Alright, this is not my usual thing. Not by a long shot. A book about teen angst, hero worship and fighting because it's fun… yeah, no thanks (before Alright, this is not my usual thing. Not by a long shot. A book about teen angst, hero worship and fighting because it's fun… yeah, no thanks (before you post a reply dear reader, yes, I know there's more to this book than that, please hold fire a few moments). You may be wondering, "Tim, why did you even bother with this?" Excellent question hypothetical reader, I'm glad you asked.
I read this because a friend of mine started a book club in real life (through skype though as too many people still cannot meet up), and by all the gods I will encourage such a thing and agreed to participate prior to even knowing the book. When this was picked… well, I was less than thrilled.
Let me get this out of the way. I have not read The Outsiders. I have no intention of reading The Outsiders. I will perhaps read The Outsider, or perhaps The Outsider maybe even The Outsider but I will likely not read The Outsiders. Maybe it's the "S" at the end, but most likely it is because it just doesn't appeal. I shall be a square and not in fact "be golden." (or whatever the hell that line is)
Nonetheless, I will read a book to help a friend kick things off. What did I think of it knowing that the deck was very much stacked against it?
…
Honestly wasn't bad. Again, not my cup of tea, but it's not a bad book. I found aspects that I truly appreciated. I liked the interactions with the father and the fact that our lead didn't understand the more educated conversations. In particular I found one section of dialogue to be a gem. In it our lead tells his older brother that his former girlfriend (Cassandra) says she is not hooked on drugs:
"Oh, yeah. Well, I believe her." "You do?" "Sure. You know what happened to people who didn't believe Cassandra." I didn't. My father said, "The Greeks got 'em." Now see what I mean? What the hell did Greeks have to do with anything?
It's a little back and forth which said quite a bit about the characters. In fact, one aspect I can praise all around is that the entire book is mostly like this. Aspects that are said inform you of who these people are, and our lead, poor Rusty-James just doesn't pick up on it. It's actually well told in that regard.
The fact that Rusty-James doesn't get so much of what's going on improves the book in an unexpected way. He gets an overwhelming sense that things are wrong at times, but can't figure out what or why; just a sense of foreboding.
So, while I may not have the nostalgia for Hinton to make me appreciate this in a way that perhaps I would if I had read her books as a teenager, I can still appreciate the clever ideas and the stylistic way she told the story. Frankly though, there's just not enough actual story to really make a book (and with the large print, it's really not much more than a lengthy short story). It's an interesting character piece, but doesn't feel quite finished. I appreciate aspects of it, but it does feel like there was a build up to something that never quite made it. 3/5 stars....more
"I think people who suppose themselves virtuous eventually become ridiculous because of the unending self-deception they must practice."
So say[image]
"I think people who suppose themselves virtuous eventually become ridiculous because of the unending self-deception they must practice."
So says our narrator, Elizabeth, who has no need of self-deception. She knows who she is. She knows what she is. She knows what she wants. She is not virtuous. Just look at this little bit of her narration in chapter 1:
"I first came to live with Grandmother about a year ago, after I killed my parents. I don't mean to sound callous. Let me explain."
This book reminded me of being a teenager. Not because of the narrator being one, but because it is the sort of thing I would have probably stayed up till 4AM reading. A book of witchcraft, murder, incest, mystery and a narrator who is, not the nicest of young women... hell, let's be blunt, she's obviously a sociopath teenage girl with power. In other words, it's everything that caused a panic during the horror paperback boom. Some of the stuff that made me the reader I am now.
This one has been an interesting reading experience. Rarely have I ever gone from loving a book, to almost hating it and back to loving it. I've never done that before with a book so short... nor has the aspect I loved also been the aspects that frustrate me.
Elizabeth is a weird little book. It's like a fever dream. Things happen fast. Things don't always make full sense, operating almost like, well, a dream. That said, its logic leaps never feel too much and instead give it a surreal quality. I love this. I hate this. On one hand I love that it doesn't linger, it keeps things going constantly even if it's filled with quiet scenes. At the same time a character is introduced and within a few chapters seems to drop an important line or two and then fade away. It's a frustrating experience.
It's a book that requires constant attention. Almost every line can is saying more than it actually says. Sometimes it's immediately clear what is being said... sometimes not so much. It's prose is sensual, there's a lot of suggestion, but rarely ever actually showing anything.
Do I like this book? Yes, I almost loved it. Aspects mentioned above frustrated me a bit too much for that though. I find the last three or four chapters were the way too fast, and wished it would have lingered a few moments on them. That said, the fast pace frequently worked well. Overall 3/5 stars...more
Mostly know as a painter and a designer, Leonor Fini was a writer as well. All around she's a fascinating person to read about, but one doesn't often Mostly know as a painter and a designer, Leonor Fini was a writer as well. All around she's a fascinating person to read about, but one doesn't often hear of her fiction? Why is that?
[image] (Did I mention stylish?)
Well, I cannot fully say as I've only read Rogomelec. Perhaps there are more reasons beyond what I can see here... perhaps her fame in other areas made it more difficult for her writing to take off... maybe, just maybe, it her writing was a touch too weird even for the surrealists (that was a joke, I assure you).
To be honest, I don't know how to review this. I once described the film The Beyond as "less of a movie and more of watching someone else's fevered dream." That pretty much sums up this book as well. There is a plot... sort of, but it's more like the outline of a plot, to get us from one surreal event to the next.
Are the surreal moments interesting at least? I would certainly say so, but that is going to be very much an opinionated thing (as is much in terms of surrealist artwork). The book feels much like a classic Gothic in some ways, filled with broken cathedrals, weird inhabitants, and a constant feeling of unease. In many ways the surrealism adds to this aspect (after all, it's not like this is unheard of in the genre, The Castle of Otranto begins with a giant helmet falling on a young man on his wedding day!). This one certainly takes the concept and runs with it though.
I don't use this phrase often, but I don't really get this book... but I'm not really sure you're supposed to. I think this is one of those works that each person is going to have their own interpretation of, and they are all equally right and wrong.
From a design standpoint, I like the illustrations. I like keeping them in mind with the scene Fini is describing, though again, I don't know how to always interpret them. Sometimes I see more in the images when comparing it to what came the page before, other times they look straight forward enough until examined and thought about. Though the illustrations may seem simple at first, I do advise all potential readers to really examine them, the art and story are very much in conversation with each other.
Do I recommend this book? That may be the hardest part of this review... we'll leave it with the statement that I personally enjoyed it well enough, but would not advise for everyone. 3/5 stars...more
Dear reader, I have been told in the past that my rare 1 star reviews can be "overlong and mean spirited." If you feel that way, I respect that and suDear reader, I have been told in the past that my rare 1 star reviews can be "overlong and mean spirited." If you feel that way, I respect that and suggest you look at one of the more positive reviews for the book. They will likely be kinder and shorter. ____________________
Man, there certainly was a stream of killer animal novels in the 70s and 80s. Rats, slugs, insects, sharks you name it, if it was even a semi-sentient animal, it probably wanted to kill you in some creative fashion. The Pack continues this idea with "man's best friend."
Okay, so let's start off noting that the idea of this book is horrific. Not just the idea about dogs attacking human as a pack, but WHY they are attacking. You see apparently the author heard about people who came from the city, rented houses on islands, bringing an animal to entertain their kids and then when it was time to go back home, would leave the animal on the island to die. That is horrible, and after a prologue where we see just that, I was ready for these assholes to come back to the island the next summer for some comeuppance and doggy revenge.
...
Nope! It takes place in the winter, and focuses on the dogs going after the people who live on the island year round (who did nothing in the prologue and many of them indeed condemned this behavior) and their vising family.
[image]
Already we have gotten off on the wrong start. Do we get a death scene with ANY of those people who left their animals behind? No... okay, well this is already thoroughly disappointing. Let's see what else you'll throw at me.
NO! Stay positive. I mean, this is still salvageable. I'll confess, I enjoy a good b-horror killer animal story. Those were my thoughts going into the book, followed by this: "This should be cheesy good fun... why isn't this cheesy good fun?"
Oh, dear sweet naive Tim of a week ago, you know nothing of the world. Forgive me for being cynical (which if you won't, now might be a good time to abandon ship on this review, because I'll be getting worse) but the book is less of an animal attack story and more of a cutting metaphor for reality! It's about you feeling like you're stuck in a world gone mad full of disappointing decisions. This book is like a slap in the face every time you read it, so much so that it's less a book and more of a timely reminder on social distancing (people from the future, please tell me this joke is dated... oh, please, please tell me that).
First the positives. It's fast paced and short. There, I praised the damn thing. Now let's eviscerate it.
Let's get down to the characters. They have names, but I won't bother typing them out. It requires more brain power in terms of memory than the book deserves.
There is lead character guy, I'll talk about him later because I could write an entire essay on why he's the most frustrating protagonist I've read in years.
Annoying wife: she's a big city girl who doesn't understand these outdoorsy ways. She would rather complain about not being in the city, complain about a broken nail, and spend a fortune on jewlery and clothes. You know the cliche, I don't need to continue.
The lead's mom and dad. They live on the island and can't understand their son and his city folk ways. They suspect that he may... *Gasp* want them to move to the city as there is no one to take care of them on the island... AND THEY ARE RIGHT! Will they be able to talk their son out of his fool notions? Do any of us really care? (view spoiler)[The dogs sure don't and kill off this plot point pretty fast... pun most certainly intended. (hide spoiler)]
There's the kids. They have no real personality. They are children and only seen briefly. Nothing really to hate here, I mean they're kids... oh, wait, they started talking and are just as annoying as everyone else in the book. That's a relief. To hell with them too.
Finally there is the brother. The brother is a Vietnam war vet, who is lost in a world at peace, and spends his time wandering aimlessly, drinking, sleeping with most likely underage girls, hunting and wanting to prove himself better than that hoity toity college educated brother of his... because of course that had to be his character. Of course you had to make him a bigger asshole than his brother, because his brother is such an insufferable dick. You know what though, I still like him better. He may be an annoying cliche, but he shares my dislike of his brother, so I'll even mention his name is Kenny because at least he's got one thing going for him.
[image]
Oh Fight Club references, they do come in useful sometimes...
So, speaking of toxic masculinity (wonderful transition there Tim, that newly invented Pulitzer Prize for Goodreads reviews is almost yours), lets talk about our lead. So, he's an insecure asshat who seems to go the entire book "taking back his place," which is to say showing his wife who is the boss. No, I'm not joking, that seems to be the lesson learned from this experience.
At one point I made an update that just said the following "Wow.... I’ve never read one single page filled with so much macho bullshit in all my years of reading. I can’t decide if the book is entertainingly bad now or just bad."
Now it is time to reveal what was on that page. Be ready for a long quote.
"He would kill them, and that would show her.
The thought startled him. Her? Diane? Diane loved him, there was no question of that. Maybe he indulged her too much over the years, maybe he hadn't been as demanding as he should have been. But now he would show her. Now he would reestablish his superiority.
There was more. He tried to shut off his mind, but it pumped out additional truths. The reason surfaced no matter how he denied it. Finally he had to admit to himself that the night's excitement had exhilarated him far beyond anything in recent memory. That he once again felt incredibly alive after so many dead years in the city."
Okay, let's breakdown this paragraph by paragraph.
First one: Yes, killing dogs will sure show them. May as well put on a labcoat and shout into a thunderstorm "I'LL SHOW THEM ALL!!!!!!"
Second paragraph: He should have been more demanding? He needs to... reestablish... his... superiority? I really have nothing to say to that. I really have no words. Please, someone help me out here. Jean-Luc?
[image]
Thank you Picard. As always, you are a source of wisdom.
Paragraph three: so... the most exhilarating night of your life was (view spoiler)[the night your dad was murdered in front of you by a bunch of dogs, and traumatized your family... There's no nice way to say this, but you're kind of fucked up dude. (hide spoiler)]
I wish I could say the macho bullshit ended there, but no, of course it doesn't. At one point he is in a life or death situation and debates on calling his wife for help. He decides not to because: “the thought of her knowing he had failed again was abominable.”
Is this a book about killer dogs or the most insecure man in the world? I honestly don’t know anymore.
At one point his wife has the gall to offer a suggestion, namely that they throw out food laced with some of her vallium, so that maybe the dogs will get drowsy. His reaction "The pills again. Her answer to everything." Okay, I dislike his wife as a character, but seriously, to hell with you man. She made a semi-reasonable suggestion and he immediately dismisses her.
Later his wife saves him from another situation and we get the following gem "An now his wife had to act to save his life. The dogs; rotten, disgusting dogs, had humiliated him, made him less of a man."
Want more? His son gets bitten by a dog and his wife fears rabies, he decides to make a run for the car. He considers why should he do this when help will eventually arrive.
"For Diane, he told himself. And, after pausing, admitted silently, for myself."
Not for your son, you selfish bastard? No, again, it always comes down to him, to proving himself the big man. Can't accept anyone's help, has to prove he can do it, take control for himself and show his wife who is boss. To hell with the kids, they exist just to show that he is a dominant male who produced more than one offspring.
To hell with this book.
If I were a diplomat, I would call this book "an admirable attempted at an old story." I am not a diplomat, so I'll call it a "tired cliche, followed by a tired cliche, rounded off with a touch of cliche and some fine wine, because I assure you, you'll need alcohol to finish this off.
In closing: TLDR - book sucks, don't read it. 1/5 stars....more
I always try to think of some positive spin for the books I read, even ones I don't like. My positive spin? This cover truly captures that pulp paperbI always try to think of some positive spin for the books I read, even ones I don't like. My positive spin? This cover truly captures that pulp paperback feel:
[image]
Sadly I don't have that cover, so there is nothing redeeming about my copy of the book.
Are you proud of yourself Farmer? I hope you are, because at least then we can say someone took some small measure of joy from this miserable experience, because it sure as hell wasn't me. What's that? It was supposed to be a joke?
I get the goddamn joke Farmer. It just isn’t funny.
So for those of you who are unfamiliar, here's the joke. Kilgore Trout was a character in several Kurt Vonnegut novels. He was supposed to be a hack sci-fi author who only got published in dirty magazines and the occasional paperback. He was a terrible author who just so happened to make the occasional brilliant philosophical point. Enter Philip Jose Farmer who essentially said "I could be Kilgore Trout!" He managed to convince Vonnegut to allow him to publish under the pen-name Trout and write one of the books mentioned in Vonnget's fiction. The result? God awful.
Now it's hard to fully fault the novel as it was intentionally written to be bad. That's a fine joke that could work as a short story. Something like 20 pages could be amusing. At 200+ pages though, it's painful. Also, Farmer is no Trout. Sure he wrote a bad book, but all attempts at philosophy are just as laughably bad as the rest of the book until after a point it ceases to be funny and only succeeds in gaining a groan.
Here is a brief outline of the book: Simon goes to a planet looking for answers to his questions. Natives of said planet have no answers. Insert detail description of the aliens' sex lives...possibly with Simon involved. Wacky misunderstanding. Run away. Repeat until we finally finish and you're graced with the one clever line in the entire book.
Yep, there's one clever scene and its the end of the damn book. The rest is filled with jokes like the following:
"Simon arrived in his ark at the same place where Noah was supposed to have landed. This was a coincidence that only happened in a bad novel..."
Look, Douglas Adams could have made that joke work. So could Terry Pratchett. You know why? Because they were funny. A joke like that would be have an amusing meta quality. Here... here it's not funny because it's just a reminder of the torment Farmer is inflicting upon us. Yes, we are reading a terrible book, you don't have to remind us. The prose is doing that for you.
1 star wailing in pain until its death out of 5....more
I never put Kurt Vonnegut on my list of favorite authors… and shame on me for that as I’ve at the very least liked everything I’ve read by the man. OnI never put Kurt Vonnegut on my list of favorite authors… and shame on me for that as I’ve at the very least liked everything I’ve read by the man. One of the things I always love about his work is that he was quite possibly the most hopeful cynic in existence. Pessimism is borderline overwhelming in his work, but it always seemed like deep down he still liked people and hoped we would do better, even while being positive that we were doomed by our own failures.
Well, not so here. This book is Slapstick, and like the slapstick comedies of old, there is only failure here. Some people may be good, and some may improve along the way, but there is no hope here. This is easily the bleakest novel I’ve read by Vonnegut (view spoiler)[and that’s saying something considering he literally ended the world in one of his novels. (hide spoiler)]
The plot follows Dr Wilbur Daffodil-II Swain, current (and last) president of the United States of America, King of Manhattan and owner of 1,000+ candlesticks, as he documents his life story and how the world declined. It’s a tale of genius twins, mad schemes, name changes, orgies, revenge, drugs, dystopia and utopia. It’s a tale where everything can go right, even while everything goes to hell. It’s about life, the afterlife and about how to cope with both. It doesn’t make any sense in description, and yet it makes perfect sense while reading.
In other words, it’s a slapstick comedy in literary form. The bleakest slapstick you will ever read, and while it does have Vonnegut’s touches of humanity, this is very clearly a novel where he’s working out his own demons. What was he working out? I feel I can’t explain it, but he will. Literally he opens the book telling you why he wrote it… and it all makes sense, and makes it even more depressing.
This one is unfocused and all over the place (even by Vonnegut standards) and overall it feels like a bit of a mess. It is easily my least favorite of his novels, yet I’m still giving a solid 3 stars. Even at his worst, Vonnegut is able to speak to me in a way that few authors… hell, few humans in general, have ever been able to speak to me.
I’d like to close with just a general note. Vonnegut was not an author to be read for beautiful prose. He liked quick simple sentences, that said only as much as they needed to. Despite that, here he finds a moment or two to bring a touch of awe out of that simple prose. “Standing among all those tiny, wavering lights, I felt as though I were God, up to my knees in the Milky Way.” ...more
A brief note before we begin, this review may (or may not) be revised later. I’ve written it while suffering from major jet-lag (literally traveled foA brief note before we begin, this review may (or may not) be revised later. I’ve written it while suffering from major jet-lag (literally traveled for 30 hours, and went through a 11 hour time change in the process). For all I know, it may only make sense to me as the person who wrote it and be absolutely incomprehensible to everyone else. If so, consider it a rather parallel to the novel itself. :)
For those of you who have ever endeavored to write a novel, I feel your pain. That moment of putting everything into a work, only to read it and realize that it sounded much better in your head, I know the feeling well. I have numerous stories stored away in a box because part of me loves them, but also needs to keep them far away and out of sight. Those of you who give those a read every once in a while and wonder “why bother?” let me offer one note of encouragement to you: Murakami is pretty much an international literary rock star, and he wrote this book first. So, you know, there is hope.
Now that I’ve offered that rather intimidating start, let me say that this isn’t really a bad book… it’s just not a very good one. I fully admit that I gave it three stars on account of a fascination aspect, and not because it is “good.” It’s interesting to see the start of an author I will come to respect, in pure amateur mode. I mean, you see ideas he will go on to play with and perfect, and there are little moments of genius here and there, but this is not the Murakami I love. This is very much someone still trying to find a voice. It is pretty much the definition of a first novel; it is mostly plotless, yet still full of holes, unanswered questions, a rambling nature and some just downright weird choices.
As someone who started reading Murakami with The Wild Sheep Chase, it is quite interesting to see early versions of those characters… it’s also weird seeing how tonally different the first novel is compared to the third. This strange little slice of life story will somehow evolve in a future book to a borderline metaphysical noir.
Is this a book I can recommend? Only to those who already have a firm grasp on Murakami’s work, as it’s mostly a curiosity; something to read after you’ve gone through his major works, and want to see where many of the ideas began. For those who fit into that category, you’ll probably find it a fascinating quick read. ...more
I sadly have very little to say about this one. In many ways I think it is the worst of the original three Earthsea books, never reaching the clever sI sadly have very little to say about this one. In many ways I think it is the worst of the original three Earthsea books, never reaching the clever subversive nature of the first book, nor the phenomenal world building and charm of the second. It has some minor elements of them, but it mostly just feels like the most standard generic “hero story” of the three. With that said, I think I may prefer it over the first one slightly, as I feel it tells a more entertaining tale, but I can easily see where many would disagree.
The real highlight of this one for me is seeing how Le Guin aged Ged. She did an excellent job of making Ged grow up. He was (in my opinion) an insufferable know it all for a good portion of the first book, a wise man who understood his limitations (but always hopeful to work on them) in the second, and here an old man looking back not always fondly at some of his deeds, yet still able to see the good in the past. I found his growth a delight and liked seeing how his previous adventures (some we never even see) affected him.
Unfortunately, his companion in this book is not very interesting. This time Ged is joined by a young nobleman, whose personality seems to be a combination of hero worship followed by bouts of doubt. That pretty much sums up every insight we get into him and he’s about as uninteresting as that sounds.
While I had hoped for more, I find that I do not regret reading this series. The first and third did not reach the heights for me that many hold them too, but the second book far exceeded my expectations. I find that one line here sums up my entire feelings on the book:
“I do not care what comes after; I have seen the dragons on the wind of morning.”
Will I read the fourth book? Maybe at some point. For now I’m happy to leave this world for some time. Though I cannot put myself as one of the many fans who consider it one of the all time fantasy greats, there are aspects of the series that I will treasure. A solid 3/5 stars. ...more
2/19/21 - I'm editing my review. It may seem odd to edit a review for a book I read over two years ago without a reread, but I've noticed whenever I t2/19/21 - I'm editing my review. It may seem odd to edit a review for a book I read over two years ago without a reread, but I've noticed whenever I talk fantasy with my friends, I use this book as an example of perfect world building. It's one of those rare novels that the more I think about it the more perfect it becomes. I have no strong desire to revisit the first or third book, but this one may actually go on my favorites shelf. _____
If you read my review of the previous novel, A Wizard of Earthsea, you will know I was not enamored with it. You will note that I did not say it was bad, far from it. I respected the hell out of that book for many of the things it did, but I did not personally care much for it. I went ahead and read the second book because I felt like, to a certain extent, I must be missing something. I think it is no exaggeration to say that Earthsea is one of the most loved Fantasy series, having clearly inspired many works and having endured strong since the late 60s. What was it that captured imaginations but did no more than gently tap mine? Was it the younger reader aspect? Was this a series that one needed to read at a young age and then let nostalgia keep fresh?
It is at times like this that I actually hate that our star rating is listed before the review, as anyone with a casual glance can say, “Yes Tim, enough with the dramatics, we can see the four (now FIVE) stars. Tell us why you liked this one better.” *Sigh* Star ratings just have no flare for the dramatic.
Yes, I liked this one better. A lot better. Where I respected the first book, I couldn’t say that I found it enjoyable. This one I can say both. This one is something of a masterpiece in my eyes. This one corrects literally every issue I had with the last. Here we get to know our characters more personally; we are let into their lives rather than kept at a distance. There is far more development than “I was an arrogant kid and then grew up” (yes, I know that’s a slight exaggeration… but not much of one). Here I actually really cared about what was going on.
The book is short, at only 212 pages in my edition. This works both in its favor and against it. On one hand, the story, if we really get down to it, could be summed up in a few sentences. Really, not much goes on from a plot assessment. In fact, if we only focus on plot, the book could have ended something like 20 pages earlier from a traditional narrative perspective. I will even confess that as I read the last two chapters, I had a metaphoric raised eyebrow wondering why the hell we were getting essentially an extended epilogue. Was this really needed?
Oh, my… yes, yes it was. The first book was a hero’s journey. A lesson learned, darkness vanquished, let’s go home triumphant. This one is almost entirely an internal struggle with a fantasy story happening around it. This is the story of someone who has literally lost everything, including her name, and seeing if she’s willing to lose what little security she has for, not the guarantee, but the mere possibility of something better. This is an emotional story, and one presented in a “young adult” friendly fashion, while letting those of us who are older see the darker side, the story told from the shadows and between the lines. The ending section, in my opinion, is what heightens the entire story aspect and raises it to that minor masterpiece status.
Now, ignoring this, I would still say I liked this book better, even if it didn’t have the emotional impact (though I assure you, I’m so very glad it did). Why? World building. The world of the previous novel was interesting, but with the second book Le Guin cemented herself as one of the best in terms of world building. She expands upon concepts mentioned in the previous book and plays with them in interesting ways. This one takes place on a different island, in a different country and as such we see a completely different perspective. We see the world through other eyes with a vastly altered view from the previous book. The world is built up in so many interesting, but small ways, such as the rituals in the temple performed, but never fully explained, as much of the reasons for them have been lost to time. I complained in my last review that the book seemed almost like a textbook, too distanced, now I almost feel like I would happily read a full history of the world presented here.
And that my friends, is the highest compliment I can give a fantasy novel in terms of world building.
5/5 stars and my highest possible recommendation....more
*Pulls up Spotify and plays “Rats” by Ghost for the remainder of the review*
If you’re doing the same at home, please imagine every time you read the w*Pulls up Spotify and plays “Rats” by Ghost for the remainder of the review*
If you’re doing the same at home, please imagine every time you read the word “rats” that it is delivered as it is in that song. It will make the review significantly more entertaining.
So, James Herbert was an awesome horror author. I feel I cannot stress that enough before I begin this review, because “The Rats” proves that was not always the case. Now do not get me wrong, this book is actually quite entertaining, and don’t let that initial reaction put you off. If you just want to read a book about rats causing havoc in London… well, then this is the book for you! That said, as someone who started reading Herbert with some of his later work, it is shocking to see that the writing quality is nowhere near what he would become.
It suffers very much from “first novel syndrome”. We have a rather dull everyman lead (who may be the least interesting character in the entire book, save for some unnamed tourists... and the tourists are possibly debatable). The book is structured almost like a series of short stories, with most chapters being random citizens chased/devoured by rats in a new and creative way, while our lead just happens to tie together everything together in a few interconnected chapters.
Also, with the exception of the last chapter, there’s very little in terms of tension building. Instead Herbert seems content to replace suspense with “shocking” moment. Some of these moments work, (view spoiler)[I can practically hear him saying “I know, a baby and a dog killed on the same page! That’s got to get them!” (hide spoiler)] some sadly just come off as a tad silly.
With all complaints aside, it is a very entertaining read, which is really all I can ask for from a book about killer rats. I mean, I didn't expect to gain some great new insight to the human psyche, I wanted rats ripping off people's body parts... and that I received. It has some utterly ridiculous moments, but all in good fun, like a creature feature played late at night on cable. It can’t be taken too seriously, but for those looking for rodent terror, there are certainly worse places to look. I give it 3 giant killer rats out of 5....more
"The office of the university president looked like the front parlor of a successful Victorian whorehouse."
That is one hell of a line to start your bo"The office of the university president looked like the front parlor of a successful Victorian whorehouse."
That is one hell of a line to start your book off. It certainly sets a tone for our narrator, doesn't it?
Let's start off with a little background... not on the book, but on me. A week or so back I started reading the first of Parker’s Jesse Stone novels, and the reaction from a few of my friends was along the lines of “Why are you reading this when you haven’t read any of the Spencer novels?” I’ll be honest, the only thing I knew about Spencer came from the back of the Dresden Files books, where they say that Dresden is a combination of Spencer meets Merlin. So yeah… I was a bit clueless there, and decided to check out the first of this 30+ book series. The end results? Fairly entertaining.
As mentioned, I came into this after reading Night Passage, so I’m coming from the unique perspective of starting off with a later Parker book and then going to his first. The writing style is so different that they could be two completely different authors. The chapters are longer here (despite being the shorter book) and there are lot more description, whereas the other book was mostly dialogue. The later book was faster paced, whereas this one is much rougher and very clearly channeling authors that came before him (Here’s looking at you Chandler). I can’t really say that one approach is better than another, but I will say it was easier to get into Night Passage.
With that said, Spencer is a more entertaining protagonist than Stone was; he’s got more charm and a great sense of humor that shows off from the first line. I get the feeling though that Parker was trying to figure out the tone for the character. I haven’t read the other books, so I’m not sure how the character will evolve, but Parker was certainly off to a good start.
My only real issue with the book is that I wished it would have focused more on the manuscript in the title. One could have based an entire book off that hunt, but Parker instead chooses to focus on a more traditional mystery, with the manuscript seeming more like an after thought the farther we go. That aspect gets resolved, but its unsatisfactory when compared to the rest of the plot.
All in all, I found it a pretty good start to the series, and one I’m will to continue with in the future. ...more
"It began as a mistake," he tells us at the start. With those few words he seemingly describes everything that is about to happen. He could have pract"It began as a mistake," he tells us at the start. With those few words he seemingly describes everything that is about to happen. He could have practically started each section with those words and it would seem fitting.
This is a supposedly autobiographical novel (which I judge to be mostly true, because while I have never worked at the post office, I’ve done enough odd jobs to meet the very type of imbeciles he describes on a regular basis). I can draw three conclusions from this:
1. Charles Bukowski was a very clever man. His wit and humor shine throughout the book. With very simple language he gives you a fascinating look into his (character’s) life.
2. Had we met in real life, I probably wouldn’t have liked him. He’s often obnoxious and his actions become almost pitiable at times.
3. Despite that I probably wouldn’t like him, I could listen to him talk for hours, because the novel feels like a really good rant after one is asked “How was your day?”
I’m giving this a solid four stars as I laughed from the opening pages and found it borderline hilarious throughout… until it just started getting sad. As I noted above, some of his actions get to be almost pitiable, and the laughs became less frequent as I just started to feel sorry for him. Not all of these scenes are self inflicted either; the sort of people he was shown to work with would drive a man crazy.
Which brings me to a somewhat interesting theory. Though this was his first book, I think it is also his justification on why he choose to write so late in his life. He is quoted to have said "I have one of two choices – stay in the post office and go crazy ... or stay out here and play at writer and starve. I have decided to starve." With this book he shows the insanity of his situation, and with the progression from hilarious to depressing in terms of his daily life, he shows us quite simply and realistically why he would make such a choice.
Strongly recommended to those who don’t mind some crude humor and work related madness. ...more
I was recently reminded by a goodreads friend that, despite being a Stephen King fan, I have never actually read The Shining. I have no proper justifiI was recently reminded by a goodreads friend that, despite being a Stephen King fan, I have never actually read The Shining. I have no proper justification of this. I’ve seen the movie before, and I guess I just didn’t feel like reading 600+ pages of three people stuck in a hotel during the winter. The setting just didn’t appeal that much… but as a Stephen King fan, I had to make myself read it eventually, so now was as good of a time as any.
Now, before I continue on, I should stress this; I’m not new to King’s novels. I’ve read through quite a few of them (and enjoyed almost everything I’ve read), and with zero exceptions, none of them bothered me. I did not once feel afraid because of his books, get goose bumps, paranoia or even a slight shudder. Yeah… you can guess where this is going. The Shining scared the living hell out of me.
Seriously, King made a fire hose unnerve me. A freaking fire hose.
Now, while I may call this King’s scariest novel, I don’t consider it his best novel. Nor is it the greatest haunted house novel (I would personally give that to The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson which also creeped me the hell out). King in my opinion has written better novels, but the sense of unease and creeping dread here really does stand out as a remarkable achievement.
In terms of complaints, I would say that it is a bit overlong... but, eh, it's not that bad. It’s a slow burner, yeah, but I don’t feel that I should complain, as I loved the research aspect of Jack’s storyline. The slow understanding of the hotel’s history and how absolutely... wrong it is. There does seem to be some aspects of the haunting that could have been expanded upon perhaps, but the mysterious nature of the place add a bit of charm for it. Fairly small complaints when compared to all the good here.
Jack is one of King’s more interesting characters, and the alcoholism tie to the haunting is a stroke of pure genius. He’s the heart of this story in my opinion; a struggle with inner demons in a place that is unaccommodating with composing oneself. The setting is great and despite my initial hesitation of a 600 page book involving 3 people pretty much stuck in one setting, the Overlook is so well designed that it didn't bother me in the slightest (also the fact that the first hundred pages take place outside for the most part help).
As a side note, it was a bit surprising as someone who had seen the movie, how many of the iconic scenes are not even in the book. (view spoiler)[While I knew there was no "Here's Johnny" scene (as it's one of the more famous film ad-libs) I was surprised by the lack of twins in the corridor, no hedge maze or the famous "All work and no play make Jack a dull boy"... which is still written on the side of my paperback copy of the book. (hide spoiler)]
In closing, a solid King novel, creepy as hell, perhaps a bit too long, but well worth a read. ...more
Loading...
