Truth in Nonfiction discussion

I don't know about you, but Part 3 of ICB, "Answers", had me so spellbound that I sat in the Pub for a whole afternoon, reading and re-reading the section and completely neglecting my cup of chicken soup.

Of course, by now we have discovered the "why" and the "how" of the Clutter murders. The KBI (Kansas Bureau of Investigation) has gotten answers, but I think that we, as readers, still have quite a few questions. I'd like to discuss the relationship between Dick and Perry. I believe that ICB is actually about the murderers, instead of the murdered themselves.

Connections are being made (even though Dick cried, "Living witness! There can't be!" (223)), like with Floyd Wells and the families of both Dick and Perry, and a network of witnesses is being built up. One quote in particular that stood out to me was Dick's promise in an earlier section on page 100, "Sure, honey. I'm with you. All the way," which is shortly followed with Dick's avowal that Perry killed all four Clutters.

What do the different details, testimonies, and accounts in "Answers" say about Dick and Perry and their relationship? How does Capote paint Dick and Perry? Do you, at any point, feel sympathy for them?

Finally some answers. I agree with you Amy that ICB is seeming more and more like a story not about the murder, but about the murders. I think that this notion becomes extremely apparent in "Answers." I think that this chapter truly shows just how dependent Perry is on Dick. On page 194 Perry on finding Dick after waiting a long time for him feel that his voice is "like and injection of some potent narcotic drug." This excerpt shows just how dependent he really is. Within that dependency and need for a leader, I find sympathy for Perry, but also I find myself second guessing that and looking back to the testimonies by Perrys sister. Which make Perry out to be a very evil man, not like the weak and easily hurt man that is often described within the story. I believe that Capote wants to paint Perry especially as the two-sided criminal, one with deep sensitivity but also a deep rooted evil within, while Dick is painted simply with his bad being shown more and his compassion if only for his family shown very little.

I agree with Caroline that Perry is portrayed as a two-sided criminal. Where this is really see is when Perry spills the whole truth in the patrol car right after Dick threw him under the bus. Regardless of how gentle Perry seems, he doesn't seem like the person who would go down without a fight and we see that he has mixed feelings toward Dick, so it doesn't seem so surprising that he would also throw him under. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if this was an arranged testimony on their part, meaning if one goes, the other follows. Even if they have a strained relationship, it is rather strong.

As for the portrayal of Dick and Perry to the readers, I couldn't find sympathy for Dick whatsoever. His character is so calmly maniacal that it was too unsettling to sympathize with him. Perry on the other hand, is a different story. His first impression is a gentle and pitiful, easy for readers to connect with him. But throughout the story, I almost didn't buy it. Maybe it was just me, but I wouldn't think that a criminal on parole who had no problem with killing an entire family would be so friendly or kind to others. Not saying Perry should act like a brute in public, but his kindness and vulnerability seems a bit forced. In fact, this makes him scarier than Dick because you would never know what Perry is thinking by just looking at him. Perry is a smart and smooth criminal and no one could see that in the beginning because he's good at what he does.

ICB part three "Answer" is a terrific section of the book. Capote is transitioning the reader from the act of committing murder to the understanding of the lives of the murderers. It is clear that Capote feels the need more to stress personalized aspect of why the Clutter family was killed. It gives the reader some insight on the lifestyle and the harsh reality that, on a broad sense, that through breif dialog background and culture play huge role in the decisions we make throughout our lives. In this instance Perry has been portrayed as the "lesser of two evils" even though my feelings for Perry and Dick are very similiar. I am curious as to what lies around the "Corner."

This might sound silly but I kept finding myself thinking, oh wait, could the Clutter's still be alive? I knew, of course, that they had been killed but the way Capote divulged the events of the murder through Perry's testimony, I kept thinking, maybe Perry was able to call the whole thing off; maybe he was able to get Dick to realize the Clutter's are honest people, as Perry could see. Capote writes, "He says he don't have any safe. I knew right then it was true. He had that kind of face. You just knew whatever he told you was pretty much the truth" (237).

Perry can see the honest innocence in the Clutter's, so I kept hoping the murder would be called off (knowing it wouldn't be); Capote writes, "'These people are telling the truth. The one who lied is your friend Floyd Wells. There isn't any safe, so let's get the hell out of here'"(239). I got mad at Perry for allowing himself to be contained by the short leash Dick had put on him. When Capote writes, "'I tied his feet... I asked him if it was too tight," I just couldn't handle his character anymore (241). How could he be so concerned for the comfort of these people and then turn around and kill them? Perry's character confuses me. I just wish he could have done something to stop the murder seeing as he comments that he would have been happy wearing black stockings to cover his face and commit a robbery, leaving all to live; Clutter writes, "...I wanted the money as much as he did... But I hoped we could do it without violence. Seemed to me we could if we wore masks" (234). I figure Dick might have gone through with his mission alone, but maybe, if Perry had stood his ground, the murder might not have happened. Overall, I got more frustrated with the hypocrisy and passive aggressive nature of Perry's character, to the point where I wanted to yell at him to "be a man."

Until reading "Answer", I couldn't figure out Perry's character, because Capote portrayed him in two dissimilar lights. I do feel sympathy for Perry, because he had no good guidance in his life when he was young, which seemingly lead to his illegal actions throughout his life. It seems that finding treasure and paradise is his sole purpose in life, and he will do anything to achieve that. He is certainly influenced my Dick's remorseless, stubborn attitude. For example, Perry recalls, "I could see he [Dick] was thinking, Here I've set up this big score, here' we've come all this way, and now this punk wants to chicken out. He said, 'Maybe you think I ain't got the guts to do it alone. But, by God, I'll show you who's got guts.'.....and I told him, 'O.K., Dick. I'm with you.'" (Capote, 235). Also, I like what Capote writes at the end of his interview with Perry. "Nonetheless, he [Dewey] found it possible to look at the man beside him without anger--with, rather, a measure of sympathy--for Perry Smith's life had been no bed of roses but pitiful an ugly and lonely progress..." (246). This line is how I would describe my sympathy for Perry.

On the other hand, I have no sympathy for Dick. He is a brutal murderer ("We're gonna go in there and splatter those walls with hair" (Capote, 234)), a smart-ass toward Smith and Church, and shows no remorse for either. To think that he murdered four people to acquire about $40 is absolutely frightening and disturbing.

I agree with you, Amy! The reading went very quickly and I didn’t want it to end. As far as Dick and Perry’s relationship goes, I feel Capote paints them both as needing each other initially, Dick only temporarily needing Perry for assistance in the crime (Dick doesn’t seem to stay with anyone for too long) and Perry needing Dick as a long term friend. They seem to feel obliged to one another because of the crime, but as time goes on both desire to free themselves once they discover each other’s true characters. Dick admits wanting to rid himself of the “whiny” Perry, and Perry admits being confused as to why he ever admired a person like Dick. I feel Perry and Dick both clung to their first character assessments they made about each other. For the longest time this forces them to neglect not so subtle hints in character that they should have seen all along, because they want each other to be something they only pretended to be.
Although Tina makes some great points, I have a different opinion regarding certain aspects of Dick and Perry. I agree that Dick “threw Perry under the bus” as most of us probably expected, but I don’t think Perry did the same with Dick. I felt Perry’s account of the murders was sincere for the most part, and if Perry were really going to throw Dick under the bus, he wouldn’t have admitted to killing Mr. Clutter and Kenyon. I agree that Perry might be considered more dangerous because his actions are more temperamental, but I still think Dick is the more dangerous one. Dick’s cunning and manipulative nature make him so convincing, even Nye questions his knowledge regarding the case during Dick’s interrogation when he says, “His poise, his explicitness, the assured presentation of verifiable detail impressed Nye—though, of course, the boy was lying. Well, wasn’t he?” (221). I also find it interesting when Perry says, “I’m very sensitive; I usually know what people are feeling” (233) because this is an accurate portrayal of himself from what we’ve seen so far, but even Dick had Perry fooled. I realize Perry’s interpretations of people are sometimes tainted because his own feelings blur his judgment, but the fact that he didn’t see Dick’s true self all along makes Dick much more dangerous.
I never feel sympathy for them. Perry’s remark, “The glory of having everybody at his mercy, that’s what excited him” (239) makes me especially unsympathetic towards Dick. This idea is extremely disturbing and so is Dick’s obsession with young children, Nancy being one of them. I also agree with the two-sided criminal idea for Perry’s character. You almost want to feel sympathetic towards Perry from what we’ve learned about his past, but Perry’s own account of the Clutters’ suffering reminds you not to.

I believe that Perry and Dick's relationship is one of convenience. As Caroline quoted, Perry needed Dick like a drug. He always needed someone to take care of him and with Willie Jay and his father gone he relied on Dick to fill this role. Dick needed Perry in order to commit the murder and wanted to stick together in order to keep their freedom. But at some point in the novel I knew that their allegiance to each other had to end. In the third section Dick mentions that he should have killed Perry in some lonely street in Mexico. Perry also questions his relationship with Dick and his role in the murder throughout the entire book. I think in a way Perry is jealous of Dicks looks and confidence as well as the fact that he is jealous of Dick's loving family. At the same time, Dick is also jealous of Perry. I think he sees Perry as a pitiable character and recognizes that Perry's life has been more difficult than his own. When he is telling Nancy why he does things like robbing people, he says that he was an orphan. This reminded me of Perry's life more than anything else. It seems strange to me that he would want Nancy's sympathy even with what he is about to do. I think that even as Dick was committing these crimes he knew he was doing wrong and wanted an excuse and forgiveness.

It does not surprise me that Dick abandoned Perry and not the other way around. Perry was holding out and not giving anything away about Dick, while Dick had already threw him under the bus. As Perry had already expected, Dick was not as much of a team player or as strong as he always pretend to be.

But I definitely agree with some of the statements above. Perry and Dick keep flipping back in forth in my mind. I pity the lifestyle they live and the fact that they resort to such extremes to live and cannot get good jobs, but at the same time the means they choose to fulfill their own dreams are inexcusable

Dick could never ever have my sympathy, while Perry could have if this book was purely fictional. For example in the film Leon: The Professional, Leon is a detestable character for his job as a hit man; however, as the audience learns more and more about him and his father-like relationship with a 12 year old girl they cannot help but root for him. The Clutters were real people and, reminding myself of that constantly throughout the book, I cannot excuse Dick or Perry for what they did regardless of the considerate details that Capote provides about Perry. With that being said I find myself wondering why, if his motive is not to make the readers feel sympathetic, Capote decides to spend so much time sensitizing Perry: Capote tempts me to praise Perry for standing up to Dick and preventing him from sexually violating Nancy. Capote also reveals that Perry provides the mattress under Herb so he is more comfortable. Also, in this section, we discover that Dick and Perry did not really want to kill the Clutters and Herb did not think he and his family would be killed either. Dewey notes, “Herb couldn’t have suspected, or he would have fought. He was a gentle man but strong and no coward” (240). The cutting of Herb’s throat is Perry’s stubborn attempt to “make him admit he was a phony and a coward” (244). Perry admits that it was an issue between him and Dick, not with Herb; he thought Herb was very nice. Perry is driven by a resentment toward Dick for getting him in this situation and the embarrassment that comes along with it; a lousy silver dollar that he is scrambling for. I’m not even sure Dick realized that Perry wasn’t going to kill him and after that it just becomes binge killing. Capote writes, “The crime was a psychological accident, virtually an impersonal act” (245). Does Perry think that it was a mistake to kill this poor family? Does Dick begrudge it also and blame Perry? Since Perry described himself “as though I was reading a story,” am I supposed to just forgive and redeem him because he was in a trance did not have control of himself? I think the reason why Capote writes the story primarily on the murderers is because the Clutters “had nothing to do with their murders;” instead, the murders resulted because of the relationship between Dick and Perry. Their relationship is extremely complex relationship and all of its attributes lead up to the malicious murders. Sharing so many details is not to spawn sympathy for the murderers, but they are rather shared to better understand why the victims were murdered instead of “killed by lightening” (245).

It seems as though both Dick and Perry at first relied on each other pretty heavily. Both men had some second thoughts about the murder, and I think they stayed together as long as they did because they were afraid of being caught without the other one there. Earlier in the book Dick and Perry agreed that if they went down they would go down together, so it is surprising that Dick gave Perry up so quickly, especially when most of the evidence against them was circumstantial.
Right before they were arrested, however, Dick and Perry's relationship seemed more strained. Perry was becoming more and more dependent on Dick, and every time they were apart Perry would drive himself crazy worrying about whether Dick had bee arrested or turned himself in. Dick was growing tired of Perry, and I think this is why he sold Perry out.
Like Dewey, I'm tempted to feel sorry for Perry, because of his past, but even so nothing can excuse or explain what he did. Taking the lives of four innocent people is absurd and inexcusable, and I believe whatever punishment Perry and Dick receive in the last chapter was completely merited. All that's left to answer now is the question of what happens next.

I think that everyone has pretty much touched on how its much harder to express sympathy for Dick as opposed to for Perry. I think that this part of the book was very revealing, more then just Dick and Perry's motive for the murders, but the more central theme of the relationship between the two. This chapter of the book did, as numerous people have previously commented on, focus more on Perry's involvement with Dick, opposed to the groups involvement with the Clutter family. I think Capote did a great job in this section of the book, sway the reader into wanting Perry to get away from Dick, and for the reader to gain sympathy for Perry overall. When Perry and Dick had finished murdering the family and Dick kept repeating "no witnesses", Perry thought to himself to kill Dick, to ensure that there really were not any witnesses. "It was cold, and the wind and the cold felt good. The moon was so bright you could see for miles. And I though, why don't I walk off? Walk to the high-way, hitch a ride" (240). I wanted for Perry to turn around and walk off right then and there. The whole time the pair were in the house, I was very curious to see as to how Perry would act among the situation with Dick. The way Dick wanted to "deal with" Nancy, and how Perry intervened several times, and the way Perry went out of his way to make sure the family was comfortable made it even harder to bear when he kept on with the plan with Dick, murdering the Clutter Family "In Cold Blood". The end of the chapter when Dick spilled Perry's names over all the murders, and how Perry handled it was rather expected. The true sick person, Dick, was the first one to buckle under the mental pressure, whereas Perry is nearly respectful towards Dewey and Duntz. Im very curious to see as to what happens in the upcoming parts. I have a hunch that there is more behind Perry's deceiving and abstract character.

I am so glad Amy that you started this discussion by saying that you were totally spellbound by this section, because I think we all were. I literally have been curled up reading in the Green Room for 3 hours, and have completely fogotten about all other things around me. Crazy how that happens!
Okay, now to the serious stuff-
Wow, so we have our men. I feel like a weight has been lifted from my chest, as well as the citizens of Holcomb (especially Dewey). I could not help but smile at that scene when Dewey gets the phone call about Dick and Perry finally getting caught and put in custody (pg. 212). But I guess while we have gained so many answers, I feel like I still have a few about the relationship between Dick and Perry. For the first two sections of ICB I felt a strong sympathy for Perry, but after hearing him speak of the whole account and murders I do not understand why he did not just leave, run away, do what he knew was right. If he really was the man that I thought he was why had he not killed Dick when he wanted to; "...that's when I decided I better shoot Dick. He'd said over and over, he'd drummed it into me: No witnesses. And I thought, He's a witness. I don't know what stopped me. God knows I should've done it. Shot him dead" (245). We know Perry wanted so badly to kill Dick, but something kept him from pulling that trigger. In so many ways I wanted him to, but I will have to agree with Caroline when she says that Perry needed Dick like a drug, like his asprins. It was that connection, that bond, that was created between both men that kept Perry from leaving or killing Dick. As much as Perry despises and does not agree with Dick, he can not figure how to get himself out of that bond. He is stuck.
When Dick points all the murders on Perry, I feel like this is the ephiphany of their relationship. Perry had been putting such faith in Dick, always giving him that space in order for him to change and become a better man. But when Perry finds out that Dick blames all the murders on him, Perry pulls out all his faith on him. That was the last straw for Perry. I wonder if Dick and Perry were placed in the same cell what they would have said to one another, if they would have said anything at all. That would have been an interesting scene.
So to maybe move away from this topic a bit, did anyone else notice the dream that Dewey had? These reoccuring dream schemes I personally like, and think they add a bit of errie suspense to the novel. What do you guys think? Unnecessary or necessary?

For me, this story is much more than a simple murder mystery—it is also the story of Perry’s life. We watch him transform from this kid-at-heart kind of character, molding father figures out of Willie-Jay and Dick to replace the sorry excuse for his true father, into a man who confesses to murder with not only disappointment in himself, but also understanding of his criminal act and respect for the authorities holding him. Along the way, we watch as Perry realizes that his dreams of, “diving deep…toward sunken treasure—were gone”. He also reconsiders past thoughts of suicide as a “tremendous fascination”, to being “the specific death awaiting him”…foreshadowing? (202). The experiences Dick has forced Perry to endure have caused him to grow up, and although he has progressed into a man now, during the murders he was still, to me, more like a teenager. Like the average teen, he considered standing up for himself, but feared the judgments he would receive from his peers (Dick). So rather than a drug per say, I would classify Dick as more of the father Perry so much craved in his life, and like most children, it takes a lot to lose trust in their parents. Thus, Perry’s fear of disobeying Dick, and losing the third father in his life.

Going off of Mallory, I think the dreams are definitely a really cool aspect of this story. In a way, both Dewey’s and Marie’s dreams sort of give us the allusion that the Clutters are still part of the investigation, despite their deaths. Also, Perry’s sister’s (Mrs. Johnson’s) imagination of “the dead as well as the living” provides a bit of eerie allusion to both/either the past and/or the future (187).

This might be going off on a little tangent, but reading "Answers" made me think back to what my Psych professor was telling us today in class about split-brain studies. He mentioned how, in order to lessen the severity of certain forms of epilepsy, patients can go through surgery to separate the hemispheres of the brain, which, in the process, separates the cohesion of thought process/ physical actions. He gave an example of one patient he worked with who was simultaneously buttoning and unbuttoning his jacket to go outside with the researchers to be tested; because the patient was reluctant to be tested, one of his hands automatically unbuttoned each button that his other hand had just finished buttoning. Since his brain hemispheres weren’t connected, they weren’t able to think and act together. They each made their own decision and let the parts of the body that the hemispheres could control carry out the desired actions.

Anyway, hearing Perry’s side of the Clutter murder made me think back to the split-brain patients. Everything Perry said about the night of the murder seemed to contradict his actions. For example, he made it seem like he wasn’t going to enter the house in the first place. In fact, there nothing that he said about his thought process that made me think he was actually going to go into the house. But then all of a sudden, he’s walking into the house with Dick! What! Perry didn’t really explain why he changed his mind (although I guess it’s implied that the peer pressure and liquor helped a bit), but instead explained his actions. Another example is the ways he comforts all of his victims. He makes it seem like he has no intention of hurting them, but instead merely leaving them in the robbed house. But then all of a sudden, he’s killing them! What! He never seems to mention enough of the thought process for WHY he does something, but instead the thought process for why he’s not going to do something (which he later does). He seems to have a very contradictory mind, and I do, in fact, sympathize with that. Obviously Perry does not have a split brain, but I still think that Perry is psychologically fascinating. I wish I knew more about psychology and Perry’s brain to be able to see if there’s more to his horrifying actions than just a rough childhood. Does anyone have a little more experience in this field, or see any other signs or explanations for both Dick and Perry’s behavior?

It seems we all agree that ICB has taken a turn from straight murder mystery to a psychological thriller, especially aimed at understanding Perry. After having read this section, it seems Capote's sympathy for Perry is perhaps born out of a deep and intense intrigue for Perry's character. There is a much stronger emphasis on Perry than on Dick, and I wonder if this is due to an interest and sympathy on Capote's part, or perhaps because there was simply more information able to be gathered on Perry.
I too find Perry to be an intriguing character. He certainly doesn't come across as the cold-blooded monster that Dick seems to be, yet there is no excusing him from his involvement in the murders. He seems to me to be "lost", unsure of his role in life, and scared to or perhaps not realizing that he has full power to take control and save himself. He follows Dick along simply because Dick provides a measure of guidance and confidence that Perry, in his uncertain state, is simply drawn too. I think it is perhaps this "lost" quality that drew Capote too him, and draws the readers to him as well.
A few people mentioned Dewey's dream, and other dreamlike qualities throughout this section (and indeed the book as a whole), such as the characters who have reported imagining that they have seen certain members of the Clutter family alive (Mrs. Kidwell, p. 207). These are interesting because they offer a spooky element to the story. These constant reminders of who the Clutters were as people prevent us from fully moving on past the murder. I think perhaps this helps to reflect the state of mind of many of the inhabitants of Holcomb, and keeps the reader closely and emotionally tied to the story even as we focus more on Dick and Perry.

I want to branch out from a few different posts, but will start with Amy’s initial framework for the discussion. As this thread began, we thought about the relationship between Dick and Perry now that they have actually been identified as the killers. As I contemplated this relationship, I noticed that while reading the section I felt differently about Perry, determining that it may be a result of Capote’s portrayal of him as Capote seemed to loose the sympathy he once held while writing about his character. By the time of their interrogations, I saw a weakness shine through in Dick, a surprise to me as I expected he would remain stone-cold and try to hold true to the elaborate lie he and Perry had planned to tell for as long as he could last against the investigators who were so sure that they must be the pair convicted. In a sense, I saw a switch in the roles of Dick and Perry as Dick weakened and Perry gained strength. Perry finally impressed me during his chained car ride back to Kansas (p. 233). For the first time Perry finally steps up, defends himself, and says what he wants. Dick was no longer in charge of him and although he was now under control by the prosecutors, he is able to freely say what he wants and get the total truth off his chest, regardless of the penalties that will soon follow. It is quite ironic that although he has been caught, he has also been set free. Capote ended nearly every section about Dick and Perry with a mystery. As a result, I was still left searching for more throughout the section. Everything I needed to know, the who, what, where, when, why, and how, had been told, yet I was still looking for more. I wanted the intimate details and yet again Capote kept me searching and lurking through the pages. Who pulled the trigger four times? That is what I was itching to know the most. On a few occasions, there was a suggestion that it may have been Perry, which surprised me and made me want to deny that possibility, for I saw him as the nicest killer their could ever be…as strange as that sounds. He actually cared for the Clutters at times by placing a pillow or cardboard box under them for comfort, or talking to Nancy and sharing tidbits of their lives with each other. It did not fit the normal assassin profile. Ultimately I see Perry as a broken man rather than a careless criminal, yet this section made me reconsider my opinions about him. I grew confused by my interpretations of Perry and ended up wondering, have I misinterpreted the characters all along?
I want to speak to Mallory’s point in regards to the reaction of Holcomb once news broke that the killers had been identified. In my opinion, Dewey was the only person to show a happy reaction. As the broadcast is heard in the diner (p. 230), the people are still second guessing the validity of it; they still believe that a killer, or at least an accomplice, is prowling among them. I found this rather saddening. They may never regain the strength to feel comfortable in their tiny, close-knit community. Also to return to your final point, Mallory, I loved the incorporations of the dreams. Although Capote likely fictionalized these pieces quite a bit, I thought they set a phenomenal stage for the coming events. Prior to the capture of Dick and Perry, I felt a pretty strong pull into the story during Dewey’s dream. I thought that this aspect of the novel was able to clue us in on how hard the people of Holcomb were hit by the murder and prolonged arrest, especially Dewey and Marie as we were able to get inside their head during their dreams.
Overall, I was once again impressed by Capote’s ability to keep us searching for more from the story. He continuously twists the story, pulling us back and forth between characters and events as he holds on to the tiniest details, which mean so much once finally revealed.