Bones & All

In Bones & All, Camille DeAngelis examines the concept of hunger though cannibals, known as “eaters” in the text, who possess overwhelming urges to wholly consume other people. Through the lens of a hunger for something that is particularly morally and socially unacceptable, DeAngelis explores what it means to be “hungry,” as well as concepts like compulsivity and restraint, free will and predisposition, shame, and the ethics of indulging one’s urges.

The standard definition of hunger is the desire to consume food when the body needs energy for sustenance. The appetites the eaters fulfill, however, are more complex: Their appetites are innate, existential, and enduring. In this way, hunger serves as a metaphor for deeper needs and desires. For Maren, hunger encompasses other types of wanting, especially for connection. She hungers for the love of her mother, for acceptance from her peers, and for the stability and connection of family. Like other coming-of-age novels, the text also explores the new urges that arise in young adulthood, including sexual desire. In this way, the author explores the normal, intrinsic desires that motivate behavior, emphasizing that even abnormal appetites are rooted in basic human needs.

DeAngelis explores the internal consequences of appetites taken to their most extreme. While most of the eaters in the novel feel a compulsion to kill and consume their victims, Lee exhibits moral restraint; he only kills and eats people who make the world a worse place. Maren, on the other hand, initially responds to her urges with deep shame. Even though her hunger continually overwhelms her, and she knows it isn’t her fault, she views herself as a monster who will hopefully find the willpower to change. Each time she gives in, it reinforces her negative self-image. Like Maren, Lee can’t fight his hunger, but he doesn’t pretend that he can change. He is resigned to his nature and doesn’t display shame or self-loathing as overtly as Maren.

Lee’s self-control contrasts with Maren’s compulsivity, highlighting questions about the role of free will versus predisposition when pursuing needs and desires. Maren’s hunger is a genetic predisposition: Her father and grandfather experience the same urges. That her appetite “runs in the family” calls Maren’s free will into question, mirroring debates within psychology and medicine about the role of genetics in addiction, a type of hunger in its own way.

The author also explores external consequences of the characters’ appetites and the morality of indulging them. In the story, the characters must take a life to satisfy their hunger. In Maren’s case, her actions not only result in death for her victims, but they weigh heavily on her relationship with her mother and lead to her abandonment. Through this, DeAngelis brings forth questions about the limits of tolerance and acceptance, as well as the concept of unconditional love. It is notable, too, that DeAngelis herself is vegan, raising questions about the ethics of killing and eating any flesh.

Peace, in the narrative, only comes through self-acceptance of one’s urges, rather than overcoming them. Maren gives up on trying to change, accepts her nature, and stops trying to fight her hunger. When Maren and Jason joke that she is a succubus—a female demon who feeds and kills on men after exhausting them sexually—it is a sign that Maren is no longer so uncomfortable with her hunger and has found a semblance of self-acceptance, but also self-control.