My friend sent it to me and I had no idea that the author even existed. I was also 100% sure that the author was a woman. As it turns out I was majorly wrong which isn’t really the point, I know. The point is: I will read whatever the author will write or has ever written because I loved every second I spent reading the novel.
Yes it is violent, cruel, merciless. But why all the fuss? Sarah Kane wrote only plays in that fashion -only less poetic. The scene that really got to me the most, was Marcus‘ speech after Lavinia’s rape. The beautifully written poetic speech which is so vital to understand the monstrosity of the assault. It says in the Intro that it was often cut or left out when the play was performed. I really don’t see why. And I really want to see it on stage some day.
Oh war das toll. Ich habs natürlich geschafft die Bücher komplett achronologisch zu lesen, aber das tut dem Ganzen keinen Abbruch. Bemerkenswert finde ich nicht nur die Fülle an Sub-plots und Geschichten in Geschichten die alle letztlich von Bedeutung sind, sondern auch die Tatsache, dass die unaussprechlichen Grausamkeiten das wohlige Gefühl, dass sich bei mir einstellte, nicht kleinkriegen konnten. Ich war entrüstet, empört, angeekelt und dann kurz darauf entzückt, glücklich und verzaubert.
Rumo ist natürlich toll. Ich will außerdem ein Einhörnchen, aber das wollte ich ja schon als ich Ensel und Grete las.
Am Schönsten ist aber die allerletzte Seite, weil ich das Buch mit einem breiten Grinsen geschlossen habe.
1) THE SMALL ASSASSIN: omg. I will never have children. Ever. So creepy!
Otherwise the rest so far (I’m at „The Lake“) was kinda predictable… mh.. I shall read on.
Now, more than one year later, I’ve managed to finish it. The thing is…it’s not really my genre and I don’t like short stories (for no apparent reason. There is only one of Neil Gaiman’s short stories that I like and I love his writing to death).
What I liked about it is, how ordinary people and events are turned into creepy occurrences. The stories were mostly a bit creepy and I love Bradbury as an author. I just don’t like short stories and I guess that is why I struggled.
I put in on hold. I’m in page 106. So far I think this:
– Why does the protagonist, who is an archaeologist and who tried to find the oldest human remains, not investigate the monster, its origin etc?
– Why is the protagonist’s personal drama more unrealistic to me and harder to buy than a monster, which lived in a lake? Or a ghost? I think this does tell you something about the character’s motivation and that it was just constructed to add some drama I don’t think necessary.
– I fail to see why I should bother about a 30-year-old behaving like a 16-year-old? There are condoms and other means to prevent pregnancies. Please have no Mary Sues, but women who can actually decide what they want to do with their own body, namely have a child or not. Also, there is something like speech which is used by teenagers and speech which is used by adults.
– excuse me: Monster. In lake. Please investigate? React like real people would: freak out/ investigate/ take pictures / run like hell / start a religion revolving around the monster. Or act like people in a fairy tale/fantasy novel would: find its family and start talking with it. Whatever.
– Run the wife over with a plane? Seriously??
– Question: You are really really sick. You feel really really crappy and in the end it turns out to be lupus. But you do not go and see a doctor despite the fact that you have felt really really crappy for 3 months? Really? (Random drama anyone?) Will the lupus pay off in the end? Is it vital for the progress of the plot or the character arch?
– The whole: mom isn’t telling me who my dad is this is unfair but to me and not to him as she states – thing… uhm… yes, that is how people react.
Not to be unfair or harsh to a novelist or anything, but will these things make sense? I need a break from it right now, because it angers me because there is potential and I see it wasted. Is it supposed to be a fun thing, because then it lacks the humor. Should I take it serious, which I can’t because it needs to be more realistic (not real).
I read this because I think that the movie is one of the best movies of the past 10 years, including the best performance of Viggo Mortensen’s career. So I was torn between not wanting to read th enovel and wanting to read it.
In the end I am more tan glad I read it. Not just because I now know that the movie adaptation for once truly captured a novel. But also because the book is magnificent. The style reflects the life of the protagonists (nothing really disrupts the routine). Their relationship is heartbreaking and I still love the fact that the focus stays on them, not on what happened and why and how. This is not important and I love that.
I recommend everyone to read the novel, to then watch the movie and then go down and embrace your loved ones.
Love! I expect from Neil’s books to be the following (because he spoilt me since the first one I read): magical, fun, entertaining, captivating, a warm comfy blanket, happiness, a smart narrator and story and the hope that it’ll never end. I got it again with this one.
I always wonder whether I could rate them and usually „The Graveyard Book“ ends on position one but „Neverwhere“ follows up so closely that it is almost up there on the same spot and then I’d rate them all on spot 3.
Anyway: much much love! More please.
That was a depressing read, not one that was fun. I have to admit I am not one for gangster stories. But also those characters, who were so blind to life and themselves, so lost and stuck, they got on my nerves. In itself it isn’t bad, it’s just not my thing.
The author felt the need to have the protagonist explain on the last 2 pages why they did what they did. Good plots don’t need this.
Furthermore, the characters are crude and unrealistic. Whereas the protagonist is the most round one, the others are 2-dimensional at best.
The plot reeks of sadism and cruelty and unlike „American Psycho“ it isn’t a smart if horrifying comment of today’s society. Unless the message of „The Wasp Factory“ is to not kill and torture kids or animals, and you as a reader need to be shown why not, then there is no reason to pick up the novel. If you are however into torturing living creatures, you might just get off reading the thing.
I was under the false impression that the novel was related to the movie in any way other than the three rules of robotics.
The novel seemed like a row of short stories or episodes linked together by the plot of the interview and I wasn’t really interested in that. The episodes as such also weren’t that interesting either.