Book Review #26: Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn

I want to begin this review by saying that it will be extremely spoiler heavy. This book came out OVER a decade ago (2012), and the movie came out NEARLY a decade ago (2016). If you’ve managed to avoid the spoilers and big reveals so far, I’m assuming it’s because you really don’t care about this book. Either that, or you are still waiting to read it, which is why I’m placing this acknowledgement here in the first place. If you’re still avoiding spoilers for this book, you’ve been warned.

The reason I’m including spoilers in this post is because it’s very hard to discuss this novel in-depth without revealing the plot. Flynn’s writing throughout this book is a masterclass in foreshadowing, deception, and character development, and in order to discuss those literary devices, it’s necessary to discuss the main “spoiler” and other plot points throughout the book.

Gone Girl is the story of Amy and Nick Dunne, a once happy couple that comes under scrutiny when Amy Dunne disappears. The beginning of the novel follows Nick after Amy’s disappearance, detailing his mindset and the measures he takes to help investigators look for his wife. Nick’s story is interspersed with Amy’s diary entries that begin at the start of their relationship, recounting a girl-meets-boy story that eventually turns into a boy-hates-girl story.

Of course, the reader is uncertain this entire time about what actually happened to Amy and whether or not Nick is involved. The sections from his perspective proclaim he had nothing to do with his wife’s disappearance, but we aren’t sure if he’s an unreliable narrator or if he’s telling the truth. Amy’s diary entries seem awfully incriminating, but we can’t be certain if they’re telling the whole truth either. The entire first half of the book is a he-said-she-said about Amy and Nick’s relationship, and the reader must try to figure out the truth from their piecemeal accounts.

Because this is my second time reading the novel, I saw a lot more foreshadowing than when I read it the first time, specifically in Amy’s diary entries. If you’ve already read the book, I would highly recommend reading it a second time because a lot of her passages reveal so much more about her character once you realize that she’s writing them as a scorned, sociopathic lover and not an abused, down-on-her-luck housewife.

Because, of course, she’s not actually missing. But we’ll come back to this thought.

When I first read the book, I really didn’t care for Amy Dunne. Her diary entries were often judgmental, and I thought she seemed a bit out of touch. Of course, she garners more sympathy once her husband turns cold and violent, but from the beginning I remember feeling odd about the diary. I’m going to say that I think this is intentional on Flynn’s part. Amy, the orchestrator of this story, believes she’s a master manipulator. She believes she can control almost anyone, and she does not doubt that people will wholeheartedly believe her diary.

However, as the reader, I truly didn’t wholeheartedly believe it. While that could just be my own personal gripes, the character of detective Rhonda Boney also felt strange about the diary entries. Because of this, I think Flynn intentionally wanted us to question the diary a little bit, just like Rhonda Boney did, to show that even though Amy thinks she has the idea of “emotional appeal” down-pat, she can’t get it quite right. This lends credibility to the idea that she’s a true sociopath. She has a little bit of a conscience, enough to understand emotions and morals, but she can’t fully apply them in an authentic way. Us normal people can tell that her story is just too meticulously crafted.

During this second read, I could really see how Amy crafted “Diary Amy” as a “cool girl”. The “cool girl” is an idea that Amy is obsessed with, and it’s one of the most talked about parts of this novel. Diary Amy is laid back. She makes jabs at other girlfriends and wives for being too uptight with their partners. She discusses feelings of jealousy that she shoves down because she’s trying to be “cool” for her boyfriend. Eventually, the reader understands that Diary Amy, by trying to keep her “cool girl persona”, is becoming trapped in her relationship. She is the ultimate wife (by the end of the diary), and her husband refuses to appreciate her, eventually coming to resent her for the traits he once seemingly adored.

Initially, we feel bad for Amy, although we know something must be off. Just like detective Rhonda Boney, whose great instincts cause her to question Amy’s disappearance off the bat, we know something is a little too hokey with this diary.

Because, as I alluded to earlier, she’s not really missing. Amy has framed Nick for her own murder, intending to eventually kill herself and let her body be found so that he will surely go to prison (with the hope of receiving the death penalty). We find out that Nick has been cheating on Amy for nearly a year, something she herself knows about, and because of this betrayal, Amy uses that year to plan this elaborate ruse.

She befriends people in her community, telling them stories of her husband’s abuse. She plants DNA evidence to corroborate her disappearance. She stages the scene so that the detectives think Nick has murdered his wife and made it LOOK like a kidnapping instead. It is completely unhinged, but so well done that it goes exactly to her plan. Then, Amy leaves town on her own, intending to watch Nick’s life unravel before killing herself and floating her body down the river to later be found as the grand finale.

This, of course, leads us to the famous “Cool Girl Monologue” that Amy gives when she reveals her true self to the reader (about halfway through the book). Of COURSE Diary Amy was too kind, too understanding, and too relaxed. That’s who Amy was trying to be for Nick, until she realized that this level of nonchalance is completely unsustainable. She rails for the next few pages about how most relationships start with fakeness. We try to craft ourselves into what we think men (or our partner) want, creating different variations of the “cool girl”, instead of just being ourselves.

Now, I know this monologue has been heavily discussed, and there are all sorts of opinions about it. I, for one, enjoyed it immensely. While Amy isn’t completely correct in her analysis, she does bring up great points about what we now call the “not like the other girls” or “pick me girls” trends. This can also be referred to as internalized misogyny. It’s the idea of women incorporating designated “male” traits into their personality to distance themselves from other women. These traits make them seem like “one of the boys”, or someone a man doesn’t have to perform for.

Amy incorrectly assumes that all women do this, but she’s not wrong to say that internalized misogyny is something many women deal with. However, Amy herself is extraordinarily antagonistic towards the idea that women do this, even though she admits freely to enticing Nick with her own falsely crafted personality. It’s one of the most hypocritical monologues out there, and it reveals how delusional Amy is in regards to her own sense of self. Our first introduction to the real Amy shows us that she’s a true narcissist to her core, because she can’t possibly believe that some women don’t fake every facet of their personality, because all she can do is fake who she is.

She details for us the other personalities that she’s tried on, fully believing that other women do the same thing. While there are women who adopt different personas or styles in the name of self-discovery, they don’t typically change every facet of their being to match this style. This is what Amy does. She’s a chameleon who clinically changes every single thing about herself to create a new vision. With this monologue, Flynn gives commentary on the idea of internalized misogyny while also characterizing Amy as a true, bonified narcissist. It’s really brilliant, I think.

Amy also seems to think that her need to swap personalities stems from her parents’ career choice. They’re the co-authors of the Amazing Amy books, which are children’s books that are based on Amy’s life. Amy says that wherever she failed in life, the fictional Amy succeeded, which gave her a warped sense of self. I have no doubt that this would create incredible self-esteem issues, but it’s really just a way for Amy to further absolve herself of any wrong-doing. She also reveals that she absolutely hates her parents, whom we know care a lot about her through Nick’s perspective, which adds to Amy’s villainousness. She despises her parents because she believes they harmed her in this way on purpose. Amy can’t fathom doing anything without a direct purpose or intent, so her parents must have had this intent.

Both Nick and Amy acknowledge the psychological effects her parents novels had on her growing up. However, one doesn’t fastidiously plan out their spouses murder because of personality deficiencies caused by being overshadowed by a series of novels. In my wholly unprofessional opinion, the deficiencies would have had to be present first, then were further exploited by this odd dynamic between Amy, her parents, and the books.

I think it makes sense for Amy to believe that her parents screwed her up. A narcissistic sociopath like Amy would not blame herself. She blames Nick for the downfall of their marriage, and she blames her parents for “creating” her. I do find it odd that Nick also credits her parents for creating this “monster”. He does sincerely believe that Amy is completely at fault for her behavior, but if I were in his shoes, I don’t think I would be blaming Amy’s parents at all.

While they may have sabotaged her self-esteem with these novels, plenty of people have much worse childhoods without becoming self-righteous murderers. It seems odd for Nick to make this connection to her parents, who supported him until the evidence stacked up too high. However, Nick does tend to blame his father very heavily for his own issues as well.

This is one of the more interesting parallels between Amy and Nick. They both have a lot of insight into their own issues, and even though they’re extremely self-aware, rather than correct these issues, they choose to blame their parents for them without any attempt at self-correction. In Nick’s case, because Nick’s father never showed emotions, verbally abused his mom, and was just a terrible person, Nick has a LOT of issues with vulnerability and communication.

With these personality traits, Flynn seems to be showing how different parenting styles can affect the way children grow up, and how refusing to take accountability for these negative traits can cause a lot of self-sabotaging. It brings about a nature vs. nurture discussion, in a way. Had either Nick or Amy had different parents, different socioeconomic statuses, etc., how much differently would they have turned out? It’s heavily implied that their childhood trauma is a large factor in their adult actions and behaviors, so had they had different childhoods, what would have happened?

We’ve talked about how Amy’s childhood affected her, and for Nick, his emotional trauma affects him heavily during the investigation. When he should be an inconsolable, grieving mess, he appears almost bored because he’s trying so hard to numb his emotions (which was his response to volatile situations in his childhood). Amy knows this about him and uses it to her advantage, which further shows how diabolical and premeditated she is.

Truthfully, Amy is a wonderful villain. She has an extreme sense of justice, and she is completely unapologetic as she doles it out. In her mind, though she knows her actions are “wrong”, she feels they are deserved. I think Flynn’s portrayal of Amy is one of the best portrayals of a truly psychotic woman. While we may feel slightly (very, very slightly) sympathetic about Amy’s childhood, we understand that it’s not the reason Amy “went bad”. She’s just a true villain, and I really appreciate that. I think all too often we love to give a villain a backstory to justify their actions, but Amy’s actions are not justifiable, and they’re really only understandable in a purely logical sense (A leads to B leads to C, even though C is murder).

While Nick is clearly not a sociopath, the childhood parallels are some of the more interesting things Flynn includes in this novel. There’s the idea that Nick and Amy are toxically perfect for one another. He had just the right amount and right kind of damage to set her off (a.k.a. reach her potential as a murderess), and she had just the right amount of neuroses and psychopathy to bring Nick up to her level (a.k.a. force him to reach his full potential to fight for his life).

Eventually, Nick figures out that the only way he can clear his name is to plead with Amy to return. He does this by going on talk shows and saying exactly what she wants to hear. He screwed up, he’s a bad man, he’ll be better if she comes back, he just wants her to return, etc.

Post-disappearance, Amy has tried (and failed) to rough it. Having always been wealthy, she is immediately taken advantage of in the outside world. While she can control people she knows well, she has no control over people with real-world experience.

Side note: I love the idea that Amy, this psycho who has ruined multiple lives at this point, is taken advantage of by a couple of (what she would describe as) hicks. It’s such a great way to show that she’s not the mastermind she thinks she is, even if she does have Nick wrapped around her finger. In the real world, Amy is a gullible hack like everyone else.

After losing all of her money, she phones an old boyfriend who has his own unhealthy obsession with her. This is where she remains, unsuccessfully trying to turn Desi away from her, until she starts hearing that Nick wants her back. She believes she can save their relationship, because she’s absolutely mental, and she kills Desi (the old boyfriend) to frame him for her kidnapping. Then, she is the kidnapped and battered wife who returns to Nick. Of course, his innocence is only maintained so long as Amy stays alive, so he can’t harm or kill her even though he (at least he claims to) desperately wants to.

There’s a point where Nick (after figuring out Amy’s plan, after Amy returns, and after he realizes there isn’t much he can do to actually expose her because she’s thought of everything) thinks about how his wife has literally murdered someone for him. How many people can say their spouse has killed for them? It’s a really screwed up thought, and I think shows the reader a last bit of insight into Nick. While Amy is unapologetically screwed up, Nick must also be screwed up to be able to reach her level.

The novel ends with them remaining together. Amy is the sweetheart of America, and has full control over the narrative. Although Nick desperately wants to out her, he can’t find a way to do it without dragging himself down too. She ends up using sperm that they sent to a sperm bank to get pregnant, further ensuring that Nick won’t harm her physically. At the very end, there is a last bit of foreshadowing where Amy seems mad at Nick for something he’s said, so I think we can safely assume that they don’t get a happy every after.

Overall, I think Gone Girl is one of my favorite mystery novels. It is extremely well-written and well fleshed out. While the framing may seem a little over the top, Flynn does a great job of showing how Amy gets away with it due to the media attention, incompetence of law enforcement, etc. I like to believe that eventually, Amy is found out and there is a really twisted Netflix documentary made about her story. I would totally watch it.

The Lit Wiz


Posted

in

by