This 2007 book is the story of an exceptionally beautiful 9-year-old Rachel who is kidnapped by a pedophile. His fantasy is to keep her safe from the danger that he has imagined she is in. His plan is crazy and he eventually releases her, and the story is about what happens in the mean time. <Here> is a decent review that covers the basics.
There is a lot to the book, and I found it a very good read overall. As usual, my slant here is how the book portrays pedophiles, how realistic those portrayals are and how they relate to the universe of real pedophiles.
I have heard that most child abductions for sexual purposes consist of a quick sexual consummation and then the child's murder. I will also note that this sort of crime is extremely rare. The abductor Ron has a different slant. He is in love with Rachel and wants her for his own. He does not want to harm her. He outfits his basement to be suitable living quarters for a girl -- though locked quarters. I imagine many pedophiles have a fantasy of this kind, but if you stay in touch with reality and think it through, you realize it will never work. The child will miss her family, be frightened and miserable. Eventually winning her trust is far from likely, though possible if you count on Stockholm Syndrome, and you have to keep her hidden for years. The rapist/murderer has a simpler plan that for all its horror has a reasonable chance of working if the girl's body is never discovered or never linked to him.
"Cognitive distortions" is a phrase professionals use to describe how pedophiles think, especially when they break the law, and Ron has plenty. Along with the ones that let him imagine his plan will work, he sees her sitting on the lap of her landlord and decides she is being abused and his kidnapping will save her from that. (Somehow the sensible alternative of an anonymous tip to child services does not occur to him.) This too draws on a common theme among pedophiles. Why would a child want to have anything to do with a pedophile? Most often, the precondition is that the child is seriously lacking affection, respect and support elsewhere in her life, and the pedophile can provide those things. This actually happens fairly regularly when pedophiles have chaste relationships with children. Tragically, sometimes it also crosses a line into child sexual abuse.
Among pedophiles I have encountered online, a very few would fantasize about abducting a child, having sex with her in a terrified condition and then killing her. A great many would fantasize about helping a child escape from abuse and offering her a good home and life instead. In this respect Ron is accurately portrayed. Where he becomes extraordinarily rare is in actually thinking his plan could work and carrying it out.
To its credit, the story does not give some clear answer as to how Ron became a pedophile, nor does he introspect much on the subject. When he was 12, his 9-year-old stepsister initiated sexual contact with him via make-believe "sexing", consummated by way of frottage. This caused his first ejaculation, suggesting he was well into puberty. He is emotionally captivated as well and vows to marry her when she turns 18. I don't know if all 12-year-old boys would be excited by a 9-year-old who comes on to them, but I am sure that a great many would be who do not turn out to be pedophiles. It is a useful bridge that serves to make Ron's attraction more understandable and less foreign.
Ron resists the temptation to do sexual things with Rachel during the days of her captivity, but it is portrayed as a war between the alternatives of doing nothing and doing something monstrous. Towards the end he comes closest to abusing her. What was it he came close to? Perhaps engaging in frottage to orgasm as he did with his 9-year-old stepsister years before. Rachel's fear makes him stop instantly. If she had continued to find the tussling fun, maybe he would have continued. But stopping instantly when Rachel's fear shows is totally in character for him. Yet it's not clear this all-or-nothing idea is the most realistic. He does have an adult girlfriend Nancy who likes his lovemaking, so he knows something about female sexual response. A pedophile with his values might be more likely to try to engage a girl slowly, getting her used to one thing at a time.
But, to the point in the post title: Ron is not the only pedophile in the story. I am surprised that no one in reviews has remarked that there is at least one other, and quite possibly two.
The girl's mother Celia at one point tries giving piano lessons, and her only student is a man John Paulsen who takes an interest in them beyond the musical. She invites the man into her bed, but he is unable to get aroused and gives as his excuse his concern for Rachel, sleeping in a nearby room. The mother realizes that Rachel is the attraction for him, not her. In isolation, it could be because she is such a beautiful child and his interest is parental. But his inability to perform sexually with the mother strongly tilts the likelihood to him being an exclusive pedophile. That does not mean he is a molester. He rapidly disappears from their lives.
Another likely pedophile is Celia and Rachel's landlord Mika. They meet when they are caught in the rain near his house and he offers them temporary shelter. But after an hour's conversation he also offers them an apartment for free and over a course of years does many other favors for them. Could Rachel's beauty induce this generosity if his perception of it was only parental? It's possible. Nothing sexual happens between Celia and Mika over the course of years, which she dismisses because she quickly pegs him as gay. Yet we never hear of any men coming over or of Mika going out. Occasionally the book takes Mika's perspective and we hear his thoughts, which include great affection for Rachel, but nothing openly sexual or romantic towards her or anyone else. There is once again a missing sexuality that begs for an explanation. He might be a pedophile and not realize it -- which was my situation for the first 50 years of my life. It's possible that Gowdy has written his character totally unaware of this possibility, but nonetheless it exists in what she created. If you resist this idea, perhaps it's because of your natural assumption that pedophiles are horrifying. What's so terrible if he is? -- as we do know he's not a molester and is a valuable adult in Rachel's life.
These two pedophiles are in a way much more interesting than Ron. They never act on the pedophilia in a bad way, but it shows up subtly in the story as an attraction to Rachel beyond what most men would feel. There is no drama around their pedophilia, but that represents vast numbers of pedophiles, who live lives doing no harm to children.
No comments