on reading In Cold Blood, and yet here I am, a few months later, completely glad that I made the switch.  I am sure that, if I did stick with my original choice, I would've been happy, however I don't feel as though I would feel as happy as I do now.  I believe the feeling is more or so a sense of accomplishment, mixed with a little bit of pride.  Am I patting myself on the back slight? Sure, but what's wrong with doing that every now and then.

Prendergast Revealed

   Finally, some closure on one of the numerous plots in this story.  Throughout the novel, the reader has been given little snippets of the man named Prendergast and his obsession with Mayor Harrison.  As the story progresses, we learn that this man is slightly mentally unstable, and yet, he seems to have no connection to the story whatsoever.  The fair progresses, everyone seems to be having a wonderful time, and there's Prendergast, moping an complaining about the fact that the Mayor hasn't appointed him as the corporation counsel.
   We begin to see his spiral downward in earlier chapters, when he begins writing angry postcards, a few mentioning the Jesus, to a lawyer named Trude.  Not only does this seem somewhat insane, but then the reader is told that someone spotted the man on the streets, walking in circles.  If this isn't a clear sign of someone who lost one too many marbles, I don't know what is.
   The actual reason for Prendergast to be in the novel doesn't make much sense until we find out what happens.  While everyone is curious to see what will happen on the last day of the fair, the Mayor, who Pendergast supported like no other, is living out his life.  With the anticipation of the Fair's end at an all time high, plans shift abruptly.  Prendergast, after being humiliated by those who worked for the Mayor, decides there is only one thing left to do.

    Prendergast shoot and kills the Mayor, and then turns himself in...

    With this, Larson finally gives the reader some closure.  Both main plots, Burnham's and Holmes', still are unfinished, leaving the reader guessing at what will happen next.  However, with the use of Prendergast, Larson has given the reader a small bit of closure, making them feel as though they have accomplished something so far.  This technique helps to keep the book going, but also serves as a way to finish up one of the sub plots that has been seen throughout the novel.

The Ferris Wheel

    After some further reading, the pace of the book is rapidly increasing.  The fair is almost open, the buildings are painted white, and everyone is preparing for opening day.  Everyone is doing their best to move forward with their work.  Not only that, but Burnham has found something to challenge the Eiffel tower.  Looking back, it is surprising how much the World's Fair has affected my own life, mainly in one way more than the other.
    During the World's Fair, a new attraction was introduced; the Ferris Wheel.  As a means to challenge the Eiffel tower from the previous World's fair, Burnham met a man, named George Ferris, who eventually would propose the idea of the Ferris Wheel.  In all my life, I believe I never once asked, "Who invented the Ferris Wheel."  I didn't even consider that it would be named after the man who created it.
    This train of thought led me down some interesting tracks.  As a child, when I would go to the fair that would come around for the fourth of July, the one ride I would always want to go on is the Ferris wheel.  The other rides were really fast and, as a little child, I didn't think I could handle them.  However, this gigantic wheel was slow enough to not make me sick, but high enough to still seem dangerous.
    For those of you who love movies, the Ferris wheel is seen in many of them, being the perfect setting for two people to have serious conversation.  The Ferris wheel can be seen in movies such as Never Been Kissed and even The Notebook.  Yes, those movies are considered to be chick flicks, but there is nothing wrong with watching them occasionally.  I mean, let's be realistic, who doesn't love the scene where Noah (Ryan Goslin's character) is hanging from the Ferris wheel, jeopardizing his life just to get the girl, but I digress.
    The fact of the matter is that the without the World's Fair, the world wouldn't have the Ferris Wheel.  I believe couples everywhere owe George Ferris and Daniel Burhnam a large thank you.

Prendergast?

    So far, this piece of literature has left me with several question.  Now, I could go on and on, rambling about why I think Larson keeps switching back and forth between plots.  The technique of using Burnham as a symbol for good and Holmes as a symbol for evil is fantastic.  I could even discuss how the anticipation about getting the fair built is an excellent back drop to these two plots.  However, that is not what I am writing about in this post.  As I sit here in front of my laptop, tired from a long day of work, eyes strained and watered from reading for the past hour and a half, I have one puzzling quest.

    Who is this Prendergast fellow that keeps popping up everywhere.

    During the course of the story, the reader finds out that while planning for the buildings of the fair is commencing, a man named Carter Henry Harrison loses the election for the position of mayor in the city of Chicago.  That's all well and dandy, however, the next small section makes no sense stating:

                          Elsewhere in the city. Patrick Prendergast grieved.  Harrison was his
                          hero, his hope.  The margin was so narrow, however, that he believed that
                          if Harrison ran again, he would win.  Prendergast resolved to double his
                          own efforts to help Harrison succeed.

    I believe a group "Huh?" is in order.  Larson randomly throws in this character with no explination of who is is.  Well played larson, well played.  I suppose I'll just have to wait and see who he is and what he has to do with the plot; the never ending, constantly flip flopping plot.