Can we discuss this?
What did you think of it? Have you read anything else by this asshole?
What did you think of the ridiculous praise from Bret Easton Ellis in the front cover?
The repetitive 90's party/hookup shit got really old really fast, I didn't really buy the overall gimmick. It eould have been better as a short story about a house thst grew, everything eles felt unnecessary.
That said I did like the letters from the mother to the son.
I can't find it anywhere in bookstores or libraries in my country. One e-shop has it but it has to be some limited rare edition because they are asking a shitload of cash for it :(
I also heard e-book is not good. Is there a scan or something out there?
i liked the part about the house....but the other part about the kid and all the other stuff, including the style gimmick, got in the way. the disorientation in the house was good, though, and even well written, compared to the rest.
New theory: Lit is a gimmick. You're all illiterate and faking it through obscure pretension. From what I can gather of this site over the past few weeks, the main schism is between people who play it safe and just pretend to worship Pynchon, and people who think Richard Dawkins (his atheism, not the actual bio stuff of course) and Sam Harris are the apex of intellectual achievement. House of Leaves is one of the greatest books of the past few decades.
Learn how to read.
A face in a cloud, no trace in the crowd.
Not the guy you're replying to but I'll give it a shot. I loved the aesthetic of horror the text made manifest as the chaotic abyss of the unknowable. I loved its implementation of post-modernist deconstruction of the novelistic form in a way that expanded the modernist stylistic trait of form matching content (as in word (dis)placement and gaps complementing (thus enhancing) the feelings of an indifferent world and mindscape in the Navidson Record, and the disorientation and creeping madness of the Truant narrative). I loved the philosophical breadth of the undertaking. I loved the character of Truant, he's one of my favorite narrators. I can hardly think of one that got more in my head. I loved the letters from Truant's mother (those alone would make an incredible, mind-bending novella). The list could go on.
Sorry if any of that is confusing but I was trying to compress a lot into a little bit of space.
Big fan of it. The Navidson Record segments are a top notch page turner and sometimes genuinely chilling, which is kind of bizarre since it'a deliberately written in an incredibly dry, overly academic style.
Johnny Truant is kind of annoying, although imo it's still a good portrayal of creeping insanity. It's just that I don't really give a shit about Johnny or his endless partying. The part where the porn star kills his dog is spoopy AF though.
Some of the other sections are really good too. Everyone seems to love the letters from Johnny's mother, and Karen's segment is kind of hilarious. I was cracking up at the part where she interviews Hunter S. Thompson and he's talking about destroying a fish tank and getting kicked out of his friend's house because of the movie.
I'm kind of split on the crazy formatting. Sometimes it works, but a lot of the time it's more exasperating than anything.
Overall 8/10. Could've been a 9 if the Johnny Truant sections were better and the experimental formatting hit the mark more often.
It was pretty good, but I would have enjoyed it better if Danielewski had better prose. If it was basically Pale Fire 2.0 it would have been fantastic, but it's just Stephen King with formatting quirks