Dog Eat Dog

After reading Edward Bunker's autobiography Education of a Felon, I was looking forward to reading his fiction books. Dog Eat Dog is brilliant on so many levels. I read it straight through all at once, because I wanted to know what was going to happen next, and I couldn't put the book down. After finishing the book, I tossed it into my Goodwill donation box, because I probably won't read it a second time, unlike his autobiography, which I've read so many times that the cover is falling off the book. So why was I ultimately disappointed in this book, even though I would still recommend it? With the best anti-heroes, you're rooting for them even when they're the bad guys. As I was reading this novel, I kept thinking about the characters in Steinbeck's Tortilla Flat, who are similar to the characters in Dog Eat Dog in a few ways. As far as society, they're worthless. Drunks, drug addicts and criminals. Yet by the end of Tortilla Flat, the reader is totally on the side of the bums, even though they don't do anything except drink, steal and sleep with women. The characters are so compelling that you care what happens to them. In the end, this novel disappoints because the reader never develops any kind of personal investment in the lives of the characters. It's still worth reading just because the writing is top-notch, and this makes an interesting companion read with Bunker's autobiography.

With Dog Eat Dog Edward Bunker shows us his talent for writing down-and-dirty, there are no keeping the punches in this shocking novel about three friends and ex-cons that come up with a plot to rip off other criminals. The book does side slightly with the criminals, but it does not glorify them as misunderstood good guys, it shows them as mean and evil at times, but also let us see that they are human, and that not all the bad that is inside them is of their own doing. Bunker might not master the language as well as seaseoned crime-fiction writers, but this adds to the authenticity of the book too, making it seem more "there", while it leads us towards the ending. The book is a character study too, and we see some truly terrible characters here, even a few without any "good" sides. It is a brutal and shocking book, and not for every one.

Edward Bunker's "Dog Eat Dog" may lack the sophisticated prose and style of a more seasoned crime writer, but its realism more than makes up for it. These men are real criminals with real evil in their hearts. They are not cartoonish buffoons like they would be in an Elmore Leonard novel. Bunker knows the hell of cocaine addiction, he knows the desperation that drives men to commit robbery, he knows the allure of the criminal life, he knows there is no true "honor" among thieves. This book is like a kick in the teeth. Unlike some cartoonish crime novels, "Dog Eat Dog" is not meant to entertain. It is an uncompromising portrayal of what it really is like to be a criminal, and how difficult (almost impossible) it is to distance yourself from the criminal lifestyle. It's not surprising that Bunker is a reformed ex-criminal. It's doubtful anyone else could have written such unflinching realism.

My all time favorite writer is William Faulkner. Very simply he had a way with words. Currently, only William Styron comes close. Sophie's Choice embeds itself on your psyche the same way The Sound and the Fury throws your emotions spinning down a steep hill. William Styron tells us that Edward Bunker, an ex-con, is the only one who can really make us understand what an ex-con experiences. Bunker does more than that. His "way with words" is remarkable. In five or ten years grad students will be attempting to explain the subtleties of Dog Eat Dog. For now, its a great read and a great story. Like any great fiction, be ready for the roller coaster ride