“At first, I hated this book. The beginning is filled with standard Chuck Palahniuk gross-outs, which I believe serve no purpose other than shock value. As a reader, I find that insulting to my intelligence. I'm not squeamish by any means, but I think gross-outs need to serve a purpose other than strictly shock value. This has been my problem with most Palahniuk books. People seem to respond more to the gross-outs than to the actual story being told. It's the same in this book.
It wasn't until the last quarter of the book that I became interested in the story. It's really hard to describe what piqued my interest without giving away too much of the plot, so I'm not even going to try.
The writing style was a little tedious. It really bothered me at first because it seemed as though all narrators were in agreement about the events that transpired so the whole "oral history" seemed completely unnecessary. By the end, those separate narrators came to mean something.
The plot was weird. I'm still not sure if I entirely get it, but that's Palahniuk for you! It made for an interesting read, and got me thinking by the end.”
Cally B wrote this review Friday, October 9 2009.
(
reply |
permalink )
