The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time

Mark Haddon’s The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time appears on the first page to be compulsively readable, yet written in overly simplified, unsophisticated language­– something rarely seen in other “upper-level” novels of its type; however, it is this style that parallels the very importance of the book. The book’s main character, too, differs from the average protagonist. Christopher Boone, an autistic boy, lacks the ability to comprehend human emotion. Although he is clearly in touch with his own feelings, he is completely unable to read physical or emotional reactions of others. However, what Christopher lacks in social ease, he more than makes up for in his exceedingly abundant knowledge of factual information. The book presents itself as a murder mystery yet early on distinguishes itself from that very cliché. The mystery of The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time is not in who killed the dog, as the reader was once led to believe; it is instead the mystery of Christopher’s place in the world and the world’s place in his.

Christopher’s inability to see emotion indirectly exposes how much of society relies on subconscious dialogue. Much of how we communicate to one another is lost without physical expression. From a change in the tone of voice to an alteration in facial muscle, most language is accented, if not completely reliant on, visible physical emotion. Christopher explains that he is unable to determine emotions on the scale between “happy” and “sad.” The beauty of human emotion is its breadth of scale, most of which lies between those two categories. Although it is obvious that Christopher cannot “see” the world, it also becomes clear that the world, although it thinks it does, is truly unable to “see” Christopher.

Arguably one of Christopher’s most important gifts to the reader is not his retention of numbers, his meticulous organizational techniques, or his protective demeanor. Christopher has an ability to perceive the world without preconceived notions, prejudices, and cultural distortions. This ability is deliberately absent, and greatly so, in the novel’s other characters. Christopher’s mother and father act as foils, for his mother, who has cheated on her husband with the neighbor, and his father, who killed the neighbor’s dog in revenge, lack the evident moral sense, which Christopher so blatantly possesses. Christopher, although he cannot understand why others react the way they do, has learned the basics of right and wrong behavior, as is evidenced in his understanding of the dog’s murder. This seemingly primitive and basic lesson is one that the adults in his life have not yet grasped. He is unable to comprehend the convoluted methods of falsehood, which his parents undoubtedly symbolize. Therefore, he provides an unedited, unblemished, and rare account that his self-conscious, moral-lacking “elders” will never come to expose.

Have the instinctive emotional complexes of modern society hindered us from attaining the pureness of Christopher’s simplistic moral guidelines? What have we gained in our emotional complexity, and in turn, what have we lost? (500)