The Millenium Trilogy...Or At Least the First Two Books in the Millenium Triology

I read Steig Larsen's novel the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo a while ago, and I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it either. I've actually had a hard time trying to explain how I felt about the novel to other people. It's well written, but the first 3/4 of the book were monotonous...not enough so that I put it down and didn't bother to pick it back up again...but enough that I found it mildly irritating.
Before I'd even picked up the book, I read a review of it, referring to it as a feminist work, which intrigued me a little bit, and did contribute a little to my desire to give the book a read. I've gotta say though, I totally disagree with The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo being a feminist work of fiction. It's clear that Larsen is trying to make a statement about a culture that condones, or at least seems to shine a blind eye on violence against women, but it falls short. The main female characters are strong, but at times almost too much so. What Larsen has created with these characters is not a fictionalized reality, but rather a caricature. The women are either extremely strong, or they are victims. The men are all either aggressors and perpetrators of violence against women or some sort of protector. I fail to see any balance or reality in the characters that Larsen has created. I do suppose, however, that anyone reading this should keep in mind that I am writing this from a Canadian perspective, and the novelist and the novel itself are Swedish. Perhaps I am lacking some of the proper context.
As you can tell by the title of this entry, I have only read two thirds of this trilogy, but I've got to say that the Girl Who Played With Fire is a far better read than the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (which as I said above, I didn't hate, but I found the balance in the book a little bit off. Three quarters of it were devoted to giving the reader a background and only in the last quarter was there any catalyst or increase in action). The Girl Who Played with Fire was more interesting from the get go. The action was balanced throughout the story, and there weren't any parts that I found particularly monotonous. I've got to say that I still have issues with Larsen's characters though. You've got Lisbeth Salander (the main female character)who Larsen has crafted as someone who doesn't give a flying fuck about any social norms. She lives as off the grid as possible. She sees the world in black and white. She doesn't take shit from anyone, she's brilliant (like genius smart), doesn't need help from anyone and won't do anything that she doesn't want to do. So reading that, you're thinking 'Holy fuck, that seems like a pretty strong female character'...but wait, Larsen decides to make her bi-sexual and in the second book the character gets breast implants. So the reader is supposed to believe that the character who doesn't buy into any social stigmas and media propaganda suddenly decides that we wants a boob job. Nope, I'm not buying it. I also had a little bit of a problem with one of Lisbeth's lovers in the book. Apparently it's not enough for a character to be a lesbian, but she had to be the caricature of some kind of uber-lesbian. She's a kick-boxer who does performance art at S&M clubs and part owner in a store that sells lingerie and fetish wear. This is my problem with Larsen's characters. It seems as if everyone has to be a complete extreme. It's very unrealistic and totally over the top.
Some of you might say that I am reading too much into this and that I'm not just taking the story at face value. Perhaps you're thinking that Larsen didn't even really intend for this to be read as any kind of commentary on the rights of women or feminism or anything of the sort. You may be right, and at face value, the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo was a good story, and the Girl Who Played with Fire was even better. I'm not denying that. But here's some food for thought...The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo's title in the original Swedish is Men Who Hate Women. I find it hard to believe that Larsen would call the book that without thinking that he was making some type of commentary on the rights of women.
That's all.