However, the character who really made the novel enjoyable was Lisbeth Salander. She was tough, quirky, and different. Regardless of whether you thought of her as a protagonist or antagonist, she made Blomkvist seem like an old man. Nonetheless, they created a unique partnership in the book that allowed them to be a crime-fighting duo purely because of their differences. In fact, all the characters developed nicely based on their interactions with each other throughout the year in which the novel takes place. 
Lynn_Harnett
"Stunning debut for Swedish novelist"
Sign Up | Log In
content
content
members
Create
- Write a Review
- Post a Quick Tip
- Create a List
- Ask a Question
- Create a Poll
- Create a Community
Thanks for stopping by and reading my review. Yes, I highly recommend starting with the first book of the trilogy. Larsson is a pretty amazing author, so I have a feeling you will really enjoy this book, and the rest of the series.
The other two books have been on my TBR list for a while. Once I get some current books read and reviewed, I will probably tackle the other two. If you want to read them with me, I can wait for you to finish this book first.
A banned book list would be a lot of fun! I know some of Steinbeck's books have been banned.
Thanks for the article too! I'm going to read it now.
As far for the "altruistic" attributes, Blomkvist was the "conscience" in the novel. He was the righteous journalist fighting for the "little people." He demanded truth at all costs, and this was supported by all of his actions up until the very end, which seemed out of context based on how he was presented in this first novel.
No, I have not read the succeeding books, but I have purchased them to read in the near future. I heard the novels get better and that Lisbeth's character is more fully developed. I look forward to the rest of the series purely because Larsson is a fantastic writer, and I'm positive he will take the main characters to even further depths.
I did a little preliminary research on Larsson too, and I would say that Blomkvist is not a fictional representation of the author, especially as presented in the first book. My main source of frustration had to do with how his character jumped from point A to point C with no natural progression through point B.
Still, it was a good book, and I do advise reading it as well as the rest of the trilogy. :)
I have not read "Watchmen," so I won't compare the two characters.
However, Blomkvist is not insidious at the end of the book. I was disappointed that he didn't stay in character and do what he would have done at the beginning of the book. The beginning and middle of the book just felt disjointed from the end, which was rushed anyway.
As far as Blomkvist being corrupt, that is not shown or proven in this book. Perhaps in a later book but not in this one.
Also, I never rated "Watchmen" low, or at least I didn't mean to. I believe at the time I was trying to rate the film, which I saw, but maybe I mixed them up. Either way, I just corrected it. I know you mentioned this before, and I had been meaning to check what you were referring to.