Reviews

Nod by Adrian Barnes

Only show reviews with written explanations

ithinkmohammedistaken's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark reflective sad fast-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.25

jettiedabs's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

The power of words and the power of sleep. Two things underestimated by many, but coveted by the wise, are explored in this incredible novel.

I am not one for sci-fi so I was hesitant about a novel shortlisted for the Arthur C. Clarke award, but this real-world-with-a-twist setup is very comfortable for me and I enjoyed the humanity, banality and sardonism of our world glinting through the plot.

What some might see as a jaded world view (and by others as dogged 'sense') is upheld by our narrator Paul, who for all his pragmatism about the human race is fond of grandstanding his intelligence and grasp of language to condemn his peers - with little care for the irony of the situation. This makes for a gripping perspective as the world we know unravels and Nod takes over, stripping away the things held dear as well as the neglected, the scorned, the uncomfortable, until all that is left is survival - and Paul's instinct to journal his way through the evolving nightmare he now calls life.

Love and pain and hope and despair and values and duty are all just sides of the human soul's shape. I can't think of anywhere I have seen this presented more terribly than here, and that is to its credit.

I heartily recommend Nod for those with the constitution for tales of despair and introspection. This story made me say some form of 'wow' out loud, twice, and I am not a wower. I am very glad to have encountered this.

crochetdinosaur's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark funny tense fast-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

3.0

stephanimichelle's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

Nod is one of the stranger books I’ve read recently, a brilliant concept but odd.

For some reason people have stopped being able to sleep in an odd epidemic that hits countries across the globe simultaneously. Only 1 person in 10,000 can sleep; the sleepers share a dream of a golden light.

Early news reports suggest possible reasons for the plague of wakefulness, and warn citizens that 4 weeks of sleep deprivation is fatal.

As sleep deprivation starts to affect the Awakened paranoia sets in, society starts to crumble, and there is a clear division between the sleepless and the Awakened.

Gangs of Awakened start to form, hunting down sleepers as they spend more and more time under the thrall of the golden dream.

The main protagonist Paul is an etymologyist (the study of words not insects!) and author who lives in Vancouver with his girlfriend Tanya. When the event takes place, Paul is writing a book called Nod, about lost and forgotten words. The novel is written as a diary, with an entry for each day over a 4 week period.

Paul is a sleeper, but Tanya is one of the awakened; their relationship deteriorates rapidly as she starts to suffer from the effects of sleep deprivation.

This is a really interesting idea, and as someone who suffers from insomnia I can definitely understand how lack of sleep could lead to scary behaviour.

Unfortunately the execution leaves a lot to be desired; I found Paul to be unlikeable and pretentious. For a lot of the book it seemed as though he spent more time waffling about the origins of a particular word than trying to find out what was going on, making plans for survival or doing anything useful.

Before the outbreak of mass insomnia Paul holes up in his apartment, writing his nonfiction books and sneering at the world. For a while after the outbreak he behaves in the exact same way.

I also didn’t like the writing style and found it difficult to get into the story.

pearlbrook's review against another edition

Go to review page

1.0

Hoo boy... I'm going to reformat an amazon review I wrote when I first read this book. Sorry for cheating but I can't put myself through reading it again.

Genre: Modern day apocalyptic science(ish?) psychological fiction. The world suddenly can't sleep (except for a few special people) and slowly descends into madness and death. Some violence and weird treatment of women.

Spoiler

Main character: Paul
Favourite character: N/A
Villain(s): Charles

Character rating: 1/10
Plot rating: 1/10
Setting rating: 1/10
Overall rating: 1/10

Pros: I picked this book up because I was thoroughly intrigued by the premise. I love the post-apocalyptic genre and the way this particular apocalypse happens is both unique and has a big psychological element to it that I found fascinating.

Cons: Where do I even start?

The narcissistic main character/narrator is the single most annoying, author insertion fantasy I have ever come across. The author was clearly so desperate to prove that his intelligence is far beyond anyone else's that he made the main character and arrogant, insufferable, verbose Chosen One who, by half way in, I was seriously hoping was headed for a gruesome death. He spent so much time keen to show off his apparent word-smithing skills and "unique" philosophising that it left us with a book full of plot holes; a book which lacked emotion, sense or structure.

Onto the plot! Perhaps I am too used to books which try to explain why events are taking place. Apparently that is an unnecessary artistic choice or something. In other worse, don't expect any insight on the source of the sleeplessness, how it has affected the whole world simultaneously, why the children have been muted, how they survive on their own in a wood with no food when everywhere has been ransacked, why the Sleeping Cats exist or what they hope to achieve and so on.

But surely, you cry, the plot is well defined and laid out! It must follow the teachings of the best professors and literature researchers! The author surely knows how to write, given that he is an English teacher with a Masters in creative writing?

I weep for you, fellow reader. In this book there is no plot arc. The ending is flimsy and without any kind of real closure. The detail of the illness and the destruction of society are either badly researched, badly implemented, or both. The book jumps from "and then this happened" to "and then this happened" with little logical plot. The main adversary seems magically immune to many of the cognitive and physiological problems he should be facing as his sleeplessness continues. According to the development of the disease outlined at the beginning of the book, his actions should be pretty much impossible.

If I am being very charitable I will say that the author is attempting to establish a new, avant-garde style of writing that turns the world of fiction on its head and makes us question everything we know about creative writing. If I'm being less charitable, I'd say he makes us question his right to teach literature ever again.

Final thoughts: So yes, I hated this book. Absolutely and completely detested it. There are very few books I give 1/10 to, and none that have made me quite so angry. But I am just one person who is tough on authors and very set in her ways. I encourage you to make your own mind up on this one and then feel free to return and tell me why I'm wrong and how I completely missed the point. I really hope that is the case. But I'd still rather stick a pin in my eye than ever read this again.

nagemznarf's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

Picked it up and finished in a day. Very interesting take on the apocalypse genre. Compelling read with no wasted pages, consistently moving the plot forward. An emotional ending followed by an essay by the now-deceased author really drives the story home. Would honestly love to watch this as a movie.