The Fig Eater, a novel by Jody Shields, borrows from noble references to weave a mediocre mystery. The jacket makes references to “Freud’s Vienna”, and “Jody Shields focuses a brilliant light on the murky world of imperial Vienna and Freud’s patient Dora.” That light might be so brilliant that it is hard to make out true details of “Imperial Vienna” and any real connection of Freud to this novel.

Dora, Patient “0” when it comes to Freud’s development of the psychoanalytic theory, and her fictional murder, is the focus of this novel. Aside from using Dora and her family, “Herr K” and his family and a cast of others from Freud’s pivotal Dora: An Analysis of a Case of Hysteria, there is not much similarity. (To be fair, the author may not have intended to have more of a connection since she does mention that these are “inspirations” in her Acknowledgements). To her credit, Jody Shields is an accomplished writer and is not in the mental health profession. She is former design editor of the New York Times Magazine, former editor at Vogue and House and Garden. That being said, and my ranting over with, let’s get down to a more objective review of her work.

The novel is a fictional account of the mysterious murder of Dora and the torrid sexual triangles of the above-mentioned cast of characters. The true protagonists are “The Inspector” and his wife, Erzebet; “a Hungarian steeped in intuition and lore of Gypsy Mysticism.” Erzebet becomes obsessed with some of the “mysticism” surrounding the circumstances of the murder and begins her own parallel investigation, without her husband’s knowledge. Through these parallel investigations, the reader learns much about System der Kriminalistik (R. Hans Gross, 1908), a handbook of criminal investigation of the time, and about Gypsy folklore. These parallel investigations come close to, but never cross, even at the conclusion of the novel, and the reader is left without sense of closure and more of a sense of having read two unrelated stories. The third person limited omniscient point of view leaves the character development superficial and it is difficult (at least it was for me), to understand some of the nuances of the relationships. This is probably appropriate for the Mystery Novel genera.

Despite my criticisms, the novel did hold my attention. This was most likely because I was waiting for the “main character,” Freud, to make an appearance…which never happens. Another reason my attention was held was because I was reading Dora: An Analysis of a Case of Hysteria along with the novel. Perhaps this is why I was left disappointed. I admit, my review is biased because of my background and because I an not a mystery buff (although Sir Arthur Conan Doyle strikes my fancy). I couldn’t help but feel cheated and duped in the end by “False Advertising.”

Categories: Fiction