“Nighthawks” pans out as a noir detective-type story with a private investigator (Bosch) tailing his person of interest, Angela. The initial assumption one makes is that Angela is perhaps a criminal, a spy, or the accomplice to a criminal. Bosch follows her through her daily life, but the majority of the story takes place in an art museum Angela frequents.
What I found most striking was Angela’s observant analogy on page 84:
“All light in the painting comes from within the coffee shop. It is the beacon that draws them there. Light and dark, yin and yang, clearly on display.”
When starting, the reader likely makes the assumption that Angela has done something wrong, so the reader is on the lookout for signs of transgression on her part. However, when Bosch reports back to his client, Griffin, and it becomes apparent that Angela is a runaway daughter, the focus shifts. Why did Angela run away? Was it because of a rebellious phase or did Griffin do something to cause such a rift to form? Griffin is clearly an influential figure, so did Angela tire of a debutante life? New assumption: Griffin is a concerned father with considerable wealth looking to reconnect with his daughter. This perspective continues to cast Bosch and his employment contract with Griffin in a favorable light, if with a smattering of doubt.
More facts are revealed, or rather implied, which flip the favorability of characters considerably. As Bosch leaves, Griffin asks if she mentioned Maui and goes on to claim that ‘he was drunk, goddammit, and it never happened again.’ This revelation is key. Bosch’s now-terminated contract as well as Griffin’s character have become a point of contention with the reader. Angela’s wariness when confronting Bosch in the museum becomes understandable, along with Bosch’s assertion to Griffin that it wasn’t the right girl in an effort to protect Angela.
At the beginning of the story, we have a rough concept of black and white, Bosch (good[?] protagonist) and his target (bad[?] opposition). The classic beauty and intrigue of the story comes from the blurring and eventual shift of those views. Additionally, Angela’s brief mention of yin and yang itself becomes a device. The philosophy behind yin and yang itself states: ‘Within light, there is a small amount of darkness. Within darkness, there is a small amount of light. You cannot have one without the other.’ It is that small amount of contradiction to the defining trait that balances the two out and connects them. In the beginning, we defined Angela as ‘the dark’ ergo the unknown, and Bosch/his client as ‘the light’ ergo the known. The story carries out these roles for two-thirds of the content, before these small but powerful amounts of light (Angela’s desire to escape and her independence) and dark (Griffin’s past actions that drove his daughter away) are revealed, which color our views of these characters. In this way, Michael Connelly has created a short but wonderful example of how characters themselves can create a yin-yang situation.
Love how you explained the plot twist! Your descriptions of the characters and that light switch readers get after hearing both stories were well done!