justaboxofmoths's review against another edition
1.0
I couldn't get through the book. I've been trying for two years, and just couldn't do it. I found it to be overly pretentious and just plain annoying.
sumayyah_t's review against another edition
Kind of.. dull, actually. Did not make it past page 15.
prcizmadia's review against another edition
2.0
Guy becomes disillusioned with his corporate day-to-day life and embraces a punk commune, one that acts out in all the predictable ways. Is swallowed whole by the delusions of a self-created creed. Encounters stereotypes of all stripe. Yawn. Nothing new here, and I know it's not about the 'what' but the 'how,' but I found the 'how' lacking. I don't know what I found more jarring: the shift in voice and language, the utter wooden-ness of the characters, the self-indulgent pornographic scenes, or just the jaggedness of the plot. Can't be too mad, I only spent 3 commutes on this, so nothing of value was lost.
mjmccomas's review
3.0
The beginning of this book had me skeptical of the high critical acclaim. It starts off as a hyper-sexual story of lost, young souls that was at times so graphic I began to question if this was simply well-written pornography. But it ultimately evolves into a frantic, beautifully-articulated portrait of mystical fervor, religious fanaticism, frustration with capitalism and paternalism, and the confusion inherent within idealistic youth. Taylor writes with high deliberation and intelligence and is gifted at navigating perspective. It's a reasonably short, easy, engaging read that still transcends mere entertainment. If you are sensitive to sexuality, this may be too much for you. If you have an open mind, the sexuality is not carelessly included, and the novel is certainly a worthy read.
drlove2018's review against another edition
4.0
I enjoyed this very much, though I prefer his short story collection. He jumps around a lot from one narrative voice to another, which in a collection of stories didn't bother me - in fact, I liked the diversity of characters and points of view. In a novel, though, I found it rather jarring. Still, I marvel at Taylor's ability to capture and immerse his reader in a distinct subculture while maintaining the specificity and authenticity of his characters. He also has a remarkable gift for weaving some rather dense philosophical concepts into his fiction in a way that is intriguing and illuminating, instead of the off-putting way in which 'concept fiction' so often attempts the same feat. I would definitely recommend this, especially to anyone who has struggled with the obstacles that crop up between ideals and praxis - the question of whether to reject the system and try to exist outside of it, or to attempt to change the system from within; and the challenge, attendant with the latter, of looking for ways to function within the system without being consumed by it.
pattricejones's review against another edition
Deeply disappointing in its unexamined phallocentrism. Early on, the protagonist cannot believe that he has found himself in the midst of "every straight guy's number one jerk-off fantasy" (p. 51). We can't believe it either. And it only gets worse from there. I kept reading, thinking that perhaps this technically gifted writer was playing a trick on us. But, no. He appears to expect us to accept this plot as credible as it devolves into an increasingly incredible story, the climax of which is just so trite that again I wondered if the author might be joking.
library_lurker's review against another edition
1.0
i read this book mostly because i, too, have written a book (not-yet-published) about a wacky collective house, and i want to read all the other wacky-collective-household books to see the similarities and differences. well. this book, like mine, has a dumpstering scene right in front, but that's the only major similarity.
mr. taylor's a competent writer (although a little too MFA-ish for my tastes), but, OMG, i could not handle this book. i didn't care about any of the characters, and about halfway through it turns from a look-at-my-wacky-outside-of-the-mainstream slice-o-life to a bizarre tale of starting a religion? that worships an ex-housemate who ran off?!?!?!!!? are you fucking kidding me???? all the christianity (even though i know it's a parody of christianity, or whatever) REALLY grated on me. i simply could not deal. i feel dirty.
mr. taylor's a competent writer (although a little too MFA-ish for my tastes), but, OMG, i could not handle this book. i didn't care about any of the characters, and about halfway through it turns from a look-at-my-wacky-outside-of-the-mainstream slice-o-life to a bizarre tale of starting a religion? that worships an ex-housemate who ran off?!?!?!!!? are you fucking kidding me???? all the christianity (even though i know it's a parody of christianity, or whatever) REALLY grated on me. i simply could not deal. i feel dirty.
heyvito's review against another edition
4.0
From the back cover:
The Gospel of Anarchy by Justin Taylor is one of my favorites of 2011 so far. It opens with David, a college dropout working at a call center in Gainesville who is addicted to Internet porn, jerking off and throwing his laptop into a bathtub.
David is unlikable. He’s the sort of lost that doesn’t really care if he’s found or not. He’ll accept any sort of connection. He’ll follow whatever path in order to get there. When he meets the punk anarchists, he falls in love with their carefree lifestyle. The residents of Fishgut are punks, hippies, anarchists, and anarchristians. After David quits his job, moves out of his apartment, and becomes a resident of Fishgut, the book begins to ramble in an amazing way.
The Gospel of Anarchy explores faith and belief — in God, in a mysterious and absent punk-anarchist, in nothing — and how faith and belief can be fleeting, can be found and lost, can mean everything and also mean nothing. For David, this newly found faith in “Anarchristianism” means everything. He lost his girlfriend, dropped out of college, and was working at a job he hated just to pay the bills. When he finds Fishgut, his life suddenly has meaning.
Taylor’s writing is better suited for novel-length works. His short story collection, Everything Here is the Best Thing Ever, was good, but it could have been better. You could tell that he had so much more to say, that he had all this potential, but it was wasted on short stories. Taylor finds his voice in The Gospel of Anarchy. If you haven’t already, read this book.
In landlocked Gainesville, Florida, in the hot, fraught summer of 1999, a college dropout named David sleepwalks through his life — a dull haze of office work and Internet porn — until a run in with a lost friend jolts him from his torpor. He is drawn into the vibrant but grimy world of Fishgut, a rundown house where a loose collective of anarchists, burnouts, and libtertines practice utopia outside society and the law. Some even see their lifestyle as a spiritual calling. They watch for the return of a mysterious hobo who will — they hope — transform their punk oasis into the Bethlehem of a zealous, strange new creed.
The Gospel of Anarchy by Justin Taylor is one of my favorites of 2011 so far. It opens with David, a college dropout working at a call center in Gainesville who is addicted to Internet porn, jerking off and throwing his laptop into a bathtub.
At home there was no conversation. No back and forth. No feigned ease, no modulated voice. No voice, period. Silence reigned. Quiet clicks. The world opened up to me through a small bright window, my personal laptop computer, which was of course too heavy and ran too hot to actually keep on my lap, not that I wanted it there. I had to use a plug-in trackball mouse because I couldn’t get the hang of the touchpad thing. The laptop was barely a year old, still more or less state-of-the-art, and had pride of place on the desk in my living room, where I sat and surfed a wave that never crested, climbed a mountain that never peaked. Curved, oiled, chesty, slick, spread; sometimes I imagined the girls in a kind of march, and endless parade celebrating — what? Themselves, I guess, or me. pg. 9
David is unlikable. He’s the sort of lost that doesn’t really care if he’s found or not. He’ll accept any sort of connection. He’ll follow whatever path in order to get there. When he meets the punk anarchists, he falls in love with their carefree lifestyle. The residents of Fishgut are punks, hippies, anarchists, and anarchristians. After David quits his job, moves out of his apartment, and becomes a resident of Fishgut, the book begins to ramble in an amazing way.
Truth is, these Catholics’ moderateness, and more generally their modernity, is at the heart of what spooks her about them. How the archness and the archaism of their faith seems to fit so snugly in with the regular lives they’re all living right now. What can the gilded crucifix, and the Man hung thereon, mean to the boy who buys sweatshop-produced Nikes at the mall by the highway? To the girl with the sorority pin, or anyone behind the wheel of an SUV? She knows these are cliché questions, straight out of Anticapitalism 101, but cliché or not, the questions are earnest. How can it be that the crucified Christ means so many different things to so many different people all at once? How can He contain it all? pg. 63
The Gospel of Anarchy explores faith and belief — in God, in a mysterious and absent punk-anarchist, in nothing — and how faith and belief can be fleeting, can be found and lost, can mean everything and also mean nothing. For David, this newly found faith in “Anarchristianism” means everything. He lost his girlfriend, dropped out of college, and was working at a job he hated just to pay the bills. When he finds Fishgut, his life suddenly has meaning.
Truly transcendent moments seem to lose something in the re-telling–they tend to be fleeting, and rooted in some feeling of extreme presence: a stronger or better sense of self, or of synchronicity between the self and the universe. When writing is going very well it can feel that way, and this is what Katy has in mind when she goes to the Devil’s Millhopper in chapter two. Art is not a religion, but the making of it and the reception of it can both qualify as devotional acts. - Jonathan Taylor in an interview at The Rumpus
Taylor’s writing is better suited for novel-length works. His short story collection, Everything Here is the Best Thing Ever, was good, but it could have been better. You could tell that he had so much more to say, that he had all this potential, but it was wasted on short stories. Taylor finds his voice in The Gospel of Anarchy. If you haven’t already, read this book.
sshabein's review against another edition
4.0
To expect Taylor to devise an entire philosophy out of nothing along with the novel itself would be naïve. Expecting fiction to arrive completely out of the imagination misunderstands the act of writing. Even the most speculative or avant garde fiction hopes to connect with its readers, and readers connect when they can identify. The best fiction contains so much truth and honesty, but affords itself the benefit of creating its own facts. Taylor took an existing philosophy and manufactured a world to surround it. He lived in Gainesville between 2000 and 2004, and the description of the university town drips with humidity and rising mercury. The pressure builds in each character in a way that mimics the Florida summer. Borrowing from an existing group of people is no less valid than borrowing from an existing city.
(full review can be found on Glorified Love Letters)
(full review can be found on Glorified Love Letters)
whatsheread's review against another edition
When asked by someone earlier to discuss The Gospel of Anarchy, the most lucid thought I had was to describe it as interesting. The plot is virtual non-existent, and the writing embodies anarchy itself. It is confusing, slightly disturbing, and more philosophical than I expected. Yet, in the end is somehow works. It is a novel that forces one to confront one's own biases and expectations of society. It is not one to be read quickly but rather to be enjoyed slowly, evaluating every word and phrase. It draws some unusual conclusions and presents some disturbing images but makes for a decent novel.
Call it my own failings, but I was not prepared for a book that was actually about anarchy. I thought the title was more allegorical; it is not. Once I got over this initial surprise, the story evolves into an exploration of each character's own struggles to find meaning in his or her life. Some follow blindly, with no doubts whatsoever. Others think they understand but find out they do not. Some characters are utterly sympathetic, while others are not. The result is a wild ride through the chaotic world of Fishgut.
Mr. Taylor evokes the spirit of anarchy in his writing. He switches tenses and characters without any warning. Sometimes, he flows into a stream-of-consciousness effect, while other scenes are terse and simplistic. If anything helps one understand what it means to be anarchist, Mr. Taylor's writing in this novel is a great example of making a point not to be bound by the rules of writing.
The Gospel of Anarchy starts out strong, unfortunately fades towards the end and yet finishes strongly. Its failings are that it simply becomes too preachy. When Mr. Taylor focuses on Parker's writings rather than on the actual characters, the story itself loses steam. The novel works best when the reader gets the opportunity to delve into each character.
The Gospel of Anarchy is not for everyone. In his effort to present anarchy and its teachings, Mr. Taylor pushes the boundaries of comfortable reading, leaving even the most open-minded reader squirming in one's seat. Chaotic and at times confusing, he quickly delves into this particular subculture and its exploration of everything and anything. Through the characters' questioning and searching, the reader gets the opportunity to explore his or her own opinions on faith, on politics, and on what it means to follow the rules. For those who can handle the sometimes explicit descriptions and heavily philosophical discussions, The Gospel of Anarchy is a great novel to get someone thinking. I suspect that for a majority of people, however, it is one to skip.
Call it my own failings, but I was not prepared for a book that was actually about anarchy. I thought the title was more allegorical; it is not. Once I got over this initial surprise, the story evolves into an exploration of each character's own struggles to find meaning in his or her life. Some follow blindly, with no doubts whatsoever. Others think they understand but find out they do not. Some characters are utterly sympathetic, while others are not. The result is a wild ride through the chaotic world of Fishgut.
Mr. Taylor evokes the spirit of anarchy in his writing. He switches tenses and characters without any warning. Sometimes, he flows into a stream-of-consciousness effect, while other scenes are terse and simplistic. If anything helps one understand what it means to be anarchist, Mr. Taylor's writing in this novel is a great example of making a point not to be bound by the rules of writing.
The Gospel of Anarchy starts out strong, unfortunately fades towards the end and yet finishes strongly. Its failings are that it simply becomes too preachy. When Mr. Taylor focuses on Parker's writings rather than on the actual characters, the story itself loses steam. The novel works best when the reader gets the opportunity to delve into each character.
The Gospel of Anarchy is not for everyone. In his effort to present anarchy and its teachings, Mr. Taylor pushes the boundaries of comfortable reading, leaving even the most open-minded reader squirming in one's seat. Chaotic and at times confusing, he quickly delves into this particular subculture and its exploration of everything and anything. Through the characters' questioning and searching, the reader gets the opportunity to explore his or her own opinions on faith, on politics, and on what it means to follow the rules. For those who can handle the sometimes explicit descriptions and heavily philosophical discussions, The Gospel of Anarchy is a great novel to get someone thinking. I suspect that for a majority of people, however, it is one to skip.