Lisbeth's Revenge

I was wondering about Lisbeth's revenge on Bjurman. I mean, are we supposed to cheer? Personally I found it just as disgusting, if not as horrifying, as the original rape. The tattoo may have been a just punishment, however. Do two wrongs make a right for Lisbeth?

Posted by Ro i Ireland , 3 February 2011

Bjurman got what he deserved.

Posted by F in Helsinki , 3 February 2011

Yes, he did. I still didn't really enjoy reading about Lisbeth sexually assaulting someone. I suppose we're not supposed to.

Posted by Ro in Ireland , 3 February 2011

Bjurman deserved it...PERIOD!

Posted by Steve Wojtak in New Jersey , 3 February 2011

He deserved every inch of it!

Posted by Matt in ILL , 5 February 2011

and we diserve a new BOOK !!

Posted by , 5 February 2011

He deserved it. It's not two wrongs either; It's revenge.

Posted by Katherine , 7 February 2011

It wasn't right, but she thought it would keep him from doing any more harm to innocent people who relied on him for help. So basically it was a little bit of 'street justice' for someone who took advantage of women and thought he would never get caught.

Posted by Mary in ILL , 8 February 2011

Lisbeth an innocent? I think not. I prefer to see the tattoos as representing two marked people. Of course Lisbeth has the redeeming characteristic of being inherently moral. She is wounded. She wounds. It is horrific but a brilliant image.

Margaret Wales

Posted by M John in Swansea , 9 February 2011

After reading the various responses, I believe the truth is embedded in "She is Wounded. She wounds." Strangely, we do care for Lisbeth, but carving Bjurman was cruel.

Posted by coffeesnobology/Lynn in Florida , 9 February 2011

It shows the immensity of a character like Lisbeth Salander that such actions are so staunchly defended. I don't deny that Bjurman deserved everything he got but was merely questioning Lisbeth's method of vigilante justice.

Posted by Ro in Ireland , 9 February 2011

She should have castrated him too!

Posted by stevo in Liverpool , 14 February 2011

I learned one thing in life, regarding this subject. If there isn't legal justice to protect your rights as a human, you find your own ways of resolving it, thus giving your own way of punishment. LS has been devastatingly hurt. No authorities ever listened to her.

Posted by YP in Istanbul , 15 February 2011

Wake up! It's a work of fiction you are discussing here.

Posted by Martin in Frankfurt , 15 February 2011

Who exactly are you speaking to, Martin?

Posted by Ro in Ireland , 15 February 2011

Definitely deserved it...no question about it.I agree with Ro though-I didn't enjoy reading or viewing any of the sexual abuse, by either perpertrator.

Posted by Aine in Ireland , 16 February 2011

Carving Bjurman was cruel, but I do think he deserved everything she did. I agree with M John in Swansea

Posted by Kristine in Norway , 17 February 2011

A work of fiction? If you think things like this (BOTH incidents) don't happen every day somewhere in this world, in the so-called 'civilized' world, then you are naive, Darling. Do not ever doubt one's own ability to bend to the cruelest of acts if pushed to it. As a human being you are capable of more violence than you can imaginne in the right situation. But, by the Grace of God (as I believe), most of us never have to find that character trait within ourselves, will never have to suffer the indignity of seeing ourselves in that light.

Posted by NavyMomReader , 18 February 2011

But yes, in this instance, we are reading a work of fiction! :-)

Posted by NavyMomReader , 18 February 2011

That girl has a temper! Bjurman abused her badly and she responded. Her distrust of authority pushes her to inflict her own justice. Right or wrong? She doesn't care.

Posted by Al in Rockford , 18 February 2011

Lisbeth is one of the most fascinating characters in modern fiction. I loved her even more for her courage in planning and caring out her revenge against Bjurman. He got what he deserved!

Posted by sjs 2/20/11 in lawrence ny , 20 February 2011

Lisbeth is indeed a fascinating character. She planned out her actions against Bjurman consistent with her desire to simply be left to live. I think she does care about right or wrong, which has a lot to do with consequences. And I don't think it was even so much about revenge, per se. For example, she wasn't overly concerned about revenge on her father for many years -- that was more about stopping him from doing more harm. She never seemed vengeful to me. She did not choose to kill Bjurman; she did not choose to castrate him. She chose to show him what it was like to be the victim. And to set him up so that he could not harm her again. I don't think she even wanted to control him, so much as she was willing to do what it took to prevent him from controlling her. As people have mentioned above, she knew well that the authorities were not on her side; every contact with them spiraled into a kafkaesque nightmare. Are we supposed to cheer? No, I don't think so -- but it was fascinating to watch her lock him up, without bars. Tattooing him with his crimes was brilliant. Sure, tattooing hurts -- but in terms of physical pain, she gave him less than he gave her. And it served as pretty effective "castration," too.

Posted by thoughtful in Maryland , 21 February 2011

I do wonder though, why Lisbeth doesn't try to show the authorities she isn't retarded though. I mean she's 25 and she's perfectly capable of living alone and taking care of herself. Her history is against her, sure, but if she went to the care workers/social services and acted normal, talked to them, let them do some test on her, after some time they would probably realise she is okay and release her. I know she's against authorities, but she's really making things hard on herself. She probably has Asperger's Syndrome, she's socially awkward, but not to a huge extent....she could at least try, instead of acting like she can't even speak a word and has severe mental disabilities. What is she achieving with that behaviour??

Posted by Cass in Christchurch, NZ , 21 February 2011

Cass, people in Lisbeth's mind-set don't think about what they are achieving with their behaviour. She is DEFINITELY not an Aspergers personality type; she feels far to much rage and she is too comfortable with sex and intimacy. If she were Aspergers then she would very carefully and objectively analyse her behaviour without emotion and attempt to formulate a response with which she could use when encountering similar situations in the future. I speak as one who is borderline Aspergers myself.

Posted by Eltham in Cardiff , 7 Mars 2011

This is definitely Old Testament, eye-for-eye, revenge. It is typical of Lisbeth. Her first tendency is to respond in kind. One of the things I find interesting is that it took her some time to decide to respond in kind - simply because her mentor taught her to evaluate the repercussions...

Posted by Gorgon1001 in Denver , 19 Mars 2011

It was great to see the perpetrator getting some good old fashioned justice, wish there were more people like Lisbeth out there, then perhaps more people would consider the consequences of their crimes

Posted by , 20 Mars 2011

In next 2 books you find out reason why Lisbet doesn't talk/explain to police or other authorities. She tried to talk to them when she was child, and they not only didn't listen, but closed her in asylum where she was tied up for days.

Posted by Danchi in Banja Luka , 31 Mars 2011

I say Go Lisbeth. He deserved everything she did to him and more. Karma is a bitch!!

Posted by LeeStarr in Melbourne , 2 April 2011

Since all is fictional we can respond in any vein possible. Two wrongs don't make a right but there was only one wrong. Revenge served up cold is not a wrong but simply an leveling of the playing field.

Posted by Paula in Telford, PA USA , 12 April 2011

she was just out to pay him back with what he did to her and probably to others and make sure it would never ever happen again

Posted by , 11 May 2011

Bjurman was no better than Cardinal Lahey pleading guilty to thousands of counts to child porn visiting Thailand and similar port repeatedly even after the church made a $15 settlement for molestation charges decades before. Bjurman was her Guardian. He practiced with impugnity what he declared rules of a a sustained rape with no end in sight. He got off way to easy. OK, if your not into a smooth device of practice for the job, how about castration? You can even knock him out first if your squemish. Seems more befitting to me. Then throw the molester in jail and let the penile, I mean penal system work its miracle of rehabilitation. I believe Lisbeth has no room for malice in her arsenal.

Posted by Colm Heneghan in Park Ridge, IL , 13 May 2011

The question of right/wrong is less interesting than the apparent use of the tattoo. Not likely to undress around many women with that tattoo, so the function of the tatoo is not revenge but more along the lines of a restraint against future abusive behavior by Bjurman. In many ways it is an elegant solution and more effective than any restraining order.

Posted by Spooner in USA , 22 May 2011

<Lisbeth is indeed a fascinating character. She planned out her actions against Bjurman consistent with her desire to simply be left to live.> said thoughtful in Maryland.

Sorry, nothing of the kind. She expected to film him forcing her to another felatio. Poor kid never thought what evil was in store for her. It was revenge allright, in the right measure for the offence, according to her own Moral Compass (?things are either good or evil? ? this is how Mikael and Dragan Armanski describe her to bublanski after they find her prints on the gun).

Posted by Aharon in Ramle, Israel , 28 May 2011

The key is to REALLY put yourself in her place. How could you do less than what Lisbeth did? I'd have killed him, she didn't. I was, frankly, astounded that she let the slime live. And he deserved more than she gave him.

Posted by Lucy in Quincy, IL UA , 20 October 2011

Given Bjurman's style with women, I question the effectivness of the tatoo. By the time a woman sees it, it is too late. Of course, Lisbeth kept track of his activities too.

Posted by Mark in Millis, MA , 20 December 2011

in my opinion bjurman deserved exactly what happened to him because he is such a filthy old prick and he exploited salander in every possible way i felt so bad for her but she got her revenge and that was an example set for bjurman's type of people.

Posted by trinity , 12 January 2012

I think that bjurman got what he deserved, she should of castrated him too, he was a filthy sex fiend.

Posted by v.heather in perth australia , 25 January 2012

I was so wxcited about the book and the film! I support Lisbeth in her revenge. She could have cut his eggs. Both films are great and I felt so sick and my ass was acking during this scene =)It was so pitty for me to finish the book..I love Lisbeth and Michael!

Posted by Anna in Yekaterinburg, Russia , 1 February 2012

Honestly, it was revenge, but it was also a way to show us just how messed up Lisbeth is. Those actions are pretty awful no matter who you do them to...even if he did deserve it...and a lot of people are simply not capable of it.

Posted by Rachael in Toronto , 17 Mars 2012

this was the moment i fell madly madly in love with lisbeth for the revenge she got!

Posted by candace in los ángeles , 12 April 2012

Bjurman got what he deserved. it doesnt matter about right or wrong. bjurman raped lisbeth so lisbeth beat the shit out of him. it was never about right or wrong it was about revenge. lisbeth's mind followed a simple rule which is you do shit you pay the price even if you pay it in a "wrong" way what he did was wrong so same thing happened to him

Posted by ily in new york , 17 April 2012

and Cass if you have readb the other books you would understand that she never trusted the police she figured itb out her own way. she didnt wanna end up in an institution again like when her father had dirty cops lock her up

Posted by ily in new york , 17 April 2012

Lisbeth had every right to do to what she did to Bjurman. Lisbeth is Zala but with her own moral code and I wonder if the dragon on her back is sortof the preverbial monkey on your back. Reminding her never to become totally like your father.

Posted by sonya in new britian , 19 April 2012

As Lisbeth told on the movie ( Hollywood Version) that Bjurman is not allowed to be with another woman because Lisbeth knew he is going to do the same he did with her. And put some tattoo. I think it is the right thing that Lisbeth to do it because if she didn't do it maybe Bjurman will never stop to rape her. ( maybe) Lisbeth maybe have other way to do it so she put that tattoo as a sign of warning. Actually there is nothing wrong what she did but if u are asking why didn't she report it to the police.Because Lisbeth told to Mikael that if he calls the police she will go away and never hear her from her again. Why ? because Lisbeth never trust the police. Instead of staying in the bars and be freed for another years she put that tattoo as a sign of punishment maybe Lisbeth will thought that maybe if Bjurman stayed in prison for years he might escape and do it again on women.Or maybe if Bjurman was free he will do the same crime again and again. Or maybe she did because she wants to feel Bjurman the pain she's feeling when she was raped.

Posted by Mawyy :) in PHILIPPINES , 21 April 2012

It was the best way of revenge I ever seen in my entire life I mean does men's like Bjurman exists they try to advantage of the situation it's really disgusting and I will do it if was my case. He really mess up with the idea that lisbeth would keep discreet or maybe she couldn't say something to anyone or she couldn't do anything about it, he was surprised I guess when he found herself that she filmed the rape. He deserved what he got.

Posted by Wspjims in Zurich , 27 April 2012

I think it was more of an eye for an eye deal. Bjurman's position in the book is to act as her guardian- a certain of authority, but he takes advantage of that authority. As it's emphasized in the book that Lisbeth has a serious distrust when it comes to people who should to listen to her. Bjurman took it as she doesn't know how to take care of herself or how to resolve situations, but he finds that out after he experiences what she experienced. So that would probably be where an eye for eye deal comes in. In my opinion I think he got served.

Posted by Kristin in Pittsburgh , 15 May 2012

Larsson's Million Dollar Dialogue:

Then she poured the coffee and handed him a sandwich.

“I’m really not hungry,” he said.

“I don’t give a damn if you’re hungry. Just eat,” Salander commanded, taking a big

bite of her own cheese sandwich.

For the sake of brevity, I'll just say: Larsson CANNOT write well on any level whatsoever!!! Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish!

Posted by Pia in Stockholm , 15 May 2012

Bjurman got what he deserved. I would have done the same but i would have not only carved that same tattoo on his stomach, i would have tattooed it on his back and on his forehead.

Posted by Raven Salander in London , 8 October 2012

Lisbeth knows best that Bjurman has hard to stomach where the tattoo is at to remind him every second of his waking life. Revenge is best served painfully cold.

Posted by Dragonreader in Anonymous, Calif. USA , 26 May 2013

Lisbeth went easy on Bjurman. He got what he really deserved from Zalachenko and Niedermann. I remind you also that I live in the southeastern U.S. where "He needed killin'" is an affirmative defense to a murder charge.

Posted by rickbull in Nashville , 26 May 2013