We are the Light, Matthew Quick, author; Luke Kirby, narrator
After a horrific terror attack at a movie theater, murdering almost 20 people, but affecting far more who survived or who were friends or relatives of those survivors, as well as those who were killed, a town has to find a way to heal. The emotional consequences and after-effects of the tragedy were enormous. How could anyone justify the senseless murder or the loss? How could they cope with their grief? The heroes who have to sometimes commit murder, to stop the killing, suffer as well, from emotional trauma. Lucas Goodgame was married to a victim. He was already suffering from PTSD as a result of his service as a helicopter pilot in Vietnam. He murdered the shooter. Now he is suffering from the shame and guilt of his heroism. He does not see himself as a hero. He writes letters to his former analyst, Karl, a therapist who followed the philosophy of Carl Jung. Although he does not write back, the story unfolds as the letters are read.
Lucas had been a shy, retiring, sensitive youth, from a home with dysfunctional parents and a mother who was demanding and authoritarian. When he met Darcy, she was able to round him out and make him whole. She was able to free him from his mother’s negative influence. They married, but didn’t have children. They didn’t want to bring children into this toxic world. They were both educators. He was a hero to the kids with whom he interacted. He helped troubled kids.
After the attack at the Majestic theater, which took the life of his wife, Darcy, he had an emotional breakdown. Although he tried to stop the attack, he could not save his wife. He had murdered Jacob, the killer. That action saved the lives of many others. Still, he was burdened with the guilt of not being able to save her. He sees himself as a villain. Darcy’s best friend, Jill, moves in with him to help him through this terrible moment in his life. Secretly, he has lost touch with reality. He believes that Darcy is not dead, but that she is an angel who visits him, flying in through the window, leaving feathers behind as evidence of her visit.
When Jacob’s brother, Eli, begins to camp out in a tent in his yard, Jill and Lucas take him in to help him, too. Together, Lucas and Eli plan a movie production to help bring emotional release and unity back to the suffering community. They want to bring back the theater that had been shut down and scheduled for demolition. The powers that be thought that would heal the community, but Lucas and Eli plan a production that will heal them, instead, by having them face and deal with the monster that caused the chaos. They will show that the monster also had a good side, by showing that we are all good and evil.
Using letters to Karl, his former Jungian therapist, Lucas tells the story. Lucas was and is now, totally attached to, and in need of, this very same therapist who now has a restraining order against him. He never responds to Lucas. As time passes, Lucas stops seeing his wife as an angel, stops writing to his therapist, and finds a way to heal the community and himself.
The story is hard to follow, at times, making it hard to decide what is real and unreal, for the reader as well as Lucas. As Darcy stops flying through the window with feathered wings, and as his letter writing to Karl diminishes, his relationship with Jill grows and that helps him to deal with and face reality. The use of names is clever. The current crime wave of mass school shootings is makes the story more relevant. The subtle use of wit, in the midst of so much pain, softens the effect of the traumatic event for the reader.
A monster invaded the town, and the monster had to be purged. Eli and Lucas transformed him into a victim too. Then the people and the town were able to move on. Both Eli and Lucas were dysfunctional. Both had mothers who were influential in their dysfunction. The mother of Lucas “guilted” and shamed him all the time. She made him feel inadequate, unable to achieve his destiny. The mother of Eli made his brother Jacob, the murderer, wear a dress and lipstick to punish him for his behavior. She was evil, herself. The vast majority of the men in the book were without emotion, and were toxic, in some way. The fathers abandoned the mothers because they were too demanding. Bobby was a good cop, but he was rare. He did not use his badge to make people uncomfortable, to make people feel frightened. He helped people whenever he could. Did bullying cause the shooter to behave the way he did? Did he target innocents because he had been targeted? Which came first, which caused the problem? Does the person start out dysfunctional or did the reactions of those they interact with make them dysfunctional? With different parents would they have been different people?
Survivors have to go on after these traumatic events, and the way to find peace and comfort is a rough road to hoe. You never forget the loss or the trauma, but you have to learn to cope and live with it. Rehabilitation is the key, but it is hard to achieve. The book focuses on a great deal of dysfunction. Is it white-washing the actual dysfunction of people by blaming everyone else without assigning responsibility to the person who is disruptive? Is it making those that are mainstream the dysfunctional? It is an interesting question to contemplate and consider.
This is another book that progressives will love because it caters to progressive ideas and supports them. Survival, support groups are important for recovery. We eat too much fat and fried foods. Cops are often the villains. Men are toxic. Those who agitate and go against the group promoting activism are dangerous. Sandra did not want to heal the community, she wanted to agitate it in order to demand gun control. She was the foil, the fly in the ointment. She wanted to stop Lucas from making his movie using the survivors as the actors. Home life is presented as the cause of the pain that creates dysfunction. The person who commits the crime is not necessarily evil, since all of us have good and bad within us. Responsibility for one’s behavior often lies elsewhere, not with the person behaving poorly.