Camilla Bruce

I was attracted to this book having read Camilla Bruce’s previous first brilliant novel, ‘Triflers Need Not Apply’ which I adored. So, reading this one about another historical female serial killer was inevitable. Unlike the first book whose main character, Belle Gunness, I had a passing knowledge of, I had never heard of the main protagonist here, Kate Bender, so I was eager for information about her and began reading the book with great anticipation.

As with ‘Triflers…,’ the author states that this story is constructed from what little-known facts (which are exceedingly rare) we have about Kate Bender and most of that is hearsay and speculation. Kate was a member of a strange, dysfunctional German immigrant family, called the Benders, consisting of mother (who may have been called Elvira or Kate Snr), stepfather, William and William’s son, John. The story begins showing the family arriving at Labette County, Kansas in 1871 and eventually we learn they were running away from their previous place of residence, a farm in Louisville, Kentucky. The plot unravels slowly at first with a lot of description about how the Benders feel and think about their new place, the construction of the house on the farm and how they acquaint themselves with their neighbours, brothers, Mr Rudolf and Mr Ern Brockman and a young lad called Hanson.

Elvira, William, and John look after the farm which they also run as a resting place for travellers. Kate who is beautiful, outgoing, and confident has men under her spell and she earns a bit of extra money by pretending to have a gift of being able to commune with the spirit world as a medium. I found this part of the story a bit tiresome to be honest and skim read ahead to the crux of the story: the murders. However, as Elvira also practices witchcraft, this and Kate's practice as a medium turns out to be quite significant in highlighting the prejudices of the time. But this is all the two women have in common. Through snippets of conversation between Kate and Elvira we learn something dreadful happened in Louisville with a couple called the Vandles and we swiftly learn that Kate and Elvira’s relationship is very estranged - almost to the point of utter hatred between the two; a fact which sits uncomfortably for mothers and daughters I would say, but I suppose it was necessary and perhaps true for the dynamic between the two characters to work and for the ensuing events. Throughout the story Kate and Elvira are constantly at loggerheads, with the latter blaming Kate for committing the murders which forced the family to flee. However, as the story unfolds, we learn she is not the only one who commits murder.

The characters are interesting but a little one dimensional in that some are hard to connect with emotionally but I was most interested in Kate. Unlike Bella whose traumatic childhood experiences help you understand her motives even if you cannot condone them, there is no real reason given for the murders that Kate and her family do so I could not understand her or believe in her, let alone condone her actions. This is perhaps because, with so little information about Kate Bender, it is hard for the author to create her as more rounded. Towards the end of the novel, there is a twist (no spoilers) that left me a little dissatisfied that justice does not seem to have been done in the Bender case unlike with Belle whose final fate satisfied my sense of justice being done.

The writing in ‘All The Blood…’ is dense as in her previous novel and hard to follow at times, so it is a slow build to the pacey latter part of the novel with its graphic descriptions of each bloody murder and the consequences on Kate, her family, the victims' family, and society in general. Underlying it all is a covert criticism by Camilla Bruce of the era as misogynistic in its demonization of the Bender women and where there was an unbelievable thirst for vigilante style retribution meted out by the people rather than the state conducting the rule of law. For example, Mr Brockman courted Kate and was severely punished by a ruthless mob for his involvement with her which seemed an extreme reaction when there was evidence that the Benders had fooled him as they fooled everyone. We also learn a shocking detail about Rudolf Brockman towards the end of the story after the Bender’s escape from Kansas that I felt was not necessary to include here because it left me asking questions about how he came to that terrible end. On the other hand, I think the author deliberately includes the shocking detail about Brockman to balance our view of Kate’s murderous nature and to suggest that the Kate, a bloodthirsty murderess, is perhaps not so significantly different to those who we might consider ‘normal’ human beings rather than sociopaths.

As with ‘Triflers…’ Camilla Bruce interjects different voices in the novel. We have parts of the story told by Kate, parts by Elvira and parts by Hanson, a young worker at the Brockman farm and trading station. Hanson is the voice of reason who signifies conscience of the reader. This is a clever trope because as Bruce explains in her epilogue, a lot of what we know about the Benders is conjecture and fantasy and there’s an underlying feeling that Bruce actually had some sympathy for Kate’s demonic reputation because she says that ‘there’s really nothing to suggest that Kate was any guiltier than anyone else’ (p343).

Though for me, ‘Triflers…’ is still one of the best true crime stories I have read, this does come a close second. I did enjoy ‘All the Blood We Share’ and as before it’s left me wondering what more could we find out about Kate Bender, because after she flees from the farm, we just have it on Hanson’s account that all the other Benders are dead (naturally or not is unclear) but as for what actually happened to Kate, no-one actually knows and maybe we never will but I really want to find out. So it's a good story leaving me asking for more and is definitely worth a read.… (more)

"It doesn't matter how he was or not; no husband could survive with you. You are far too lethal, Bella, my dear. It's running in your blood."

This was a good but brutal read. Bella's travel to America and then her trying to make a new life is a bit slow, but the story really has to build up. Slowly you get to know Bella and her older sister Nellie and how they are settling their lives in Chicago.

But quickly, it's obvious Bella is not settling well. As each new turn of events in the story unfolds, it's just shocking and amazing that this is based on a true story. Once she is settled with the kids at the farm, each new horror and brutal murder is more shocking than the last. Such a good book but man, rough. Definitely read more from this author!… (more)

This is the fictionalized tale of a true crime. Our villain, Bella, is a Norwegian peasant who immigrated to America in the late 1800s, eventually ending up a comfortably well-off landowner in the town of LaPorte, Indiana ... because nothing helps maintain a healthy bank balance like luring gullible potential husbands into showing up with all their life savings sewn into their clothing and then bopping them on the head with a meat cleaver.

I don't read much true crime fiction (had to read this one for a book group) so am worried about being too judgmental. But I found this to be psychologically inauthentic, offputtingly melodramatic, and way too long.

The villain in this piece is that unicorn of mass murderers - a woman. Why don't women engage in serial homicide? Most psychologists believe it has to do with motive: while male mass murderers are almost always driven by sexual impulses (any victim of the appropriate gender/age will do), women typically murder as a way to settle specific threats or grudges.

Which makes Bruce's task a hard one: how to explain the motives of a woman who - in this narrative - is depicted as slaughtering a sexual predator, a score of inoffensive men, and a handful of innocent children? Not exactly a consistent or predictable victim pool. Bruce's solution is to provide a whole plethora of explanations: revenge, spite, sexual thrill, greed, sociopathy. To accomplish this, Bruce engages in a lot of what you might call "creative speculation" - inventing, among other narrative devices, a childhood sexual assault, a sister who's torn between horror and familial loyalty, and a romantic liaison with a psychopath. If you're thinking "Hmmm - that's a lot of speculation!" - well, I had a problem with that too. Even with these embellishments, Bella's actions struck me as random and psychologically inauthentic, the acts of a cardboard villain rather than an real (albeit deeply disturbed and amoral) person.

Moreover, this is much, much longer than it had to be. If the author merely cut all the pages where Bella's sister Nellie worries about her sister, that would eliminate 100 pages right there. Much of the dialog feels like padding, and Bruce's storytelling fails to generate dramatic tension or momentum.

I realize that no non-fiction author, no matter how skilled, possesses the ability to climb into the brains of their characters: the best they can do is create a "best guess" based whatever evidence, research, and psychological insights might be available. Truman Capote did this brilliantly in "In Cold Blood." Camilla Bruce in this outing ... not so much.… (more)

I picked [b:Triflers Need Not Apply|55883417|Triflers Need Not Apply|Camilla Bruce|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1608647388l/55883417._SY75_.jpg|75798172] off the library's historical fiction shelf as I liked the title. The blurb, which presents it as a female revenge story, overcame my reflexive disinterest in murder-focused fiction. In short, I took a chance on it and was, unfortunately, disappointed. This was one of those books I got 100 pages into then had to decide between giving up or reading the rest as fast as possible. (I almost always pick the latter, as it's interesting to analyse why a book disappoints and also a shame to waste a library card space.) The plot follows a woman from her poverty-stricken and brutalised youth in 1870s rural Norway to middle class comfort achieved via murder in 1890s/1900s Chicago. The first person narrative alternates between Bella, the murderess, and Nellie, her sister. According to the author's note, Bella was an actual historical person and this novel is a fictionalisation of her crimes.

To begin on a positive note, there is a good attempt to emphasise the toll that repeated pregnancies took on women. For the most part, though, I found the novel's execution clumsy. The split point of view slows the pace and there is no real tension. It could have been powerful to get Nellie's perspective on her sister's murderous activities, yet there wasn't sufficient psychological insight to make this effective. Neither character's motivations or actions felt particularly vivid. Each development in Bella's story seemed oddly predictable. There was none of the ambiguity, mystery, and fascination of, say, [b:Alias Grace|72579|Alias Grace|Margaret Atwood|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1298545436l/72579._SY75_.jpg|2069530].

In addition, I found suspending my disbelief excessively strenuous on two fronts: speech anachronisms and plot oddities. Of the former, the most painful example is the repeated use of 'stomach virus', e.g "He said it was a stomach virus, but it didn't look like a virus to me". Although viruses had technically been discovered (or at least hypothesised) by the 1890s, their role in stomach ailments was not understood and this terminology would have been limited to scientific researchers. Certainly not lower middle class women with no medical experience! I've never come across a 19th or early 20th century novel using the term 'stomach virus' and its repeated use totally threw me out of the setting. I'm surprised this wasn't picked up in the editing process.

Of the latter oddities, I found it peculiar that Bella grew up half-starved, subsisting on little more than porridge, yet in America was suddenly able to cook elaborate meat, patisserie, and confectionary dishes without assistance from a servant or even the ability to read much English. There was a general lack of attention to detail that grated. Another example: how was Bella able to keep spending excessively against her husband's wishes when he could have just cut off her credit line in shops? I'm willing to suspend my disbelief about minutiae when a novel entertains or immerses me, but this one didn't manage to, so I kept noticing and getting irritated by this stuff.

I suppose [b:Triflers Need Not Apply|55883417|Triflers Need Not Apply|Camilla Bruce|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1608647388l/55883417._SY75_.jpg|75798172] has reminded me to take a sceptical attitude to cover quotes like 'page-turner', 'dark humour' (I didn't notice any), and 'based on a true story'. Lacking character depth or historical texture, its depiction of a female serial killer just seemed lurid. Perhaps fans of true crime retellings with less pedantic minds than I might enjoy it, but there are much better novels about murderous 19th century women around.… (more)