I was wondering about Lisbeth’s revenge on Bjurman. I mean, are we supposed to cheer? Personally I found it just as disgusting, if not as horrifying, as the original rape. The tattoo may have been a just punishment, however. Do two wrongs make a right for Lisbeth?
Posted by Ro in Ireland , 3 February 2011
Lisbeth is indeed a fascinating character. She planned out her actions against Bjurman consistent with her desire to simply be left to live. I think she does care about right or wrong, which has a lot to do with consequences. And I don’t think it was even so much about revenge, per se. For example, she wasn’t overly concerned about revenge on her father for many years — that was more about stopping him from doing more harm. She never seemed vengeful to me. She did not choose to kill Bjurman; she did not choose to castrate him. She chose to show him what it was like to be the victim. And to set him up so that he could not harm her again. I don’t think she even wanted to control him, so much as she was willing to do what it took to prevent him from controlling her. As people have mentioned above, she knew well that the authorities were not on her side; every contact with them spiraled into a kafkaesque nightmare. Are we supposed to cheer? No, I don’t think so — but it was fascinating to watch her lock him up, without bars. Tattooing him with his crimes was brilliant. Sure, tattooing hurts — but in terms of physical pain, she gave him less than he gave her. And it served as pretty effective “castration,” too.
Posted by thoughtful in Maryland ,
I do wonder though, why Lisbeth doesn’t try to show the authorities she isn’t retarded though. I mean she’s 25 and she’s perfectly capable of living alone and taking care of herself. Her history is against her, sure, but if she went to the care workers/social services and acted normal, talked to them, let them do some test on her, after some time they would probably realise she is okay and release her. I know she’s against authorities, but she’s really making things hard on herself. She probably has Asperger’s Syndrome, she’s socially awkward, but not to a huge extent….she could at least try, instead of acting like she can’t even speak a word and has severe mental disabilities. What is she achieving with that behaviour??
Posted by Cass in Christchurch, NZ ,
I say Go Lisbeth. He deserved everything she did to him and more. Karma is a bitch!!
Posted by LeeStarr in Melbourne ,
Since all is fictional we can respond in any vein possible. Two wrongs don’t make a right but there was only one wrong. Revenge served up cold is not a wrong but simply an leveling of the playing field.
Posted by Paula in Telford, PA USA ,
she was just out to pay him back with what he did to her and probably to others and make sure it would never ever happen again
Bjurman was no better than Cardinal Lahey pleading guilty to thousands of counts to child porn visiting Thailand and similar port repeatedly even after the church made a $15 settlement for molestation charges decades before. Bjurman was her Guardian. He practiced with impugnity what he declared rules of a a sustained rape with no end in sight. He got off way to easy. OK, if your not into a smooth device of practice for the job, how about castration? You can even knock him out first if your squemish. Seems more befitting to me. Then throw the molester in jail and let the penile, I mean penal system work its miracle of rehabilitation. I believe Lisbeth has no room for malice in her arsenal.
Posted by Colm Heneghan in Park Ridge, IL ,
The question of right/wrong is less interesting than the apparent use of the tattoo. Not likely to undress around many women with that tattoo, so the function of the tatoo is not revenge but more along the lines of a restraint against future abusive behavior by Bjurman. In many ways it is an elegant solution and more effective than any restraining order.
Posted by Spooner in USA ,
Sorry, nothing of the kind. She expected to film him forcing her to another felatio. Poor kid never thought what evil was in store for her. It was revenge allright, in the right measure for the offence, according to her own Moral Compass (?things are either good or evil? ? this is how Mikael and Dragan Armanski describe her to bublanski after they find her prints on the gun).
Posted by Aharon in Ramle, Israel ,
The key is to REALLY put yourself in her place. How could you do less than what Lisbeth did? I’d have killed him, she didn’t. I was, frankly, astounded that she let the slime live. And he deserved more than she gave him.
Posted by Lucy in Quincy, IL UA ,
Given Bjurman’s style with women, I question the effectivness of the tatoo. By the time a woman sees it, it is too late. Of course, Lisbeth kept track of his activities too.
Posted by Mark in Millis, MA ,
in my opinion bjurman deserved exactly what happened to him because he is such a filthy old prick and he exploited salander in every possible way i felt so bad for her but she got her revenge and that was an example set for bjurman’s type of people.
Posted by trinity ,
I think that bjurman got what he deserved, she should of castrated him too, he was a filthy sex fiend.
Posted by v.heather in perth australia ,
I was so wxcited about the book and the film! I support Lisbeth in her revenge. She could have cut his eggs. Both films are great and I felt so sick and my ass was acking during this scene =)It was so pitty for me to finish the book..I love Lisbeth and Michael!
Posted by Anna in Yekaterinburg, Russia ,
this was the moment i fell madly madly in love with lisbeth for the revenge she got!
Posted by candace in los ángeles ,
Bjurman got what he deserved. it doesnt matter about right or wrong. bjurman raped lisbeth so lisbeth beat the shit out of him. it was never about right or wrong it was about revenge. lisbeth’s mind followed a simple rule which is you do shit you pay the price even if you pay it in a “wrong” way what he did was wrong so same thing happened to him
Posted by ily in new york ,
and Cass if you have readb the other books you would understand that she never trusted the police she figured itb out her own way. she didnt wanna end up in an institution again like when her father had dirty cops lock her up
Posted by ily in new york ,
Lisbeth had every right to do to what she did to Bjurman. Lisbeth is Zala but with her own moral code and I wonder if the dragon on her back is sortof the preverbial monkey on your back. Reminding her never to become totally like your father.
Posted by sonya in new britian ,
As Lisbeth told on the movie ( Hollywood Version) that Bjurman is not allowed to be with another woman because Lisbeth knew he is going to do the same he did with her. And put some tattoo. I think it is the right thing that Lisbeth to do it because if she didn’t do it maybe Bjurman will never stop to rape her. ( maybe) Lisbeth maybe have other way to do it so she put that tattoo as a sign of warning. Actually there is nothing wrong what she did but if u are asking why didn’t she report it to the police.Because Lisbeth told to Mikael that if he calls the police she will go away and never hear her from her again. Why ? because Lisbeth never trust the police. Instead of staying in the bars and be freed for another years she put that tattoo as a sign of punishment maybe Lisbeth will thought that maybe if Bjurman stayed in prison for years he might escape and do it again on women.Or maybe if Bjurman was free he will do the same crime again and again. Or maybe she did because she wants to feel Bjurman the pain she’s feeling when she was raped.
Posted by Mawyy
in PHILIPPINES ,
It was the best way of revenge I ever seen in my entire life I mean does men’s like Bjurman exists they try to advantage of the situation it’s really disgusting and I will do it if was my case. He really mess up with the idea that lisbeth would keep discreet or maybe she couldn’t say something to anyone or she couldn’t do anything about it, he was surprised I guess when he found herself that she filmed the rape. He deserved what he got.
Posted by Wspjims in Zurich ,
I think it was more of an eye for an eye deal. Bjurman’s position in the book is to act as her guardian- a certain of authority, but he takes advantage of that authority. As it’s emphasized in the book that Lisbeth has a serious distrust when it comes to people who should to listen to her. Bjurman took it as she doesn’t know how to take care of herself or how to resolve situations, but he finds that out after he experiences what she experienced. So that would probably be where an eye for eye deal comes in. In my opinion I think he got served.
Posted by Kristin in Pittsburgh ,