I am always shocked when I read westerns, because they are never the sexist, racist novels that I expect. Shane, once again, blew my expectations out of the water (in a good way), even with my dislike of young narrators.

In the movie "The Negotiator" with Samuel L. Jackson and Kevin Spacey, the characters talk about the movie "Shane". That was where I first heard of it, and since I occasionally read westerns, I figured I should put it on my list. Please be aware that the movie is different from the book, especially in that the ending that is discussed in "The Negotiator" isn't different and not so ambiguous in the book.

For being an old book in a pulpy genre, the characters have a surprising amount of depth. I'm not saying that they are super deep, mind you, but while we never know exactly what Shane did or where he came from, we know that he is troubled by who he used to be. We know a bit about the parents and the kid in the book too. Surprising moment #1: This is the third or fourth western that I've read in which gunfighters are tragic, unhappy characters, doomed to wander until they ultimately die young. Yes, they are cool and can help out when you need to fight back against someone who wants to hurt or exploit you, but they will never be welcome in one place for long. (The movie "The Magnificent Seven", based on a samurai movie, explores this theme extensively.)

The setting is absolutely the same as other westerns. Of course, this book is one of the classics of the genre, so there you go.

The plot is also classic: the cattle rancher wants the land that the homesteaders have settled. We know where this will go.

Here is surprising moment #2: while the mother in this book is very much like the ladies of most fiction of the era, in that she is very interested in hats and cooking, she is strong, and when someone says, "This isn't a sight for a woman," she doesn't faint or hide. She is still right there. There are moments where she is the first to see what is going on or where she is the one that keeps the father strong.

But more than anything else, there is mind blowing moment #3: this is the most polyamorous non-romance novel I have ever read. I guess in the movie, there is a lot of sexual tension between the mother and Shane. In the book, it is completely clear that the mother and Shane have some kind of feelings for each other (not portrayed in a sexual way). However, it is really the father and Shane who are shown most intimately. The boy comments early on that the men stood looking at each other, and it seemed like their hands would/should move to touch. Again, there is nothing sexual about any of this. There are no hot looks or compromising situations. The mother indicates to the father that she has feelings for Shane, and the father is basically like, "That's fine." Then, they hug or kiss. It is the most idealized polyamory, where the whole family is made stronger by the addition of this person who they all love. Even the end keeps to this idea.

While reading this book, it occurred to me that I haven't read anything recently that feels like something you would read in English literature class. Is it the subtext? Can we just say everything we want to say these days, no matter how naughty, so we don't have to hint at it? I don't know, but I can say that this book is far more open to interpretation than most of what I read.

Shane isn't a literary classic, I think, because of the beauty of writing. The language is simple and not especially beautiful. The people who will like it are probably those looking for a story of people working together, of kindness, and right triumphing in the end. It sounds kind of cheesy, but I really enjoyed it. The intense, loving polyamory was just a nice bonus. I would be surprised if someone who really doesn't like westerns would find it thrilling, especially if they aren't interested in giving it a chance. I think that if a reader isn't at least willing to look at it with an open mind, they will probably gloss over the parts that are so good.