discomagpie's review against another edition
4.0
I gave this book a 4.5/5 on InsatiableBooksluts.com. My co-reviewer, Rob, gave the book a 3/5.
We often do discussion-style reviews at our site. Here's an excerpt:
"Susie: well… (grins) I could tell exactly why you didn’t like it, but I thought I’d let you put it in your own words.
Rob: I didn’t marginalia it much. I wonder why? Probably it was just too boring and irritating to bother.
Rob: Oh, I know exactly why I didn’t like it.
Rob: Andrew Whittaker sounds like Holden Caulfield–all grown up, but still whining, and pissing, and moaning about his life. It was Catcher in the Rye Part 2 for me.
Susie: I thought it was hilarious. I laughed out loud when he wrote in a letter about how that guy wrote like Hemingway would have written, had Hemingway never gone to high school.
Rob: it made me laugh a few times, early on, but midway through that stopped. I just wanted to get it done.
Susie: Andrew’s writing is dreadful.. which made me appreciate Sam Savage, it must be damn difficult to be a purposely bad writer in a way that isn’t actually making the book terrible.
Rob: lol–yeah, he pulled that off pretty well. And while I can appreciate it, and while some of it was funny, the overall book gave me bad flashbacks. Heh.
Rob: There was one very good line though, on pg 55. He’s talking to Miss Moss, and he says, “As for God, I am not simply agnostic–I am indifferent…” I think that’s Savage peeking through there, it was too poetic and subtle for Andrew."
Read the read of the review discussion at our site.
We often do discussion-style reviews at our site. Here's an excerpt:
"Susie: well… (grins) I could tell exactly why you didn’t like it, but I thought I’d let you put it in your own words.
Rob: I didn’t marginalia it much. I wonder why? Probably it was just too boring and irritating to bother.
Rob: Oh, I know exactly why I didn’t like it.
Rob: Andrew Whittaker sounds like Holden Caulfield–all grown up, but still whining, and pissing, and moaning about his life. It was Catcher in the Rye Part 2 for me.
Susie: I thought it was hilarious. I laughed out loud when he wrote in a letter about how that guy wrote like Hemingway would have written, had Hemingway never gone to high school.
Rob: it made me laugh a few times, early on, but midway through that stopped. I just wanted to get it done.
Susie: Andrew’s writing is dreadful.. which made me appreciate Sam Savage, it must be damn difficult to be a purposely bad writer in a way that isn’t actually making the book terrible.
Rob: lol–yeah, he pulled that off pretty well. And while I can appreciate it, and while some of it was funny, the overall book gave me bad flashbacks. Heh.
Rob: There was one very good line though, on pg 55. He’s talking to Miss Moss, and he says, “As for God, I am not simply agnostic–I am indifferent…” I think that’s Savage peeking through there, it was too poetic and subtle for Andrew."
Read the read of the review discussion at our site.
catladylover94's review against another edition
1.0
it was slow, it fit the name just great, i felt sorry for Andy at times, and i guess he spent alot of time just writing, something and nothing at all
katemariea514's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
frisbeewhippet's review against another edition
1.0
This book is about nothing. Really. It's a collection of documents written by the main character (journal entries, letters to friends, letters to tenants, grocery lists, etc.) that is meant to reveal the man's state of mind as he slowly admits that he is a failure professionally and personally.
The book is not "funny" or "touching" or "dark" or "outrageous." It's not "inspirational" or "a tale about rallying in the face of adversity" or "a peek" into anything. It's nothing. It's just a book about nothing. It's a book about a man with mediocre problems who has mediocre reactions to them and creates your run-of-the-mill mediocre drama with said problems.
It is entirely possible that this mediocrity is precisely what the author was trying to capture with this book. If so, congrats to Sam Savage...but the work did not appeal to me.
If you used to work on a literary mag or spent any time in an MFA program, you'll enjoy the first 25 pages or so. After that, consider stopping. Seriously. Don't read on because you're waiting "to see what happens." Nothing happens. Just put the book down and move on.
The book is not "funny" or "touching" or "dark" or "outrageous." It's not "inspirational" or "a tale about rallying in the face of adversity" or "a peek" into anything. It's nothing. It's just a book about nothing. It's a book about a man with mediocre problems who has mediocre reactions to them and creates your run-of-the-mill mediocre drama with said problems.
It is entirely possible that this mediocrity is precisely what the author was trying to capture with this book. If so, congrats to Sam Savage...but the work did not appeal to me.
If you used to work on a literary mag or spent any time in an MFA program, you'll enjoy the first 25 pages or so. After that, consider stopping. Seriously. Don't read on because you're waiting "to see what happens." Nothing happens. Just put the book down and move on.
phloxandbramble's review against another edition
1.0
i didn't make it far into this book. i liked the style but couldn't force myself to read a whole book about the main character.
miss_tsundoku's review against another edition
3.0
If you have a dream to be a rich and successful writer, don't read this. Honest.