The Whistler

“‘So [Greg Myers is] a crook?’ Geismar asked. Hugo said, ‘He’s certainly a convicted felon, but he’s served his time, paid his dues, and is now an upstanding member of our bar, same as the three of us.’”

None of the people outside the BJC is pure of motive. Myers is motivated, as he always has been, by greed for part of the whistleblower payout. To do their jobs and exact justice, Lacy and her associates must work with people for whom justice is secondary to self-interest.

“Both Hugo and Verna came from large, sprawling families with countless aunts, uncles, cousins, and no shortage of drama and conflict. Lacy often envied the security that came with such a clan, but she also felt thankful she didn’t have to bother with so many people and their problems.”

The author explores the theme of a woman identity outside the context of a relationship with a man. This is significant because it reveals that Lacy is comfortable with herself: She’s self-contained and self-defined yet still enjoys the company of men and appreciates the importance of community. The author reestablishes this later in the novel: “The truth was that, at the age of thirty-six, Lacy was content to live alone” (78).

“Verna, I’ll make you a promise. If I ever feel the need to carry a gun, I’ll quit and find another job. I’ve never fired a gun in my life.’ ‘Well, in my world, our world, there are too many guns and too many bad things happen because of them.”

The BJC is an organization of lawyers, not law enforcement officers. Carrying a gun is no part of Lacy’s job. More importantly, the author is a lawyer. His preferred method of problem-solving is to resolve conflict using laws and courts. He and his protagonists focus on that element of crime management. However, when confronting criminals who use guns, the author and characters recognize the necessity of more aggressive law enforcement that uses the tools of threat and intimidation against people like Vonn Dubose, whose own preferred methods are threats, intimidation, and murder.

“Lacy listened intently and sipped more coffee. ‘If Myers is correct, she’s skimming cash from an Indian casino. That’s rather hard to believe, don’t you think? I mean, one of our circuit judges elected by the people and so highly regarded.’ ‘It is indeed. We’ve seen judges do some bizarre things, but nothing as bold as this.’”

According to the author, the American system of jurisprudence is remarkably free of corruption. The BJC deals with relatively minor infractions of the law; crime on the scale that this story depicts is unheard of in the US.

“Only California had more men on death row than Florida. Texas was a close third, but since it was more focused on keeping its numbers down its population was around 330, give or take. California, with little interest in executing people, had 650. Florida longed to be another Texas, but its appellate courts kept getting in the way. Last year, 2010, only one man was lethally injected at Starke.”

The author emphasizes the imperfections in a system created by imperfect humans. These imperfections call into question the morality of the death penalty, implying that it is morally inexcusable for the state to risk killing even one innocent person.

“If Junior Mace had not been a ‘strange one’ before arriving fifteen years earlier, he could certainly be excused for being a bit odd now. Total isolation leads to sensory deprivation and all sorts of mental problems. Corrections experts were beginning to realize this, and a movement to reform the practice of solitary confinement was struggling to gain momentum. Said movement had not made it to Florida.”

Many people consider the purpose of incarceration to make criminals uncomfortable. The author’s observation here raises the question of whether the state should be in a business that can lead to mental illness—especially given the incontrovertible fact some people are wrongfully convicted.

“There were some people in the background, some outsiders who eased their way into the picture. Our Chief at the time was a good man who got corrupted. These outside folks got to him, I’m not sure how but I’m sure it involved money, and he became convinced the casino was the answer.”

The author provides another illustration of how honest people can become corrupted. First, outsiders “eased” themselves in, not overtly confronting the chief with the prospect of criminal activity. Next, they emphasized the advantages of money for the tribe—education, healthcare, and relief from poverty—making the advantages appear greater than the moral cost. In this case, the chief chose the greater moral good to his tribe over what appeared to be a small cost in illegality.

“Looking back, I’m not sure Son and I were on the right side when we fought the casino. It’s brought jobs, schools, roads, a hospital, a level of prosperity our people had never dreamed of. When a Tappacola turns eighteen, he or she qualifies for a lifetime pension of $5,000 a month, and that might go up.”

Even knowing that organized crime is the foundation for the entire casino operation, and even after being wrongly imprisoned and under a death sentence for 15 years, Junior is still swayed by the casino’s very real benefits to the tribe. In that sense, Junior himself has become corrupted.

“All of it made [Claudia] smile because it meant the Indians were prospering. People had jobs. People were having fun. Families were on vacation. Treasure Key was a wonderful place, and the fact that she was siphoning only a small piece of the action bothered her not in the least.”

Here, Judge McDover illustrates that she is not motivated by malice but by what might be called a purity of greed. She is satisfied, even gratified, that others are benefiting from what she thinks of as “her casino.” If she has any sense of wrongdoing, she assuages it by telling herself other people are benefiting as well.

“And though she was in business with people she didn’t like, their swindling conspiracy was impervious to the outside world. There was no trail, no evidence. It had, after all, clicked right along for eleven years, since the day the casino opened.”

The judge again illustrates her fundamental corruption by acknowledging that she does not like the people she works with. In fact, she is terrified of Dubose, yet she justifies her association with him through a belief that she cannot get caught. In other words, she recognizes that he is evil, but getting caught is the actual crime.

“Before and during the trial, she had been convinced of his guilt and wanted to deliver the right verdict for the voters who had just elected her. But with time and experience, she had developed serious doubts about his guilt. As the trial judge, though, her job had long been finished and there was little she could do to right a wrong. And why should she? Son and Junior were gone. The casino was built. Her life was good.”

McDover claims she wanted to deliver the “right” verdict as opposed to the true verdict. In retrospect, she recognizes that she made an error. Her association with Dubose likely contributed to that recognition. Tellingly, she has no desire to repair her mistake. She sees Junior, who has spent 15 years on death row, as “gone.” She has no empathy for his suffering, no ability to see him as a human being. Her focus is on her own comfort.

“‘The great thing about you, Claudia, is that you were so easy to corrupt, and, once corrupted, you fell hopelessly in love with the money. Same as me. The difference is that I was born into corruption, it’s in my DNA. I’d rather steal money than earn it. You, on the other hand, were pure, but the ease of your conversion to the dark side was astonishing.’ ‘I wasn’t pure. I was driven by hatred and a burning desire to humiliate my ex-husband. I wanted revenge and there’s nothing pure about that.’”

Both characters exhibit a degree of self-awareness, and neither has any sense of shame about their immoral actions. Unlike other characters who found themselves gradually seduced into crime, these two had no compunctions from the outset.

“The term ‘Native American’ is a politically correct creation of clueless white people who feel better using it, when in reality the Native Americans refer to themselves as Indians and snicker at those of us who don’t [..].”

Many Native American people indeed feel this way, although the issue is more complex (see the Further Reading section of this study guide). While the term “Native American” has a long history going back to the 1700s, the US government formally adopted the term in the 1960s for purposes of both courtesy and lawmaking.

“When a woman turns eighteen, she is entitled to the monthly check, which has been $5,000 for many years now. But if she marries, then it’s cut in half. I get $5,000; my wife gets $2,500. So, more and more of our young women frown on marriage. The men are drinking and causing trouble, so why bother with a husband when you get more money without one? There’s also the theory that a reduction in our population means larger checks for those who survive. Another bad plan. You have to invest in children for a healthy society.”

This is a peculiar piece of sexism. Even if it were reasonable to limit the household incomes of married couples—especially a couple raising children—placing the burden specifically on women makes no sense. The implication is that the tribal leaders making decisions about money distribution based them on short-term greed rather than the long-term health of the community. With the declining population, the tribes run the risk of losing cultural identity.

“‘So a casino can submit whatever [information about its income] it wants?’ ‘Yes, that’s the current state of the law, and it’s not likely to change.’ ‘And a casino pays no federal tax of any kind?’ ‘That’s correct…it’s completely voluntary. If a tribe says no to any form of taxation, there’s nothing we can do.’”

The unique status of reservations as sovereign nations allows their residents much latitude if they conform to federal law. However, state regulatory agencies have no authority, and the federal government prefers to keep a distance unless unavoidable, in which case, the FBI has authority within a reservation’s borders. This is one reason—in addition to the organized crime aspect—that the BJC needed the FBI’s assistance.

“Quite frankly, Ms. Stoltz,…if a casino wants to fudge on its financials and skim cash off the top, or under the table, doesn’t really matter, there’s little to stop it from doing so. It’s a perfect storm for corruption… Add the fact that most of the business is in cash that’s absolutely untraceable, and it’s just a bad mix.”

This quote illustrates how lack of oversight contributes to corruption. Some people will always be willing to use corrupt means to take advantage of others, and without the restriction of a watchful society, those individuals come to dominate. Most tribes operating casinos contract with reputable companies that specialize in casino management. The Tappacola did not do so because Dubose introduced the project, and it was thus corrupt from its inception.

“After dark, [Claudia and Phyllis] put on jeans and took a car into the city, to SoHo, where they dined at a tiny French bistro. Later, in a dimly lit bar, they sipped more champagne and giggled at how far they’d traveled, not just in distance, but in life […] With the bulk of the dirty work out of the way, the girls got dressed and took a car into the city. They bought shoes at Barneys, had a long lunch at Le Bernardin, and eventually drifted to the diamond district, where they dropped in on one of their favorite dealers.”

Claudia and Phyllis’s relationship is another illustration of the theme of woman-to-woman friendships. Their romantic relationship has elements of the same kind of friendship Lacy has with Verna and her other female friends. The author particularly emphasizes shopping together in both instances as a uniquely feminine activity.

“When [Gunther] was down he never stopped betting on a brighter future, and when he was up he choked on the money and forgot about the bad times. Atlanta would never stop growing, and it was his calling in life to clutter it with even more strip malls, apartments, and office complexes.”

Gunther is a foil for Vonn Dubose. Both are real estate developers. Both are aggressive and domineering. Gunther, however, is motivated by love for his sister and an enthusiasm for helping her, whereas Dubose is motivated by a love for intimidation. Gunther illustrates what Dubose might have been had he not been—according to him—born corrupt.

“For Lacy, though, his energy was infectious, even stimulating.…Once when she awoke, he was standing next to her bed, wiping tears from his cheeks.”

Lacy and Gunther are more alike than they appear on the surface. He is the outward expression of Lacy’s inner drive, while she more freely expresses the deep emotion hidden under his blustering exterior.

“‘Shut up, Lyman, and start packing… And, Lyman, it goes without saying that it’s in your best interest to keep your mouth shut.’ ‘Of course. That’s what we do around here, right? Bury our heads, keep our mouths shut, and cover up for the big boys.’ ‘You got it, and the part about shutting your mouth can begin right now,’ the Chief said.”

The corruption surrounding the casino has progressed to the point that the Tappacola tribe’s leaders openly and shamelessly acknowledge it. They don’t even pretend that they are protecting the tribe’s welfare at this point.

“Verna is blaming me? […] I don’t believe this, Michael. Verna and I have been close for years.”

The belief that Verna may blame Lacy for Hugo’s death turns out to be a misapprehension on Michael’s part. He paid more attention to the men surrounding Verna, crediting them with more power in their relationship than existed. However, Verna never considered blaming Lacy. At its best, the friendship between women has a force beyond what men usually recognize.

“Gunther, like most white people, thought the idea of an innocent man on death row was absurd. Surely Junior was guilty of something or he wouldn’t be there […] In Gunther’s opinion, the prisons were full because of rampant crime.”

In a society dependent on a fair justice system, no one wants to believe that the system could be so profoundly flawed that the state is killing innocent people. Rather than demanding that the system be modified to be more accurate, they resolve the cognitive dissonance by denying the possibility of error. An overestimation of the level of crime in society aids that denial.

“Looking back, [Clive] did not remember the exact moment when he decided to cross the line and begin breaking the law. He did what his boss told him to do, and there seemed to be no harm in doing it. He knew the laundering was illegal, but it was so easy. There was no way to get caught. Hell, their own accountants had no clue. Besides, he was being paid a lot of money, and spending a lot, and life was good. Sure he was working for a criminal organization, but his bit part in the racketeering certainly could not amount to much.”

This passage exemplifies the theme of corruption. For characters who start out essentially honest, the introduction to crime starts small: The individual goes along with everyone else, follows orders, and doesn’t fully realize what’s happening until it’s too late—and by that time their criminal activities seem normal, possibly even harmless.