Penance by Eliza Clark- Reading Diary (part 1)

As I was reading Penance by Eliza Clark I decided to create a reading journal. This is where I’d record my reactions and thoughts about plot and characters live as I was reading. I’ve marked these up into sections with page numbers and for this week’s blog I have posted my diary for the first 200 words. This is a journal you can read along with the book and feel free to share any of your own feelings about the book in the comments. There will be spoilers ahead.

Pages 1-100 

I hadn’t read any Eliza Clark for a while and as soon as I’d read those first few pages I was like: ‘oh yeah, this is great.’ Was I a little bit repulsed? Yes, absolutely. I think this is what Clark plays with so well and from just this first segment I’m excited to read on. 

The brutal description of the crime that is the catalyst for this story is a gory start but I suppose it sets the tone. The story’s going to be quite grim, but of course it is; It’s a story about a teenager getting murdered. The questions posed early on about how we interact with violent crime, how we research it and find entertainment even humour immediately made me question myself. I was a bit grossed out by the murder but did I want to know more? I eagerly read all the grimy details. I can already sense the criticisms of the commodification of true crime. The language used by the podcasters in the book echoes the type of language used by bullies. The type of bullying Joan experienced.

 I’m someone who grew out of an interest in true crime but as a teenager I definitely consumed it. I’d do my makeup as someone talked, maybe even joked about horrific violent crime. As I got older I really recognised how messed up it was, it would upset me and I couldn’t bear to watch it anymore. Having this experience though, has made me reflect on this presentation of the issues with true crime. The gross, creepy language used by podcasting characters really isn’t a stretch. Even when the victim is a child.

The setting ‘Crow-on-Sea’ feels very real to me. I could really recognise those small seaside towns in decline and the insular, self-corroding feel is real. Often around the coast there are fairly noticeable wealth differences. This is something that Clark has represented depressingly accurately. In the setting I also picked up on some claustrophobic feelings. The character Amanda mentions how people get ‘caught up in crow’. This reminded me of how in small towns people either leave quick or never. I feel the setting so far is a self sustained toxic environment. It also feels a bit like a pressure cooker. 

I also found the presentation of playground politics interesting. I’ve been out of school for a while but how Clark describes that weird middle period between primary and secondary was so real. The way some kids race to grow up and others try to stay as young as possible. This was a segment that I didn’t hugely relate to but I put that down to the fact that I sort of floated through school without much of a problem and was never part of any adolescent dramas. Not even murder or arson. 

The book did remind me of the brutality of some people’s school years though. Kids really can be evil in primary school but they can get even worse in secondary. Clark does a brilliant job from what I’ve read so far at showing how kids are developed and conditioned into these acts of cruelty. Obviously I’ve not been a primary school student for a long time but I found those scenes of casual cruelty kids show in the playground really interesting to look back on. I think we can sometimes think those early years and our relationships in them don't add to much  when you get older but it's clear that Clark is showing how these are formative years. Social standings in primary school reflect on the rest of the characters' lives, positively or negatively. Angelica is a great example of this.

Angelica likes to feel special, she’s told she is. She is told she is better than others. Her father isn’t exactly the best role-model. I did find the scenes where the narrator interviews him quite funny. He is comically smarmy. I will say so far she has seemed a bit cartoonish as a villain, almost stereotypical. Sort of the traditional stuck up, rich girl vibe. 

Something I’ve found intriguing so far is the ghosts or at least the ghost stories. The background of hauntings and how Angelica might be interested in them seems to stand out from the rest of what I’ve read so far. I’m wondering how this will fit in and build the story.  

Pages 100-200 

In the last entry of the reading diary I mentioned how well Clark wrote about primary school politics. Well, she does an even better job at writing the unhinged weirdness that is a friendship group in secondary school. I realised as I was reading that I hadn’t really seen my experience or at least the time period of when I was at school reflected accurately in books before. So much of it was very nostalgic, Tumblr, anon messaging sites, just the way the characters interact with the internet. 

The quiet cruelty of the friendship depicted was, again, nostalgic. It took me right back to how school friendships worked and as I was reading the interview the narrator has with Lauren, it also made me reflect on my own behaviours. Lauren, despite being friendly and kind, is not an innocent character within the mean mechanics of her group. I think Clark depicts these girls as actually being fairly normal. I mean obviously it won’t stay that way- I know that they end up murdering Joni. My point is that the girls could be perceived as these horrible, evil characters but they're not- they're just teenage girls doing what teenage girls do. The question is how that cruelty left unchecked leads to the type of consequence we know are coming in the novel. 

Speaking of Joni, I’ve enjoyed her presentation as a victim. Sometimes in crime or thriller novels authors can have a habit of making a ‘perfect’ victim, especially with teenage girls. I like that Joni isn’t the best or the worst at anything. I like that she can be both cruel and kind. I like that she can be both a victim and an aggressor. It makes her real rather than a sort of ethereal character with a ‘too good for this world’ vibe. So far much of Clark’s novel has been rooted in reality and often the parts we don't really want to talk about. 

I wrote previously about Angelica’s character, how she is almost a perfect villain. My perspective of this has changed as I read on. I though previously she was a bit of a stereotypical

mean girl character but I now realise this is the whole point. It’s very interesting how she perceives her autistic sister as being so different from herself. I wondered as I was reading if Angelica perhaps isn’t as neurotypical as she thinks. She has set expectations of social standings in school and when these don’t materialise in reality, when her view from film and Tv aren’t real she struggles to cope. She has an interest in musical theatre, taking GCSE drama very seriously (the memories) and a secret fandom account. Again, I can genuinely think of people I went to school with and think they were like Angelica. She has also been somewhat humanised to me. The ‘mean girl’ is how she wants to be perceived but Clark delves underneath this. We see how she is actually a victim of her friendship group, an emotional and social punching bag. The mentions of ghosts is now fitting better, especially with the interests characters like Dolly and Violet have in true crime. I can see how Angelica could be sucked into those dark interests with her experiences of death and feelings about ghosts.

I have read the first few pages of ‘girl b’ or Violet and so far it’s been quite brutal. Her character is desperately sad and it's like she goes from one trauma to the next all whilst being isolated and mistreated by her peers. I’m quite interested to see how her and Angelica’s friendship develops or if it forms at all. I think her relationship with Dolly will also be interesting to read. I will add that the content in this section has been heavy but handled well. I remember from reading ‘Boy Parts’ that Clark was able to cover these dark or upsetting topics well. She also interjects with humour which is a great method to not overwhelm a reader but also highlight the subjects in a genuine way. I did actually chuckle to myself at the ‘don’t look at my frogs line’- perhaps that is what I’m most excited to read about next. What's the deal with the frogs?