Just finished reading this. Is it good?

You tell us dipshit

Idk is it?

>>7594470
>>7594474
Idk

Is Clive Barker's stuff as disturbing and fantastical as everyone says he is? I'm worried those qualities of his are overrated and that he's just another bestseller shit. J.G. Ballard likes him, so I guess that's a good sign.

>>7594484
It's pretty good, similar to King I'd say (but better endings) - get the Books Of Blood, there are some cheap editions, a lot of short stories, IMHO his best work

Of the novels I haven't read OP's book, I've only read Damnation Game (IMHO a bit boring, very "classical" in structure and story) and The Great And Secret Show (dropped in the middle, very boring, DFW didn't like it either: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1990/02/19/the-horror-of-pretentiousness/ea31f4c8-4f6a-40ca-af84-3a1d77e32cbc/ )

>
>
>
>what...never mind

>>7594521

I don't like Stephen King, so I guess I won't like him then.

That DFW review is pretty good though.

>>7594467
Form your own opinion worm. Non of us can think for you.

>>7595197
You must be new here.

>>7594538
>Too long by half, and basically just silly, it seems the work of one of those dreaded commercial successes who've become so impressed with themselves they no longer think they have to work at being interesting.

DFW writes about Barker but actually preempts what critics will say about Infinite Jest

>>7594484
>>7594538
I'd say he's worth reading for his first books (Books of blood, The Damnation Game and Hellbound heart), so basicly till circa half of th 80's. And for me, his very best things are some stories from Books of blood (not the whole thing, maybe a half of those stories is bad) and mostly The damnation game (cool begining, and then it shifts between good and meh, but imho his best novel).


Since then he's slowly turning into something more like dark fantasy and I don't like it; I tried few of them, finished only The Great and Secret Show and I think there was something good in that book, but mostly it was boring and bad.

>>7594467
This is my favorite book. Read it first when I was 13. This is actually where I learned what anal sex was. This is probably his best book, although Galilee is really good, too.

Mr. B. Gone is very cool.

>>7595413
Yeah this. Weave world was ok, but I read it when I was about 14, that's sort of it level. Books of Blood are probably the best, though I can't remember if I read the damnation game.

>>7595413
>>7595422
I disagree, to some extent. I think he was always dark fantasy. A lot of his newer stuff does suck, however, Galilee is really good. Imajica is great.

The Damnation Game, The Graet and Secret Show and Everville, and the Books of Blood are all standard fare.

I really liked his plays, like Colossus and History of the Devil.

The thing about Barker is, in his stories the monsters usually have very human motivations, whereas the humans are often power mad or in some way evil. He also writes good, strong female characters, which is a rarity.

>>7595432
>I think he was always dark fantasy.

Yeah, kind of, but earlier books were more splatterpunk/gore/whatever. By the moving more towards fantasy I mean that it's just going more like fairy tale (well, fucked up fairy tale but still the same thing). For me he was the best at his imaginery, as in the begining og The damnation game, that post-WW2 scenes. That was great for me.

File: image.jpg (25KB, 186x300px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 186x300px

How do you chaps rate Brian Lumley?